May 5, 1887. J 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



329 



BEAG-LES. — Champion — Dog: A. H. Wakefield's Little D uke. 

 Bitch: A. H. Wakefield's Twinkle. Open— Dogs : 1st, very high 

 com. and com., A. H. Wakefield's Fitzhugh Lee, Leader and 

 Racer, Jr.; 2d, H. F. Schcllhuss's Trailer; 3d and high com., Somer- 

 set Kennels' Jupiter and Goodwood Rattler. Very high com., G, 

 Laick's Rattler. BUcIick 1st, A. H. Wakefield's May Belle II.; 2d, 

 Somerset Kennels' Jessie; -3d and high com., H. F. Schellhass's 

 Trinket and Melody. Very high com.. F. P. Quiraby's Lizzie. 

 Puppies: 1st, IL F. Schellhass's Riot. 



BULLDOGS.— Champion— Dog: J.E. Thayer's Robinson Crusoe. 

 Bitch: J. E. Thayer's Britomai lis.— Open— Dogs: 1st, J. P. Bar- 

 nard's King Cole, Jr.; 2d, C. D. Cugle's Merrv Monarch; 3d and 

 reserve, T. W. Mills's Bruce and Guillemio. Very high com., J. H. 

 Sanderson's Gimlet. Hi^h com. and com., C. L. Collins's Bendigo 

 and Boss. Bitches: 1st, R. * W. Livingstone's Thespian: 2d, J. E. 

 Thayer's Carmen; 3d, J. L. Boardman's Rose. Com., R. & W. 

 Livingstone's Silver Pitcher. Puppies: 1st, J. H. Sanderson's 

 Gimlet; 2d, A. Hoysradt's Rocksie. Verv high com., T. W. Mills's 

 Monarch. 



BULL-TERRIERS.-Champion— W. J. Comstock's Victoria.— 

 Open — Dogs: 1st, E. D. Morgan's Cairo; 2d, J. M. Cox's Tony; 3d, H. 

 A. Waldron's Silver. Very high cr»m., J. Patterson's Judas. Com., 

 S. Van Vecten's Lord Nelson, C. Powers'* Dandy and E. D. 

 Adams's Jack. Bitches: 1st, 2d and very high coin., E. D. Mor- 

 gan's Bonnie Princess, Queen of the May and Grand Duchess; 3d. 

 Miss Fannie W. Ogden's Gipse.y. High com., Miss Neilson's Rose. 

 Puppies: 1st, H. D. & J. R. Steers's Queen Bess. 



FOX-TERRIERS.— Champion— Dop: F. Hoey's Valet. Reserve, 

 A. Belmont, Jr.'s, Lucifer. Bitch: A. Belmont, Jr.'s, Safety. Re- 

 serve, A. Belmont, -Ir.'s, Marguerite.— Open— Dogs: 1st a.ud com., 

 J. E. Thayer's Kaby Mixer and tiaby Jack; 2d. A. Belmont, Jr.'s, 

 Bacchanal; 3d and high com., E. Kelly's Earl Leycester and 

 Shovel. Reserve and high com., L. & W. Ruthcrfurd's The War- 

 ren Spider and Warren Jim. High com., W. T. McAleer's Gen- 

 eral Grant. Bitches: 1st, high com. and com., J. E. Thayer's Rich- 

 mond Dazzle, Richmond Myrtle and Mecrsbrook Nan: 2d, reserve 

 and very high (torn., A. Belmont, Jr.'s, Diadem, Tiara and Ver- 

 dict; 3d and com., L. & \Y. Rutherfuid's Lady Warren Mixture. 

 Warren Jostle, Warren Spangle and Warren Lust v. Verv high 

 com., E. Kelly's Flame.— Puppies— Dogs: 1st and com., A. Bel- 

 mont, Jr.'s, Resolute and Faust; 2d and 3d, L. & W. Rutherfurd's 

 Warren Spider and Warren Swagger. Reserve and high com., 

 J. E. Thayer's Shameless Mixture and Sandy Mixture. Bitches: 

 1st, L. & W. Ruthcrfurd's Lady Warren Mixture: 2d, A. Belmont, 

 Jr.'s, Tiara. Reserve, Mrs. V. Spader's Biddv. High com., Mait- 

 land & Bunker's Tarn. — Wibf.-Haibed— 1st, W. M. Connor's 

 Cheshire Laddie; 2d, J. E. I. Grainger's Tyke; 3d, S. Bell's Bristles. 



BLACK AND TAK TERRIERS.— Over "LBS.-lst, G. Bell's 

 Bessie; 2d, H. Muss's Lady. \ ery high com., F. Gcbhard's Harry O. 



SCOTCH AND HARD-HAIRED TERRI ERS.— 1st, J. O'Neil's 

 Boxer; 2d, E. D. Morgan's Highland Laddie. 



DAN DIE DINMONT TERRIERS. — Prizes withheld. 



BEDL1NGTON TERRIERS. — 1st, E. D. Morgan's Tees Rock; 

 2d and high com., W. H. Russell's Sentinel and Elswick Sue. 



IRISH TERRIERS.— 1st, C. T. Thompson's Geesela; 2d and verv 

 high com., J. O. Haine's Eileen and Dennis. 



SKYE TERRIERS.— 1st, W. P. Sanderson's Lass O' Gowrie; 2d 

 L. H. Spence's Ben. Very high com., A. W. Powers'* Tunis. High 

 com., N. V. Ketchum's Teddie. 



YORKSHIRE TER RIE RS.—Dogs: 1st, J. F. Campbell's Sir 

 Colin, 2d, Mrs. J. R. (riMei-sleeve's Dick. Reserve, A. W. Cabot's 

 Lancashire Star. High com., J. Marriott's Charlie and J. Mad- 

 dox's Prince. Com., J. Marriott's Niger and T. D. Burke's Bright. 

 Bitches: 1st, B. J. Harrison's Mossey; 2d, W. Brooks's Midget. 

 Very high com., D. J. McElroy's Polly and T. D. Burke's Beauty. 



TOY TERRIERS. -1st, Mrs. G. Landau's Prince; 2d, Mrs. E. 

 Kccler's Yum Yum. Very high com., Miss K. Nelson's Tiney. 

 High com., M. A. Hanchett's Mousey. 



PUGS.— Champion— No entry.— Open— Dogs: 1st, P. F. Turner's 

 Victor: 2d, Miss M. E. Bannister's Jumbo, Jr.; 3d, G. W. Fisher's 

 Tom Thumb. Very high com., Mrs. H. Montgomery's Click and 

 Dr. H. R. Surles's Rob Roy. nigh com., Mrs. R. Endicott's 

 Wrinkles. Bitches: 1st, 2d and veryhi^h com., Mrs. Chas. Wheat- 

 leigh's Yuma Yuma, Yum Yum aud Victoria; 3d, Mrs. Louisa 

 Reed's Flora. Com., Mansfield & Hinckley's Little Daisy. Pup- 

 pies: 1st, Mrs. F. Senn's Tootsie Sloper; 2d, withheld. 



KING CHARLES SPANIELS. — 1st, F. B. Fay's Milwaukee 

 Charlie; 2d, W. Phillips's Roscius; 3d, A. W. Lucy's Duke. Very 

 high com., Mrs. Lawson's Charley and Mrs. Kistemann's Cham- 

 pion. High com., Mrs. F. Senn's Prince. Com., J. S. Bacon's 

 Lady. 



BLENHEIM SPANIELS.-lst, W. Phillips's King Victor; 2d, 

 Miss Mamie Phillips's King Pippin, 



PRINCE CHARLES SPANIELS.— 1st, Mrs, Kistemann's Lillv; 

 2d, withheld. 



RUBY SPANIELS. — 1st, 2d, high com. and com., King Charles 

 Kennels' Princess Alice, Ruddygore, Red Rose and Red Tycoon. 



JAPANESE SPANIELS.— 1st and 2d, Miss Eugene Clark's Kobe 

 and Kuma. 



ITALIAN GREYHOUNDS. -1st and 2d, Miss Edith M. Van 

 Buren's Fanny and Cupid. 



MISCELLANEOUS.-LAP.GE-lst, Glencoe Collie Kennels' Sir 

 Lucifer; 2d, withheld; 3d. G. H. Watson's Carlo. Small— Equal 

 1st, Mrs. H. T. Foote's Me Too aud Miss Helen Dauvrav's Chi- 

 quita; 2d, Mrs. A Grinnell's Pedro: 3d, W. B. Anderson's Cliquot. 



SPANIELS AT PHILADELPHIA. — Editor Forest and 

 ISbrmins In Mr. C. H. Mason's critique on the Philadelphia 

 show, he says of the Clumber spaniels Johnny and Drake 

 that it would "spoil a great deal of fun" were he to inform 

 the "unfortunate gentleman who has never seen a typical 

 Clumber" why Drake is a much better dog than Johnny. 

 Would Mr. Mason have any objections to foregoing the 

 amusement he speaks of by informing your readers in what 

 way Drake beats Johnny and is a much better dog? Three 

 judges— Messrs. Hemingway, Wilmerding and West, all 

 members of the American Spaniel Club— have decided that 

 Johnny is the better of the two, and I happen to know that 

 in his native place (Ottawa) Johnny is considered much the 

 best, and there are good judges of the breed there. Just a 

 word with regard to Drake's much harped on "domed" 

 skull. Mr. Rendle is right, although he uses an unfor- 

 tunate term to convey his meaning. Mr. Mason need not 

 remind me that the "marked stop" is an important feature 

 in the head of the Clumber spaniel, but Drake's forehead 

 is rather too heavy, and the top of his head is round, not 

 perfectly flat, as it should be. This, I think, is what Mr. 

 Rendle wishes to convey, and he is right. The only fault 

 which can be found with Johnny's head is that it has not 

 quite sufficient depth of brow, and in the opinion of many 

 he does not want even in this particular. Let Mr. Mason 

 refer to the fourth edition of "The Dogs of the British 

 Islands," and turn to the illustration of Bruce, of whom 

 Stonehenge says that he may be regarded a good type of the 

 breed. Let him also look at the illustration in LcChenil of 

 Oct. 14 last of Dot IT., one of the Duke of Portland's famous 

 kennel. He will see that neither of these dogs has a deep 

 stop. I do not quote these, illustrations to prove that depth 

 of stop is not a desideratum in a Clumber's head, but I think 

 that as these dogs are said to be typical English Clumbers, 

 despite their lack of stop, Johnny, who has far more than 

 they have, is not a long way off the mark. Of course Mr. 

 ♦Mason is obliged to write in the strain he does to palliate 

 his Providence blunder. It is only to be expected. I trust, 

 however, that he will sacrifice his prospective amusement, 

 and enlighten the "unfortunate gentleman" and at the same 

 time your readers. Kindly insert this at as early a date as 

 p xssible.— A MEMBER OF THE AMERICAS SPANIEL CLUB. 



THAT BUFFALO SHOW. — Horn el Isville, N. Y., April 

 29.— Editor Forest and Stream: I would say to Mr. Cook, 

 Secretary of Buffalo Kennel Club No. 2, that John Lewis' 

 one of the directors of club No. 1, came here to Hornellsville 

 and engaged me as superintendent. At that time I had 

 never heard of Mr. Chadeayne. I send you part of premium 

 list and catalogue; entry No. 88 was made by and the bitch 

 is owned by the treasurer of club No. 2, so it is likely he 

 knew what he was doing.— J. Otis Fellows. 



STANDARDS AND JUDGES. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



The dog show season will soon be over and your columns 

 will not be crowded with show reports, and our few capable 

 uon-sporting judges will have time to do a little missionary 

 work among us benighted outsiders. I think that Mr. 

 Mason, Mr. Watson and Mr. Barlow would do real service 

 to doggy interests, and I am certain they would contribute 

 to the clear understanding by us Gentiles' of judging, if they 

 would give us a "precis" of how judging is done, on what 

 grounds the awards are made, what determines a judge in 

 placing this dog first, that second and t'other nowhere, and 

 now far they take standards into consideration. Remember, 

 I am asking this favor honestly and in good faith, not to put 

 anybody in a hole. I take it for granted that the standard 

 fairly and honestly established by any specialist club for the 

 breed they represent is to be accepted as portraying an ideal 

 of what tiie breed should be. and, of course, I take mastiffs 

 as an illustration, Here Mr. Mason can answer better than 

 anybody I know, for he has displayed that rare qualification 

 in a judge of detectiug real merit where it was not supposed 

 to exist, and putting forward a dog that other judges had 

 treated contemptuously; as. for instance, that great dog 

 llford Cromwell getting he's, vhc.'s, seconds, and being 

 generally despised, until Mr. Mason put the seal of merit on 

 him at the New Haven show; and, with the exception of Mr. 

 Wallack, Mr. Mason is the only judge that has appreciated 

 just what the merits of Nap are, a dog the exact counterpart 

 of such cracks of the olden time as Turk, Hanbury's Prince, 

 etc., but not of the fashionable type of to-day. It has been 

 so long since Mr. Watson judged mastiffs that I cannot 

 speak in such terms of him, and, besides, he put my dog 

 De Buch first, which he shouldn't have done, as Rover had 

 the pull on him. Nevertheless, Mr. Watson can give us the 

 philosophy of judging as well as anybody, and I hope the 

 pages ot the American Kennel Rc<tfstcr will be ornamented 

 by his philosophizing. 



Now the mastiff standard expressly requires that a dog 

 must have a square muzzle, and emphasizes this by strictly 

 defining a "square" muzzle as "forming a right angle with 

 the upper line of nose;" that the loin must be "broad, flat 

 and muscular;" and that the hocks must be "bent." Well 

 and good; the two latter are absolute necessities, not merely 

 to appearance, but to strength, power and even moderate 

 activity. Well, then, if a dog is notoriously deficient in all 

 or any of the three, and thereby expressly contradicts the 

 fixed requirements of the standard, how can it be a good 

 specimen? How can a judge give a first to a dog that is just 

 what the conservators of the breed say the breed must not 

 be? I cannot see how superexcellence in some other direc- 

 tion can atone for fundamental violations in this. Even 

 accept Mr. Wynn's scale as the existing authority (as it 

 probably is, none other being in existence), can perfection, 

 absolute perfection in head, with its 42 points, count as con- 

 doning positive contradictions in hocks? Then again, per- 

 perfection in head requires a square muzzle; how then can 

 a dog whose muzzle is 10 or 15 degrees out of square have a 

 good head? Yet I have seen both Mr. Mason and Mr. Wat- 

 son recently commend an animal the worst undershot I 

 know of, and with hocks like an elephant's. Now take such 

 a mastiff as we can recall half a dozen specimens of, who 

 have truly square muzzles, broad flat skulls, admirable 

 bodies, good legs, good action, aud with heads certainly 

 short as compared with any other breed, say much shorter 

 than Alston's Colonel, whose muzzle was 4Vin. to a sknll 

 TJ^in. long, or Hanbury's Prince, or Turk, still further out 

 of the way, yet not as short as certain "elephant"-hocked, 

 frightfully undershot dogs. On what principle of rational 

 interpretation can such a dog said to be worse than one 

 who contradicts the standard in vital points? If a dog is 

 not perfection in hocks, a bit straighter than we would 

 like, or not as deep and thick in loin as he should be, yet still 

 fairly coming within the definitions of the standard in these 

 points and very much better in head than one that surpasses 

 him in hocks, body and loin, I can see where the first men- 

 tioned is the better dog, on the principle of the superior value 

 attaching to head properties ; both dogs come fairly within 

 the definitions, and the one excelling in the most highly 

 valued quality is evidently the best. Suppose you would 

 give the mastiff standard to— say Mr. Davidson, ask him to 

 forget that he ever saw a mastiff, bat to take this standard, 

 study it thoroughly and form an idea of the dog intended to 

 be portrayed by it and then take it into a show and apply its 

 teachings* to the selection of the best dog, Do you not agree 

 with me that he would pass by many and many of our crack 

 winners and say " Why this is'nt a mastiff , it has'nt a square 

 muzzle, its hocks bend the wrong way, it has no loin at all" 

 for useful purposes." Then tell the judge that that is the 

 winning type and he would ask "Are you a fool ? or do you 

 take me for one ? " Yet is not this just what a standard is 

 for ? The judge who thoroughly knows the breed doesn't 

 want instruction as to what its characteristics are, and the 

 novice naturally expeets, and on the strongest possible 

 grounds of right, that the standard will teach him what is 

 right and what is wrong about various specimens. Of course 

 I do not say that the standard will make a competent judge 

 of a novice ; as Mr. Wynn succinctly defines it, " If the judge 

 doesn't know his work as a judge, his knowledge of the breed 

 is no use to him j " but it can hardly be denied that the 

 standard should be applied with the same sound judgment 

 and reasonable interpretation, on the same principles of 

 common sense that all law is interpreted by in our courts. 



I fear to stir up a hornet's nest about my ears by saying a 

 word about collies, and although I don't pretend to know a 

 good from a bad collie, I think I may be allowed an opinion 

 on collie men and collie standards, as far as the plain Eng- 

 lish of them goes; and does the winner of to-day answer the 

 requirement of the standard so recently set up of a "moder- 

 ately wide skull?" Yet didn't the London Stoelc-Kecper 

 lately call the attention of English collie judges to the 

 woeful divergence of their judging from the standard of the 

 English Collie Club? Surely mine ancient foe, "Porcupine," 

 will admit that the Stock^Keeper is the collie paper. 



Further along comes up another question. Which should 

 the judge do, award prizes on the lines that other recognized 

 judges have done, only striving to consistently apply the 

 most obvious deductions from their decisions? Or should he 

 go further ba«k and apply the principles of the standards? 

 It seems to me that the former involves the conclusion that 

 all standards are to be taken in a "Pickwickian sense," and 

 it is significant that the very worst offenders against the 

 mastiff standard are the very lights of the O. E. M. Club 

 who prepared it. They set up the requirements of square 

 muzzle, bent hocks, etc. , and then went to work to breed the 

 most conspicuous departures from it that were within the 

 limits of possibility. Setting up a standard and then put- 

 ting Crown Prince up as a wonder, when he was about as 

 flat a contradiction as well could be; glorifying him as a 

 stud dog, when ninety-nine out of the hundred of his get 

 have hocks as straight as a walking stick. If he ever got 

 another than Debounair with decent hocks, it didn't come 

 to this side of the water. 



The English Collie Club seem to have sedulously emu- 

 lated the 0. E. M. Club in their revival of the ruling princi- 

 ples of the Pickwick Club, but, like most imitators, they 

 are but feeble strivers after their exemplars. Mark you how 

 a real authority acts when he judges; how Mr. Hanbury 

 put Prince Regent over Crown Prince ; and how Mr. Wynn 

 nut Beau over The Sbah when the latter was held a world- 

 peater, and the astonishment Mr. Nichols would give "the I 

 natives" would be more panoramic than the results of Mr. 

 Mason's independence about Hford Cromwell. 



To sum it up in two conundrums : Why do not judges 

 give prizes on the lines the standards indicate ? Or why do 



not breeders change the standards to fit the dogs that win 

 under it ? 



In such an inquiry as I make, it is almost impossible to 

 clearly state it, with full significance, without reference, by 

 name, to judges and dogs. This generally raises a stir from 

 the owners of dogs that may be disparaged, and the judge to 

 whom lack of infallibility is imputed immediately boils 

 over ; and as I wish to restrain my question and any discus- 

 sion that may arise on it entirely to principles, not' individ- 

 uals, I may not have made myself as clear as I would wish 

 to do. W. WADE. 



Hulton, PA.. April 27. 



THE PITTSBURGH JUDGING. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In your report of the Pittsburgh show your reporter has 

 treated me in two instances at least most unfairly, and says 

 what he himself knows are not the facts, and therefore not 

 true. In order that I may not be misunderstood aud enable 

 me to more fully explain, I will quote his own writing, viz.; 

 "It is utterly impossible for any man who has not been in a 

 good school for a number of years, to successfully handle 

 one-half of the classes Mr. Goodman undertook to pass on. 

 He himself discovered this before he got through with his 

 work, and asked us to help him out of the dilemma his lack 

 of foresight had placed him in." 



Now the fact of the matter is, that I was in no dilemma, 

 as he terms it, although he would have your readers infer 

 that the judging had actually come to a stop, or, in other 

 words, that I was stuck and could not go on without his 

 assistance, when in reality and in fact, the judging had all 

 been finished the day before, except some of the specials. 

 The particular special in which your reporter gave his as- 

 sistance, aud the only one for which he was asked to assist, 

 was the one of $25 for the best kennel of terriers. For reason 

 of my own, not necessary to mention here, I did not wish to 

 make the decision entirely on my own responsibility, and 

 with the consent of Mr. Nay] or, one of the contestants for 

 this special, your reporter was asked to assist. This is the 

 extent of his* helping me out of the dilemma. It is plainly 

 seen that he is trying to make a mountain out of a mole hili. 



The other part of his report, to which I have to take ex- 

 ception, and which is wliolly untrue, is where he says I 

 asked the veteran Heald "if both dogs were owned by the 

 popular exhibitor from Lancaster." This, as I said before, 

 is false. I never asked any man (that is either before or 

 during the judging) whom the dogs were owned by. I went 

 tq, Pittsburgh to judge dogs, and not their owners," and right 

 or wrong, I gave the ribbons to those I thought worthy of 

 them. I find no fault with his criticism on my judging. 

 That I may have made some blunders is possible, but in his 

 preface he would have your readers believe that nearly every 

 dog was wrongly placed, which, however, he fails to prove 

 in his criticism on the dogs further on. 



Harry L. Goodman. 



Auburn Junction, ni. 



WORKING AND NON-SPORTING SPANIELS. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I should like to ask the American Spaniel Club "whither 

 are they drifting?" and what kind of a non-sporting cocker 

 they are trying to evolve. It is surely time that this non- 

 sense was stopped or else the club will soon be the laughing 

 stock of the country. The oldest specialty club in America 

 should know better than to foster a dog'that looks like a 

 cross of a crocodile and a sausage, with his long back and 

 short crooked legs he is not worth keeping for the work that 

 he can do, only fit to sit on a show bench and exhibit his 

 glossy coat and long feather, and the more of the crocodile- 

 weasel-dachs cross he shows the more prizes he can win. 



I helped to make the standard and I know it was not in- 

 tended to fit the non-sporting cocker of to-day, only an old 

 man's dog that has not grit or life enough in him to pull a 

 "settin' hen orfen her nest." Crippled as I am I could walk 

 down half a dozen of them in a day. The judges are to 

 blame for this, but "it's English you know," and they must 

 followthe style, but if they will read the "Wanderers'" article 

 in Union's (iazette of April 1, they will then see that 

 English sportsmen are awakening to the fact that show 

 spaniels are not suitable for work, and a judge of spaniels 

 should be a man that knows the work required of a dog. 



At Boston they had a great class of spaniels, but the best 

 spaniel trainer in America wrote me that he would not have 

 the lot as a gift to train for work, and he has ordered a pair 

 of working spaniels of me. You see I am forced to breed 

 two kinds, one for the show bench, and one for the field. 



I am aware that this will not please many of my friends, 

 and I am also aware of the fact that the cocker before the 

 A. S. Club was organized was a poor, light-bodied, long- 

 legged specimen, but he soon improved under the standard. 

 But why not let well enough alone, or why try so hard to 

 overdo the thing? Does the standard call for the dog that 

 you and your judges have forced to the front? Not much, 

 my dear friends. 



In this breeding for long bodies and short legs you have 

 overdone the thing, and you have forgotten all about the 

 working qualities of a cocker, and from a graceful, well- 

 built, active dog you have evolved a nondescript, lumbering, 

 plodding wretch only fit to be looked at and used as a 

 fertilizer. 



The standard says "a cocker spaniel should be eminently 

 a well-built, graceful and active dog, and should show 

 strength without heaviness or clumsiness." That does not 

 mean that he should be 6in. at the elbow and his whole 

 length from nose to root of tail 35in. 



"Head of fair length, muzzle square, skull rising in a 

 graceful curve from the stop." That does not mean that 

 the head should be as heavy as a Clumber's, with a promi- 

 nent brow, or skull as flat as a collie's. 



I think that will do for this time, and that it will set the 

 boys to thinking; so I hope they will see their errors and 

 reform at once, or else I shall be compelled to tell them 

 what I know about working cockers. J. Otis Fellows. 



DETROIT SHOW.— The following changes have been 

 made in premium list: Classes 38, field spaniels; 43, cocker 

 spaniel puppies; 87, champion deerhounds; 88, open deer- 

 hounds; 92, champion bulldogs; 107, Scotch terriers; 109, 

 black and tan terriers under 71bs.; 110, Dandie Dinmont ter- 

 riers, have been divided into sexes with the same prizes for 

 bitches as for dogs. Classes for bitches being half numbers 

 as 38K, i$y s , 87}4, etc. We have decided to make classes as 

 follows: 38a, deerkound dog puppies: 88^a, same for bitches: 

 84>:<, champion Ulnier bitches. We have' added and received 

 about fifty more special prizes. The age of all setter pup- 

 pies has been changed to 15, and of all pointer puppies to 

 12mos. The weight of cocker spaniel bitches should read 

 281bs. wherever printed 241bs. in the premium list. We are 

 receiving a good many entries and the applications for ad- 

 ditional blanks are coming in by the dozens. It is our aim 

 to be third on the list this year in regard to number of en- 

 tries, aud we have done all m our power to make the show 

 a financial success. Railroad and steamer excursion from 

 all parts of Canada, Michigan and Ohio have been arranged 

 for the week of the show and everything points to an enor- 

 mous attendance. We have decided to withdraw the classes 

 1 aud 2, extra champion English setters and classes 20 aud 

 21, extra champion pointers, as no provision is made for them 

 in the A. K. C. rules.— Chas. Weil, Sec. 



PUG DOG CLUB.— The first general meeting of the 

 above club will be held at the Westminster Kennel Club's 

 show at New York on May 4, 1887, at 3 P. M. It is hoped 

 the attendance will be large. 



