( 682 ) 
XXVII. — Report upon the Exhibition of Hops at Kilburn. By 
Charles Whitehead, F.L.S., F.G.S., &c., of Banning 
House, Maidstone, Steward. 
Since the Canterbury Show in 1860 there has been no exhibition 
of hops in connection with the Royal Agricultural Society of 
England until this year. It was most unfortunate that the season 
of 1878 was unpropitious for hop-producing, so that the crop was 
for the most part of indifferent quality and low colour. This 
materially tended to prevent hop-planters from entering samples, 
as however good the management of hops may be in the oast- 
house, condition and colour cannot be imparted to them unless 
they have been grown under the influences of favourable 
weather ; and those who grew their hops badly in 1878 did not 
choose to risk their reputation by showing blighted, rusty, or 
mouldy samples. 
There were some good hops produced in certain districts 
where blight and rust and mould did not prevail ; for example, 
in Farnham, Worcestershire, and Herefordshire : from the two 
last-named counties the competition was most satisfactory, and 
several of the samples were of excellent quality and gave proof 
of careful management. 
No doubt, in many cases, planters, especially those cultivating 
only a few acres, did not like to lock up a pocket of hops for 
many months, and did not enter for this reason. This could 
not have been avoided, as it was absolutely necessary that a 
pocket should be exhibited, and a sample taken from it at the 
time of exhibition. 
The pockets were sampled, in the presence of the Steward, on 
the Friday previous to the opening day of the Show, in order 
that the hops might be some time in the paper. One sample 
of the ordinary size was taken for the Judges from each pocket, 
and a large sample also, which was placed in the shed for the 
inspection of the public. 
The judging commenced on Monday at 10 A.M. The 
following is the Report of the Judges : — 
Meport of the Judges on Hops. 
Class 316-323. 
In concluding their awards the Judges deem it necessary to attach the 
following report. 
We cannot forbear remarking, in tlie first place, on tlie comparatively 
small number of entries by English growers ; and can only account for this 
on the supjwsition that the crop of 1878 was generally inferior botli in quality 
and appearance to many previous growths, offering little inducement to 
growers to exhibit their samples. 
Notwithstanding this drawback, we are glad to have been able to include 
