Report on the Exhibition of Live Stock at Hull. 
511 
Mr. Jefferson enters into detail, and says : — 
Class 28 contained ten animals of great merit ; but, in awarding the prizes, 
tlie Judges themselves were not satisfied, whatever the public might think of 
their decisions. After selecting five we differed as to the order in which they 
should be placed. We all agreed that No. 288 did not seem useful for breed- 
ing purposes ; but the Veterinary Inspector took the responsibility off our 
shoulders by pronouncing in his favour. I think we did not act consistently 
in withholding commendation in this class. If No. 287 was considered worthy 
of the fourth prize, Nos. 286, 292, and 293 ought to have had commended 
tickets. 
Class 29. — Here again the Judges were divided. No. 299 does not take 
the eye at first, but he improves on acquaintance, and he was well worthy of 
the position assigned to him. No. 307 has beautiful fore-quarters, but a 
shabby-looking stern. No. 300 is an even made aristocratic-looking bull, and 
rightly placed third. No. 298 is a great flesh-grower, level made, and richly 
clad ; and, had it not been for his deficiency in neck vein, he might have 
commanded a better position. Even with this fault, it is a question whether 
he should not have changed places with No. 307. No. 303 is a majestic even- 
fleshed animal, of great substance ; but his coarse shoulders nearly forfeited for 
him the slight honour that he won. 
Class 30 we considered the weakest we had before us, and again we differed 
as to the order of merit. Neither Nos. 312 nor 315 came up to my standard 
as Eoyal prize winners. 
Class 31. — Here, for the first time, the Judges were unanimous. Nos. 336 
and 339 are two calves of great promise ; and if their education is properly 
attended to, I expect to see them Senior Wranglers of future Eoyal exami- 
nations. 
Class 32. — We had no difficulty in selecting No. 357 for first honour, but 
we joined issue in placing second and third. 
Class 33. — Having chosen Nos. 378 and 371 for first and second prizes, it 
became an invidious task, amidst so much excellence, to draw for third and 
fourth ; eventually we placed Nos. 375 and 376, two young mothers of 
offspring, in preference to their more obese and barren-looking rivals. 
Class 34 gave rise to much critical argument amongst three Judges, whose 
individual tastes and fancies seemed to run in different grooves. No. 302 was 
the rock upon which they split, and the question arose whether she should 
have first, second, or fourth place assigned to her. The heifer certainly is a 
wonderful grower ; but her excellences are more suggestive of Bingley Hall 
or Islington honours, than of a prolific mother of Shorthorns. 
Class 35 contained two ripe plums, the richness of whose flavour acted 
alike upon all our palates. 
Mr. Mitchell reports as follows : — 
The Shorthorn Classes, as a whole, were very good ; some of them par- 
ticularly so. 
Class 28. Old Bulls. — Was a very fine class all over, the first and second 
prize ones remarkably so ; although we thought the first too much fed up 
even for a Showyard. 
Class 29. Bulls under Three Tears oZc?.— Not equal to Class 28 ; still there 
were some first-rate animals in it. 
Class 30. Bulls under Two Years old. — The weakest class in the lot. 
Class 31. Bull Calves. — A good class, some very fine animals in it. 
Class 32. Cows. — Although small in numbers, remarkably good in quality. 
Seldom are there six such fine animals in one class. 
