644 Report on the Exhibition of Live-Stoch at Preston, 1885. 
We would suggest that all classes shown under the saddle should be termed 
" Hackneys for riding purposes ; " that classes for driving-horses should come 
under the head of " Harness horses," or " Hacknej-s for driving purposes ; " 
and we further urge that, as the Stud Book for this class of animal has agreed 
upon and adopted the distinct term " Hackney," that of " Eoadster " ije 
discontinued. 
"We beg very strongly to recommend the above course as one which will 
greatly simplify the work of Judges for the future ; it will also enable them 
to give more satisfaction to the public, and exhibitors will clearly understand 
the conditions under which their animals are being judged. We also recom- 
mend that the Hackneys for driving purposes should in future be shown in 
harness, with the exception of those classes for three-year-olds and imder, as 
■we do not consider that Judges can in all cases distribute the awards correctly 
until they have seen the horses driven. Manners of aged horses should be 
taken into consideration for harness as well as for the saddle ; besides, some 
horses go in such different form when they are driven to what they do when 
led in hand. 
We found Class 35 an exceptionally difficult class to judge, as three-year- 
olds -were competing with aged horses, which was very unfair on the former ; 
neither was there any restriction as to height, consequently horses of entirely 
dififerent classes were judged together. On enquiry, we were informed by the 
Steward of our ring that the prizes were given and arranged almost entirely 
by the Local Committee. We hope the Council will permit us to recommend 
that they should keep these arrangements entirely in their own hands, so as 
to establish right precedents for other Shows to follow. 
Taking the classes as they come on the list — 
Class 11 was small, only five entries, but the first- and second-prize 
winners were good horses. 
Class 12 had eight entries. The first, second, and third were good animals, 
the others were bad. 
Class 17. — This was an exceedingly good class, as was shown by the 
whole class being commended. The first- and second-prize animals were 
exceptionally good, and we asked if a third prize might be added, as the mare 
which we placed third and the mare to which we gave the IJeserve Number 
were both good mares worthy of notice. There were eleven entries. 
Class 18. — Only four entries, of which the prize-winners were useful ones. 
Class 35. — Nine entries. A very mixed class, the winner of which is a 
very perfect mover and beautiful harness mare. 
Class 36. — Four entries. A very bad class. 
Class 37. — Eight entries. A very good class, the three prize-winners 
being all very good animals. 
Class 38. — Seven entries. A very good class, the first-prize winner an 
exceptionally fine mover. 
Class 39. — Eleven entries. A very good class, the first- and second-prize 
winners being exceptionally good. 
Class 40. — Six entries. A very bad class. 
W. H. Fii-K. 
Wm. Parker. 
John Eowell. 
In signing the Hcport I am compelled to state I consider the prize-winner 
in Class 11 (Hackney Stallions) deficient in quality, and also in character, 
for high-class " Hackney Sires." 
In Class 36 (Harness Mare or Gelding foaled in 1883) the first-prize 
■winner is to my mind a well-moulded and promising harness mare. 
Wm. Parker. 
