Somersetshire Farm-Prize Competition, 1875. 517 
2ndly. That it is equally a matter of fact that wild mustard seed is an 
irritant poison, giving rise to inflammation of the stomach and intestines. 
3rdly. That, imder these circumstances, and owing to chemical and micro- 
scopical analysis having both demonstrated the existence of considerable 
tjuantities of wild mustard seed in the rape-cakes in question and in the 
.stomachs of the animals the subjects of this communication, I am of opinion 
that such cakes are extremely vmwholesome, and consequently unfit for feeding 
purposes. 
4thly. That it is probable that the wild mustard seed was not in this 
instance purposely or intentionally added to the rape, but that both plants 
had grown together, and that their seeds were not separated before they were 
crushed and pressed into cake. 
R. V. Tusox. 
XX. — Report on the Somersetshire Farm-Prize Competition, 1875. 
By J. BoWEN Jones, of Ensdon House, Shrewsbury. 
Prizes were offered by the Royal Agricultural Society of 
England, in connection with its visit to Taunton this year, for 
the best-managed farms in the county of Somerset, under three 
separate heads, viz : — 
Class I. — For the best-managed Hill-FARM, including not 
less than fifty acres of arable land, and not less than one hun- 
dred acres of hill pasture, whether convertible or otherwise, and 
whether adjacent to the arable land or not, 50Z. ; for the second 
best, 25/. 
Class II. — For the best-managed Dairy-FARM, of not less 
than one hundred acres in extent, 50Z. ; for the second best, 25Z. 
Class III. — For the best-managed Faem, not qualified to 
compete in either of the foregoing Classes, and of not less than 
two hundred acres in extent, 50Z. ; for the second best, 25Z. 
I The competition was limited to Tenant-farmers paying a 
hond-Jide rent for not less than three-fourths of the land in their 
occupation. 
1 The system of husbandry pursued on farms in each of these 
classes is distinct in its character, and as they are all largely 
represented in the county, the prize list would have been incom- 
plete had they not all been embraced ; it is, therefore, much 
to be regretted that the Society's offer did not elicit a more 
spirited response in Classes I. and II. 
The entries for competition are tabulated on p. 518. 
The instructions to the Judges were especially to consider — 
1. General Management, with a view to Profit, 
j 2. Productiveness of Crops. 
3. Goodness and suitability of Live Stock. 
4. Management of Grass Land. 
5. State of Gates, Fences, Roads, and General Neatness. 
6. Book-keeping. 
