Prkii Sheet for Chester Meeting of 1893. Ijtv 
tnission had had another meeting. 
But he wished to say for his colleagues 
on the Royal Commission that they 
appreciated very highly the generous 
assistance which had been given by 
the Society towards the improvement 
of horse-breeding, and they would 
quite understand the reasons why 
this could no longer be given. If it 
should be decided that the g^ant must 
be discontinued, then he hoped the 
Society would be able to see its way 
to restore to the prize list the prizes 
which it originally gave for thorough- 
bred horses. 
Mr. Alfred J. Smith had great 
. pleasure in supporting the resolution 
of the Chairman of the Stock Prizes 
Comrpittee. He thought they as an 
agricultural society had perhaps no 
right to show so much preference to 
the thoroughbred stallions and the 
breeding of hunters, over and above 
the money they voted to the draught 
horses of the heavy breeds. They in 
the county of Suffolk had been very 
liberally provided with stallions from 
the very first-rate establishments of 
the Duke of Hamilton and of her land- 
lords. They had tried the experiment 
for the past twenty years, and they 
. found that it was much more profitable 
for the tenant-farmer to go back to 
the breeding of heavy and draught 
horses. He understood that in certain 
cases the amount of the premium for 
the service of fifty mares had exceeded 
the selling price of the stallion to 
which the premium had been awarded. 
On the other hand, he thought any 
foreigner must be surprised that he 
was not allowed to see in their show- 
yards a specimen of any of their 
beautiful heavy breeds in the stallion 
classes, after they had arrived at 
maturity or at their proper age. That 
was a point to which the Stock Prizes 
Committee ought to give greater 
consideration. 
The motion for the discontinuance 
of the grant was then carried nem. dis. 
Prize Sheet for Chester Meeting of 
1893. 
Mr. Sanday then formally moved, 
pursuant to notice, and Mr. Terry 
aeconded — 
That the sum of 5,0001. be placed 
at the disposal of the Stock Prizes 
Committee for providing prizes for 
live stock, poultry, and produce at 
the Chester Meeting of 1893. 
Sir Matthew Ridley expressed 
the hope that the grant of 5,0001., if 
carried, would not be taken as a 
precedent for future years. 5,0001. 
was a very large sum to give for 
prizes, and he thought that the Coun- 
cil should know whether they were 
expected to bear, in addition to the 
amount of the prizes, the very large 
expenditure (often amounting to some 
hundreds of pounds) involved in 
making the necessary inspections for 
the awards of prizes for farms. If 
these competitions were of real benefit 
to the district in which the show was 
held, he would be the last to object 
to them ; but as the competitions had 
now been going on for more than 
twenty years, and almost every 
•county had been visited, he thought 
it was desirable that the question of 
their continuance should receive con- 
sideration. He desired, therefore, to 
move as a rider to Mr. Sunday’s 
motion, “ That it be referred to the 
Journal Committee to consider whether 
it is desirable that the Society should 
accept in the future any prizes for 
farm competitions, and that they 
be requested to bring up a recom- 
mendation on the subject at the next 
meeting of the Council.” 
Mr. Stratton agreed with Sir Mat- 
thew Ridley, and said that there were 
in every district specialists in farming 
whose practice ought to be reported 
upon. Such men as these would not, 
however, enter for the competitions, 
and the reports in the Journal did 
not, therefore, take account of their 
farms. 
Mr. Garrett Taylor said his 
experience, as Judge of farms on two 
previous occasions, showed him that 
the best men in the district did not 
enter into competition for the prizes. 
He seconded the motion with much 
pleasure. 
Earl Cathcart pointed out that 
one advantage of the farm competi- 
tions was the valuable reports on the 
competing farms which the Society 
obtained for the Journal. Thequestion 
raised by Sir Matthew Ridley should, 
however, receive the very careful con- 
sideration of the Journal Committee. 
Sir Nigel Kingscote said that, as 
Chairman of the Finance Committee, 
