September 23 , 1880 . ] JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 275 
JUDGES AND JUDGING AT HORTICULTURAL 
SHOWS. 
S our neighbours the French observe, “ It goes 
without saying,” that the success of exhibitions 
depends in a great degree on the judging. 
However good an exhibition may be, and how¬ 
ever able and assiduous the officials of the show, 
if any serious mistakes are made in the awards 
from time to time exhibitors become alienated 
and gradually drop off, and without exhibitors it again 
“ goes without saying ” there can be no show. The 
committees of horticultural societies are generally aware 
of the importance of securing good judges ; but as not a few 
of those committees are composed of gentlemen who have 
necessarily but little practical acquaintance with the art that 
they so laudably endeavour to promote, they do not always 
succeed in securing the best men obtainable for adjudicating 
in the several departments of an exhibition. Occasionally 
judges are appointed, not because they possess special qualifi¬ 
cations for the office, but because they are fortunate in being 
employed by some grandee who is also a supporter of the 
society. Such gardeners may be excellent judges, but, on the 
contrary, they may not possess the necessary qualifications, 
and there is always more or less risk of disappointment ensu¬ 
ing in some form or other when local men are appointed to ad¬ 
judicate at provincial shows. All good gardeners are not good 
judges. Some do not possess the faculty of a quick and 
accurate comparison of the merits and failings of the several 
exhibits before them ; others of a cautious frame of mind lack 
the virtue of decision and become nervous, then sometimes 
decide wrongly ; others, again, have a great amount of self- 
assurance, and jump at conclusions—“ knock off a show,” as 
they say, “ in no time," as if this were a proof of their com¬ 
petency. But even such men are not infallible. 
Then, again, when good judges are secured they are not 
always judiciously apportioned. There are some, but not 
many, judges who are equally conversant with the merits of 
specimen plants, Orchids, florists’ flowers, fruit, and vegetables. 
Such men may safely be sent into any department of a show. 
Others are specially competent, and these are the majority, in 
one particular branch. A gardener may be a first-rate judge 
of fruit, but quite “ at sea ” amongst specimen plants and 
florists’ flowers. Another may be a thoroughly good plant 
judge, and quite out of his element amongst fruit. This is an 
important matter, and should always be remembered when the 
judges are being apportioned to the different sections of a 
show. I have seen three judges “ doing ” the specimen plants, 
and two of them admitting they knew nothing about them, 
and have also seen fruit misjudged by first-rate plantsmen. 
Some men in the horticultural world appear to be very fond 
of judging, or of the guinea or two at the end of it. They, 
indeed, offer their services and seek appointments. Such 
judges do not hesitate to act in any department, and they may 
give satisfaction ; still it is to be remembered that experienced 
and competent judges have no need to “ seek for work,” as 
they have more applications for their services than they can 
entertain. 
It is the rule of some societies to have fresh judges at every 
show, while other societies employ the same men for, it may be, 
twenty consecutive years. As to this, it maybe said that every 
plan that works well is good ; but it cannot be denied that a 
great number of exhibitors are often heard expressing an 
opinion when they meet the same judges at the same show for 
half a lifetime, that “ a change would do no harm.” Changing 
the men every year may work well for a time, but the course 
is not the safest; for it follows that a very good man may be 
succeeded by one less competent, and superior judges are not 
so plentiful as to enable this system to be carried out in¬ 
definitely. As in other matters, the safest course is probably 
the mean between two extremes, and old hands should oc¬ 
casionally stand aside to afford younger men an opportunity 
of exercising the functions of censors. Two old well-proved 
judges to one new one is always a safe course, and a young or 
fresh man is being brought up to the efficient discharge of an 
important duty. 
In the distribution of judges different customs prevail. At 
one show a certain number of classes are allotted to one judge 
who has to perform his duties alone ; in other cases the judges 
work in pairs ; in others, again, in triplets. Judging is neces¬ 
sarily costly when a number of adjudicators have to travel 
from two hundred to three hundred miles to perform their 
duties, and it is possibly thought that by the single-judge 
system there is a saving of expense. It is a question if this is 
really so. There are very few judges indeed who like to act 
alone, and the majority of them are twice as long in adjudi¬ 
cating on a given number of classes as two men would be. A 
single judge having no one to share his responsibility naturally 
hesitates long over every class for fear of making a mistake, 
and, be it understood, this very hesitation not infrequently 
leads to a mistaken verdict. I have seen one of the very 
best fruit judges in England in a most uncomfortable position, 
and in a state of perspiration when acting alone; but with a 
coadjutor the work would have been easy to him. In this 
case, as he afterwards admitted, he made one mistake, and 
said the judging would have been done in half the time if 
he had had an assistant. No doubt the majority of judges 
will coincide in this opinion. 
The other extreme of judging in triplets is founded on the 
principle that a majority must decide the points at issue, and 
with two judges only, and their views being different on 
any exhibit before them, there can be no majority and no 
decision. As a matter of fact, however, the verdicts are 
usually given with unanimity, and the concurrence of two 
good judges is quite sufficient for all practical purposes. 
Where cost is no object let three judges be appointed by all 
means in every section of a show, but generally there is a 
decided waste of power by this plan. 
Judging in pairs is for all practical purposes sufficient, and 
No. 13.—Von. I., T-iiiiid Series. 
No. 1669 .—=V©l. LXIV., Old Series. 
