Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 62

The Single Judge Question

The Single Judge Question

The next subject was the relative value of the various methods of judges, and on this the remarks of the Committee were as follows:—"The system of judging with three, two, and one, and by points, all have their advocates, and much may be said in favour of each. Until last year the judging at Christchurch Show was always done by three to each class; but as some were desirous of a change, that Association adopted the plan of two judges instead of three, which gave satisfaction, and was considered an improvement. Whether any other system would act even more satisfactorily, is a question which remains to be proved. There are strong advocates for judging by points, which they claim would ensure a more uniform system of judging. Mr Bruce, Chief Inspector of stock for New South Wales, has written an elaborate pamphlet, with diagrams, on the above subject, a copy of which is now on the table. There is also on the table a copy of the Californian State Catalogue, kindly forwarded by Mr H. Reece, which fully describes the point system as adopted there.'

Mr Orbell moved—"That as the system of judging by two judges has been found to work satisfactorily, it is desirable that this method should be adopted by all Societies."

Mr McLaren seconded the motion, and urged that the work of judging could be as page 8 well done by two if not better than by one.

Mr Kyngdon moved as an amendment—"That each Society be left free to adopt its own system and number of judges."

Mr Wanklyn seconded the amendment.

Mr Fitzroy said the Association in Hawke's Bay had been discussing this subject for some years, and had come to the conclusion that it would be better to adhere to the system of one judge.

Captain Willis said their Society had tried the one judge system, and had found it very satisfactory. He thought the judging by points could easily be arranged.

Mr McFarlane said he had been judging under all the systems, one, two and three. He had come to the conclusion that the two judge system was the best, because they could always call in a third as referee.

Mr Pashby supported the two judge system. It had been carried out in England at the Royal Society's shows, and he thought the Conference ought to adhere to it. There were many advantages in the two judge system.

Mr Allison was in favour of two Judges.

Mr Bidwell said in the North they had great difficulty in getting judges. He thought that the Conference should adopt the amendment.

Mr Matthews thought that under the one judge system they would not find a man taking the position unless he felt thoroughly competent, whereas when there were two or three one leaned on the other. The question of expense was a great point too, and in this direction there would be a great saving by only one judge being appointed. He would support the amendment.

Mr Coleman Philips thought that the Conference should be emphatic in their recommendation of one judge being appointed. By one judge he meant one for each class of sheep, not one for all the classes.

The amendment was then put, and carried on a division by 16 to 12.

Mr Fitzroy moved as a further amendment—"That in the opinion of this conference it is desirable that the system of one judge be adopted throughout the colony."

Mr Matthews seconded the amendment.

Mr D. Thomas said he would strenuously oppose the amendment, because they would find that one judge would have certain fads with regard to breed, &c.

It was pointed out that as the Conference had already left the matter in the hands of the societies it was stultifying itself by discussing the amendment.

Mr Coleman Philips suggested that Mr Fitzroy should make his motion to apply only to the sheep classes. ("No, no.")

Mr Fitzroy declined to accept this suggestion.

The amendment was put, and, on a division, lost by a large majority, and the substantive motion carried.