AN AGRICULTURAL EXHIBITION DISPUTE.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2557, 19 June 1882, Page 4

AN AGRICULTURAL EXHIBITION DISPUTE.

A ease of importance to agriculturists and owners of live stock was heard at the Gainsborough (Lincolnshire) County Court. Mr A. J. Brown, of North Elsham, near Ponte--fraot, was plaintiff, tha parties suei being Mr Charles Caldeeott, the seorotary, und Messrs T. Johnson and O. Bhipham, also ofßoers of the Gainsborough Horse, Dog, Poultry, and Horticultural Society. l'he amount claimed was £lB 18s, being; the value of prizes awarded to plaintiff on account of certain horses belonging to and exhibited by him at the Gainsborough Show which was held on July 27th and 28th of last year. Defenders admitted the facts of the plaintiff's caso, whioh were as follows —On the Bth of July, 1881, plaintiff entered oertain h»rses for exhibition, the following being a copy of the said entry:—'North Elsham Hall, July Bth, 1881.—Dear Sir,—l am just off to the North Melton Show, and have only just time to oatch the post. I shall bo obliged if you will enter for me two horses in cla?s 9, hunters up to from 10 to 14 stones ; and also make for me two entries in class 10, hunters to carry 15 stones and upwards, and I will pay you the £llos for entries themselves when I am at the show. —I am, sir, yours in haste, A. J. Brown.' These lot era were addressed to the secretary, who accepted the entry, and inserted in the list the particulars as supplied by the plaintiff. On the morning of the show day, however, he informed the plaintiff that objections had been made to his entries on the ground that the same did not conform to rule 2 of the sojiety, which was as follows :—' Intending exhibitors must state upon the entry form their names and addresses in full, the class in whioh they intend to compete, also the oolor, description, and Bge of the horses.' Number 9 of the bye-laws and regulations of the society stated that' Prizes will be forfeited by exhibitors making inaccurate entries, if objections are alleged at the time of showing and afterwards sustained,' Frizes were awarded to the plaintiff for his horses amounting ia all to £lB 18s. An objection having been raised, the committee took the matter into consideration, and decided that the plaintiff was not entitled to the 18<s on the ground that he had not conformed with rules 2 and 9. Hence this action. Mr Hull, for plaintiff, urged that as the secretary had accepted the entry, although an informal one, he had waived rules 2 and 9, und plaintiff was therefore entitled to the prizes. Mr Bescoby, on the other hand, oontended that exhibitors must conform to the rules, and give upon the proper entry form their names and addresses, the class in whioh they intended to compete, the color, description, and age of the horsea. Exhibitors like the plaintiff, having a large number of horses, he said, if they did not state accurately what horses they intended to show, might send any other animal more fitted on the morning of the show than those originally intended. The object of the rule was to prevent this. The Judge held that, as the secretary of the aooiety had accepted the informal entry, the committee were not able to avail themselves of the rules quoted. His judgment would, therefore, be in favor of the plaintiff. He would, however, grant a case for the superior Courts. A verdiot was accordingly entered far the plaintiff for £lB 18s and costs.