AESTHETICS AND AGRICULTURE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume 1, Issue 17, 11 January 1873, Page 3

AESTHETICS AND AGRICULTURE.

A humourous contributor to the Canterbury Press, who nnght well adopt a better name than that of “ Loafer in the Street,” gjvps,thus a la Artemus Ward, his ideas of an Agricultural " I should like go in. for a pound or twp’ of ccstasv about the Agricultural Show, but I can t. My mind is not built on a agricultural or pastoral basis. I can look at a prize bull -without an approach, to atear.' I can’y feel rpnmgtjAat a well-grown carthorse and sheep are the bit common here, There p nothing, original about sheep. Pigs arc usefid though unclean , but i’m ho judge of them, or Was not until Hie show dav, when Slaggstook mV round plained all aboufcpigs.. He took two t his Christian performance. I left him i Without being mail on pigs’- I-tatr s «verykh show, the prixe beer Especially.l hßafirfib, .high an opinion of this branch of colonial show who came —not to see thft f show—►but TO show themselves. Bless ’em, and quire iflgnt too. It's not every day you can exhit . before happily. I was going to the flower show, but which, asmrsATroulotaw, mlthfr-Hwirere*aM most of the fruits in the world were represented. I thought the cdlifetibh? &ttU9t be better inside, so I saved a shillmg. and went at the implements. Before oan<fl©4Wfl. demand for very timiled,the majority St If so, how did you find them. I only ask from curiosity,, fori quitebfehe Dj&f' demands skilled labor, and, as Sam says, It s the seasoning . 9({| strain