CHAPTER XVII

HUMOURS AND VAGARIES OF THE SHOW-RINGS

I remember meeting a friend, many years since, whose wife was rather a

fine woman, who had _been_ younger and better looking, but still

"fancied herself" a good deal, and had a decent Pug, which she made a

point of taking to any shows held in their neighbourhood, and as I knew

he had entered the Pug in two or three classes at a local show where a

reverend gentleman, at that time very well known as an "all round

judge," at many shows throughout the kingdom, was officiating, I said,

"Well, old fellow, and how did your wife get on with her Pug?" "Oh, very

badly," said he, "there was a smart looking girl, with pink roses in her

hat, had a dog in the ring, and the judge couldn't look at anything

else, although our Pug was ever so much better!"

As I happened to hear, casually, that another reverend judge, who had

been not only a very successful breeder and exhibitor, but one of our

ablest judges, particularly of the non-sporting breeds, was about to

decline further judging, I considered, especially at that time, when

there were few judges of ability and standing, that he could be ill

spared, so I wrote to ask him, if I obtained a strong expression of

opinion from some of the leading exhibitors in his section, whether he

would reconsider the matter, and he wrote me a very courteous letter,

agreeing to do so. I then had a fac-simile letter, of my writing,

prepared, and sent a copy to all the leading breeders and exhibitors of

non-sporting dogs, and I do not think I had one refusal. I doubt if any

judge ever had such a requisition, and the result was, that for many

years, the public had the benefit of his valuable services, until, I

regret to say, ill health compelled him to give up all such matters, but

he retained his popularity to the last, and his retirement was

universally regretted. I have often met him since as a looker on at

shows, and we have occasionally corresponded.

As I have mentioned in the earlier pages of this work, for many years I

was a very keen breeder and exhibitor of Dandies, and kept a great many

of them at one time, perhaps the strongest kennel of the breed in the

kingdom, and won scores of prizes, etc. I remember, on one occasion,

when I had a team of dogs at a show in Gloucestershire, I had one of my

best Dandies entered either in a "Rough Terrier Class," or a class

composed of "Winners of so many Prizes" (in those days, all sorts of

peculiar classes and conditions were introduced into the schedules), and

there were two judges to officiate, neither of whom, I very much expect,

had ever had a Dandie before him previously. I was, at first, much

amused to see how they were puzzled over him, and I could see them

taking counsel together (I may say, they were men of the highest class,

as straight as gun barrels, and both deservedly respected and esteemed

by the whole kennel world, one amongst sporting, the other among

non-sporting classes, but as I hope and believe they are both still

living I will not mention their names, although I have told the tale to

one of them to his intense amusement and delight). But afterwards, I

began to fear they would, from not being sure what manner of animal I

had in tow, pass me over, or worse still, give some inferior notice to

my dog, who was a noted champion, and about the best specimen of the

breed _at that time_. After a while they came back to me and made a more

detailed examination of my dog, asked me his number, and awarded him

First Prize and Special, to my great relief, as I had been thinking what

a fool I had been to enter a "Champion," to have such a chance of a

"knock-back" at a county show!

Sometime after that, I was taking a short exhibiting tour, with a team

of my dogs, following three or four shows, held close together, and not

more than one or two days each in duration. Amongst others I had an

excellent Dandie Bitch with me, who had never been "out of the money,"

and was in excellent form at the time. I showed her at one place

(Reading, I fancy,) and took first under the Rev. W. I. Mellor. The next

show was, I think, Swindon; there I met almost the same lot of Dandies,

this time under the late Mr. W. Lort, who, after he had looked through

the class, came up to me and said, "I am sorry to say, Mr. Lane, I

cannot give you more than 'Very Highly Commended,' for your Bitch." I

replied, "In that case, sir, I shall be greatly obliged by your passing

her over altogether; she took first prize yesterday in the same company

under Mr. Mellor, who is reckoned one of our leading Dandie judges, and

I am going to show her under him to-morrow at Henley (I think it was)

where I have every hope she will _do the same_, so that I should not

like her to take 'V. H. C.' _for the first time in her life_ in

between." So the bitch was passed over and duly won another first prize

the next day.

The first time I had the honor of judging any dogs belonging to members

of the Royal Family was many years since at Warwick, where, I believe,

H. R. H. the Prince of Wales exhibited, for the first time, Skyes, and

foreign dogs. He may have shown others, also, but those were the classes

with which I was concerned. I remember the Committee and Chairman of the

show were, quite properly, much impressed with the honour of the Royal

patronage to their show at that time, nearly or quite the best held out

of London and admirably managed by a well organised and most capable and

courteous committee of "real workers," whom it was always a pleasure to

meet. As I judged, or showed, at all their shows, I can speak from

experience; and I may further say that I consider it a _positive

calamity_ for the kennel world when these shows came to an end. For, not

only were they most delightful gatherings, of the "Flower of the Fancy,"

both dogs, and people, but, held in well adapted buildings and premises,

near the quaint old Midland Town, almost under the shadow of the

historic castle and under the active patronage of the late Earl of

Warwick, and the present Earl, then Lord Brooke (both able and devoted

"Dog Fanciers") and his beautiful wife, who always used to grace the

shows by her presence, and took a keen interest in many of the animals

shown, besides being an exhibitor in some of the classes. The Chairman

intimated to me that the inmates of the Royal Kennel should stand well

in the Prize List. I told him "every dog entered would be judged by me

strictly on its merits, and if it was afterwards found the Royal Dogs

were amongst the Prize Winners, none would be more pleased than I

should, but I could not say or do more than that, and I was sure H. R.

H. would wish his dogs to stand, or fall, on their merits alone!" Since

then I have very often had the honour of judging dogs from the Royal

Kennels, both Sandringham and Windsor.

I remember it so happened that the first time Her Majesty the Queen

exhibited any dogs, nearly all Her Majesty's entries came into my

classes at a Great London show. Soon after my entering the building I

went to have a look at my classes, and shortly afterwards, the secretary

came up to me and said, "Do you know you have the great honour of being

the first man to judge any dogs from Her Majesty's kennels?" I said, "I

have heard so." He then said, "Well, I am most anxious they should all

be in the prize list, as I consider it a high honour that Her Majesty

has allowed them to be entered." I said, "That is all right enough, but

although I will not admit Her Majesty has a more loyal or devoted

subject than myself, I am here in a public capacity as a judge, and if

Her Majesty's dogs are entered, in competition with Her Majesty's

subjects' dogs, they can only be judged 'on their merits,' and from what

I can see on the benches as the Royal dogs have been pointed out to me

by your keepers I don't think many of them will be 'in the money,' as

the classes are very large and good." He said, "That will never do; what

can be done?" I said, "Will you leave it to me?" He said, "Yes,

entirely." I said, "Then I will have all the dogs of the same colour and

type as those from the Royal kennels, formed into a separate class,"

(which luckily, was feasible,) "and judged together." This was done and

I hope caused general satisfaction, which would not have been the case

had any partiality been shown, nor would such have been approved by Her

Majesty, I am perfectly sure, if the circumstances came to be known at

the palace.

On one occasion when I had been judging a number of classes at a large

London show, after I had done, one of the fair exhibitors came up to me

and said, "You don't seem to like my dogs." I said, "If you will tell me

the numbers of your dogs I will refer to my judging book, and see what

notes I made of them." She gave the numbers, and I read out the notes on

each. But this did not satisfy her, and she said, "Ah! I am only a poor

widow, if I were only a rich heiress, like ----, I suppose it would be

different, she can win any number of prizes with her dogs." I replied,

"You have no right to speak in that way to me, neither you nor any other

exhibitor can say I have ever made any distinction between rich and

poor. I have always sought to judge the dogs alone, irrespective of

their owners; if the dogs of the person you mention have won it is

because they were, in my opinion, the best." She said no more, nor did

I, but I presume she thought I spoke the truth, as I have often noticed

her as an exhibitor in my classes, at various shows since, and it is not

reasonable to suppose she would continue to show under me, if she

thought I favoured any one!

Indeed, there are so many "lookers-on" round every ring, nowadays who

understand the various breeds, and are prepared to criticise the awards,

that judges are "put upon their mettle," particularly with some of the

popular breeds, where the competition is often very keen, and the

entries large.

Some years since, at a large show in Wales I had a large and good class

of Bedlington Terriers, but there was one dog that stood out, head and

shoulders above the rest; it chanced that I began my examination of each

specimen in the class, which I always endeavour to make, and a short

note of the result in my book, at the dog standing next to him in the

ring, and therefore he was the last to be looked at, and merely going

over him enough to see that his coat, condition, topknot, legs, eyes,

teeth and ears, were satisfactory, I sent them for a run round, marked

my book and dismissed the class; while I was waiting for the next lot of

dogs a very melancholy-looking man crept up to me and said, "Would you

kindly tell me, sir, what you gave my dog?" I asked his number, and when

he told me, said, "First and special for best in the show;" he threw his

hat up in the air, and roared out, "Well, I'm blessed, I knowed he

knowed 'em, he didn't hardly want to look at my dog, he didn't, he could

see he were the best with half an eye, he could," and, from being a

solemn and sad-looking person, he became the most jovial-looking fellow

you could wish to see. I did not know his name, and do not know it now,

but he amused me very much at the time!

I do not remember _where_ it occurred, but I was judging rather a good

class of Scottish Terriers somewhere in the provinces, and a keeper

brought in a dog I liked the look of, and after going over the classes I

marked him first, and told the keeper to take him away and bench him,

which I suppose he did. You can imagine my surprise when shortly after,

the same dog made his appearance in the ring again, this time led by a

man I knew well as rather an extensive exhibitor, at that time, and he

began "making the most of his dog" before me. But as I had quite done

with him, and had still some of my awards in the class to make, I did

not want that, so I said, "I should take away that dog, and bench him if

I were you, as he has been judged and sent out sometime since." The

exhibitor in question, whom his worst enemy would not describe as either

shy or timid, was unusually rapid in his departure from that ring, and I

have since heard the story from others, to whom I suppose he told it,

but I have never told it until now!

I have had such a long and varied experience of judging, that although I

have often and often had classes large enough and strong enough to make

one "pull one's self together," I never remember being really

"nonplussed," but _once_, and that was when I was judging some years ago

at the People's Palace, situated in the East End of London. I presume,

the "drawers up" of the schedule had not been previously experienced in

such work, as amongst others, they had provided a "Variety Class for

London Exhibitors," and, if obtaining entries is a criterion of success,

it was very successful, as they obtained no less than 145 entries. I do

not know, but I should think, it was the largest class ever seen at any

show! And when I saw the tens and scores of dogs pouring into my ring, I

wondered what was to become of them, as it was a good walk merely to go

round them, and they formed a small dog show by themselves, and I

noticed about five or six well-known "Champions" amongst them, as it

included most of the known breeds of dogs. After referring to my judging

book, many pages in which were of course taken up, I found I had three

prizes to divide amongst this crowd, so I went to the committee, and

explained the matter to them. They behaved very well indeed, they said,

"We will leave the matter entirely to you, do whatever you please in

it." I went back, divided the class into over thirty pounds and under

thirty pounds, cleared out all that was no good, and weeded down the

remainder, and eventually gave two equal firsts, two equal seconds, and

two equal thirds in each division, making twelve prizes and two

"reserves" in all, which was a lot better than attempting to award three

prizes amongst close on 150 dogs. I think the exhibitors were pleased,

and felt I had done the best in my power to get them and myself out of

an awkward position.

Many of my readers will remember Mr. George Helliwell, better known to

his intimates as "Yorkshire George," and his long connection with the

late Mr. Fletcher's successful kennel of sporting dogs. It was always a

safe "draw" to touch on the merits of the Fox Terrier "Rattler," who won

many of his numerous honours, when in George's care, and he was never

tired, and would be nearly moved to tears in recounting his virtues and

triumphs. I remember one occasion, when he was officiating as a judge,

in which capacity he was in great request, and highly qualified. After

he had judged a class, one of the exhibitors, who was not satisfied with

what he had awarded to his dog, went up and asked him why he had not

given him more, saying his dog "had a wonderful pedigree," and thought

he ought to have beaten all there. George said, in his own peculiar way,

slapping his inquirer gently on the back, "If tha' tak my advice, lad,

the next toime ther' goes to show, thou'll tak thy dog's pedigree wi

thee, and leave dog at 'oom!" I fear my writing of the matter does not

properly convey the intense humour of the incident, and the "broad

Yorkshire dialect" in which the advice was given! But "George's" many

friends will picture it for themselves.

I saw in the papers lately the death of Mr. Frank Adcock, and it brought

to my mind not only his craze for Giant Bull Dogs, which is well known

to "the Fancy" of his day, but also his Great Dane "Satan," most

appropriately named, as he rightly or wrongly enjoyed the reputation of

being the most savage member of the canine race ever benched at shows.

I remember him as a very large, I think, dark Harlequin-coloured

specimen of the breed, always muzzled, even on the bench, and it usually

required two, and sometimes four, keepers to deal with him, and on one

occasion, I think it was a show at Bristol Drill Hall, many years since,

when he was being removed from the benches to be sent back to his owner,

he, although still muzzled, overpowered his attendants, and worried and

tore most of the clothes from one of them, well known to exhibitors as

"Teddy Morgan," who gave me a blood-curdling account of his experiences

of the affair. He said he fully thought "Satan" would have killed him

then and there, and spoke of the nonchalant and airy manner in which his

owner treated the matter, when he, afterwards recounted his perils and

troubles to him, with all the embellishments of which he was capable,

adding, "Mr. Adcock, he guv me a 'quid' (20 _s._) sir, and said he were

glad it were me, and not some raw cove what didn't understand dogs!"

All About Dogs: A Book for Doggy People · 第 3 / 10 章