AWARDS FOR SHEEP

Manawatu Standard, Volume LX, Issue 249, 18 September 1940, Page 8

AWARDS FOR SHEEP

ALLOCATION OF AMOUNT,

SPRING SHOW SCHEDULE

A motion that prize-money be increased in the Kyeland and teouthdown sheep sections, which was carried at a meeting of the general committee of the Manawatu anil West Coast A. and P. Association to-day, cansed some discussion on whether such a step was an equitable one. The sheep committee had been instructed to reduce the prize money in its classes by 20 per cent., but it was finally decided to bring the ltyeland and Southdown prize list into line with the Romney classes.

The point as to whether a mistake might have been made for the allocation of these classes was raised. Mr A. C. Morton asked whether the object of the association was to look after one or two classes or to make an exhibition representative of the live stock of the North Island. The latter was . the case, and if the association was going to encourage competition it must treat all classes alike. “If this \yere not done the Show would sink to the level of a small country show, lie thought that this treatment of the classes was a principle to which the association should adhere. Mr J. A. Mitchell said the association had to put down its foot at some time or another. It was all very fine to talk about princii>le. Something had to be done to prevent the association going back. Mr Morton aaid that he was quote in agreement with reducing costs, but why should they not be reduced equitably '( He would like to see 60 much taken off each class. He moved an amendment that the prize money should bo the same for all the classes in the Show, but that a general reduction should be made by 20 per cent. Mr L. 13. Wall said that the Romney and Southdown classes were moneymakers and he thought that the committee was quite right in watching their interests. Mr H. It. Green commented that if the amendment were carried it would amount to a ‘vote of no-confidence in the sheep committee. Mr Morton said his amendment was not intended ias a vote of no-confi-dence. It was simply that the question had been reopened. The amendment was lost and the motion to increase the money in the two sections was carried.