Almost all our exhibitions suffer at times from the withdrawal of exhibitors whose presence is always welcome, who smart under a sense of injustice at the hands of the judges. On the other hand, it is often very hard to get good judges to serve, from the fact that they smart under the insinuations of disappointed exhibitors, that improper motives or ignorance affect their decisions. Societies should themselves agree on some general points of excellence on which the judges could rely for support. What is or is not the "best half-a-dozen" of any thing, has a very indefinite meaning. In a hundred men, what is "best" in the eyes of fifty, will not be best in the estimation of the other fifty. As it is now, one never knows what is the ground on which committees make awards. A large number of exhibitors, when disappointed, will make allowances for this, and feel that if they lose a premium to-day they think they deserve, tomorrow they may get one given them that the other fellow ought to have had. Then they are satisfied to accept the decision that by competition they invited.

But there are others who, if they feel their articles did not get the premium they believe they ought to have had, can make no excuse for a reasonable ground for a difference of opinion, and from that time forth "their good works are seen no more in all the land." Even these weak brethren are worth caring for, and might be saved if rules for judging were formulated wherever practicable for the guidance of the judges. In roses, dahlias, and some other things, the "points" of a good thing have been defined and agreed on, and this rule might be extended to other things.