28 The Amerian Angler 
sembling the spots on trout and the old time 
strawberry mark. But my health is good, so I 
I don’t worry. B. P. Van Horne. 
FripLey, Montana, July 20. 

Fishing and Shooting «‘ Longbows.”’ 
As the subject of ‘‘unveracity”’ of anglers 
is attracting much attention, the annexed notes 
of H. R. Francis, in the English -zshing Ga- 
zetfe, are amusing and interesting: 
It is startling, and by no means satisfactory, 
to an old fly fisher strongly imbued with the 
esprit de corps which ought to mark the 
brotherhood of the angle, to note the frequency 
and strength of the charges of mendacity pub- 
licly advanced against anglers as a body. 
Exaggerations of the weight and number of 
fish captured are quoted and dwelt on as if 
true reports were not ten times commoner than 
false ones. A cry of ridicule is raised when 
some curious fishing adventure is recounted, as 
if every experienced angler had not witnessed 
a score of odd accidents which he would a 
priort have pronounced most improbable. 
Nay, this imputation of ‘‘enormous lying’”’ 
finds such ready currency, that stories are 
continually written for our sporting press of 
which the whole fun lies in inventing some 
monstrous absurdity and printing it as a speci- 
men of piscatory fiction. It may, I think, be 
worth while to inquire what solid ground exists 
for the sweeping charge of ‘‘unveracity” 
leveled against the brethren of the angle, and 
to what causes such a charge is traceable. 
There is a cynical proverb which declares 
that ‘‘there is no smoke without fire.” As ap- 
plied to imputations on individuals, the accept 
ance of this adage would be a charter for libel; 
but in the cases of large classes, fairly open to 
observation and criticism, we cannot deny it 
some weight, and the question is, how much 
fire accounts for the smoke in a particular in 
stance? or, dropping metaphor, how far is the 
class imputation warranted? Arguing first 
from what Paley calls ‘‘the nature of the case,” 
we may fairly assume that on questions of 
mere sport most men feel themselves less 
bound fo strict veracity than on those of impor- 
tant fact or serious business. They are under 
no legal or professional obligation to accuracy, 
and, without any ‘‘intent to deceive,” often 
make loose and exaggerated statements. But 
I cannot admit that Piscator isa greater sinner 
n this way than Venator or Auceps. Mem- 
_ chance. 
bers of the same hunt, meeting after a good 
run, will exchange their narratives with per- 
fect truthfulness, but he would be a bold man 
who would vouch for the account of a ‘‘fast 
thing’’ in the shires givenin some remote coun- 
ty by a chance sharer in the honors of the 
field, As for shooting, sportsmen who are 
either self-conceited or pretentious, may, and 
constantly do, swell their nominal bag by claim- 
ing to have killed birds, which they certainly 
fired at, but as certainly missed. 
Mr. Richard Penn—a good shot as well asa 
skillful fly-fisher, ‘‘in the merry days when I 
was young ’’—-tells of a day’s partridge shoot- 
ing with two friends, at the close of which they 
respectively claimed to have killed thirty-one 
and thirty-three brace. Mr. Penn waited for 
the numbering of the slain—sixty-three brace 
all told—and then quietly remarked that his 
own share in the bag seemed to have amounted 
to the mzsszug brace. I have myself witnessed 
cases when the claims were hardly less ex- 
aggerated. Then as to distances. Shade of 
General Longbow ! what a hyperbolical fiend 
seems to possess the men who glory in their 
‘long shots!’” Comparing their estimate by 
guess with the actual results as given by 
measurements, which I have often done, my 
conclusion has been that eighty yards for 
sixty, and sixty for forty-five, are but moder- 
ate expansions of the fact. ‘‘Judging dis- 
tances” is a special accomplishment, and the 
shooter, especially if a novice, and therefore 
‘on his trial,’’ gives himself the full benefit of 
the doubt he may fairly entertain! I do not 
believe that anglers are less veracious than 
other sportsmen, and [ have found the more 
skillful of the brotherhood trustworthy even to 
the minutest particular. Still we must admit 
that a good many fibs, and not a few downright 
lies, are told as to success in fishing. Your 
professed angler of the Winkle type is a 
grievous offender, though mostly in the way of 
vague generalities. I remember once being 
asked to escort a foreign nobleman who wished 
for a day’s pike fishing on the Thames. He 
was a very agreeable companion, though he 
seemed to ‘‘ protest too much” as to the dons 
brochets hehad slaughtered, and I gladly made 
all the arrangements for giving him a fair 
It was rather early in the season, and 
I soon found out that his best hope lay in work- 
ing the dead gorge—rather weary work, but 
requiring more patience than skill if the water 
were well chosen and fished pretty closely. 
