CUB-HUNTING 275 



keepers know that it is their wish that they should 

 be drawn blank. Briefly, it is not the resident land- 

 owners, but the non-resident shooting-tenants who 

 cause the friction between shooting and hunting. 



But it is my ambition to remove, or at least 

 to diminish, the existing friction, and therefore I may 

 be pardoned for giving advice which under other 

 circumstances might be deemed impertinent, especi- 

 ally as I believe that the major portion of the friction 

 arises from mistake. Let us take a typical case. 

 The landowner lets his shooting to a non-resident 

 tenant with the stipulation that hounds may draw 

 the coverts, and that foxes are preserved. This 

 stipulation is probably agreed to "over the maho- 

 gany," and is not expressed in the lease. The tenant 

 gives a vague instruction to the keepers not to shoot 

 foxes, an instruction which the keeper will rigidly 

 obey, since the social ostracism of the village ale- 

 house in a hunting country is as powerful as the 

 social ostracism of the country-house smoking-room. 

 Having issued this instruction, the tenant considers 

 that he has fulfilled his sporting obligations, oblivious 

 of the fact that there are more ways of killing 

 a fox than shooting him or poisoning him. How- 

 ever, so far the contract has been drawn, sealed, and 

 delivered on paper ; but what is the practical result? 

 The non-resident tenant arranges for a big shoot, and 

 either forgets or does not think it necessary to notify 

 the M.F.H. of the date. He comes down with a 

 party of friends with the laudable ambition of 



