328 CENTURY OF ENGLISH FOX-HUNTING 



political economy ; but like many other theories it 

 is difficult to compel the practice of it. If a man 

 allows himself to be cheated by his keeper, it is 

 difficult for even his best friend to interfere. The 

 busybody who meddles about other people's servants 

 generally receives for his pains a polite hint to mind 

 his own business. So, even when the gamekeeper 

 is a notorious public nuisance to the neighbourhood, 

 his employer, if he does not reside in the neighbour- 

 hood, is probably the last person to hear about his 

 faults. He gives the keeper certain orders, but he 

 does not see that those orders are carried out. 

 Thus he tells him to preserve foxes, or at all events 

 not to destroy them, and is indignant when he is 

 told that his coverts never hold a fox. He may 

 ask the keeper for an explanation, but he is generally 

 content with the simple denial of the keeper, that 

 he has not destroyed any foxes. Besides, I am 

 sorry to say that in many instances this indignation 

 on the part of the non-residential shooting-tenant 

 is only assumed. He does not hunt with the local 

 pack of hounds, and may not know the M.F.H. 

 and his followers. He does not care whether or 

 not he is locally popular, as he has no interest in 

 the land. Being only a bird of passage, the opinion 

 of county society has no weight with him. His 

 sole object is to get as big a bag as he can for 

 his money. Finally, the keeper knows this and 

 acts in accordance with his knowledge, and though 

 he dare not openly shoot a fox he will destroy him 



