MODERN CONDITIONS OF HUNTING 35 



— that these coverts were drawn on the days when they 

 were not out, and in one instance when the master com- 

 plained to a comparatively new subscriber that he never 

 went there because there were no foxes, the man 

 naturally asked who the covert belonged to, and who 

 rented the shooting. 



This he was told, and though he said nothing at the 

 time, he was, as it happened, a friend of both parties. 

 The landlord, it should be said, was non-resident, and 

 the tenant only came down at intervals, and could not 

 be called a resident of the district. Well, the matter 

 passed out of the master's thought, but a few weeks 

 later he received a letter from the tenant of the shooting 

 — a total stranger to him — stating that he (the tenant) 

 had just heard that hounds never drew the coverts in 

 question because there were no foxes in them, also that 

 he was quite unaware of the state of affairs, and that as 

 a matter of fact he was under the impression that the 

 coverts were drawn in due course, and that he had 

 always given orders that foxes should not be interfered 

 with. The master's feelings when he received this letter 

 can be well imagined. He was delighted to find that 

 he had been under a misapprehension about the coverts, 

 but was also terribly annoyed with himself for not 

 having made personal application to the shooting 

 tenant. It appears that a previous tenant had prac- 

 tically warned the hunt off, and when the shooting had 

 changed hands it had been reported about the country 

 that the new tenant was a friend of the former tenant, 

 and an even greater enemy to hunting than his pre- 

 decessor. 



This story suggests two things, first that it is ab- 

 solutely necessary for a master of hounds to approach 

 every new-comer, who has land in his hand, and if 



