202 THE MASTER OF HOUNDS 



just cause ; but, though the rebuke may be spoken in 

 the mildest language, the delinquent remembers it, and 

 takes good care not to offend again. Such a Master 

 rarely interferes with his huntsman while hounds are 

 hunting, unless hounds run out of their own country 

 and then check, or, what is a worse dilemma, the 

 hunted fox goes to ground in a neighbouring country. 

 In such cases, if the Master does not happen to be on 

 the spot to issue instructions, the position of the hunts- 

 man is one of grave responsibility. The hard-riding 

 division clamour that they should cast for their fox or 

 dig him out. The latter practice is now admitted to be 

 a distinct breach of Hunting etiquette, which would 

 cause serious friction between two neighbouring 

 Hunts ; but the temptation to make one short cast is 

 often too great to be resisted. 



"Gentlemen, we have lost our fox, and must hark 

 back into our own country." Such ought to be the 

 mandate of the huntsman in the absence of the Master, 

 though I have known a huntsman to be blamed for 

 giving this order, and, in spite of persuasive tongues, in- 

 sisting on its being enforced. On the occasion to which 

 I refer, we had run some four or five miles out of our 

 own country, when hounds were at fault. The Master 

 was not up, so the sole responsibility rested with the 

 huntsman, who gave the order quoted. Nor do I see 

 that he had any alternative, unless he transgressed the 

 orthodoxy of sport. However, the occupier of the 

 land, where we lost our fox, heard of the occurrence, 

 and was annoyed that our huntsman should have 

 acted up to the strict letter of Hunting etiquette. I 



