GUNS AND AMMUNITION. 



RIFLES, WOODCHUCKS AND BOYS. 



When ii years old I began my rifle 

 shooting by assisting a small friend to an- 

 nihilate the neighbors' cats. By hard 

 pleading I persuaded my father to buy me 

 a rifle — one of the little abominations 

 known as Floberts. I do not remember 

 killing anything with this, though I came 

 near shooting my father on one occasion, 

 when the gun went off unexpectedly. I 

 next came into possession of a second-hand 

 Remington, .22 caliber, which, as I remem- 

 ber, had apparently not been cleaned 

 since first used. The chamber was so large 

 that half the powder gas escaped at the 

 breech, and once when a conical B.C. bullet 

 stuck in the barrel, I tried to blow it out 

 with a few .22 shorts. Result: 3 or 4 bul- 

 lets in the barrel, which had to be bored 

 out. 



Then I bought a .32 rim fire Remington, 

 and thought I had found perfection. By 

 this time I had learned to keep a rifle clean, 

 and had begun to understand the real in- 

 wardness of the article. This gun did good 

 service on woodchucks, and was accurate 

 up to 100 yards or farther, on a still day. 

 But the bullet would not kill a woodchuck 

 where he stood unless it hit him in the neck 

 or brain. 



It is not much short of cruelty to hunt 

 woodchucks or larger game with a .22 cal- 

 iber rim fire. Still, if put in the right place 

 a .22 short will kill anything. A friend uses 

 one on hogs and cattle when butchering. 

 A .22 in the center of the brain is as good 

 as a 13 inch shell. But no man can put one 

 every time just where it should go. 



Next in size, and about the cheapest and 

 pleasantest gun to shoot, is the .25 rim fire. 

 If it could be loaded with a hollow pointed 

 bullet it would make a fine woodchuck 

 gun, were it not for one thing. In practis- 

 ing on this game bird, it is often essential 

 to know where the bullets strike, and any- 

 thing smaller than a .32-20 throws up little 

 " smother." 



To excuse so many references to wood- 

 chucks, I might explain that it is about the 

 only game the rifleman finds in Massa- 

 chusetts, and to my mind, it takes a rifle- 

 man to get it. Using any ball short of a .44 

 or .45 one must shoot straight to lay this 

 tough little chap out. Even hit in the head 

 his hind feet will work automatically, his 

 head will somehow point toward his hole 

 and in he goes. The only sure shot I know 

 is in the neck. This will always stop him 

 without a wiggle, and as his neck is' good 

 and thick, it is a fair mark at 100 yards. 



I have used a .32-40 Remington Hep- 

 burn for the last 7 years on these diggers, 

 and it is probably the best black powder 



rifle for the business. Have killed them 

 from 5 feet to 250 yards, and .once shot one 

 at what we called 80 rods. It took an ele- 

 vation of 7 l /2 divisions of a Lyman com- 

 bination sight on a .32-40, 27 inch barrel. 

 This Remington is the No. 3, bored for the 

 .32-40 Marlin cartridge and weighs 9 

 pounds 10 ounces. Last year I got a short 

 range bullet mold, and, shooting 13 grains 

 of powder and 98 grain bullet, found I had 

 to elevate my rear sight 2^2 notches at 100 

 yards to throw the regular 165 ball with 42 

 grains powder as high as the short range 

 cartridge carried. I cannot explain that. 

 I used a telescope on this rifle, but do not 

 like it. They are ticklish things, and not 

 pleasant on a gun with any recoil. 



The .32-20 Winchester is a fine cartridge 

 for chucks, but not accurate beyond 75 

 yards. The charge is a smasher, and with 

 an express bullet should be good for deer. 



Now, as to an all around rifle. One 

 heavy enough for fine target work is too- 

 heavy to carry for pleasure. The next rifle 

 I own will be a .25-36, half magazine. 



I have always loaded my own cartridges; 

 casting bullets in a Winchester mould — the 

 best made. They are finished up to the 

 Winchester standard, and are blued, which 

 practically breaks them in. The Ideal 

 moulds are roughly finished and the tail of 

 the cut off is in an awkward place to strike. 

 Also, the constant use of a reloading tool 

 swinging on the same pivot as the mould, 

 must sooner or later affect the fit of the 

 mould. Their single moulds and tools are 

 all right, barring the finish. The ball sizer 

 on the regular tool is a delusion and a 

 snare. I have seen one take off more on 

 one side of the ball than the other. 



This matter of finish is something to- 

 which some makers might pay more atten- 

 tion. The Stevens rifle is as accurate as a 

 rifle can be, yet the finish on their model .44. 

 is shocking. The edges of the receiver are 

 sharp, the stock does not always fit well, 

 and the bluing on the barrel looks as 

 though it were put on with a brush. I have 

 seen that on a Favorite model come off like 

 blacking, on one's hands. 



It is sad to relate, but the rising genera- 

 tion in these parts seems addicted to the 

 shot gun. I do not know more than one 

 boy in town who shoots a rifle, and not one 

 but owns a shot gun. I regard the shot- 

 gun as having a demoralizing effect on the 

 youthful mind. The average boy with a 

 shot gun knows nothing of wing shooting. 

 He takes his game sitting, and he likes a 

 shot gun because he is sure to hit it. He 

 has not learned to hunt for the pleasure of 

 being in the woods or fields; but hunts for 

 the sake of killing something. Our game 



388 



