Mat 2d, 1884] 



FORESf AND STREAM. 



343 



first called his attention to the birds, and then asked him if 

 he would like to see them nearer. He replied that he would, 

 and T at once drew in my line and told him to seat himself 

 in the bow of the boat. 'I then took the paddles and com- 

 menced urging the skiff forward as quietly as possible. The 

 birds meanwhile had crossed the creek and gone in among 

 some lily pads and tufts of wild rice that grew close to the 

 edge of the stream. We had hardly entered these when up 

 went the old bird, hut no young one started, and I knew 

 that it was fully fledged. This rather surprised me, and I 

 told my nephew to stand up, look carefully, and he would 

 see it swimming and hiding in the rice, that was around us. 

 But no, no bird was there. " 1 was about to stand up myself 

 and see if 1 could not discover it, for the place was compara- 

 tively open, when all at once Frank turned around, with 

 something of terror depicted upon his countenance, and ex- 

 claimed, "Oh! what an enormous bullfrog, and he has the 

 bird iu its mouth." Knowing that he had mistaken a large 

 snapping turtle for a frog, 1 told him to take the oar and 

 strike it. He did so, or "attempted to, when up came the 

 young bird. It was warm and the blood was ruuniug from 

 its side. 1 found no marks on its feet as tbough they had 

 been bitten, but, a great mouthful had been taken from the 

 side of the bird and the entrails were hanging out. 



The only way now that we can see of increasing the game 

 on that marsh or any of those bordering the lake, if the 

 skunks must be destroyed, is to watch the snappers and their 

 congeners in June, when they go up the bank to lay their 

 eggs, and destroy them; while many of the males might per- 

 haps be shot as they sun themselves on the logs. But we do 

 not think the snapping turtle is as much given to this as his 

 companion. However, this is thrown out as a hint to those 

 who have preserves and wish to increase the number of game 

 birds. We have known many young ducks, and even some 

 pretty well grown, to be taken away by snappers. And this 

 even in ponds in close proximity to the house. A friend had 

 to let his pond off last summer before he could catch the 

 turtle that destroyed many of his young ducks. No doubt 

 dogs and minks are often blamed for doing something that 

 belongs to a creature of a very different nature. Farmers 

 had best watch the ponds and brooks where their ducks and 

 goslings feed if they miss them. A. H. G. 



THE CHOICE OF HUNTING RIFLES. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I have read in a recent issue of your paper the courteous 

 ieply of "C. D." to my criticism of certain repeating rifles. 

 The defense is an earnest one and commands the respect al- 

 ways due to sincerity', yet I cannot sec that the reasoning of 

 your Wyoming correspondent invalidates at any point the 

 position which 1 have taken. "C. D." pleads for the re- 

 peater, and instances cases where it has been useful; but he 

 does not show that accidents do not occur with it, nor that 

 it can be relied upon to do its work unfailingly. The tests 

 which he quotes are certainly very interesting, but I observe 

 that in these tests there was a failure to extract a shell, i. e., 

 the gun did not work, a breakdown, and an explosion in the 

 magazine. These are tbe things that I do not wish to have 

 happen with the gun I am using. Of course I do not pre- 

 tend to say that such, occurrences take place often, but 1 do 

 say that they r may take place at any time, and that 1 prefer a 

 gun not liable to such mishaps. 



"C. D.'s" critical reply covers a good deal of ground, and 

 to answer it in detail would occupy r more time than 1 can 

 give to the task. 1 hope, therefore, that he will pardon me 

 if I confine myself to the original proposition as stated in the 

 letter to which he takes exception, and to one or two other 

 matters more personal in their nature. Of these last let me 

 speak first. 



I must apologize to my critic for giving a false impression 

 as to the arm which caused the Jim Baker accident. I sup- 

 posed, from the connection in which the incident was given 

 in the letter quoted, that it was a Henry (or Winchester) 

 rifle, but, as "(J. D." had his account from the old man him- 

 self, it is evident that my idea of the occurrence was an 

 erroneous one. I certainly bad no intention to mislead. 



It is clear that I must have expressed myself unfortunately 

 as to the care which, I think, should be given a gun, and so 

 have been misunderstood by "C. D." I believe that a man 

 should keep his gun in good order, but I do not think that 

 one who, for whatever cause, fails to do this, should lose his 

 life for this failure. The penalty is rather too severe, you 

 see, for what may be nothing more than a little carelessness, 

 or may be quite unavoidable. "C. IX" implies that I criti- 

 cized all repeaters as to their reliability of action and safety. 

 My impression is that a second reading of my letter will con- 

 vince him that I did no such thing, but that I expressed the 

 opinion that those repeaters which have the magazines in a 

 tube beneath the barrel or within the stock are unreliable and 

 unsafe. Of the former there are a number of forms, all act- 

 ing on substantially the same principle, all, I believe, likely 

 to get out of order on small provocation, and all liable to 

 premature discharge within the magazine from a number of 

 causes. The Winchester gun is sooken of by those who 

 write on the subj-ct, because it is the oldest of these repeat- 

 ers, and the one from which all substquent inventors appear 

 to bave drawn their ideas. The most recent rifles of this 

 model have not yet been practically tested in the hands of 

 the public, and when any single individual says that some 

 particular form is the best repeater in the market, is per- 

 fectly safe, and will not get out of order, the public natur- 

 ally waits, before approving or disapproving, to take more 

 testimony on the subject. The dictum of one man is not 

 enough. These arms are new and untried. They have yet 

 to make a record for themselves. 1 hope that "C. D." will 

 pardon me if I say, moreover, that in some of his recently 

 published writings he has shown a very strong bias in favor 

 of one particular arm. and that, therefore, his opinion, how- 

 ever honest, may not be quite free from prejudice. 



In my previous letter 1 attempted to show that with the 

 repeater the chance of serious danger to the hunter is vastly 

 greater than with the siugleloader. I do not pretend to assert 

 that cartridges often explode in the magazine. On the con- 

 trary; I think that this occurs very seldom, but then it may 

 occur at any time, and this possibility is somewhat alarm- 

 ing. Two cases of this kind already cited occurred in the 

 hands of men with whom I had close relations. 



*'C. D.'s" criticism of men who should not be trusted 

 with guns is just enough. But then he must remember that 

 to err is human. If no one ever did a foolish or a careless 

 thing we should have very few accidents with guns. As he 

 very justly says, there is "some preventable cause for each 

 accident," but, asgunsgoiuto the hands of wise men and 

 fools alike, we must try to save the lives of as many of the 

 fools as possible by making the guns as safe as possible, and 

 so reducing the danger, from whatever cause, to a minimum. 



The man who uses a repeater exposes himself to many dan 

 gers not undergone by him who uses the siugleloader. If 

 lie is willing to take these lisks that is his affair. 

 - It is just because a man in tbe western country ruust some- 

 times lake his life in his hands that a gnu is required that 

 will always work. And this is not true of the Winchester of 

 to-day, nor do I believe it true of other repeaters working on 

 the same plan, I cannot positively assert that all of the 

 Variohs models built On the Winchester plan will get out of 

 order, because, as "C. D." suggests, I have not tried them 

 all. But, admitting this failing in the Winchester of latest 

 model, the inference that the other aims built on a similar 

 plan will act, or fail to act, in the same way, is not an unfair 

 one 1 instanced the case, of "many years ago,'* because it 

 was tbe first time that 1 had seen much of the repeater, but 

 I think that "C. D." must very well know that at the present 

 day, notwithstanding the march of improvement for "three 

 hundred years. " it is an extremely common thing for a cart- 

 ridge or shell to stick in a tube repeater. This is the 

 testimony of so laree a number of practical hunters, whose 

 word would be unhesitatingly taken in other matters, that 

 we cannot doubt that it is a fact. In a country where a 

 man's life may depend on the readiness with which he can 

 use his gun, an arm can have no fault more serious than this. 

 And now, although I have already written more than T 

 had intended, let me touch on one or two additional points 

 brought up by "C. D." He appeals for rifles that are more 

 accurate; In this appeal I unite, though 1 cannot but think 

 that for practical purposes any one of half a dozen rifles now 

 on the market is quite good enough. The proposition that 

 to do good shooting we must have good rifles, seems certainly 

 rather elementary. He complains in the last part of his 

 letter that the errors of the man should be charged to the 

 rifle, but he does not appear, iu his expressed desire, for 

 rifles that will always hit the mark, to remember that, after 

 all, this hitting depends on the man vastly more than on the 

 rifle. No intelligent and observaut person can use a rifle 

 much without learning its peculiarities, and after he has 

 acquired this.knowledge he can scarcely fail to do with the 

 arm work that is reasonably good. This on the supposition 

 that he is a decent shot, and that the arm is bored true and 

 shoots alike every time. No man, however, can account 

 for the shooting of a tube repeater, the balance of which is 

 constantly changing. If it be supposed that each time a 

 man goes hunting he is to carry a rifle with which he is 

 entirely unacquainted, we could understand how it is that 

 there should be so much anxiety about the accuracy of these 

 rifles, but the rifles of to-day are practically accurate, and an 

 individual may learn by firing at different ranges at a target 

 all he needs to know about his gun ; and as soon as a man 

 knows how his gun shoots, the fault if he misses lies in him 

 and not in the weapon. "C. D.," however, appears to as- 

 sume a man who is infallible, and takes it for granted that a 

 failure to place a ball in the spot aimed at is due to some 

 fault in the rifle he is shooting. That is the way his article 

 Teads, but of course I cannot suppose he intended to give 

 utterance to any such absurdity. 



He says further, "It is a lucky chance if the hunter can 

 come on his game at a known distance or have full time to 

 estimate it." I grant that it is unusual to come on the game 

 at a known distance, but dissent utterly from the latter part 

 of his proposition. A man who is hunting will often — even 

 usually — see his game before it sees him, and will have 

 abundant time to estimate his distance before shooting. Of 

 course, if one merely rides over the country, taking his 

 chance of stumbling on game, things will be as "C. D." 

 says, but I am speaking of men who hunt, not men who 

 blunder. And suppose the game is found to-day at 50 yards 

 and to-morrow at 150, the hunter who knows his arm should 

 be able to make the neGessary allowances for the difference. 

 To judge the distance and shoot accordingly is about as im- 

 portant as any part of the work a hunter has to do. 



I hold that the repeater is a cruel weapon, because the 

 knowledge that a man has a dozen shots in reserve, makes 

 him careless in his shooting, and leads him to continue it too 

 long. "0. D." theorizes about an ideal sportsman, but we 

 must reason about the average man. Probably neither "C. 

 D." nor I would continue to shoot, if we carried repeaters, 

 longer than was advisable, but the young hands, the men 

 who are hunting big game for the first time, will try to kill 

 as long as they can. The men who butcher, who wound 

 five head of game for one that they kill, are, so far as I have 

 had the misfortune to be thrown with them, those who are 

 so crazy to kill game that nothing can restrain them ; they will 

 shoot as long as the animals are in sight. The man who hunts 

 for his needs knows enough to take his time and to avail 

 himself of every advantage. He gets as close as he can, and 

 the single ball from his rifle does the work. Even a cool 

 headed man, unless he is accustomed to the sight of game, 

 will fire ten shots from a repeater where he would use a 

 singleloader but once. Thus the repeater is a constant tempt- 

 ation. 



I am unable to see that the article to which this is a reply 

 is other than a virtual admission of all that I have advanced 

 against this dangerous arm. I believe that other things 

 being equal, the best gun is the safest— satest in action, I 

 mean, and in being always ready for use, and, as I have said 

 beiore, 1 do not believe that the repeater with the magazine 

 m the tube under the barrel or within the stock, fulfills these 

 conditions. 



My time is so occupied that I cannot give much of it to 



writing, and I only reply now to "C. D. to show him that 



I do not consider his arguments good ones, or that he has'in 



any way replied satisfactorily to the points 1 tried to make. 



G. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



1 have owned and used rifles of large and small bores, and 

 have at last settled down to the .32-caliber, short and extra 

 long cartridges, for general hunting and target shooting. 



I believe that accuracy is of more importance than weight 

 of powder and lead. If one knows that he can place a ball 

 in some vital part of the game he is hunting, he is pretty 

 certain of making a mortal wound. There is little or no recoil 

 to the .32-caliber to affect the aim, as in all large bores. Of 

 course for grrizzlies, buffalo and moose, a large bore is ne- 

 cessary. But I am speaking now of common hunting, deer, 

 turkey, geese, etc. Probably tbe .38-caliber would be better 

 still where no small game is hunted. 



1 am now using a little .32-caliber. and find no difficulty 

 in killing whatever 1 aim at. I have killed several alligators 

 with it lately — all at one shot. The last one was eight feet 

 in length, the ball (.32 short) entered at one eye, passed 

 through the head, and carried away a large piece of bone 

 near the other, disabling the 'gator so bad that, after he had 

 stopped lashing the water with his tail, I drew him out on 

 the land without resistance on his part. The alligator is 



like a snake in that it liv s long after it has been nortully 

 wounded or has its head cut off. It is pretty well known 

 that a good sized alligator is hard lo kill ; that in order to 

 kill one at all (outright, or so you can capture it), the ball 

 must be sent into the eye or just back of the foreleg. I 

 know, nine times out of ten, where my leaden messenger 

 will strike, and as I never attempt to kill game at distances 

 over one hundred yards, (and that is further than most game 

 is killed), I am pretty sure of making a mortal wound. 



Try the .32 and .38-caliber rifles, (save ammunition and 

 sore shoulders), and you will become clack .shots, and bug 

 more game, in fact have more real sport than you could with 

 your 115 to 120 grains of powder and 850 grains of lend. 



Red Wing, 

 Glencoe, Fla. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



At last in looking over your articles on "The Choice of 

 Hunting Rifles," 1 have found a man after my own heart in 

 your correspondent "E. T. D." Tlr case he cites in regard 

 to the Winchester, is almost invariably the way I have found 

 it. The majority shoot away, thinking they arc bound to 

 bit something in ten or fifteen shots, wheu generally the op- 

 posite is the case. I have seen so many "tenderfeet" with 

 their repeaters, pump away (excuse the word pump but it is 

 very expressive) at a deer," within easy shooting distance, 

 and that deer was as safe as if he were 100 miles away, 

 You do not, as a rule, find old Rocky Mountain hunters, 

 who face the fiercest animals, use a repeater, they trust, to 

 shooting straight, not to the number of shots. I have had 

 considerable experience with the rifle, in shooting such large 

 game as bear, mountain lion, elk, deer, antelope, etc , aud 

 after giving the repeaters a fair trial, have thrown them all 

 aside and swear by my Sharps hammcrless, .40-70-330, , and 

 would far rather be face to face with a "silver tip" with 

 ray .40-70, than with twenty Winchesters or any other make 

 of repeaters. I anticipate a two months' trip this summer, 

 and if "E. T. D." wihV come out here, I will guarantee to 

 show him all the bear, deer, elk, etc., be could desire, and 

 moreover as fine trout fishing as the most fastidious would 

 ask for. 1 say with him, "I want no better gun than the 

 .40 70." Sport. 



Ceested Butte, Colo. 



THE PERFORMANCE OF SHOTGUNS. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I don't care for "style" in a gun, provided the gun is safe, 

 handles well, and is a close, hard shooter. No matter how 

 strong the material, I want some weight of metal in the 

 barrel of my shotgun and especially at the muzzle of a choke- 

 bore, I believe that where a gun is choked at the muzzle, if 

 it is light at that point it springs so that we do not get tbe 

 full benefit of the choke. I came to this conclusion by put 

 ting a light band of lead, fitting closely, around the muzzle, 

 and after firing the gun I found it would drop off easily, 

 having expanded quite perceptibly. 



I have been using for the past two years one of the Amer- 

 ican Arms Co.'s semi-hammerless single guns, a 12-gauge 

 gun, 28 inches, 9£ pounds, made to order (a 12-gauge on a 

 10 gauge stock), cut off and rechoked to leave it heavy at the 

 muzzle. Pedagoo, 



Cleveland, O. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Several of your correspondents have made statements that 

 I kill geese at 100 yards with No. 10 shot. It is not so. I 

 have seen pinnated grouse killed at that distance, and I have 

 seen geese killed with Nos. 8 and 10 after being shot at with 

 largest size drop shot. A good 10-gauge gun bored for 

 Kynoch's cases will kill a goose at 100 yards with shot from 

 BBB to TT in size, and it is my opinion it is better to hit a 

 goose at long range with small shot than miss it with large. 

 I have killed geese and turkeys when hunting quail at long 

 range with small shot; longer range than I ever killed a 

 quaii under same circumstances. Small shot loaded with 

 good powder, good wads and held right will kill a long way. 

 1 have never owned a fine gun yet that 1 bad made for long 

 range but what would stick No. 8 shot in a pine board at 100 

 yards and stick it in good. Any Baker gun 10-gauge, 32- 

 mch barrels, full choke, will do it, and put TT clear through 

 an inch soft board. Remember to use the very best powder 

 and felt wads. Field loading for wildfowl, say 4£ drams 

 of No. 6 C. & H. powder, one cardboard, one $ felt, one 

 pink-edge, 14 ounces of Tatham's TT shot, 3-inch brass 

 cases. If American guns are not fine enough for "Byrne," 

 order from England, and you will get as long range, but not 

 a bit longer. You cannot get such shooting from guns 

 chucked out on a machine so many a day, but from a 

 maker who prides himself on a long-range gun. "Almo's" 

 experience extends over three continents and twenty-five 

 years' shooting, in season; and when I stated that a goose 

 was killed away up yonder by a boy with a $25 gun loaded 

 with No. 10s for quail, I did not intend it as my mode of 

 loading. 1 still say if you want a dead goose it is better to 

 hit it with No. 8 than miss it with TT. Almo. 



Texas. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



There has been but little allusion to the great importance 

 of having a gun that will throw shot centrally with a good 

 degree of unitormiiy. It has been n.y experience that any 

 gun that will throw a given number of pellets to the center 

 will always distribute the rest of the charge iu regular man- 

 ner. How very few cylinder barrels can be dependi d upon 

 to do this beyond forty yards. For years 1 shot a cylinder 

 as good as any for the above distance, but how "wild" it 

 would shoot much of the time, after getting a little foul 

 especially. In spite of my prejudices iu favor of my dearly 

 loved old cyliudei guu, I was actually forced into the pur- 

 chase of a "full-choked" breechloader, 1 had too much evi- 

 dence crowded unwillingly upon me, so that I had to put 

 by the old gun that had occasionally made such splendid 

 shots and of tener made such decided misses. 



I put the manufacture! to a severe test, as I thought. I 

 wanted a guu that would shoot 60 yards with No. 6 shot, and 

 70 yards with No. 4, with sufficient uniformity to kill a duck 

 or pigeou. Three "full-choked" guns were targeted. Each 

 gun was shot four times. In the record there were from one 

 pellet to five that struck a five-inch bullseye in a thirty-inch 

 circle every r time, Only one pellet in one discharge fin all 

 the rest a sufficient number to have struck a duck or par- 

 tridge. In twelve shots the five-inch bullseye was not 

 neglected once. Such is my idea of what constitutes a good 

 shooting shotgun. I have never yet seen a cylinder that 

 would do that kind of shooting with uniformity. 1 attribute 

 the difference to the system of "choking." The shot may 

 possibly get tangled up somewhat when they reach the 



