490 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Jtrr,T 17, 1884. 



my brother lovers of pointers. He has misrepresented dogs, 



forfeited every confidence over placed in him, and demonstrated 

 beyond the question of a doubt that unless things are altered 

 dot? shows must degenerate into a complete farce, if indeed, 

 they have not done so already, 



Mr. Munson tells us there was not a "well-informed pointer 

 man" among the spectators who did not see at a glance how 

 far superior Meteor was to Beaufort. Mr. Munson cannot 

 name one single pointer judge who indorsed that decision. Is 

 Mr. Waddell, the well-known Western breeder, well-informed, 

 and what did he say about Beaufort? Here it is: ''The best 

 huge pointer I have ever seen." Is Mr. Edmund Orgill (prob- 

 ably the best judge in America) well informed, and what did 

 be say? Here are his own words: "A grand fellow — same 

 stamp as Faust and Bow, but beats them all to pieces— the best 

 I have ever seen— should like to breed to him." What did Dr. 

 Strachan say? and what was Mr. Steel's opinion? How about 

 Messrs. Gregory, Garrett Roach, Satterthwaite. Lamb, Tall- 

 man, Martin. Phelan, and a hundred others I could name. Is 

 Mr. Thos. Orgill well informed, and what is his opinion? "I 

 call Beaufort a grand dog, and fail to see where any one can 

 find fault with him. In my judgment he is the best-looking 

 large pointer in America, in which opinion I am backed by my 

 ffith er. " Americans give Mr. Wise credit for knowing a pointer, 

 and that gentleman has said, "He (Beaufort) could win any- 

 where," and that Beulah, the dam of Beaufort, is one of the 

 best bitches living in the held. Now for the press. Forest 

 AND Stream has said, "We consider him the best-looking 

 pointer that we have ever seen. We are assured by several 

 gentlemen who have seen him at work, that he is 

 also an excellent field performer." The Kennel Blister 

 holds a similar opinion, and Turf, Field and Farm did not 

 indorse the decision against him. The London Field says, 

 "These questionable decisions positively sink into insig- 

 nificance compared with what Mr. Sterling did with the 

 pointers * * * altogether we must sav that more dissatis- 

 faction we never heard expressed at anv single-handed judged 

 show. * * * The pointer awards were dealt out in a strange 

 fashion by Mr. Sterling. He began with large champion 



Eomters, and Mr. Munson's Meteor beat Beaufort, Knicker- 

 ocker, Don, Croxteth and Perth. Meteor was decidedly out- 

 classed in such company. He has been the subject of a good 

 deal of controversy and at Toronto he was shown in another 

 person's name, but here he was, by coming in as Mr. Munson's, 

 rendered eligible for some extra prizes. He is bad in head, 

 wants squareness, has a bad eye, ears set on too high, shoul- 

 der blades wide apart at the top, shallow chest, short back, 

 and a badly carried tail. * * * Croxteth also is much 

 better than Meteor. * * * Beaufort was decidedly the best 

 dog of that class." The only paper that indorsed the decision 

 was the one in .which Messrs. Munson and Sterling have a large 

 sum of money invested. If I am wrong in this statement let 

 Mr. Munson deny it under his own signature. 



Mr. Munson does not see any "honor" in Meteor's beating 

 Beaufort— neitner do I— but let me say right here that Meteor 

 never did beat Beaufort. Beaufort's reputation does not rest 

 on my advertisement that he is the handsomest pointer in 

 America, It rests on the fact that he is the grandest pointer 

 ever seen in the opinion of the best judges and every independ- 

 ent paper. This is the more remarkable when a' clique, as- 

 sisted by a newspaper editor, has undertaken to annihilate 

 both dog and owner. Mr. Munson is wrong when he predicts 

 the New York show was Beaufort's Waterloo. 1 am inclined 

 to the opinion that it was Messrs. Munson and Sterling's Water- 

 loo. 



It was reported before the N. Y. show that several mem- 

 bers of theW. K. C. had pronounced Meteor a very inferior 

 specimen, and it is well known that Mr. Munson expressed a 

 similar opinion of Bang Bang. Unfortunately I have not in 

 my possession documentary evidence to sustain me in regard to 

 Meteor, butlhold proof that before the tete-cl-ttbe in New York 

 Mr. Munson considered Bang Bang a very ordinary animal. 

 Wasa tacit understanding arrived at between Mr. Munson and 

 the VV estmmster Kennel Club, whereby Mr. Munson was to 

 pronounce Bang Bang the best small pointer in America and 

 the club reciprocate the kindness by sending Meteor off as the 

 best large pointer in America? I am guided to such a conclu- 

 sion by the following documentary evidence, which will also 

 explain how Beaufort was placed behind Mr. Munson's ex- 

 hibit, entered in the catalogue as being by Garnet out of Jilt. 

 Mr Munson writes in your paper of June 12 as follows: "I am 

 willing to go &n record as saving that Meteor and Bang Bang 

 are (barring the head of each, which, I think, could be slightly 

 improved) the best pointer dogs in America, and the only "type 

 of the pointer to breed to." Mr. Munson here admits Meteor 

 and Bang Bang to be of the same type, and to be perfect ex- 

 cepting m head, in which respect they could, in his opinion, be 

 slightly improved. I take him at his word. Let us now see 

 what Mr. Munson wrote about Bang Bang in April, before he 

 had 'arranged matters" with the "Westminster Kennel Club: 



rn. i rr ,«- „ St - boUIS, April 9, 1884. 



Charles H. Mason, Esq.. JV. Y..- 



Dear Sib-1 expect to catch fits in the papers for passing Bang 

 Bang by at > Cleveland, but I am sure I put the ribbons where they be- 

 longed. I am not pleased with Bang Bang. * * * I am told Beau- 

 fort is a remarkably handsome dog. Tours truly, 



Jno. W. Munson. 



»_.-,„ St - Louis, April 15, 1884. 



Dear Sib— Your favor of the 13th to hand. If I had thought Bang 

 Bang the best dog at Cleveland he would have won first, I thought 

 him good enough for second only, 1 don't fancy his head-es, 

 his front lace— and eyes. The latter are black and cocked, showing 

 the inside white of both when he looks at you. I don't, think his tail 

 good, nor Ins throat. In fact, 1 don't think him a first-class dog. 



Very respectfully, 



Jno, W. Munson. 



" NoW r' Jt is my * urn to go on record > and I go there as saying 

 that Mr. Munson forfeits forever the good opinion of every 

 po nter breeder and exhibitor in America, and he will never 

 enter a judging ring again. I do not wish Mr. Munson to tell 

 us that Bang Bang was not in condition when shown at 

 Cleveland, for bad condition would rather hide the faults he 

 alludes to than otherwise. Mr. Munson's written opinion of 

 Bang Bang in April was impartial and honest; he had not met 

 the W. K. C. in .Now York and had no axe to grind. He thuB 

 conclusively proves, supported by the strongest evidence— his 

 own— that Meteor is not a show dog. Why, then, does he 

 object to ray criticism of his dog, every word of which was 

 correct? Why also, may I ask, do the W. K. C. refer your 

 readers to Mr. Munson's opinion of Bang Bang? 



I now repeat that Meteor is not a show dog and that judges 

 of pointers such as Messrs. Whitehouse, Price, Brierly, Lort, 

 v iscount Combermere and others would disqualify him or 

 fi ay ™ t ^ r dog P° ssessed of such a head. I repeat, too, that at 

 the JN, Y. show Bravo was the gentleman of the sniall size 

 classes, and I am indorsed by no less authority than Mr. John 

 VV . Munson. It has been a, complete mvsterv to me how men 

 who have had true pointers, such as Faiist, Bow and Keswick, 

 before their eyes, could come forward and tell us that Meteor 

 and that rank bad bitch, Vatiity, are pointers at all. 



the whole business is now explained. The love I have for 

 my pointer, and a sense of duty compelled me to publish Mr. 

 Munson's letter or I would not have done it. Important as are 

 such matters to everybody interested in the breed, there is 

 another question yet to be settled, a question closely allied to 

 improvement, a question of grave importance with us all, and 

 I now call on Mr. Jno. W. Munson, or whoever the owner of 

 Meteor may be, to show in a clear and straightforward man- 

 ner that Meteor is by Garnet out of Jilt, as advertised by Mr. 

 Munson m the public stud. Charles H. Mason. 



lOMPKIiNSVlLLE, July t4, 1884. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I cannot pass over the unfortunate complexion the discussion 

 of the pointer award at the late Westminster Kennel Club 



show has assumed, and must severely condemn the acrimony 

 that pervades the majority of the articles written pro and 

 con, and above all the ungentlemanly accusations and asper- 

 sions reflecting on the honor and character of the gentlemen 

 who generously braved the dangers of past experiences. One 

 word as regards type. In my humble judgment the sole typi- 

 cal pointer from A to Z, I would respectfully refer them to im- 

 ported Snapshot, dead and worthless so far as individual field 

 qualities are concerned, but he was par excellence the pointer 

 so far as form, of the day. I am not going to criticise Beau- 

 fort, Bang Bang, Meteor, Croxteth or others, but I cannot over- 

 look the fact of the childish peevishness displayed in advanc- 

 ing as a damaging argument the quibble that Bang Bang begets 

 black and white progeny. 



"Mad let us grant him then; and now remains 

 That we find out the cause of this Effect; 

 Or, rather say, the Cause of this Defect; 

 Tor this Effect, defective, comes by Cause." 



Certainly this coloring in the progeny is foreiga to the argu- 

 ment under discussion, and assumes the farcical phase of the 

 two little hoodlums. When one threatened to whip the other 

 for throwing stones at him he yelled back in defiance, "Well, 

 I'll call your sister names." If a man should breed to Wyan- 

 dotte Smythe's pointer Bellicose, whose sire was one of Laug's 

 celebrated black pointers, or Mr. Whitman's, or Old Phil, an 

 orange or white or lemon and white pointer bitch, and among 

 the result of this union came one or more black youngsters, 

 would it damn the litter or prove a casus belli ? Weill guess not, 

 stranger. That men who wish the world to recognize them 

 as breeders, judges and sportsmen should stoop to such cavil 

 seems beyond the comprehension of intelligence. Then again, 

 gentlemen, you are switching on a siding when you drag in 

 the merits of the deeds done afield by one. or the other; in a 

 case like this it is but a secondary issue at the best. My good 

 friend Dormer harps on the ivory and texture of the bone. Is 

 the outward size a sure indication of the quality, or is it im- 

 possible for a small bone to be spongy and porous like the 

 large,or vice versa ? I am seeking enhghtenment in this quarter. 

 I am hungry, Mr. Dormer, but feed me sparingly of ivory, as 

 my masticating powers are but mediocrity. Brother sports- 

 men, in a case like this, look straight over the gun ban-els, 

 hold right on, fire away if loaded with powder of truth, 

 charity and justice, and take my word for it, you'll hit the 

 bullseye every time, and the recoil won't be felt. 



Washington A. Coster. 



Flatbush, July 13, 1884. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



. I have been an interested reader of the controversy going on 

 in the columns of your paper relative to the pointer judging at 

 the late show of the Westminster Kennel Club, held in this 

 city. Instead of confining themselves to the merits of i he 

 question under discussion, certain individuals have converted 

 it into a mere personal wrangle, and made it the channel 

 through which to bring odium on a gentleman whom but to 

 know is to esteem. I refer to Mr. C. H. Mason. In a Western 

 paper I find a number of columns devoted to the very chival- 

 rous work of hurling abuse and epithet at Mr. Mason. Any 

 one who is at all conversant with the style and tactics 

 of that great exponent of knowledge, and will take the 

 trouble to look beneath the surface of the article alluded 

 to can only see therein an under-stratum of petty malice, hate, 

 and cowardly innuendo. Doubtless this doughty editor thinks 

 it brave to sit in his office and hurl mud at a man a thousand 

 miles away, and then deprive him of the opportunity to de- 

 fend himself by closing the columns of his paper against him. 

 And what crime, pray, has MivMason committed, that should 

 call forth this great onslaught upon him? From the moment 

 his calm and temperate criticism of the pointers at the late 

 show appeared until now he has been a target for shafts o f fury 

 and hate from all quarters. "Where is the pointer breeder or 

 lover that will not admit the justice of his criticism or does not 

 feel indignant at the distribution of awards at the late show, 

 in awarding the ribbon to the nondescript Meteor over the 

 pointer Beaufort, or to Vanity over such bitches as Lady 

 Bang or Duchess? "Where is the judge of a pointer who will 

 say that those were awards of merit? 



It does not weaken the published protest one particle that a 

 portion of the signers were non-exhibitors. Any man who 

 has the interest of the breed at heart had a right to protest 

 against such infamous judging. * Neither does all the abuse 

 hurled at Mr. Mason weaken his statements, they stand out 

 pillars of truth supported by plain facts and sound logic. The 

 statement made by the writer to whom I have alluded, that 

 Mr. Mason is not a breeder, is false, reference to the English 

 Kennel Club Stud Book will conclusively prove that he has 

 bred winners at the best show in the world, the Birmingham 

 show, which takes precedence over all others. This unprin- 

 cipled attack upon Mr. Mason will be the cause of drawing 

 around him a host of defenders. American gentlemen love 

 fair play and justice to all.* T. H. Dwyeb, 



New York, July 15, 1884. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In your issue of the 3d inst, Mr. Mason takes occasion to 

 again attack Thunder, and this time slurs the field qualities of 

 the dog. 



He has persistently hounded after this dog for a year or 

 two, all of which I bore in silence, knowing that the reputa- 

 tion of the bench qualities of the dog could not be injured by 

 anything that he could say. 



So long as he confined himself to dissecting (no matter how 

 he hacked him) the form and general appearance of the dog, 

 it mattered not; but when he, not satisfied with that, has the 

 presumption to publicly state that the dog has no field 

 qualities it is quite time for me to speak. 



I most emphatically declare Thunder to be a most excellent 

 a field dog. 



That he has no appearance of idiocy, but, on the contrary , 

 possesses as much intelligence as is usually found hi dogs. 



How and why a man, who never saw a dog at work in the 

 field on game, can publicly assert him devoid of quality, 

 and, even when the records show the contrary, passes my 

 comprehension. 



Mr. Mason has posed as a self-constituted judge of not only 

 dogs, but of the gentlemen who have been kind enough to 

 judge them. Will the gentleman now assume the attitude of 

 sportsman and field trial judge? 



Perhaps he may make it appear that the writer is no judge of 

 field dog. E. S. Wanmaker. 



Elmwood, N. C, July 7. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



A Western contemporary, in a six-column editorial, devoted 

 to slandering Mr. Mason, advertising the Munson kennel, and 

 telling us what a wonderful man the editor is, gives it out 

 that Mr. Mason has never won prizes at the best shows or bred 



food dogs, and consequently cannot be a judge of dogs. The 

 Inglish stud books, which are not "in the printer's hands," 

 prove that Mr. Mason has won the highest honors at shows, 

 and bred the winners at Bu - mingham, Crystal Palace, Man- 

 chester, etc. I find that in 187ti Mr. Mason won tirst in both 

 the large classes at Birmingham, and was breeder of the first 

 and second prize winners in one class, a record I believe to be 

 unequaled. He won the champion prize at the same show 

 the year following and bred the Crystal Palace winner Mar- 

 quis, who also won first at Birmingham. Mr. Mason's name 

 appears as the owner of the winning dog at the Crystal Palace, 

 iSspj and to go through his entire list of winnings would fill 

 one issue of your paper. I believe that a man to be a judge 

 must have owned and bred good dogs. Until he has accom- 

 plished this he must not assume to teach others. Will your 



Western contemporary reciprocate my kindness and tell us 

 what good pointer it has ever owned or 'bred, and what sort of 

 company its dogs have been shown in? The editor mishthave 

 found Mr. Mason's record by reference to the English stud 

 books, but possibly" he does hot keep them, in company with 

 the subscriptions to the National American Stud Book— in his 

 pocket, Faib Plat. 



SHOOTING OVER BEAGLES. 



Editor Forest ami Stream: 



Having for a number of years given att jntion to the breed- 

 ing of beagles and collies, and their proper education for field 

 work, I became much interested in articles recently published 

 in vour paper upon "The Proper Size of Beagles."' 



As regards size, 1 herewith indorse the article of Mr. Pot- 

 tinger Dorsey, in one of your late issues. 



It has been my pleasure in times past, in company with Mr. 

 Dorsey, to enjoy very many days' sport "across the glen and 

 upon the hillside," with our beagles "roading up" and chasing 

 the timid yet swift rabbit. On account of strength, hardi- 

 ness, industry and energetic work, I think it imprudent to 

 reduce the size (height) below thirteen iuches (I refer to 

 beagles, not bassets, and I furthermore refer to beagles as 

 used for rabbits exclusively). 



As regards the practice of shooting rabbits before a pack Of 

 beagles, I am of the opinion, based upon observation, that the 

 practice is pernicious, and ii' persisted in may render a pack 

 comparatively useless, and often cause the pack to bolt a hot 

 foot when a neighborhood boy shoots aj a chipmuck or robin. 



I do not consider a pack of beagles properly qualified for 

 field work if they have not the stamina to either kill or send 

 everything that starts to the ground or hollow log. If "puss" 

 gets under cover let her go ; start a fresh one; she'll be out 

 another day. Besides, dogs become more thoroughly in earn- 

 est when permitted to mouth their game, and to a sportsman 

 the sport does not consist in the amount of game killed, but 

 in the manner in which it is done. 



If the pot-hunter desires a quantity of rabbits he starts out 

 with a cur of his own, borrows a half-dozen more from some 

 neighbor, and with the lot can under-run every brush-pile, 

 bark around every bog, and start up every living thing in a 

 neighborhood, and of course the master of ceremonies can 

 sneak up and get a shot, and go home with a bag full of prey. 



The ooject of keeping a pack of beagles is sport as ex- 

 emplified in the chase. Certainly any gentleman can become 

 interested in watching the search for cold trail of the night 

 before and the maneuvering of the pack to "road up" puss; 

 presently the "fresh trail" is felt, the signal note of the chase 

 sounded, and away they go in line, the scent being yet low 

 down. Puss shows up at every turn. Shall the pot-hunter 

 with his gun cut short the sport at the start? Do not do it. 

 Wait a niinute, puss feels anxious and begins to warm up, her 

 "foot" is hot and the scent floats high. Now note the pack, 

 lining or trailing is done; each dog is pushing for the lead. 

 Here they come, three, four, six abreast, noses up, necks out- 

 stretched, giving tongue most gloriously. Such music. Note 

 and tone more harmonious than the bang of any shotgun. 

 The chase cannot long continue at this speed. Let it end! 

 What matter how? Puss in the bag or safely sheltered in the 

 groundhog's home. Is not the sport in either case the same 

 to a true sportsman? 



Does the master of a pack of foxhounds permit reynard to 

 be slaughtered by lead? No! Just as the fox and hounds is 

 to the mounted sportsman, so should the rabbit and beagles 

 be to the. sportsman on foot. 



I rernembei- a two-days' hunt in company with Dr. J. W. 

 Downey, his brother Frank, and some gentlemen from New 

 York city, in Berkley county, Va. During the hunt we had 

 sixty starts and bagged fifty -six, and scarcely any of them 

 were shot. 



We may sum up as follows the disadvantages of shooting 

 game before a pack: First, depiives the sportsman of the 

 pleasure of the cnase ; second, causes the pack to be careless 

 in hunting for a lost or over-run trail; third, loss of animation 

 by not freely mouthing game; fourth, causes inattention to 

 business, by "harking" for the gun, all of which render a 

 pack almost worthless for true sport. F. C. Phtcbus. 



Bernardsville, N. J., July 10. 



THE LAVERACK SETTERS. 



DURING the controversy which took place a year or so 

 since between the adherents of the Laverack setter and 

 the breeders of the field trial or what has been lately termed 

 the Llewellin setter, it was my intention to have added to the 

 long list of writers who ably defended their respective favorites 

 that which I bad learned of the first-mentioned dog, but press 

 of business prevented it. It may not be amiss at this late 

 date to relate my experience with the Laverack setter, several 

 of which 1 both imported and bred. It would seem that Mr. 

 Laverack, jealous of the high standard he had attained in 

 breeding his dogs and anxious that his setter should still hold 

 the position they had gained under Ids management, over- 

 stepped the limit and continued his inbreeding to such an ex- 

 tent; that where he improved then- wonderful scenting power 

 and more firmly stamped their natural tendency to find and 

 point game, henmltiplied that nervousness to which all inbred 

 animals are prone until shyness of the gun has become such a 

 part of the nature of the breed that it is an exception to the 

 rule when the timidity in this particular does not show itself. 

 Were it not that the Laverack setters have with me evinced 

 intelligence in many ways, 1 would term the nervousness an 

 idiocy, but so convinced have I become of their good sense in 

 other important points, I would select as a stud dog a pure. 

 Laverack for certain bitches, in order to procure in the pro- 

 geny the exquisite scenting powers and innate faculty of point- 

 ing game the youngsters of this most famous breed p 



I cannot make a better comparison in regard to the intense 

 nervous organization of the Laverack setter when I liken the 

 timidity the breed as a rule exhibits at the report of a gun or 

 any sudden sound to a human being fearful of a thunder 

 storm and not being able to overcome it, knowing the while 

 he is enjoying full as much safety during its prevalence as Ins 

 suiTOunding companions. So marked has this peculnirity 

 shown itself to me that I detect it most frequently (far too 

 often) in the field trial or Llewellin breed of setters where 

 there is a preponderance of Laverack blood in them, and they 

 show the typical points of the older breed. While the Lav- 

 erack setter is apparently courageous when allowed his own 

 way in the. pursuit of game and self-willed in his method, he 

 will bear no correction. It becomes, then, a most uifheult 

 task even with the cord to train him to obedience or by taking- 

 advantage of his affections to guide him as he should go. In 

 all the setters of this breed th«.t I have owned or ever saw 

 there seems to be a want of knowledge on their pai t that their 

 powers should be coupled with those of their master in order 

 to render themselves useful. In my opinion, no setters are 

 better formed for speed and endurance than the Laverack, 

 arid the only breed that is marked in typical points, The 

 Llewellin s so widely differ in this respect, it is a question with 

 me if they .yet deserve the distinctive title they bear, and 

 just here is the proof that Mr, Laverack, breeding to gain 

 that which in his estimation was to be desired in a setter, ac- 

 complished his object. In reaching this point, however, con- 

 tinued inbreeding was resorted to and resulted W both in- 

 creasing good quality and intensifying nei vous temperament. 



It is hot my desire to have this short article taken as an 

 attack on the Laveraeks. I consider the breed valuabi e 

 yond question, In the stud they are priceless, in the field 

 useless. I have now in my possi r aJ letters from Mr 



Laverack. written to me not veyy long before his death. AJ1 

 through these epistles there runs a vein of matter which plainly 

 shows that he was fearful the dogs I purchased from him would 

 exhibit the same timidity and shyness of the gun many of 



