wa 
FOREST AN 
D STREAM. 
deer was exhibited to an admiring crowd. Though our 
pleasure was somewhat lessened by not being able to tell 
just how we shot him, still it was something to know that 
we had a dog more than a match for the “biggest buck in 
de woods,” as Smith remarked. The deer weighed a little 
over 20() pounds, We learned next day that one of our dogs 
had chased a large doe in another direction, several parties 
having seen both dog and deer, We think there are quite a 
number of deer in our drives this season and will try them 
again soon, Should the eye of Mr, T. G. Tucker chance to 
scan this sketch, I would say that the dog Monroe is a Byron 
and his sire came direct from the kennels of the gentleman 
named; a better dog never made tracks, or howled in re- 
sponse to toot of horn. A, FP. 
Briyipert, N. C. 
BULLET VERSUS BUCKSHOT. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
*‘Piute’s” discussion with ‘‘Wells” as regards the advisa- 
bility of the shotgun in shooting deer, has been read with 
much interest by me. Now, while 1 ama great admirer of 
the rifle and a good rifle shot, I cannot say that I think all 
men who use a shotgun are ‘'barbarians.” ‘‘Pinte”’ must 
take circumstances into consideration. i have not the least 
doubt that he is honest in his convictions, while at the same 
time I likewise haye no doubt that if he shot deer before a 
pack of hounds (and that is our only chance to shoot them 
here) in our tangled swamps, he would soon abandon the 
trifle and take up the ‘‘scatter gun,” at the same time ‘‘taking 
back” all he has said in derision of it. 
Why shooting a fleeing deer, before a pack of hounds, is 
not as sportsmanlike and as ennobling as creeping up toa 
feeding deer and shooting it down in cold blood, with its 
mouth full of grass, is another problem I fail to understand. 
I neyer shot but one deer by stalking, and I felt about as 
jubilant and elated over that as I should have done bad I 
shot my mother’s milch cow while feeding in her stall. I 
_ felt as meen as a “'sheep-killing dog,” while, on the con- 
trary, to kill a deer at full speed, even with ‘‘buckshot,” 
makes my blood flow freer, and my conscience doesn’t 
trouble me in the least. 
I must say that I do not, from personal observation, find 
that hounding deer drives the deer away. Ihave hunted 
the same piece of woods for weeks in succession, hunting 
three days in the week and jumping deer every day within 
a mile of the first “start” of the season. More than that, I 
ran with my hounds last weeka very large doe; she by 
some means eluded the dogs. We blew offat 12M. At 3 
P. M, the same day she was seen making her way back to 
the woods from whence she was started. Had she been so 
terribly frightened, she must surely haye gone further and 
staid longer. The same deer was seen leisurely walking 
along the road, while the dogs were at fault, and mouthing 
around within less than half a mile of her—of course, ‘‘cir- 
cumstances alter cases.” Deer are undoubtedly frightened 
at times by being chased, but they almost invariably return 
+m their haunts within forty-eight hours, unless badly wor- 
ried. : A. F. R. 
»ELVIDERB, N. C., Aug. 18, 1884. 
Liditor Forest and Strewmn: 
- The communication of ‘‘Piute,” which appeared in the 
ForRESt AND STREAM of the 4th inst., is in such honorable 
contrast with some others which I have seen, that if I had 
entertained any malice toward him it would have been driven 
away. Although it is probable enough that our views are so 
diverse upon the question which he has raised that no con- 
currence can ever exist, yet he evinces such good temper, 
and shows such a thorough acquaintance with the courtesies 
which should characterize all controversies between persons 
who are sincere in their convictions, 1 feel forced to accord 
to him very profound respect. t 
Tf he will carefully read the article of his which germin- 
ated the existing troubles, I think he cannot fail to see that 
I did not misrepresent him at all. He may not have used 
apt words to thoroughly conyey the views which he holds, 
and, hence, said what he did not mean tosay. In his zeal 
for the maintenance of an honest opinion, he may have used 
‘arguments which were not appropriate. and which, carried 
out, make his position an absurdity, It is certain I thought 
so; and in defending my own practices ] regarded it as only 
fair that I should show, by a sort of reductio ad absurdum, 
he proved entirely too much. With all respect, I think I 
proved that. I am still of the opinion that a legitimate con- 
struction upon the words used by him justified the deduction 
f made; that is, for all game the rifle, because of its destruc- 
tive character, was the only weapon which should be used. 
There can be no doubt at all that he meant no other was 
proper for deer shooting. 
1 have admitted that in an open country where “stalking” 
can be practiced, it is much better, because more effctive in 
its range. But even in the prairies and open timbered lands 
no one, whatever may be his skill, can always place his ball 
where it will almost instantly kill the deer. Oftentimes a 
mortal wound is inflicted, and the animal escapes, to die 
and become a prey for dogs, wolves or buzzards. From this 
fact L drew the deduetion, that the argument would hold 
equally well against the shotgun for small game. This was 
proving more than was desirable, as 1 thought, and hence 
illogical. seems, however, that ‘““Piute” uses a shotgun 
for pinnated grouse and sage hens, and no doubt, would use 
one for the bird which we call partidge, but which he calls 
quail. When hunting deer in the mountains, he finds the 
ruffed grouse; he uses the rifle because as I suppose, he has 
no other weapon. should do that too, and hence there is 
no use of saying anything about “my good opinion of his 
sportemanlike characteristics to the contrary notwithstand- 
in mig 
But ‘Piute” asks, “does the contrary proposition hold 
good, that because a shotgun isthe most suitable for quail, it 
is also the most suitable for deer? Does it follow that be- 
cause an ordinary rifle shot can easily hit a deer, he can as 
easily hit a grouse? Does ‘‘Well’s” logic teach him that a 
rifleman can hit a running elephant or a flying humming bird 
with equal ease?” Surely ‘‘Piute” cannot be serious in these 
interrogatories. To the first one I answer that if a weapon 
is to be inbibited which does not always kill, but sometimes 
wounds only, then the rifle is under the ban too; or if it will 
more certainly kill when it makesa wound, and the gun 
should be exclusively used which makes fewer wounds, as 
contradistinguished from deaths, it should be used on all 
game. Of course, I believe no such thing. Tt was only a 
legitimate deduction from ‘‘Piute’s” argument in behalt of 
the rifle for deer. It does not follow that because a shotgun 
is better for small game, it is also better for elk or deer, or 
buffalo, Ihave never said any such thing, nor thought any 
such thing, Iam somewhat surprised that “Pinte” should 
propound the question. ’ 
for 
recollect his position in regard to mortal wounds not imme- 
diately productive of death, and his deduction therefrom 
adverse to the shotgun, and he will see that he is condemn- 
ing his own bantling in the interrogatories which he submits, 
Not having expressed such views as he attributes to me, but, 
to my mind, very plainly declared to the contrary. 
is doing himself and me manifest injustice. 
himself to the trouble to read his first article he will see that 
the position which he then took, made legitimate every de- 
duction which I drew, intending to demonstrate by these 
say so. 
and not a word which I éver wrote makes a tolerable excuse 
allowed such a startling conclusion. 
To the second inquiry, as to the capacity of a sportsman 
to hit, with equal ease, a flying grouse and a running deer 
with a rifle, [respond that he would be exceedingly expert 
if he could—more expert than, as I think, any one is. 
logic does mot teach me, nor does my common sense, that a 
humming bird is as good a target as even a grouse, much 
less an elephant. 
say to him, in all candor, that a man of his intelligence 
should not haye made such an attempt to evade the real ques- 
tion at issue, 
argument which I never made, when he speaks of my 
My 
Now, if “Pinte” will pardon me, I will 
Nor should he have placed in my mouth an 
“logic,” proving that because No. 10 shot are large enough 
ob White they are large enough fora hear, Let him 
J am surprised that ‘‘Piute” should not have seen that he 
Tf he will put 
deductions that his argument was defective in logic. Thata 
man of his intelligence should, in vindication of his views, 
entirely pervert the evident meaning of his antagonist, and 
place him as the advocate of what he clearly denounces, 
would fill me with consternation if 1 had not too often wit- 
nessed similar exhibitions. Js there aline in my article which 
gives the faintest pretext for alleging, as ‘“‘Piute” has done, 
that I supposed No. 10 or even No. 2 shot, with ‘+ to3 
drams of gunpowder to propel them, would be effective on 
Not one. 
He must excuse me. 
buffalo or bear? And yet he tries to make me 
I will take no such position, 
for the imputation. It was his logic, if any one’s, which 
But even his did not 
authorize it. 
I confess that neither my skill as a marksman nor my 
points of argument is equal to the labor of proving the 
absurdity which he attributes to me. 
abilities in the latter, Lam, I trust, properly grateful, but I 
am not entitled to the distinction which he confers, 
standing as a sportsman is far higher than any I ever attained 
For his tribute to my 
My 
at the bar. I believe I was regarded when I professed to be 
a lawyer as having more ability to manage the facts of a 
case than the law appertaining to it. In the present case, 
however, it is only a question of argument, which requires 
no professional training. 
It is well sometimes, after a controversy has proceeded to 
some length, to go back to the origin of the dispute. Unless 
J am incapable of comprehending the meaning of the lan- 
guage which ‘‘Piute” used in the article to which I took ex- 
ceptions, he denounced the use of a shotgun in decr hunting 
as a barbarous practice, and gave what he regarded good 
reasons for his statement. Among them, and probably 
chiefest, was that the shotgun often wounded without 
instant death, and that a weapon ought not to be employed 
which had that unfortunate defect. 
Having for years used a shotgun of 15, 14 and 12-bore at 
deer and not dreamed that I was suilty of the offense of 
barbarism; thinking that ‘‘Piute” was unnecessarily severe 
in his lancuage, and that his arguments would logically lead 
to an entire abnegation of all field sports—because all 
weapons would often wound without immediate death, or 
sometimes without death at all—I took up the gage which 
he threw down and have contended with him as best I could. 
If he had contented himself with expressing an opinion that 
he thought, when the character of the country allowed it, 
a rifle was far preferable to a shotgun for large game, | 
should have maintained silence, because I would haye con- 
curred with him. But when he attempted to fortify the 
opinion with language caustically severe toward those who 
did not agree with him, and used an argument in sustenta- 
tion of his position which 1 regarded not only as unsound, 
put as leading necessarily to an absurdity, | thought myself 
justified in an attempt to controvert it, 
Tn an open country, therifle, because chietly of its superior 
range, should regard as the proper weapon. In a country 
thickly wooded, my choice would be ashotgun, which [have 
found to be quite effective at distances under sixty yards, 
Beyond that the-chances of killing are not good, though a 
buckshot, if it should happen to. strike a vital part, has 
force enough to do good work even over a hundred yards. A 
sportsman should not shoot at anything unless he thinks the 
prospect of “bagging the game” is good, whether he uses a 
shotenun or a rifle. And when an expert rifle shot pulls the 
trigger on a running deer, at any distance, even when there 
is neither twig nor weed to change the flight of the ball, he 
is not sure that his sbot will strike the head, break the neck 
or spinal column, or pierce the heart or aorta. It is possible 
that by defect of aim or other cause, he may simply break a 
leg or inflict a flesh wound. The fact is, such mishaps are 
inseparable from hunting with any kind of agun. My ideas 
of humanity have not become so refined. When I hunt, 1 
do not take with me “the milk of human kindness,” or a 
tender consideration of the feelings of “the antlered mon- 
arch of the waste,” or the beautiful mallard, or the Immocent 
Bob White. I goto kill. I go to regale my nostrils with 
the smell of death, as it comes ‘‘reeking from the spicy bow- 
ers” which the quarry has sought. 
The difference, at last, between ‘‘Piute” and myself is this 
only. For large game he thinks the rifle the only legitimate 
weapon, I agree as to some large game, but hold that for 
other kinds a sportsman may properly use a shotgun, 
especially in thick cover, For small game such as ducks, 
plover, rail, grouse and partridges, the shotgun is par excel- 
lence the weapon. Yah bry: 
I gracefully appreciate the courteous inyitation to visit 
“Pinte” in “the land of the setting sun,” in case I should 
ever visit it, and shall gladly avail myself of it. Under his 
“vine and fig tree” J feel sure 1 should experience the 
warmest hospitality, and that not one word would escape 
my host to cause me to express my gratitude for his beneyo- 
lent consideration of my ‘‘evil ways,” but that every effort 
would be used by him to show that he realized the sublime 
sentiment, too often, alas, forgotten, “enemies In War, in 
peace, friends.” Both he and 1 would try, in friendly con- 
test, undimmed by a bitter recolletion of our battles, to 
minister to each other’s happiness. 
And now, with me, ‘‘the hatchet is buried,” and “the 
pipe of peace” shall be filled with the most fragrant weed. 
I shall endeavor to *‘live to a ripe old age” by a life of tem- 
perance and healthful exercise, and occasionally, ‘‘as the 
spirit moyes me,” endeavor to fill the soul of “Piute” with 
joy by allowing him to read other “‘pleasant hits and well- 
told stories.” ' 
WHELs, 
RooxineHam, N. C,, Sept, 10. 
Fiditor Torest and Stream: 
After a long experience on the runways, I have arrived at 
the conclusion that no true sportsman, if he can help it, 
ever fires a charge of buckshot at adeer. A rific, a single 
bullet, and the deer on ‘first jump,” constitute the real 
sporting mode of killing a deer, Bleating, whistling or 
making any noise to bring the animal to a stand is unsports- 
manlike, but not as much so as buckshot. ALGONQUIN, 
OtTrawa, Can., Sept. 13, 1884. 
Biitor Forest and Stream: 
After a moderate reply to the fierce assault made by 
“Pinte” against the shotgun, I had concluded to let this con- 
troversy alone, being entertained more by the contributions 
of others than by any selfish gratification that might arise 
from anything 1 could hope to offer. The more so since 
“Wells,” of whom Iam but a humble compeer, most ably 
sustains the identical position l occupy in the discussion, 
I heartily indorse all that ‘‘Wells” has said in his most 
admirable reply to our adversary, published on the 4th of 
September. 
“Piute” in your same issue charges me with ‘‘personal 
innuenda and vituperation” It needs no finger-board to point 
where that applies. In his blind rage he scoms facts, works 
entirely upon his imagination, and supposes I am the user of 
a $3.50 “Zulu.” For his personal information allow me to 
say I neither own, use nor have I seen such except in print, 
so, touching that, [am in a measure driyen to his own re- 
sources—conjecture. Now, I suppose that a “Zulu” is 
nothing more nor less than a dangerous and worthless low- 
priced sun. If it was this sart that bronght about the orig- 
inal attack of ‘‘Piute,” it. must be an implement terrible in 
its suggestions of sayage barbarity, 
Permit me in conclusion to quote the last sentence of 
‘“Piute’s” article: ‘I had rather be a dog and bay the moon 
than such a Roman,” directed specifically at myself. What if 
he be even now transmigrated into a luckless cur, baying the 
moon, agreeably to his own imprecation? Far better had it 
been for him to have retired to some mountain fastness of his 
own State, and posted the grounds, ‘(No admittance for 
shotguns. Penalty, extermination.” There he might have 
amused himself with his several ritles, bayed at ‘' Wells” and 
and myself to his heart’s content, and enjoyed immunity 
from the presence at least of a weapon that to him seemed 
endowed with such violently disturbing, savage and barbaric 
influences. Backwoons. 
Wesr VIRGINIA, 
SHOT CARTRIDGES. 
Hiditor Forest and Stream: 
Closely allied to the subject of *‘The Performance of 
Shotguns,” lately discussed at some length in your columus, 
is that of the various forms of shot cartridges, 
T have used them pretty extensively in my hunting, and 
have experimented with them also in various ways. As to 
their utility, I may present little that is new or noyel to the 
old and experienced, Still, my experience may be of some 
benefit to some of ycur readers who make frequent inquiries 
as to the use of the larger sizes of shot, etc. 
There are several varieties, the wire, concentrators, thread- 
wound and flannel shot cartridges, besides such nondescript 
varieties as the sportsman of an ingenious turn may choose to 
prepare for himself. 
The main object to be attained in the use of any shot car- 
tridge isto carry the charge in 4 more concentrated form, 
and to a greater distance or range, than a loose charge of the 
same shot could be driven, and at the same time to preserve 
a proper and even ratio of distribution—a good pattern, as it 
is termed, 
If the cartridge fails materially in any of these essentials, 
it is little, if any, better than a loose charge, nor in fact as 
good, if it have the fault of balling or failing to deliver its 
shot. It then becomes a mere slug, with all the elements of 
uncertainty and the almost sure result of a clean miss. 
Of the different kinds, my experience and repeated trial 
lead me to the conclusion that the wire cartridge is the best. 
1 shall give my reasons for this conviction. 
The well-known construction of this cartridge, consisting 
of the shot packed in layers of soft bone dust within a eylin- 
drical wire cage, preserves the spherical form of the pellets 
and admits of their gradual escape while the charge Js in 
motion. This principle, for obvious reasons, insures a per 
formance fulfilling the “requisite essentials 1 haye named 
above. 
- In advocating this preference, I am not actuated by any 
motive to either boost up the one nor detract from any merit 
the others possess, Like the fisherman who ties his own flies, 
I make my own Cartridges, and can vary them to suit my 
own ideas or judgment as to the results | wish lo accomplish. 
I simply give facts and results as I have found them, solely 
witha view to inform those who are without experience. 
The wire cartridge, if properly made, is uniform in its per- - 
formance, which, I think, is more than can be said of any 
others have used pretty much all kinds, and have found 
in all the others a considerable element of uncertainty. 
Sometimes the concentrators work all right and sometimes 
they don’t. Sometimes a threac-wound cartridge delivers its 
shot all right and sometimes fails, the thread adhering and 
failing to unwind; it goes in a body, and the same may be 
said of the flannel. So that to these uncertainties must be. 
added want. of confidence in yourself, when you know that 
no amount of foresight on your part can give you any assur- 
ance of what the thing will do. . . 
Now, about charging. It is not necessary, nor is it advis- 
able to put a wad between the cartridge and the charge of 
powder. If yoninsert any, use quite a light one. A well 
made wire cartridge performs better without; and if you use 
any over the cartridge let it be a light paper one, or what 18 
equally as good simply crimp the shell over it. A heavier 
charge of powder can he used with the “‘cartridge” than with 
the same size loose charge, 
Use the cylinder-bored barrel; if will give you a much 
better pattern and performance with the shot cartridge than 
a full choke will. Back woops. 
BEVERLY, W, Va. 
Cnreantyg BrAss SHeLLs.—Hditor Forest and Stream: 
Will you permit me to inquire of your correspondents how 
they clean brass shells. lam aware that there are several 
methods, and should like to hear the experience of others,— 
ADI, 
