‘Dec. 18, 1884.] 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
411 
ave attained a length of 17 centimeters (6 7-10 inches). From ! 
Starnberg it is reported that the brook trout in the waters of 
Upper Bavaria, of which several werestocked with it, appears 
_ to be making itself well at home. At Georgenbach near Starm- 
berg very well grown specimens of this handsome fish have 
seyeral times been taken with the hook. In the society’s 
hatchery ars three broods, those of 1882, 1883 and 1884, and eggs 
have already been taken from the oldest. The same observa- 
tion was made here as at Hiiningen, that the fish does not 
stand the expressing of the eggs well, Nevertheless it appears 
to be a very valuable acquisition. | } 
The rainbow trout (Salmo iridea), from the tributaries of 
the Pacific, strongly recommended by Director Haack, of 
Hiningep, has received the most careful attention of the 
society, and thanks to the generous friendship of the American 
fisheulturists we haye again been able to importa greater 
number of eggs. Thisis all the more gratifying since the 
transfer of the eggs of the fish is involved in special difficul- 
ties in thatit spawns in the spring, and the eggs must per- 
force be transported in warm weather, Mr. Blackford, of 
New York, from whom, along with the consignment of Prof, 
Baird, we have received a number of rainbow trout eggs in 
exchange for German trout eggs, informed us that in the 
Eastern States the rainbow trout had changed their habits 
and occasionally begun to spawn in winter, so that he would 
perhaps be able to send eggs as early as December. However, 
we did not receive the consignments from him and Prof. 
Baird until early spring. At three several times in April and 
May were eggs sent from New York to Bremen, and our 
faithful helper, F. Busse, of Geestemiinde, performed the un- 
packing, division and despatch most carefully aud excellently, 
his worthy member of our society has always most kindly 
and disinterestedly looked out for the numerous cousignments 
of fish eggs which we have received from America, and there- 
by placed our work under great obligations. 
_ Director Haack, of Hiiningen, as I have remarked, considers 
the rainbow trout the most yaluable gift that America has 
sentus. In April, 1584. it was shown that of the fishes that 
were a year and nine months old and weighed from half to 
three-quarters of a pound, not one had been lost. Ten thou- 
sand ones and 1,500 fish were obtained. The two-and-a-half 
year-old fishes weighed in August of this year from tbree- 
a to a pound. At Szomolany, in 1883, Count von 
alffy had 434 still left out of 443 rainbow trout put in the 
year before. Mayor Schuster, of Freiburg, writes that the 
fry obtained from the first consignment of eggs are very 
beautitul, and that the stock is ample for the permanent estab- 
lishment of the fishin Germany. In Starnberg the American 
brook tront has deyeloped still better than the rainbow trout. 
Mr. Eekhardt. of Liibbinchen, got 500 fry from 526 rainbow 
trout eggs, and they have thriyen extraordinarily in a small 
pond. egimental-Auditor Zenk, of Seewiese, believes that 
the rainbow trout will prove especially well adapted to cul- 
ture in trout ponds. 
The American landlocked salmon has grown very well at 
Oliva since 1888. In the Wuerm Lake, near Starnberg, a fish 
of this species, twenty-four centemeters (947 inches long was 
caught. and a well-grown specimen inthe Teger Lake. At 
Friedrichshuld. Pommerania, these fish play actively in a pond. 
The Bavarian Fischerei Zeitung reports (page 231), that for 
three years the German and Bavarian Fishery Societies haye 
been trying to introduce the American whiteiish (Coregonus 
albus) in the Ammer, Tegern, Walchen and other South Bava- 
Tian lakes. There are strong hopes of success, for early in 
July of this year the Bavarian Superintendent of Fisheries, 
Mr. Hépplinger, a capable and intelligent man, caught in the 
Tegern Lake'so great a quantity of young American whitetish 
that he was obliged to submerge the net again to free them. 
Some well-grown specimens have since been taken. 
THE NEW YORK FISH COMMISSION.—A meeting of 
the full board of Commissioners was held at the office of the 
President, Hon. R. B. Roosevelt, in New York, on Thursday, 
Dec. 9, at noon. Im our last issue we gave a full report of 
Gen, R. U. Sherman’s trip to locate a hatchery in the Adiron- 
dacks. The selection of the site by Gen. Sherman, at the out- 
let of Clear Pond, near Upper Saranac Lake. was adopted, 
his plans for a hatchery were approved, and he was author- 
ized to contract for its erection. Mr. Bowman reported that 
the difficulty between the men at the Caledonia hatchery and 
Mr, Annin, concerning the taking of trout in the stream, had 
been settled to the satisfaction of all parties, and the rizhts 
of each had been defined. This trouble was caused by the 
men in the employ of the State netting trout on waters be- 
longing to Mr. Annin, who owns the privates hatchery and 
stream above the works and the stream owned by the State. 
In view of the increased work and the establishment of new 
hatcheries, if was decided to ask the Legislature for a sum of 
$25,000 for the next year. The work is extending in all direc- 
tions, and the appropriations should be sufficient to cover it 
all in order to doit thoroughly. Last winter the Legislature 
made an appropriation for the building of the new Adiron- 
dack hatchery, and directed-the Commissioners to locate and 
build it, but gave them no fznds with which to carry it on. 
Che Zennel. 
FIXTURES. 
BENCH SHOWS. 
_ Dee. 16, 17, 18 and 19.—Third Bench Show of the Southern Massa- 
chusetts Poultry Association, Taunton, Mass, Wm.C. Davenport, 
Assistant Secretary. 
Dec, 30, 31 and Jan. 1, 2, 1885.—Bench Show of the Meriden Poultry 
Association, Meriden, Conn. Joshua Shute, Secretary. 
Jan. 10 to 14, 1885.—World’s Expomtion Bench Show, New Orleans, 
La. Mr. Chas. Lincoln. Superintendent. 
Jan. 27, 28, 29 and 30,—Annual Bench Show of the New Brunswick 
Sey and Pet Stock Association. Mr. H. W_ Wisson, Secretary, 
ohns. 
Feb. 1 
.N. B. 
to 11, 1885.—New York Fanciers’ Club, Third Annual Exhibi- 
tion of non-sporting dogs, poultry and pigeons at Madison Square 
Garden, Feb. 1 to 11, 1885. Chas, Harker, Secretary, 62 Cortlandt 
street. 
March 3, 4, 5 and 6, 1885.—Second Annual Besch Show of the Cin- 
PACA e ROSES BeLe Club, Cincinnati, O. Charles Lincoln, Superin- 
ent. ; 
Marcb 18, 19 and 20, 1885.—Second Annual Show of the New Haven 
Kennel Club, E.S. Porter, Secretary, New Haven, Conn, 
April 7 to 10, 1885.—First Annual Bench Show N. KE. Kennel Club, 
Music Halil, Boston. J. A. Nickerson, Secretary, 159A Tremont street, 
Chas. Lincoln, Superintendent. 
ILLINOIS RETRIEVER TRIALS.—Editer Forest and 
Stream; Ata meeting of the Illinois Kennel Club, held Dec. 
8, 1884, it was decided to further ask for suggestions on the 
retrieving trials, land and water, which the Illinois Kennel 
Club contemplate holding atthe time of their annual bench 
show in 1885, I therefore invite any and all gentlemen to 
write me any suggestions they may have to make on rules, or 
any ideas hee can offer which they think would. be of assist- 
ance to the club in gove such trials, that the club may 
go to work, inbcT Rey and make the trials a pleasant and 
eran success, It was also the intention of the lois Kennel 
lub to include Canada in their previous call for suggestions. 
So that none may go away dissatisfied, they now open the 
trials to the world, and suggestions will be gladly received 
from sportsmen on the other side of the water. Address all 
communications to Joan H, Naytor, Secretary Mlinois Ken- 
nel Club (3182 Archer avenue, Chicago, Hlingis), 
- 
THE MASTIFF PUPPIES. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
Tt is hardly surprising to learn from Mr. Smith’s letter in 
last week's FOREST AND STREAM, that his idea of what 
constitutes a “proper entry” does not accord with mine. Had 
I thought it did [should not have considered it necessary to 
elicit the statement of his views which, with the admissions 
made by him, must have astonished some of your readers a 
little. He starts off with the assertion that the *‘amount paid 
by the exhibitor is a matter of no concern to any but the 
managers!” Does he really think so? if don’t. 
A committe proposes to hold a dog show, the managers 
publish the rules under which it is to be held, and among the 
number one regulating the amount of the entrance fees. 
These rules form the basis of the agreement so to speak 
between the managers and the exhibitors, and I think it is not 
*| too much to expect that they shall be equally binding on, and 
have the same meaning for, all parties interested. The 
exhibitors cannot take Jiberties with them, the managers 
should not; neyertheless, where a rule is drawn up in ambig- 
uous terms and the interpretation to be put upon those terms 
rests with the managers, it is clear that a power is placed in 
their hands which may be exercised fairly or unfairly accord- 
ing to the bent of their inclinations, To deal with principles 
first, facts afterward; Is it equitable to allow an exhibitor who 
owns a litter of say eight puppies, on payment of five dollars 
only to bring each and all of them into competition against 
another exhibitor, who, owning an equal number belonging to 
different litters, has to pay twenty-four dollars to enter all his 
pups separately? Orisitfairin principle to charge one man 
six dollars for the entry of two pups and allow another to 
enter eight for less money? Is this a ‘matter of no concern to 
the exhibitor?” : 
Now for facts, a-_statement of which will explain something 
of the ‘‘true inwardness” of this controyersey, and what Mr. 
Smith calls my “narrow-minded technical objection.” I went 
to the office of the managers to make my entries, and having 
stated that I had only two left out of my litter, asked whether 
I could enter them as a litter on payment of $5. Mr. 
Lincoln (whose sudden demise I heard of with much regret) 
informed me that I could not, as the clause in Rule 20 relating 
to litters applied only to very young pups which could be 
placed together in one pen. I said that my pups had been 
accustomed to be kept together and could without inconven- 
ience occupy the same pen, and asked whether they could 
compete separately and take separate prizes if entered 
as a litter, to which also Mr. Lincoln replied 
in the negative. I accepted his decision.as that of one 
thoroughly conyersant with the rules and practice, and 
accordingly paid $6 and entered my two pups separately. 
Mr, Smith, as manager of the show, and consequently to that 
extent an authority on the point, now says that ‘‘each and 
every pup of a litter is as much entitled to compete (i. e., 
when entered under the $5 clause of Rule 20) as is a grown dog 
on payment of $3. Can he explain why the rule means one 
thing in my case, and bears quite a different interpretation in 
Mr. Stevenson's? He says also that the entrance fee ‘‘is 
intended to cover cost of kennel, feeding, etc.” Why then 
was I charged $6 for two pups when Mr. Stevenson was 
allowed to enter a whole litter five months old consisting of 
four at least (and I think six or eight) for $5? Was it because 
his litter occupied less space, required less care, or consumed 
less food than my two pups? Perhaps there was a ‘‘clerical 
error” somewhere. Or the little spirit of favoritism, who is 
commonly supposed to preside over so many wires, happened 
this time to be on the side of the litter. Ifso, [hope my 
‘narrow-minded technical objection” (as the precursor of 
more of a like nature) has made the sprite begin to feel uneasy 
as to the quiet tenure of his office, which was created at a 
time gone by avhen managers could over-ride exhibitors to 
their heart’s content, That can’t be done with impunity now, 
and for my own part, while sincerely grateful to Mr. Elliot 
Smith for wishing to saye me the trouble of ‘‘framing any 
more categories,” | beg to assure him of my intention to 
continue doing so and asking just as many questions as appear 
expedient in the interests of dogs and dog lovers. In the next 
paragraph of his letter, he states that “formerly puppies were 
either charged $3 each or permitted, when so small as to 
occupy with their dam but one kennel, to be exhibited without 
charge. In the latter case the puppies were not entered nor 
allowed to co.npete.” This rule he says was altered because 
‘we (meaning the managers I presume) were frequently 
imposed upon by dealers,” who did what? Why they actually 
entered a dam and litter of pups, paying therefor only the 
prescribed fee of $5, in the hope of selling some of the pups ‘ ‘at 
a handsome profit.” What a dreadf iece of imposition! 
The managers, however, were not going Fe let such practices 
slide, so they amended the rule by providing that “litters of 
puppies may be entered on payment of $5.” Before the 
passing of this amendment litters of puppies could not compete 
at all, and though the amendment provides that they may be 
entered, I find no proyision in it that the puppies are to be 
allowed to compete separately, The amendment was made, 
according to Mr. Smith, with the view of preventing dealers 
from imposing on the managers by sending their pups to the 
show for sale, and therefore not for the purpose of giving the 
pups 4a right to compete which hitherto did not belong to 
them. The right to enter litters originated with the amend- 
ment referred to, and litters have no status whatever in the 
shows of the Westminster Kennel Club, except such as is 
conferred by the same amendment. Where then is the 
authority for the pups to compete separately? Is it to be 
found in Mr, Smith’s ipse dixit now published for the first 
time? That is not a part of the rules, though it may be 
considered a decision of the managers, and as such is fairly 
entitled to be considered a peculiar one. Shall we apply the 
maxim ‘‘ea uno disce omnes?” 
Mr, Smith’s statement of what occurred when Mr, Stevenson 
called at the show office to enter his litter, serves only to 
fasten on the managers the responsibility of having taken 
what in deference to the ruling in my own case may fairly be 
considered an informal entry. He accuses me of an attempt 
to deprive Mr. Stevenson of the right to compete through a 
narrow-minded ‘technical objection.” In answer to this I 
have only to say that I did not and do not owe the very 
slightest grudge to Mr. Stevenson or any of the other exhibi- 
tors, nor did I wish to prevent him or any other person from 
competing, provided the competition was equal, but I hold 
that a spirit of honor and fair play should predominate in the 
management of our dog shows as well as elsewhere, and the 
eXistence of an opposite condition of affairs appears to me to 
be a sufficient reason for framing a whole series of categories 
and an unlimited number of so-called technical objections 
provided they can be of any service in eliciting the truth as in 
the present case. Mr. Smith says “the managers gave him 
[myself] and his protest all the attention deserved.” Perhaps 
they thought so, and for their condescension in giving any 
attention to the matter, of course 1 feel deeply indebied to 
them, Unlesslam very much mistaken, however, the time 
is not very far distant when the managers will have to give 
exhibitors and their protests sufficient attention to satisfy 
them that everything is fair, square, and as it should be. 
I have occupied more of your space than ] had intended to 
do, but cannot conclude without expressing what I believe to 
be a well founded hope that the popular New Haven Kennel 
Club will set the ball rolling in the right direction by appoint- 
ing prmipenend uae at their next show. The managers have 
already gamed for themselyes golden opinions by their 
courtesy and willingness to oblige exhibitors, and there is 
little doubt ae will continue to merit the good things said 
about them and deserve more, Their letter asking the opinion 
of exhibitors*before adopting the sweepstakes system in the 
champion classes, compares more than favorably with that of 
Mr, Smith, wlio, m yery high horse style pretended to consider 
certain disagreeable insinuations as “beneath contempt.” 
That summary mode of dismissal will not, however, dispose 
of a case Sarees by stubborn facts, J. A. 8S. Greea. 
ForpHAM, Dec, 9, 1884. 
Ne K. R.-SPECIAL NOTICE, 
HE AMERICAN KENNEL REGISTER, for the registration of 
pedigrees, etc. (with prize lists of all shows and trials), is pub- 
lished every month. Entries close on the ist. Should be in early, 
Entry blanks sent on receipt of stamped and addressed enyelope. 
Registration fee (50 cents) must accompany each entry, No entries 
inserted unless paid inadvanece. Yearly subscription $1.50. Address 
‘American Kennel Register,’’ P, O. Box 2832, New York. Number 
of entries already printed 1907. 
THE NATIONAL FIELD TRIALS. 
Tes sixth annual meeting of the National American Kennel 
Club began Monday, Dec, 8, at Canton, Miss., on the 
same ground that was used last year for the trials of the 
Southern Sportsmen’s Association. The Madison County Gun 
Club are entitled to great credit forthe very excellent ar- 
rangements that were made for the accommodation of the 
visiting sportsmen. The gentlemen composing the club have 
spared no labor nor expense that would tend to the comfort 
or pleasure of their guests, and those.who were so fortunate 
as to be present will long retain pleasant recollections of this 
most enjoyable reunion. Birds were plenty, although they 
were not so abundant as last year, The weather conditions 
were very favorable; the rain of the previous week had soit- 
ened the ground, and the scent appeared to be all that could 
be desired. The attendance was not so good as usual, although 
there were a fair number present. The judges appointed 
were Messrs. J. M. Taylor, Lexington, Ky.; Judge J. M. 
Thompson, Covington, La., and Mr. I. R. Stayton, Pittsburg, 
Pa. Mr. Stayton was absent, and Mr. I. I. Stone, of Chatta- 
nooga, Tenn., was chosen to fill his place. The weather on 
Monday and Tuesday was delightful, on Wednesday it was 
cloudy in the morning and it commenced to rain at noon, 
The All-Aged Stake was finished on that day, however, and 
two heats of the Derby were run. 
THE ALL-AGED STAKE. 
Fourteen of the twenty-one entries in the All-Aged Stake 
putin an appearance. Nearly all of the work was first-class; 
indeed, we do not believe that at any previous trial has the 
average quality of the work been so good. Nearly every dog 
in the stake was fit to run in any company, and it is more 
than an even chance that were they to run again, many of 
the yanquishd would become the victors. They were drawn 
to run as follows: 
RicHmMonyd.—J. E, Gill, Lancaster, Pa., white and lemon 
pointer dog (Don—Buelah), handled by H, M. Short, Middle- 
ton, Tenn., 
against 
Bessiz A,—J. M. Avent, Hickory Valley, Tenn., white and 
lemon English setter bitch (Dashing Lion—Armida), handled 
by owner. 
Cuay.—W. T, Edwards, Varner, Ark., red and white native 
setter dog (Joe, Jr.—Fannie), handled by J. McKay, Carter's 
Creek, Tenn., 
against 
MetTnor,—W. E. Hughes, St. Louis, Mo., liver and white 
pointer dog (Garnet—ZJiit), handled by H. M. Short, 
Litwian.—P. H. & D. Bryson, Memphis, Tenn., black, white 
and tan English setter bitch (Gladstone—Sue), handled by H, 
M, Short, 
against 
Gus CAMPBELL.—J. lL, Valentine, Nashville, Tenn., white 
Sug lenion tative setter dog (Joe, Jr.—Fannie), handled by J. 
cKay, 
Lavy Ler.—W. B. Mallory, Memphis, Tenn., black, white 
and tan English setter bitch (Gath—Juno II.), handled by H. 
M. Short, 
against s 
Lavy C.—B. M, Stephenson, La Grange, Tenn., black, white 
and tan English setter bitch (Coleman’s London—Belle of 
Hatchie), handled by owner, 
PavuL GuLADSTONE.—W,. B. Gates, Memphis, Tenn., black, 
white and tan English setter dog (Gladstone—Lavyalette), 
handled by Charles Tucker, Stanton, Tenn., 
against 
Binty Gares.—Dr. A. F. McKinney, Forest Hill, Tenn., 
black and white Euglish setter dog (Count Rapier—Kate B.), 
handled by H. M. Short, 
GLADSTONE’s Boy.—Dr. G. G, Ware, Stanton, Tenn,, black, 
white and tan English setter dog (Gladstone—Sue), handled 
by Charles Tucker, 
against 
MrpoRs.—W, B. Gates, Memphis, 'Tenn,, black, white and 
eae setter bitch (Gladstone—Carrie J.), handled by H, 
. Short. 
Count Raprer.—W. B. Gates, Memphis, Tenn., black and 
qriite Huglish setter dog (Druid—Magnolia), handled by H. 
. Short, 
against 
St, Etmo IV.—Dr. §, Fleet Speir, Brooklyn, N. Y., black, 
white and tan English setter dog (St. Elmo—Clio), handled by 
HE. H. Height, Allaire, N. J 
RICHMOND AND BESSIE A. 
had the honor of opening the ball. Richmond is a light 
weight pointer of good form and considerable speed, he also 
appears to have a good nose and is stylish when on game. 
Bessie A. ran at Grand Junction two years ago and attracted 
considerable attention by her gamy way of going. She has 
lost none of her speed, and although she did not get a place, 
she made it very interesting for her competitors. They were 
cast off In some sedge and weeds at 8:48 and worked up wind 
for quite a distance. Bess was the first to find the birds, but 
she got lost at the same time in some heavy bull grass, and 
was located by the birds which flushed at the noise of the 
horses. A few of the birds settled in the same sort of cover 
and the rest went into some sedge. The dogs were sent into 
the tall grass, but it was next to impossible for them to do 
anything there. Bessie dropped on point near where one had 
been marked down, but the bird ran and she could not follow 
it. A little further on Richmond made a nice point, but the 
bird had run, and in roading it out hescored a flush, He 
then half pointed and Bessise backed him, bub nothing’ was 
found. Turning west we beat down to a branch where Bessie 
challenged in a cornfield, and getting the course she made a 
cast toward the branch and located her birds in capital style, 
and held them while Richmond was brought up to back, but 
before he could see her he caught a little scent and half 
poutied, Avent was then ordered to put up the birds which 
é dia, but failed to kill. A part of the bevy flew but a short 
distance and Bessie soon had one fast, and Avent, to order 
scored a kill, which Bessie'retrieved very prettily. Richmond 
then got in a couple of nice points to singles, which Short 
flushed to order and missed, Bessie then nailed one which 
flushed wild before the judges came up, and then seyeral more 
gat up; following them up, Bessie half pointed and drew a 
short distance, but soon leftit. Richmond then made a nice 
point and Bessie was called upto back, but the bird flushed 
