April BO, 1885.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



269 



largest covey of partridges I have ever seen, and that there 

 were at least fifty in the bevy. Of course we followed them 

 up, and shot until Frank's gun and shells got so wet that the 

 shells would miss fire and stick fast in bis gun. Some we 

 pulled out with the shell extractor, some we pulled out by 

 cutting into sections with our pocket knives, and some we 

 peeled part of the paper off and in this way made smaller. 



It was raining all this time, and we had gotten so wet 

 from the rain that fell upon us, and from wading through 

 the tall grass, that we finally sought shelter under a large 

 bending pine, and having gathered some pine-knots we 

 kindled a big fire, dried ourselves as best we could, ate such 

 portions of our lunch as had not been spoiled by the rain, 

 and returned home. Thus ended our hunt on the rainy day. 

 The next day Frank left for his home, taking with him forty- 

 nine partridges, among the rest the old patriarch, which, as 

 he afterward wrote me, he exhibited to many admiring 

 friends. He also wrote me that ho had invited a number of 

 friends to a quail (partridge.) supper, at which they had eaten 

 the old. patriarch, feet, corns and all. T. E. Epbs. 



Nottoway, Va., April 10, 1885. 



BATTERY-SHOOTING. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I have bsen much interested in the various articles on 

 battery-shooting, the pros and cons of which have been so 

 ably set forth by different correspondents. Without hoping 

 to throw much "light upon the subject, I should like to put 

 in my oar, and relate a little of my experience. I have 

 hunted and shot more or less every season for the past fif- 

 teen years, and most of my life having been spent on the 

 water, have killed numbers of wildfowl. My experience of 

 hattery-shooting on the Chesapeake and its tributaries, from 

 Havre de Grace to Eastern Bav, has convinced me that far 

 less injury is done to the ducks from batteries than from 

 poiuts. 



Ducks coming to batteries are usually killed instantly 

 very few cripples being made, for the simple reason that 

 they mostly decoy singly or iu small bunches, say from four 

 to eight, and coming close to the shooter are iustantly killed, 

 very few cripples being made, and for the same reason these 

 are generally secured. Now, in point-shooting, for every 

 duck killed it is safe to say there are more or less injured, 

 and fly on to suffer agony for days unless mercifully put out 

 of pain by the ever-present "poacher," or the darkey and his 

 musket. 



Decoy-shooting from the shores of the wide waters is 

 played out, and was for a number of years before batteries 

 were introduced. The geese and ducks have gotten too wise 

 to come within range of the shore, except in narrow waters, 

 and there geese very seldom venture; so the first departure 

 from shore-shooting was in building bush blinds on the bars. 

 Sometimes good shooting can be had from them, but they 

 are open to the same objections that limit the use of the 

 sinkbox, viz., they can only be used when the wind is from 

 the right quarter, and not much of it. 



I believe that ducks are as plenty to-day on the waters of 

 the Chesapeake as they were twenty years ago; but of course 

 no two years bring the same number of ducks. When there 

 is an abundance of celery the ducks are bound to be there, 

 when feed is scarce they go elsewhere. 



There is no fear of battery-shooting being overdone, as it 

 is more or less controlled by the elements. You may have 

 three or four - days' shooting in one week, and perhaps not 

 fire a gun again for three weeks, your boat being frozeu up 

 solid or a northwest gale blowing. It may often happen that 

 if one gets two days' shooting a week he is doing well. 



In the shoal waters of the bay and the rivers running into 

 it, the ducks often feed so far from shore that it's difficult to 

 see them with a glass. Now how long will a battery live, 

 think you, let alone give you shooting, if even an ordinary 

 winter's breeze be blowing? 



And besides, very few men, unless professional shooters, 

 care to take the immense labor and exposure attendant on 

 battery-shooting. Few city men can stand the exposure, 

 few can get the "hang" of how to put out or take up an ex- 

 tensive layout, especially in the teeth of a nor'wester. Un- 

 less a man has the love of shooting naturally in him, 

 and in him deep, no graft business, he had better let box- 

 shooting alone. If it were a question of comfort between 

 shore or box shooting, we would all decide in favor of the 

 former, barrring a "soft marsh." But as the real thing to 

 decide is, whether battery-shooting drives away ducks, I say, 

 gentlemen, 1 think not. Saugwillah. 



Horse Cove, N. C, April 21. 



DUCK NETTING. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Your correspondent who signs himself "Wollat," and 

 whose communication is published in the Forest and 

 Stream of this date, betrays a lack of entire familiarity with 

 the subject when he says that "the matter of floats will 

 make no difference with ducks." Did he ever observe a 

 flock of ducks, and witness their solicitude to keep far away 

 from a fish net "having floats?" If so, I am sure he saw the 

 ducks themselves contradict his assertion. 



He next gravely informs us that "the angle at which nets 

 are placed for catching ducks will not be interfered with by 

 attaching floats to the nets," etc. 



No such claim has been made that I am aware of. The 

 "angle" at which a net is set is of no consequence so long as 

 the ducks are unaware of its existence, but floats over the 

 same say "danger below," in language perfectly intelligible 

 to them. 



The bill referred to was drawn carefully, and although the 

 first draft did not except any part of the year from its oper- 

 ation, the drafter, when informed that the restriction might 

 work injury to fishermen unless the summer months were 

 excepted, immediately took steps to have the bill amended in 

 that respect, and at his request it was amended by excepting 

 the months of May, June, July, August and September. 



"Wollat's" anxiety lest the game warden should be 

 hampered in the performance of his duty in case the bill 

 becomes a law, is unfounded. Granting that the amend- 

 ment may prove to be unable to meet all cases, and that 

 under it all its violators may not meet their deserts, it cer- 

 tainly would not, as your correspondent seems to suppose, 

 legalize duck netting carried on with nets wilh floats, or 

 otherwise invalidate the statute as it already exists. 



If a person sets nets with floats, but with intent (to be 

 proven as best may) to kill or capture waterfowl by such 

 means, a plea that he had corks or floats attached to his net 

 would not constitute a defense, but would merely shift the 

 "burden of proof" as to intent upon prosecution, and if 

 proof of such intent could be otherwise obtained, "corks 



and floats" would not release the netter from the meshes of 

 the law. 



All that your correspondent "Wollat" suggests could be 

 done as well under the amended law as at present, but the 

 amendment would place in the game warden's hands a test 

 capable of being instantly applied to any given case. 



Your correspondent also says that "there exists an item 

 of proof that nets taken up by a warden were set with iutent 

 'to capture or kill any of such birds,' provided there were 

 no floats attached," 



To this I reply, that if the law declares a net set without 

 floats during certain months to be a violation of the law, 

 every such uet found by the game warden so set, may law- 

 fully be removed, and the duty of the warden would be in 

 such case, without further proof than the evidences of his 

 own senses, to take up such net or nets and prosecute the 

 owner or owners, upon whom would rest the burden of clear- 

 ing themselves. 



"Wollat's" suggestion that it be made the duty of the 



fame constable to destroy every net found to contain ducks, 

 fear would be found to' work great injustice to honest fish- 

 ermen in many cases, which I, for one, have no desire to see 

 done. 



Without doubt ducks may, and occasionally do get caught 

 in fish-nets set without the slightest intention existing in the 

 minds of the fishermen to catch ducks therein, but it would 

 be hard upon the fisherman, guiltless of wrong intent, to 

 render him liable to have his net confiscated or destroyed 

 merely because a duck by chance became entangled therein. 

 Let us be just to all, and also let the game warden no longer 

 be able to plead the defects iu the law as his excuse for not 

 enforcing it. A. H. A. 



New York, April 28, 1885. 



DEER HUNTING IN VIRGINIA. 



Last Thanksgiving night found us on the train at Eliza- 

 beth, New Jersey, bound for Walter Wyche's plantation in 

 Greenville county, Virginia, which we reached the following 

 Friday afternoon. Our host gave up his work and took his 

 dogs and team and introduced us to the best hunters and 

 people of the couutry, and in fact made us feel as though we 

 were among friends. We had been on hunting vacations 

 every year*' for the past ten years in different parts of the 

 United States and Canada, but never before had we known 

 anything to equal the boundlessness of Southern hospitality. 

 We found that the feeling of enmity of the South toward the 

 North, which we as Northerners had heard so much about, 

 is now, if it ever existed, forgotten, and the wish of her sons 

 now was to be and live as one union, one family government 

 and one flag forever. 



The first two weeks of our vacation we spent around Mr. 

 Wyche's. We made several short deer drives, hunted quail 

 a little, and took a genuine old-fashioned Virginia fox chase, 

 which our host and his friend, Ben Owens, got up for our 

 special enjoyment. Some daj r I may give you an account of 

 it. It is too long to tell now, but it was certainty a ride 

 never to be forgotten. Our drives were always successful, 

 so far as starting deer was concerned, but the saying of the 

 old hunters, that "the deer was an awful luCUy animal," 

 was proven only too true to us, for each day the deer would 

 avoid his usual' run, and we on the favored stands were un- 

 favored by his appearance. He would run across an open 

 field before two men who sat on their horses with guns load- 

 ed with buckshot, and let one and on one occasion three deer 

 run by them within twenty -five yards, without ever thinking 

 that they were deer-hunting or that they even carried a gun. 

 Or the deer would run out into an old road and stop still for 

 ten minutes before one of our party. He was afraid of scar- 

 ing the deer if he took his gun from his shoulder. 



Our main hunt we had put off for the last week of our 

 stay, so that we could have something to take home to show 

 our friends that we were sometimes, if not always, success- 

 ful. 



On one of these last days the probabilities of getting two 

 or three shots were very flattering. We were to take our 

 stands near the Melierrin River, and had four men to drive 

 different sections of the country toward our stands. Mr. 

 Smith Green, with his three first-class deerhounds, drove one 

 section; the nimrod of the country, Mr. Jim Powell, with 

 his dogs Rattler, Blackman and Judge, drove another; Mr. 

 Walter Wyche and Mr. Newsen with Florence, Brown and 

 three other hounds drove another, while Mr. Ed. Ogburn 

 with his pack, drove still another section. Mr. Miller and 

 myself were given the choice of stands at the river where the 

 deer had a favorite crossing, and were "dead sure" to come. 



We waited and watched patiently and faithfully, and not 

 until near noon did anything occur to disturb the stillness of 

 the day, when all at once I heard the report of Miller's rifle 

 about one hundred and fifty yards above me, and quick bang 

 again. I kept a sharp lookout aci-oss the cornfield and back 

 over the river. About a minute after Miller's shot I spied a 

 buck swimming the river for the other side. A moment's 

 sight over my rifle sent a .44 Winchester bullet back of his 

 ear, breaking' his neck and killing him instantly. As there 

 was a boat near by, I pulled out for the deer and secured him 

 by one of his horns to a tree in the river, after having been 

 carried by the swift current a quarter of a mile down stream. 

 By the time 1 got on the bank Mr. Ogburn came along and 

 helped me get the buck out on land. The deer weighed 160 

 pounds, and to get him out of the tree top and up a steep 

 muddy bank was too much for me alone. When we got 

 him on shore I saw the effect of one of Miller's shots, for the 

 bullet had broken the right hind leg low down in the ham. 

 Although I did the unsportsmanlike thing of killing the deer 

 in the water, the trophy, by hunter's law, and rightly too, 

 belonged to Miller, for he struck him first with a .44 Win- 

 chester, and as I afterward learned, at a distance of seventy- 

 five yards, and the deer on a run for dear life besides. The 

 sport we had, however, was a chance one for both of us, for 

 the buck had been run across from the opposite side of the 

 river by a little cur dog that was taking a quiet hunt for his 

 own special amusement, for I saw the cur come to the bank 

 of the river just after I had shot. 



By 2 o'clock that afternoon the drivers had all come up to 

 our stands. Each party had started deer, and some two or 

 three, but for some cause, perhaps for the reason that the 

 doer "is a lucky animal," they had taken the water about 

 half a mile lower dowu the river. The next day we took 

 the same stands, but'the deer, as the day before, went down 

 the river, and as we followed down a ways we saw the 

 tracks where five had gone in the day before. It seemed to 

 be our luck that those men could not drive us a deer. They 

 had tried several times, had acted honestly toward us, but 

 not a deer could they persuade to run by us. The deer 

 might have had a premonition that a rifle bullet would do 

 more than stick in the hide like a buckshot, and the deer we 



killed would bear out that theory, for there were two harm- 

 less buckshot loose under his skin. 



We made other drives and one. day stood on the Dry Bread 

 road at the famous "Willow oak" stand, where "A. F. R." 

 stood, as "A. F. R." mentioned in one of his letters, but the 

 deer ran for us as they did for him, to the uncertain stand. 

 where Capt. Briggs of his party stood and killed two big 

 bucks two years ago, and it was at the Captain's same stand, 

 where oue* of our party stood, when the big buck that I 

 referred to before came out of the pine woods and stood 

 square in the road watching our man, Capt. Hunt, and saw 

 how manly and commanding he looked with his body erect 

 and gun on his shoulder. Perhaps the buck thought the 

 Captain on picket duty, but he finally passed his line with- 

 out any pass word, and failed to come back or stop when 

 the Captain fired one load of buckshot in the direction of his 

 tail. 



We did not make our trip to pot-hunt or slaughter game, 

 and although only one deer fell to onr rifles, we felt perfectly 

 satisfied with our hunt. 



We enjoyed the society of the people we met and were 

 well pleased with the countiy, and can recommend any of 

 our sportsmen friends who want a short, agreeable and pleas- 

 ant little hunt that they can find no more friendly and 

 honest, whole-souled and good-hearted men than it was our 

 fortune to meet. And now, Mr. Editor, let me thank you 

 ihat it was through your columns of the Forest and 

 Stream that we were led to that enjoyment of our lives 

 that we shall always remember. N. C. J. 



Springfield, N. J., Jan 12. 



SOME REMARKABLE SHOTS. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



While woodcock shooting a few years ago on Lyon's Creek, 

 in the county of Welland, Ont., f got into a dense thicket 

 of tall wild rose bushes and low willows. My dog came to a 

 point; a woodcock sprang up, with that peculiar whistle 

 which is such sweet music in the ears of a sportsman, and 

 ju%t as he got to the tops of the bushes I covered him and 

 cut loose — a few feathers floating in the air told me I had 

 "got there." Crushing my way through the tangle of thorns 

 and vines, with the assistance of my faithful dog I gathered 

 him in. As I was about to turn away, the impression grew 

 upon me that at the instant 1 pulled the trigger I had seen 

 something— a glimpse, a shadow — beyond and in line with 

 the bird at which I was aiming. Going back to the place 

 where I stood when I fired", and getting the direction, I 

 worked my way through the bushes, and after going a few 

 yards further my dog came to a point, and a few inches from 

 his nose I picked up another fine woodcock which had flown 

 into the shot. 1 had "killed two birds with one stone." 



G. B. 



Niagara Falls, N. Y. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I was riding along the line of a new railroad route in 

 Western Louisana one evening about sunset and saw a hare, 

 commonly called a "rabbit," sitting on the side of the bridle 

 path. Thinking to have some pistol practice, I dismounted 

 and crept up iu easy range. Then leveling a .38 Colts, I 

 took careful aim and fired. The hare jumped three yards 

 and stopped. 1 thought he must be wounded, and I would 

 make sure of his carcass by another bullet. So I aimed care- 

 fully and fired again. He jumped three yards again and 

 stopped. 1 looked at the hare and then at my pistol and 

 felt perplexed. 1 crept closer, and taking very good aim I 

 fired the third time. The hare again jumped three yards 

 and stopped. I felt so much exasperated at the conduct of 

 the hare that I reversed the pistol, taking hold of the barrel 

 and throwing it, I struck the hare on the back of the 

 head and killed it outright. Picking it up, 1 examined 

 for bullet holes, but found none. I found, however, im- 

 bedded in the skin of its back and shoulders several large 

 "wolves" in the chrysalis state, which made the animal poor 

 and spiritless. With this same pistol I had killed squirrels, 

 hares," partridges, frogs and alligators, by the direct method 

 I mean, not the reversed. Coahoma. 



Memphis, Tcnn., April 25. 



"THE DEAD SURE." 



DURING the summer of 1871 I experimented with a 

 number of different makes of firearms, both shotguns 

 and rifles, for the purpose of ascertaining the most effective 

 kind. After burning a great deal of powder, with no especial 

 result, a sporting man told me that a man by the name of 

 Egerton, Cyrus B. Egerton, of Syracuse, had just perfected 

 a shotgun that he called "the Dead Sure." I obtained one. 



Briefly, the principle of the gun (a double-barreled breech- 

 loader) was this: In sighting for game, the gun was never 

 pointed at the object, but always fifteen degrees to the right 

 or left of it. To accomplish this accurately a small compass 

 was inserted in the butt, just back of the hammers. At the 

 muzzles were small pieces of mechanism called afflectors, 

 connecting with a pointer which moved in a graduated 

 circle, engraved on the stock plate just above the trigger 

 guard. These afflectors could be moved at will by means of 

 the pointer, around the inner circumference of the barrels, 

 and were so constructed as to present a slightly beveled face 

 to the charge leaving the gun. The chambers were smaller 

 than the barrels, the latter resembling reduced blunder- 

 busses. The weapon was guaranteed to "fetch something" 

 every time. 



I had no chance to try the gun that year, but during the 

 next one I went up into Lewis county and took it along. 

 Going out with it one day, after a walk of several miles, I 

 caught sight of several young partridges quite a distance 

 ahead, who were acting in the most peculiar manner. At 

 regular intervals of half a minute or so they would leap from 

 the ground, flutter their wings, and then subside. My 

 curiosity was such that I watched them for a while, but, 

 finally, the instincts of a sportsman asserted themselves, and 

 I crept warily within shooting distance. Reaching it, I 

 hastily sighted to the right of the game by means of the com- 

 pass, adjusted the afflectors through the medium of the 

 pointer, and pulled the triggers. Remember, this was the 

 first time I had tried the gun and I might have been excited. 

 At all events, when the smoke cleared away I looked in the 

 direction of the birds, and saw that they were hopping away 

 more vigorously than before. 



Marveling that they did not lie down and die, or at least 

 fly away, I tried again and again, but all to the same iffejt. 

 Finally I grew disgusted and broke cover, walking straight 

 toward them. As I approached them they made no other 

 movement than the jumping one I have spoken of, and when 

 I reached them I saw to my surprise that they were each 

 fastened to a peg in the ground by a string. I was lost in 



