Mat 7, 1885. 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



293 



Isle d'Oliron were reduced in eight years from 15.000,000 to 

 400 000 oysters In anuual yield. The government managed the 

 beds, and private persons had no share in the administration. 

 The Bay of Cahcale, on the French coast, produced 70,000,000 

 oysters m 1846. In 1867 it produced 8,000,000, a falling off of 

 08,000,000, The government controlled the beds and the fishery 

 was common tu all mm, 



The' pond of Caraghettej on the New Brunswick coast, at one 

 time produced 5,000 bushels per annum. In less than sis years 

 the production ran down to" 425 bushels'. The Shediae beds 

 also ran down from 1.000 barrels to 300 bushels in a compara- 

 tively short space of time; In both eases the government 

 controlled the fishery, which was open to any and all. 



All along the coasts of Maine, New Hampshire and Massa- 

 chusetts, oysters were found in the past in considerable num- 

 bers, The fishery was a common one, and the beds are now 

 extinct. Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, 

 Delaware, Maryland and Virginia, have all had the same ex- 

 perience. They have all. had large and prolific oyster beds; 

 they have all been controlled by the State; they have all been 

 subjected to a common fishery, a fishery of all men, and they 

 have all eventually either run out completely, or greatly de- 

 teriorated. So much for that side of the subject. 



Abroad, in England and Prance especially, attempts have 

 been made to increase the supply through elaborate systems 

 of cultivation. In some localities these systems have been in 

 operation a long time. In others they are of recent origin. It 

 iB a noticeable fact, however; that the first modern attempt to 

 assisti nature in supplying the market demand was made by 

 the French government, and it is still more remarkable that, 

 despite all the resources of the Empire, the attempt was, in a 

 commercial sense, a total failure. 



Indirectly, however, it was a great benefit. People along 

 the shores were stirred up. The experiments of the" govern- 

 ment were followed, when possible, by private individuals, 

 and with general success. For a time in France oysters had a 

 "boom" and oyster culture was the fashion. Capitalists formed 

 companies, people invested liberally, and the coast in oyster- 

 growing localities was the scene of great activity. In other 

 words, the era of speculation had set in. Naturally a good 

 deal of money was lost, for great fortunes are not made hastily 

 in oysters anymore than in anything else. But eventually 

 skill, knowledge, hard work and business capacity won the 

 success in this field that they win in all others, and while the 

 government's direct efforts failed, yet, indirectly, by starting 

 the movement, they caused an eventual increase in the sup- 

 ply; and at the present day there is hardly an oyster from a 

 natural bed to be found "in a French market, though the 

 annual production of the private beds exceeds 600,000,000 

 oysters. 



The methods of the French oyster eulturists spread to Eng- 

 land, and though following the well-established Anglo-Saxon 

 priuciple, that private persons should, where possible, under- 

 take and manage all affairs of a private nature, the English 

 government did not attempt to cultivate oysters or establish 

 government oyster farms, yet concessions of bottom were 

 made to corporations and stock companies, whose operations 

 have generally been successful. The South of England Com- 

 pany and the Whitstable Company are notable examples of 

 this success. While the natural areas were fast being depleted, 

 these two companies have had well-stocked beds and a certain 

 and assured supply for all demands made upon them. Sum- 

 ming up for Europe, before turning to this country, I find that 

 of the 2,000,000,000 oysters marketed abroad, only 6 per cent. 

 or 7 per cent, are from the natural beds, while from 65 to 75 

 per cent, are artificially raised. In other words, the common 

 public property produces in Europe less than 170,000,000, while 

 the private property produces nearly 2,000,000,000. 



Turning now to our own country. In Canada and the prov- 

 inces no steps have been taken to remedy the condition 

 Of things I have outlined, and the oysters are still disap- 

 pearing; 



In the United States only two instances exist of a recuper- 

 ation at all adequate to the increasing demands of the mar- 

 kets. These instates are the cases of the States of Rhode 

 Island and Connecticut, and both are exceedingly Instructive 

 and significant. In common With all other States, Rhode 

 Island, Up to 1865, maintained the old practice of holding her 

 oyster ground as common property. Also, as with all other 

 States, Rhode Island saw her oyster beds and oyster industry 

 gradually disappear. Prior to 1865 the oyster crop was derived 

 Almost Solely from the natural beds— the common property. 

 These beds now yield only a small seed oyster, unfit for mar- 

 ket, so great has been their deterioration! In 1865 a law was 

 passed which virtually allowed private individuals the right 

 of preemption of unlimited tracts of bottom. Under the 

 influence of this law the industry revived, and Rhode Island 

 at this day proudly contrasts the exhibit of 1865 of seventy 

 acres under cultivation yielding 71,000 bushels, with the. con- 

 dition in 1883, when she had 11,000 acres under cultivation 

 yielding over 1,000,000 bushels. 



Connecticut has about the same story to relate. She held 

 her oyster ground as common property until 1855, when indi- 

 viduals were allowed to pre-empt small tracts and their pro- 

 Erietary interests were acknowledged. No great advance fol- 

 >wed for some time, principally on account of the restriction 

 of the grants to small tracts of two acres. Tenor fifteen 

 years later, however, enterprising individuals began to evade 

 the law by procuring assignments of two-acre lots from a 

 large number of persons. Thus, virtually, the possession of 

 sufficiently large tracts was secured to one man. Then the in- 

 dustry began to flourish. In 1880 the Legislature passed an 

 act which legally recognized the existing state of affairs, anil 

 authorized the continuance of its essential principle— the right 

 to hold forever as large a tract of bottom as a man could afford 

 to buy. Under this law an extraordinary advance has taken 

 place. Connecticut's natural oyster beds do not cover quite. 

 5,000 acres and produce nothing but small seed oysters, no 

 larger than a thumb nail. But through the wisdom anclliber- 

 ality of her laws she has now 100,000 acres of artificial beds 

 yielding a splendid harvest of great profit to the State. 

 Steamers by the score are engaged winter and summer over 

 this area. Thousands of men are employed winter and sum- 

 mer in the cultivation of the beds or in harvesting of the 

 crops. Millions of bushels of oysters are produced from those 

 bottoms of the sound that have been, heretofore, for countless 

 ages, totally barren and unproductive, and no more forcible 

 indication of the value of the two systems of treating the 

 oyster interest by Legislatures coultl be given than the mere 

 mention of the fact that during the last year Connecticut has 

 sent from her private artificial beds oysters to supply the 

 Baltimore markets. 



From the foregoing, I am sure, you must reach the same 

 conclusions as I have. Reviewing the history of all localities, 

 we find that so long as the fishery is common property and the 

 industry controlled and managed by the State, deterioration 

 and eventual destruction ensues. So long as it is managed and 

 controlled by private individuals, and as soon as it ceases to be 

 common property and becomes individual property, then it 

 prospers to its fullest possible extent. These are the first gen- 

 eral laws governing all successful oyster fisheries, and I com- 

 mend them to your earnest, careful consideration. To them 

 you may also add one other deduction from the history of the 

 oyster fisheries. That is, that remedial measures are not usu- 

 ally adopted until it is too late to save the natural beds— until, 

 in fact, they have in reality ceased to be of value. 



Here then is indicated the first great and important thing to 

 be done. The law must permit indefeasible proprietary rights 

 to oyster bottom, and the control of the fishery must 'pass to 

 the private individual. Adopt that principle, by suitable 

 legislation, and ah else will follow. At least, so the history of 

 other localities tells us, and you cannot but agree with me in 

 thinking the evidence overwhelmingly conclusive, 



[TO BE CONCLUDED.] 



CLAMS FOR SCOTLAND.— New York, May 3, 18SS.— 

 Editor Forest: and StrwMH During a. visit to Scotland, I sug- 

 gested to the. Duke of Sutherland the advantage to be gained 

 by planting our clams and oysters along his coast line. At his 

 request I shipped him a lot last fall. They wore detained at 

 Liverpool and all died. I made a BecSnfl shipment by the 

 Anchor Line in February last. A letter received from Mr. 

 Henry Wright, secretary of the Duke, dated Stafford House, 

 London, March 16, conveys the gratifying intelligence that 

 they arrived at Dunrob'm Castle, Sutherland, Scotland, 

 alive; were immediately planted and began excavating in 

 the sand a.t once. Only the hard clams or "qiiahr.y 

 mereenarin) were sent. Mr. VV~ right now requests that the 

 soft-shelled clam (Mt/a armaria] be forwarded. I believe 

 this is the first successful transplanting of the quahog or hard 

 cla.m fl'Otn this country to the shores of Scotland. Mr. "VI right 

 informs me (hat as yet nothing has been seen of the twenty- 

 one black bass which I conveyed to Scotland in 1S8S. As 

 they were placed in a loch six miles long and half a mile 

 wide, perhaps it is hardly time for them to be noticed. — Geo 

 Shefard Page. 



Zht Menml 



FIXTURES. 



BENCH SHOWS. 



May 5. 6. 7 and 8. 1885.— Second Annual Dog Show of the Cincin- 

 nati Sportsman's Olub, Cincinnati, O. W. A. Coster, Superintendent. 



May 23. 14 and 15.— Third Annual Dor Show of the Toronto Dog 

 Show Association. W. S. Jackson, Secretary. Toronto, Oat. 

 _ May 19, SO, Sfl and 88. — Show of the Philadelphia Kennel Club. F. A. 

 Ditl'cuderfer, Superintendent, Philadelphia, Pa. 



June i!, 3, 4 and 5.— First Anuual Dote Show ot the Illinois Kennel 



Club. John H. Nay lor, Secretary, 8,188 Archer avenue, Chicago, 111. 



FIELD TRIALS. 



Nov. 16. 1885. -Seventh Annual Field Trials of the Eastern Field 

 Trials Club, High Point, N. 0. Entries for Derby close May 1 . W. 

 A. Coster, Secretary . Ft- . i ;..!,.: , 



Dec. 7.-Seventh Annual Field Trials of the National Field 'trials 

 Club, Grand Junction, Tenn. Entries for Derby close April 1. B. M. 

 Stephenson, La Orange, Tenn., Secretary. 



A. K. R. -SPECIAL NOTICE.. 



rp\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 1st, Should he in early. 

 Entry blanks sent on receipt of stamped and addressed envelope. 

 Registration fee (50 cents) must accompany each entry. No entries 

 inserted unless paid in advance. Yearly subscription $1.50. Address 

 "American Kennel Register," P. O. Box 2833, New York. Number 

 of entries already printed S3 12. 



THE PITTSBURG PIECE OF PAPER. 



Editor Forest and St,ream: 



Mr, Mason, in reply to the cold facts I gave him in my 

 former letter, as is his usual custom, shuns the issue and says 

 he has bred, owned and exhibited winners at Birmingham and 

 the Crystal Palace, England. I say that I have carefully 

 searched the records of the "English Kennel Club Stud Book." 

 and I Cannot tmd an instance where he has won a first prize 

 with a pointer which he had himself bred. If I am wrong, 

 why does he not come out squarely and give the name of the 

 dog with which he won, when the dog won, and which show, 

 and where it is to be fotmd in the "English 'Kennel Club Stud 

 Book." 



Mr. Mason's memory is extremely tenacious wheu there is 

 anytMng to be remembered that will accrue to his own ad- 

 vantage, but seriously defective when the reverse is the case. 

 I will prove that he does not always write the truth. He 

 says he sold the bulldog Blister for twenty-five dollars, and 

 when a man stoops to prevarication to prop up the flimsy foot- 

 hold on which he stands, his case must be a weak one, and like 

 the notorious Buddensiek's buildings, need a new foundation. 



l bought the bulldog Blister from Mr. Fred Duckworth, of 

 England, showed him successfully, and afterward sold him to 

 Mr. Thayer, of Lancaster, Mass., the enthusiastic breeder and 

 exhibitor of bulldogs. He after a short time made an ex- 

 change with Mr, Mason, on what terms I know not, for the 

 bulldog Romulus. Mr. Mason, having found by previous ex- 

 perience that raffling dogs was a profitable way "of getting rid 

 of them, proposed to raffle Blister, and tor that purpose placed 

 him on exhibition in a liquor store on the corner of Twentieth 

 street and Eighth avenue, in this city, known as "The Ken- 

 nel." The chances were put up at $1 each, reduced rates to 

 clubs. 1 myself went there and was invited by Mr. Mason to 

 take a chance. But "the best laid plans of mice and men," 

 etc. Blister was troubled with a villainous temper, which be- 

 fore the raffle came off brought him to an untimely end. He 

 made a savage attack on the bartender and succeeded in de- 

 stroying the latter's trousers, for which piece of bad behavior 

 the bartender very properly shot and killed him. Can Mr. 

 Mason deny this? If so, let him tell to whom he sold the dog 

 for $25 ; or, if he sold the dog for S25, how it happened that he 

 (Mason) offered him at a raffle, or why, if the dog was not his 

 property, the bartender held him responsible for the damaged 

 garment? Mr. Mason seems to object to my styling him a 

 "self asserted authority," but I 'will take him from his own 

 standpoint. 



He condemns me as a judge because 1 have not been an ex- 

 tensive breeder of dogs, and therefore says, "I have done mv- 

 self and brother fanciers a great injustice by acting in that 

 capacity," consequently I take it that he. must mean that no 

 man can be a judge of any breed uuless he has been a success- 

 ful breeder of the particular breed of dogs which he under- 

 takes to judge. I have already shown by the English Kennel 

 Club Stud Book, that Mr. Mason never bred a pointer which 

 he had exhibited successfully in England. I will now ask when 

 and where he ever bred mastiffs, St. Bernards, Newfoundlands, 

 greyhounds, deerhounds, or any other breed of dogs? "A man 

 who is not a successful breeder of dogs cannot be a judge of 

 dogs," says Mr. Mason. Mr. Mason has never bred any breed 

 of dogs except pointers, ergo, he cannot judge any breed of 

 dogs except pointers, and from his record and his more recent 

 comments on pointers and pointer judging at the late Boston 

 show, I, with many others, am inclined to the belief that he 

 has but a very superficial knowledge of the breed he affects 

 most to admire. 



It is true his name appeared in a book, but what is that 

 worth? Forest and Stream once said that 1 was a good 

 judge of dogs, now they allow Mr. Mason to repeatedlv say I 

 am not. 



There have been and still are pointer breeders in England, 

 whose names will never die as long as the noble pointer lives. 

 We have heard of Garth's Drake, Lord Seftou's Shot, White- 

 house's Hamlet and Price's Bang, but who ever heard of 

 Mason's anything ' Nobody, nor ever will, because Mr. Mason 

 is not a breeder, is not even a lover of dogs, except to the ex- 

 tent of the dollars and cents he can get out of them at a raffle 

 or otherwise. 



In conclusion 1 would refer Mr. Mason to a letter which ap- 

 peared in the Kennel Gazette, London, England, a few sen- 

 tences from which I will quote; "An Englishman well known 

 in this country as a fairly successful exhibitor, but certainly 

 not an authority on any breed * * * * * * Englishmen 

 should at all times learn to be modest before they begin to 

 spread their opinions broadcast. If they know sufficient, and 

 can write sufficiently well, they can find plenty of employ- 

 ment in their own country, and bv the time "they become 

 authorities their writings and opinions will be quoted in 



foreign countries; but to commence as teacher or censor jjj 

 ■jother country is an intolerable piece of egotism." 

 This letter was quoted in a Western contemporary during 

 the week in which the first Louisville show was held. I read 

 it to Mr. Mason, and never shall forge* the unutterable ex 

 pressioti of anguish and mortification which came over his 

 features as he gasped out, "This is the work of my inveterate 

 enemy, "Vero Shaw," notwithstanding the fact that, V'ero Shaw 



appe.are 

 quoting. 



When I have mare leisure I will, with your permission, pro- 

 pound for Mr. Mason's special perusal a few questions on cer- 

 tain dogs, which I will guarantee will be interesting to him, 

 however much it mav try the patience of your rcadoi s, 



J as. Mortimer. 



THE AMERICAN KENNEL CLUB. 



Editor Forest and stream: 



The most healthy sign I have seen for some time is thestate- 

 meut of your correspondent "Rosecroft," that there will be no 

 representation from the Eastern clubs at the association meet- 

 ing at Cincinnati. The scorn with which "construction" has 

 been received, has scotched the snake concealed in the associ- 

 ation, but it is not killed yet. The same stupid fatuity that 

 concocted "construction" i's at work to farther its own ends 

 and has chosen Cincinnati as the Held of operations. Nothing 

 is needed to completely kill this snake further than leaving it 

 to its own devices. The genius that elevated "construction" 

 to its commanding dignity, suffices to cover a, continent with 

 —well, we wont call it glory. I suppose the outcome will be 

 two associations, an Eastern and a Western one. This seems 

 the likeliest solution of the present mix. One thing is sure, 

 the association that promulgated "construction" got up the 

 meeting at Cincinnati, and finally snaked through the post- 

 ponement of the annual meeting to Cincinnati this year, can 

 never command the respect of the honorable, sensible men in 

 dog circles of America. When a sensible association is got 

 ten up, let as hope that it will sit down on all such tricks 

 as proxies, except, perhaps, in voting for officers, no 

 more such business as referring the Whole conduct 

 of affairs to a "hole and corner" meeting of "dear- 

 ly beloved Roger and I." I do not see why a club 

 or clubs cannot be organized on a liberal basis, one that 

 will invite the confidence and respect of the exhibitor, even if 

 it does not give him a share in its actual work. This will 

 probably be the easiest way out of present difficulties, and for 

 the present will do well enough. As soon as we get a sufficient 

 number of specialist clubs, they can keep the association 

 straight by creating a congress of their delegates to keep an 

 eye on the association. Pray, may I inquire of the members 

 of the A. K. C. who constituted the meeting at Boston, what, 

 in the world they were at, when they approved the minutes of 

 the "last meeting"? Wasn't that the meeting at Cincinnati 

 that gave us proper "construction"; And didn't all the East- 

 ern members repudiate "construction," or did the same wise 

 "proxies : " that met "in the woodpile" outvote them? Now, 

 come up to the rack, don't keep family secrets, in the present 

 state of public mind nothing will be satisfactory but a clean 

 breast of it. The proceedings of the Boston meeting will leak out 

 gradually, but a frank confession will clear all the innocent 

 ones, but until we get it they will be lumped in with the black 

 sheep. W. Wade. 



HtnvroK, Pa,, April Si, 18SJ. 



THE NEW YORK DOG SHOW. 



rpHE ninth annual New York dog show, given under the 

 JL auspices of the Westminster Kennel Club, was held at 

 Madison Square Garden last week. The arrangements were. 

 excellent,, and Mr. Mortimer, who superintended the show, is 

 to be congratulated upon the sticcess of his first attempt. We 

 gave last week a description of the show, with a list of nearly 

 all the awards. The remainder will be found below. The 

 number of entries was not quite up to the average of previous 

 shows, the falling off being mainly in the pointer and setter 

 classes. The condition of the dog3 - was equal, if not superior, 

 to that of any exhibit we have seen. The quality of the ani- 

 mals, especially in the non-sporting classes, was also better 

 than usual. 



The judging was not in all cases satifactory. Mi'. Dalziel 

 is an acknowledged authority upon many of the classes which 

 came before him, and we cannot quite understand how so 

 good a judge could make some of the mistakes that occurred 

 in his decisions, although we have the best authority for stating 

 that some of the dogs were overlooked, and that had a more 

 careful examination been made the result would have been 

 different. Mr. Tracy is a true artist and shows wonderful 

 skill in transferring to canvas life-iike pictures of the dogs he 

 portrays, but in passing judgment upon a group of animals we 

 fear that his artist's eye is prone to dwell upon the lines and 

 curves of beauty rather than upon the oftentimes less pleasing 

 outlines that denote greater worth. 



The comments on the dogs are for the benefit of the public, 

 and as a guide to the breeder who has no opportunity to ex- 

 amine them. No dog is perfect, and it is only by judicious 

 breeding that improvement of the various breeds can be ac- 

 complished, and ic is of vital importance that a thorough 

 knowledge of the faults of each animal should be had in order 

 that the mating may be so intelligently done, that these faults 

 shall not be intensified in the offspring by the careless mating 

 of animals that have the same bad qualities. 



MASTIFFS— (MR. DALZFEL). 



Hero II. and Lorna Doone were the only entries in the cham- 

 pion classes. The son of Salisbury was looking well, and his 

 kennel mate better than when exhibited at New Haven. In 

 the open dog class four o^t of the eleven entries failed to 

 put in an appearance, and the judge was not long in selecting 

 Moses for premier honors. The newcomer has a good head, 

 but is heavy in ears and has a superabundance of dewlap. We 

 will reserve our opinion of his body until we see him in better 

 condition. His legs and feet are fairly good. Homer— the 

 much abused — was well placed second. He is on the small 

 side, but has a very nice mastiff head, and is much above the 

 average in body, legs and feet. Lion, placed third, is a big, 

 handsome dog, good in body and coat, but lacking in mastiff 

 character. His head is much too long and his ears are heavy. 

 Rex is houndy in head, and so is Jumbo. There were only 

 eight bitches in the open class, six of which were present. 

 First went to Prussian Princess, a bitch with a good head, hut, 

 faulty in the legs and heavy in ears. Lady Gladys came next, 

 and a rare good bitch she is. She has a iery good head that 

 might be improved a little below the eyes, stands on good 

 legs and feet, and has plenty of length between the couplings. 

 We would like her tail better if it were longer, reaching to the 

 hocks, and perhaps she is a bit slack behind the shoulder. 

 Third went to Queen II., whose good and bad points we have 

 frequently alluded to. How Mr, Dalziel managed to overlook 

 Rosalind "we do not know. She was in nice condition, and 

 is at all times a good bitch. She should have been second, 

 if not first, with Prussian Princess third, and Queen II. vhc. 

 Twenty-one puppies made a big class, but the quality was 

 bolow par, and we failed, to find anything among them that is 

 likely to develop into first-class form. The printed list of 

 awards sent out by the club gave Vulcan as the winner, but 

 the prize went to Leo. He is a big, fine dog, but is much too 

 long in the face and heavy in ears. He has a ring tail, stands 

 too high behind and is weak in second thighs. Pharaoh, win- 

 ner of second prize, is of better type, but too much dished be- 

 low the eyes and long of ears. He lacks size and is f aulty in 

 back and tail. Duke, placed third, was our choice for first. 

 He carries his tail too high, is throaty and lacks in color of ears. 



