Jttlt 2. 1885.1 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



468 



duced into the hatcherv at Cold Spring harbor, the Commi 

 doners finally decided 'to add this branch ol hsliculUire to 

 those already in nvosress in the State, and in the fall ot 188o 

 work was begun with this end in view. Two reservoirs were 

 constructed; a laro;e one, 115x215 feet in dimensions oin the 

 inner bay, and n, small one about twenty teet square just above 

 the hatcherv. The large reservoir was surrounded on the 

 water side by a solid stone wall backed by sand and gravel, 

 and was so arranged with flood gates that the. sea water at 

 flood tide could enter and fill the reservoir to the depth of the 

 rise of tide, about nine feet, but could escape only by means of 

 a pipe which was laid from the resevvoir to a well near the 

 hatchery, from whence it was drawn by means of a small hot- 

 air engine and forced into the small reservoir. From this small 

 reservoir it could be drawn at pleasure for use in the hatchery. 

 The water thus obtained was of a density of 1 ,020, and in order 

 to take advantage of this supply for our experiments, it .was 

 decided to construct two receptacles, one a wooden tank, to be 

 placed close to the hatchery and to receive the water direct 

 from the small reservoir already mentioned, and one a small 

 pond, to be dug out of the marsh at a short distance north- 

 east of the hatchery and within high-water limits. This pond 

 was to be so arranged that it could receive not only the out- 

 flow trora the hatchery and tank, bat be supplied wi + h fresh 

 sea water at each flood. Work was begun on them early in 

 July, but owing to the difficulty of getting help and to the 

 necessity of raising and strengthening the wall of the large salt 

 water storage reservoir before it could be used, we were not 

 able to begin our experiments until Aug. 12, or after the 

 better portion of the breeding 'season had passed, and even 

 then I was able to use only the tank, owing to the. difficulties 

 met with in constructing the small pond. The tank, which 

 was placed on a firm foundation close to the south side of the 

 hatcherv, was twelve feet long, six feet wide and three feet 

 deep. It was made of thoroughly seasoned two-inch pine 

 plank, rabbeted and nailed together, with the joints setiu 

 white lead and battened upon the inside, and it was firmly 

 yoked together with two strong frames which were placed 

 around it at one-third the distance from either end. The top 

 was open and tne inside and outside were coated with three 

 layers of coal tar, which I found to be very good to protect 

 the wood of the tank from the effects of the water, but it 

 should not have been used, as it caused the wood to absorb 

 entirely too much heat, and in this manner very seriously 

 affect the temperature of the water upon the inside, and to 

 obviate this it became necessary to sheath the tank with a 

 covering of undressed lumber and also to build a rude roof 

 above it. " 



Shells were suspended on strings in the tank, and the eggs 

 were first placed in it on Aug. 12, with the thermometer at 

 67 deg. in the morning. Two days later it was 74, but diffi- 

 culty was experienced in keeping an even temperature, and 

 while the eggs hatched the embryos did not live. Sediment 

 came in the pipes, and it was decided to build a small pond 

 twenty-five feet square in the meadow. Here fresh-water 

 springs were struck, and the work was delayed until the 

 spawning season wa3 about over. 



He further says : "Everything seemed unfavorable to suc- 

 cess: we did not commence work until the breeding season 

 was nearly over and it was difficult to get spawn; the 

 weather was bad, with irregular and generally low tempera- 

 ture; and then the leaking from the marsh into the. pipe 

 capped the climax. But I do not think that the lack of suc- 

 cess was of such a character as to discourage us from trying 

 again. It would seem as if the experience gained this season 

 would enable us perhaps to be successful the next time, 

 provided we commence early enough to have every- 

 thing in readiness for work during the spawning season. 

 And I would advise that an experimental pond, upon a larger 

 scale than that of the past season, be made down near the 

 large salt-water reservoir, and that the water be used directly 

 from the reservoir, instead of after having passed through the 

 pipe connecting the reservoir with the hatchery. This will 

 enable us to get rid of all leakage from the marsh as well as 

 dispense with the use of the engine, and we can obtain plenty 

 of water to enable us to obtain an even temperature for our 

 young oysters. Three things appear to be indispensable to 

 successful oyster breeding, a moderately high and even tem- 

 perature and clear water, and it can hardly be doubted that 

 the vaiyiug set that takes place along our shores during the 

 different seasons is due, in a very large degree, to variations in 

 these three particulars." 



The report is a valuable contribution to our oyster litera- 

 ture, and the chapter on the "Natural History" and "Habits 

 of the Oyster," as well as the plates, makes it exceedingly in- 

 teresting. . . . 



CANADIAN FISHCULTURE, 

 "TT7E have supplement No. 2 to the first annual report of 

 V V the Department of Fisheries, containingthe Superinten- 

 dent's report on fish breeding in the Dominion of Canada for 

 1884. There are now twelve establish ments for the propagation 

 of fish by artificial methods in operation in the several Prov- 

 inces of the Dominion. There were not as many eggs taken 

 as in 1S83, because of the less number of parent salmon cap- 

 tured. The number of fry bred at the different hatcheries 

 was: 



Sydney, Cape Breton, salmon 1,000,000 



Bedford, Nova Scotia, salmon 1,000,000 



Dunk River, Prince Edward's Island,salmon 1,000,000 



St. John, New Brunswick, salmon 811,000 



Mirimichi, New Brunswick, salmon 795,000 



Restigouche, Quebec, salmon 010,000 



Gaspf, Quebec, salmon 859,000 



Tadoussac, Quebec, salmon 985,000 



Magog, Quebec, lake trout 100,000 



Newcastle, Untario, lake trout 5,150,000 



Newcastle, Ontario, brook trout 50,000 



Newcastle. Ontario, whitefish ^,500,000 



Newcastle,' Ontario, black bass 1 00,000 



Sandwich, Ontario, whitefish 27,000,000 



Sandwich, Ontario, pickerel 10,000,000 



Total of all kinds 53,148,000 



The "pickerel' 1 referred to is the doi-e* or pike-perch, Stisos- 

 tedivm . 



The new hatchery on the Frazer Elver, British Columbia, 

 built by Mr. Thomas Mowat, in 188b, gives promise of being 

 of great value. The quinnat and suckeye salmons have been 

 bred there to the extent ot 8,000,000. Reports from all the 

 hatcheries are given in detail and a colored map giving the 

 position of hatcheries, places where fry were deposited, etc., 

 accompanies the report. 



kills. 2. What is the proper name of our Rooky Mountain eagle 

 locally called black eapOe? Abs. 1. Your friend is quite wrong and 

 von are right 2. Aqnila chryxaetus. the golden eagle. The balrl eagle 

 occurs in the Rocky Mountains in ihe neighborhood ot the vellow- 

 stono Lake or indeed may be found near any very large I » >J.y of water, 

 but.the common eagle of the mountains is the golden eagle. 



R O A New York —Is it lawful under the recently enacted game 

 laws of this State to keep brook trout, under six inches in length, and 

 if unlawful, does the, act apply to Queens and Suffolk counties? Ans. 

 It is unlawful to keep or kill brook trout under six inches long any- 

 where in (lie State. The exemption of Queens and Suffolk counties 

 only applies to ihe date of capture. See law published in full in our 

 issue of April 23. __^_^__^__^____^__ 



^nnww$ to i^arrespotukntg. 



ISP" No Notice Taken of Anonymous Correspondents. 



E, B, W., New York.— You will find there, in season, bay birds and 

 ducks. 



A.. M.— Please, tell me wbat bird the blue ehableur is? A gentleman 

 in 'England las asked me to send him a few skins for feathers for sal- 

 mon flies. Is the bird the American jay? Ans. Probably the blue Jay 

 (Cyanurus cristatus) is meant, 



"W. L. A.— Can you or some of your subscribers inform me how to 

 catch crayfish? There are enough of them around here, and I wish 

 to get some for bass bait, but don't know how to catch them. Ans. 

 Crayfish are usually taken in pots like, lobster pots. They are made 

 of wicker with a funnel opening and hailed. Nail kegs with a funnel 

 of stocking leg have been used. 



Eagle, Missoula, M. T.— 1. Iconteud that the eagles in this Territory 

 feed upon dead horses, cattle, etc., when pressed by hunger. A friend 

 of mine Thinks that the eagle will not eat anything except what he 



r M* Mmnel. 



Address all, communications to the Forest and Stream Publish- 

 ing Co. p 



FIXTURES. 



BENCH SHOWS. 



Sept. 22, 23, 24 and 25.— Dog Show of the Milwaukee Exposition As- 

 sociation. John D. Olcott, Superintendent, Milwaukee, Wis. 



Oct 27 28 and 29.— Twelfth Dog Show of the Western Pennsylvania 

 Poultry Society, Pittsburgh, Pa. C, B. Elben, Secretary. 

 FIELD TRIALS. 



Nov 16, 1885.— Seventh Annua) Field Trials of the Eastern Field 

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

 A. Coster, Secretary, Flatbush. L. I. • 



Dec. 7.— Seventh Annual Field Trials of the National Field Trials 

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

 Stephenson, La Grange, Tenn., Secretary. 



A. K. R. -SPECIAL NOTICE. 



THE 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 hi early. 

 Entry blanks sent on receipt of stamped and addressed envelope. 

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

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

 "American Kennel Register," P. O. Box 2832, New York. Number 

 of entries already printed 2450. 



CONCERNING DOGS AND RECORDS. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Pray do not head this letter' 'The Pittsburgh Piece of Paper," 

 and please grant me a new lease of life, that I may settle up 

 monthly accounts. My last contribution to your esteemed 

 columns contained so many stinging facts that Mr. Mortimer 

 required several weeks to dodge them, but I see he puts in the 

 old plea— "busy." It takes about as long to produce a Morti- 

 mer letter as it does to erect a Bartholdi pedestal, and when 

 the work is completed there are indications that the "com- 

 mittee" have had a hand in the generous enterprise. The six 

 feet and four inches long owner of a rather good-looking bull- 

 terrier has just called upon me, and wishes me to say that in 

 his opinion Mr. Mortimer's latest per-"version" is a Baby-long 

 production, ''crooked fore and aft." In remaining silent for a 

 while I hoped that my friends would gather up the fragments 

 of their not very sweet tempers. The calendar is so full of 

 errors, and savors so much of blackguardism that I should 

 have been justified in discarding it, but "peace at any price" 

 never was my policy. A clear statement of facts is what dog 

 lovers need, and those who cannot face the music should step 

 down and out. 



Why does the owner of Rory O'More try to ape that funny 

 fellow 7 " "Lillibulero?" Imitations are not desirable, so let the 

 witty Irishman hatch his own little jokes, and patent them as 

 well, if he thinks fit, All of us cannot be "Lillibuleros" and 

 "Porcupines," neither can the ignorant rise to the level of the 

 educated. Blackguards are so numerous, and are so frequently 

 dubbed gentlemen (?) that "Lillibulero" thinks it best to give 

 gentleman a distinguishing name, and he fixes upon ' 'man" as 

 the nearest approach to "gentleman." The great judge of mas- 

 tiffs struck a sweet chord and one that is certain to be re- 

 sounded. The mistake of Rory O'More's master was in not 

 advising the public before he stepped into "Lillibulero's" boat, 

 which, by the way. is only big enough for one. Several unini- 

 tiated persons jumped at the conclusion that the Albany 

 writer was in earnest when he said a ' 'pop bottle" is a scholar 

 and a rogue is a gentleman. If the individual with 

 two skulls only had known what the Rory O'More 

 boomer said about him at the Boston show, he never 

 -would have allowed him to join the shattered ranks 

 of the aristocratic . and gallant "Kill Mason" regi- 

 ment. Neither would the Albany man have been allowed 

 a seat in the syn — agogue had the "gentleman with two skull s 

 heard his not very complimentary remarks about the chaplain 

 of the regiment— the Bishop of Canterbury (Conn.) . Duplicity, 

 the Rory O'More man should be told, is no sign of good breed- 

 ing, and bon sang ne pent mentir. The gentleman says he has 

 made Irish setters a specialty: how would it be to sell out and 

 make good mannners a specialty. They would stand him in 

 better stead than a thousand little Rory O'Mores. He made 

 his debut in 1877, and since then he has bred Roiy O'More II., 

 the fortunate recipient of undeserved honors at the last New 

 York show. What a record! In a recent letter to a Western 

 paper he said he never heard of me as an owner of dogs "out- 

 side of the pointer, which, -with one or two other breeds of 

 non-sporting dogs alone, seemed to be his [my] specialty." 

 Does he think I owned any dogs inside the pointer, and does 

 he firmly believe that the pointer is a non-sporting dog? The 

 record proves that I owned and exhibited Irish and other 

 setters before the Albany novice made his debut, and that I 

 have won a special prize" "for the best sporting dog in' the 

 show" (with an Irish setter), before ever this new hght was 

 heard of in connection with dogs. Yes, he is a great man, a 

 genius, and I hope "wont lose his reputation by dying.''' 



I cannot please my friends, they ask too much of me. Mr. 

 Mortimer is not satisfied when I judge for him, and allow him 

 to take not only the honor aud the glory, but the pay as well; 

 whereas the man with two skulls goes into mourning because I 

 refuse to write prejudiced reports for his paper— "keep it 

 quiet" — and establish a reputation for an individual whose 

 -ignorance is equalled only by his roguery. Will the gentlemen 

 please find another tutor? My engagement with them is can- 

 celled. 



It was cunning of Messrs. Mortimer & Co. to try to convince 

 the readers of this paper that I never have won first prizes 

 with pointers of my own breeding. That position was not 

 tenable, and so Mr. Mortimer qualitied the falsehood by add- 

 ing, "mentioned in the E. K. C. S. B." A smart attempt to 

 mislead the public, and it is not the first time Mr. Mortimer 

 has tried the experiment. Why didn't he say "mentioned in 

 the N. A. K. C. S. B."? When I exposed Mr. Mortimer's 

 record (?), proved that; the business he was engaged in when 

 he was in England prevented him keeping dogs, challenged 

 him to show that he ever bred, owned, or exhibited a decent 

 specimen in this cotmtry, and gave his complete list of win- 

 nings, i. e., fifteen prizes won with fifth-rate bulldogs and bull- 

 terriers, he replied as follows: "DaMel says in his notes on 

 ' Judges, Then- Election,' 'There is a rather broad-spread opinion 

 that to be a good judge a man must have been a successful 

 breeder. The experience gained by breeding may be bene- 

 ficial or prejudicial, but it can never make a man a judge.' " 

 Dalziel's opinion was very weighty when Mr. Mortimer hoped 

 that by quoting it he might get James Mortimer out of a cor- 

 ner. How does Mr. Mortimer reconcile that argument with 

 his statement that I am not a judge because (in his opinion) I 

 have only bred two good dogs? Mortimer-like, isn't it? 

 He continues: "I will wager that I am correct 

 in stating that first prize at Birmingham with Vis- 

 count, and first prize at Belfast with Lady Godiva 



were the only first prizes mentioned in the E. K. C. S. B. 

 that Mr. Mason ever won with pointers which he had 

 himself bred; that is to say, from 1872 to 1881 he succeeded in 

 breeding one dog, with which he won one first prize at Birm- 

 ingham, and one with which he won one first prize at Belfast." 

 What has become of the dogs exhibited by other persons, but 

 which were bred by me? Tricky, isn't it? If Mr, Mortimer 

 will consult the blue book at Babylon he will find that very 

 few shows were registered in the stud books between the years 

 1872 and 1881 , for the very simple reason that few shows 

 adopted the K. C. rules, and the club only admitted such 

 shows as did. 1 will explain this for Mr. Mortimer's benefit. 

 The "Book of the Dog" says: "Amongst older breeders the 

 names of Mr T. Starter, Mr. C. H. Mason, Lord Sefton, Lord 

 Downe and Mr. Garth, Q. C, appear most prominently, and 

 then- blood is eagerly treasured by breeders." How many 

 first prize winners which they had themselves bred were reg- 

 istered in the stud books between the years 1872 and 1881? T. 

 Starter, 1;C. H. Mason, 2; Lord Sefton, 0; Lord Downe, 0; 

 Garth, 0. If Mr. Mortimer's argument is worth anything C. 

 H. Mason is the best judge of the lot. Will Mr. Mortimer be 



food enough to display his ability in another direction? When 

 require his assistance he shall hear from me. If a man wants 

 to secure an able defense he should persuade the plaintiff to 

 engage Mr. James Mortimer and the Bishop of Canterbury. If 

 he can do that he will get a verdict with costs. 



Mr. Mortimer accuses me of not confining myself to the 

 "subject matter under discussion." What next? When I 

 placed Mr. Mortimer's record in the hands of the public what 

 did he do? Dodged my questions and invited me to discuss 

 "Buddensiek buildings," "bar-tenders," "raffles," "stud books," 

 "damaged garments," "mice." etc. All of my questions were 

 relevant. Mr. Mortimer denied my having judged more than 

 two dogs for him at Pittsburgh, but admitted that "he forgot 

 all about it," consequently I challenged him to deny that I 

 judged certain dogs for him at the Chicago show of 1883. My 

 object in doing so is apparent. Mr. Mortimer dodges the 

 question and creeps behind the statement that "he [myself] 

 does not know how to conduct a controversy in a temperate 

 and gentlemanly manner." Had Mr. Mortimer denied my 

 having judged certain dogs for him at Chicago I would have 

 produced a live witness in support of the assertion that I did. 

 I might have asked Mr. Mortimer if he is acquainted with the 

 individual who called upon me (shortly after my arrival in 

 this country) and said, "Let's see the bulldogs and Young Bill, 

 I know nothing about the others." Mr. Mortimer might also 

 have been requested to furnish parti eulars as to the name and 

 residence of the person who not very long ago (within the last 

 four years) used to send dogs in a hamper to a man to find out 

 "which is the best and what are they worth?" No wonder 

 wh?n Mr. Mortimer sees a short-faced spaniel he thinks its 

 skull has been smashed in with a "mallet" upon the anvil of 

 some little London smithy. What is the use of showing good 

 dogs? Mr. Barlow is right in refusing to serve on a, committee 

 of which Mr. Mortimer is a member. 



This is how Mr. Mortimer demonstrates that "I don't know 

 how to conduct a controversy in a 'temperate' manner," and 

 that he does know: "Mr. Mason thanks me, and hugs the de- 

 lusion to his breast, that I have, as he has heard, told people 

 that he w r as 'much the best judge in America.'" What I 

 really did write is, "Mr. Mortimer has never been asked to 

 consider me a judge, but I thank him for having told people 

 that 'Mason is much the best judge in America.' What a 

 splendid indorsement! But how does Mr. Mortimer know when 

 a man is or is not a judge?" Really, I fail to see any hugging 

 about that. Perhaps it is hugging A la Babylon, Temperate, 

 veiy temperate. Mr. Mason does not know how to conduct a 

 controversy in a "gentlemanly manner," but Mr. James Mor- 

 timer does, and this is how he proves it: "Mr. Mason refuses 

 to discuss either 'tumble-down liquor or bartenders,' what- 

 ever that may mean." This is what I wrote: "Mr. Mortimer 

 will please pardon me for refusing to discuss either tumble- 

 down buildings, liquor or bar-tenders. . Mr. Mortimer's ex- 

 perience with such things, extending over a number of years, 

 gives lnm a decided advantage over an oppenent, and I never 

 undertake to write on subjects I am not familiar with. How 

 wotdd it be for Mr. James Mortimer to adopt a similar reso- 

 lution ?" Gentlemen do not resort to trickery and falsehood, 

 and as a rule are sufficiently well educated not to misquote. 

 When a gentleman joins in a controversy he retires therefrom 

 precisely as he entered— a gentleman. With just enough of 

 learning to misquote, Mr. Mortimer can scarcely be consid- 

 ered a success in his new role of exponent of etiquette. 



Now for Mr. Mortimer's Chicago questions, that is to say, 

 "pertinent" questions. He asks who, when I "prated" about 

 the wrongful entry of Meteor and Vanity, was the owner of 

 Princess Phoebus. I will tell him who was not the owner — 

 the judge; and further, that she was entered in strict ac- 

 cordance with the rules of the show. Had she not been 

 I would have referred Mr. Mortimer to Rule 12 (old style). 

 Mr. Mortimer's vicious insinuation that I gave the grey- 

 hound Friday Night a spurious pedigree would be treated 

 with the contempt it deserves, had I not undertaken to meet 

 all charges from Babylon. Friday Night was sold to me by 

 Mr. Lancaster, of this city, who gave me the following pedi- 

 gree: "Friday Night is brother to Saturday Night; sire. 

 Master's Prince; dam, Sally." It is easy to see that either 

 Mr. Lancaster or somebody else fell into an unaccountable 

 blunder. Saturday Night is by Master's Sam out of Polly, and 

 therefore is a better bred dog than if he had been by Prince 

 out of Sally. Would any sane person intentionally give a dog 

 a worse pedigree than it really had? What object could Mr. 

 Lancaster have in giving Friday Night a false pedigree, when 

 he sold the dog as the "brother to Saturday Night"? Does 

 Mr. James Morti mer think that because dogs are brothers 

 they have different pedigrees, or what in the name of com- 

 mon sense is he driving at? 



Mr. Mortimer's next question is, "who is the real— but hold 

 up, I have resolved not to do this." Did man ever hear of a 

 more sneakish, contemptible, mean, ungentlemanly piece of 

 work than this? It has only been equaled by the fellow who, 

 when he found he could not "kill Mason," went home to write 

 my dogs down, and by the scoundrel who suggested "throwing 

 poison to the dogs." Who is the real ownerof Rockingham? 

 That is what Mr. Mortimer did not care, to ask because he 

 thought that Ms cowardly insinuation imputed fraud. Gen- 

 tlemanly, isn't it? The reason why Rockingham has been 

 written down in a Western paper is because the Bishop 

 of Canterbury thinks "the dog belongs to Mason." The 

 report was circulated at New Haven for a joke, the bishop 

 got hold of it and all of your readers have heard of the resolu- 

 tion that was passed several months ago, i. e., "Seeing we 

 cannot 'kill Mason, Watson and Davidson,' we will go for 

 them dogs." Poor Rockingham! a worthless-looking cur, be- 

 cause a disreputable character thinks "the dog belongs to 

 Mason." Mr, Mortimer's other questions were so well 

 answered by "Porcupine" in the Sporting Life of June 24, 

 that I will simply quote them here. The prickly-backed tyke 

 has already accused me of stealing his points, and I don't 

 want him slinging his quills at me. I know two men in Chi- 

 cago who have been wearing heavy overcoats all through the 

 spring, and yet there isn't an inch of them bodies that isn't 

 tattooed by the quills of "Mr. Lillibulero Porcupine." 



To show a few ot the fatal blunders Mortimer's blind egotism leads 

 him into, let us see what he says about Mr. Mason's knowledge of 

 dogs: "My confidence in his capabilities as a judge of dogs has 

 been rudely shaken by more recent developments, notably by his 

 claiming worthless dogs at catalogue prices, by some of his awards 

 at the Washington show in 18S3, and more particularly by the ahsurd 

 faet of his competing with the mastiff Nevison against Bonivard 

 for the special prize for best non-sporting dog at the New Haven 

 show 1884," In the first place he calls these "more recent develop- 

 ments," Mr Mason arrived here in the spring of 1881, judged at 

 London, Ont.. in October of that year, and there claimed a first prize 

 winning pointer at $100. refusing « large bouus to be off ihe trade: 

 at New York the following May, 1882. he claimed Jester, the English 



