70 



FOREST AND STREAM, 



[Feb. 18, 1886 



creased under the operation of the law of 1879, and T am 

 satisfied from personal observation that it is aoin the Sarauae 

 region, with which I am familiar. You may think it gen- 

 tlemanly and very convincing to charge me with, lying about 

 it, but that does not alter the fact. 



7. You object to my stating my belief ' 'that hounding is one 

 of the least destructive methods of hunting deer." Read 

 Mr. Wardner's letter in the pamphlet referred to— himself 

 an old still hunter. Inquire of Paul Smith, or of anybody 

 who knows what he is talking about and you will get the 

 same reply. Read Mr. Fuller's letter; read Martin Moody's 

 letter; read Mr. Manning's letter: read Dr. Dodge's letter; 

 read Mr. Francis H. Wceks's letter. It is a very short way 

 out of the trouble to accuse, as you do, all men who do not 

 agree with you of being liars; 'but, my dear Mr, Editor, 

 abuse is not argument, and your calling people liars, aside 

 from being very discourteous^ does not make them so. It is 

 the method usually resorted to by those who have no better 

 argument to use and always reminds one of the lawyer who 

 having lost his case in court revenged himself by swearing 

 at the judge and jury. I have repeatedly heard it stated 

 that not more than one deer is taken in every three races run 

 prior to Oct. 15 in the Adirondack region at large, and I 

 believe that average to be pretty near the truth. I recollect 

 well one series of eight consecutive hunts, with two or three 

 dogs each, by a party, some days of five and others of six, in 

 which not a single deer was killed or wounded. I recall 

 another occasion when a party of four of us with five guides 

 and four or five dogs, hunted' five days and killed two deer. 

 Not. less than two deer were started each day on each of 

 these occasions. There are, no doubt, certain portions of the 

 woods and certain seasons late in the fall when tke propor- 

 tion of deer killed is larger than this. But the statement is 

 made on excellent authoiity that single still-hunters on the 

 Bnow last winter killed, each, from thirty to fifty deer, and 

 that there are many carcasses hanging in the woods this 

 winter, billed by stiil-kuuters for market and never carried 

 out because the price of venison went so low that the sum 

 received would not pay for the labor. Allow me to suggest 

 that you dispose of all these statements also by simply 

 characterizing ibem as untrue, in fact I see no other course 

 for you to pursue. 



You have also, my dear Mr. Editor, a very fascinating and 

 convincing way of arguing, by attributing motives to your 

 opponents other than those which they themselves honestly 

 set forth. For example, you say that we are clamoring for 

 a law against floating, "not because they [we] believe that 

 it will save the game, but because they [we] hope thereby""to 

 regain the privilege of hounding Why do they [we] want 

 to exchange -jacking for hounding? Because by the hitter 

 method they [we] can get more deer." Now, 1 object to 

 this. We don't say of you that you f spouse the anti hound- 

 ing law in order to sell your paper, because we find at the 

 bottom corner of paee 41 a suggestion that those who are 

 interested on your side should send marked copies of your 

 excellent paper to their members at Albany. That would be 

 mean and probably untrue. But it would' be no more untrue 

 than your statement that we are actuated by the motives 

 which you attribute to us. We have given the reasons why 

 we object to jacking. Why don't you show that there is 

 true sport in sitting cramped up in the bow of a boat for 

 hours and then blazing away with a double-barreled shot- 

 gun, at a distance of a boat's length, at an entirely uusus 

 pecting doe or fawn? Why don't you show that it is 

 perfectly easy to select your same and Jet the does go. as we 

 do in hounding? Why" don't you show that the killing of 

 one doe does not exert at least four times as much effect on 

 the future number of deer in the woods as the killing of a 

 buck v Why don't you show that one-half the deer wounded 

 by jack-hunting do" not crawl off into the woods to die a 

 painful death of their wounds and starvation? If you could 

 do some of these things you would, and thereby add to the 

 sum total of human knowledge facts on which legitimate 

 arguments could be founded. No one with the spirit of a 

 man in him, who has ever heard the bay of the hounds, 

 would think of resorting to jacking except as a dire neces- 

 sity to provide food for his camp. 



8. You attack the statistics, furnished by pretty much 

 everybody, to the effect that the still-hunters killed more 

 deer last year than usual. If you have facts from reliable 

 persons to show that still -hunters did not do so, bring tbem 

 forward. We will cheerfully give due weight to evidence 

 which you may adduce, but must respectfully decline to ac- 

 cept as conclusive your bare stat> ment that statistics "quoted 

 from the Boonville Herald are wholly without foundation." 



9. Read over Mr. Fuller's letter again. Here is a differ- 

 ence of opinion between yourself on the oue hand, and Mr. 

 Fuller, and every other woodsman that I ever talked with, 

 on the other. You think that the deer are not made shy by 

 hounding; the others all think that they are. Mr. Bergh is 

 driven almost into convulsions over the fright which a deer 

 experiences at the approach of a dog. Pray calm his nerves 

 with this positive assurance of yours; and while you are 

 about it assure him also that, during the proposed hounding 

 season, no dog ever "tears into fragments one of the most 

 beautiful and harmless of God's creatures " 1 never knew 

 or heard of a dog's overtaking a deer in the North Woods in 

 my life, unless the deer had been previously wounded by 

 some night-hunter. You know this also, and, of course, he 

 will believe all that you say A deer can take to the water' 

 and throw off a dog in ten minutes any time that he is tired 

 of the race. 



In the same interview, please reassure Mr. Bergh also on 

 the s-anitary question. Teli him that you have it on the au 

 tliority of a physician of more than twenty years' practice, 

 that even if a dog were excited, yes, "intensely excited," so 

 much excited that be could catch a deer and bite it, so ex- 

 eiUd as to be really "rabid" when he bit the deer, that 

 even then the flesh of lhat deer could be cooked and eaten 

 wiih entire impunity; that while the flesii of a deer killed 

 after a long run in warm weather may not keep very well, 

 it is perfectly harmless while it does keep. At the same 

 time whisper quietly in JMr. Bugh's ear that if this physician 

 is mistaken, and the meat is, under these circumstances, 

 deadly poison, so much the bettc r. You will soon be rid of 

 these cruel brutes of "sportsmen" off the face of the earth, 

 and they are perfectly willing to take all the risks. 



Samuel B. Ward. 



Albany, N. Y , Feb. 15. 



The shrewdness, wit and incisiveness of Dr. Ward's reply 

 combine to make it forcible, and we presume that no one 

 who has read it enjoyed it more than we did. It is charm- 

 ingly ingenuous. Tue injured idle is always effective. To 

 appear to have been abused and misrepresented is always to 

 win sympathy for one's cause. We have so high a regard 

 for Dr. Ward's personal sincerity in this matter that we feel 

 sure that he wx>uJd regtet, even more than ourselves, should 



sympathy for him as an injured being blind the Legislature 

 to the real points at issue. Dr. Ward will agree with 

 us that it is of much more importance that the truth about 

 deer bounding should be clearly presented, than that he 

 should receive the sympathetic regard always accorded to in- 

 jured innocence. Dr. Ward will therefore understand our 

 motives when we firmly butkindly point out to him that this 

 position is untenable, and is likely to mislead. We did not 

 call Dr. Ward a liar; we called his document misleading and 

 deceptive. Dr. Ward, in the third line of his letter, calls 

 our statements misleading. We do not, therefore, imagine 

 that he intends to abuse us or to call hard names, and we 

 shall not seek to pose as maligned and insulted. We are 

 much more concerned lhat the truth about deer hounding 

 shall appear than about anything else in this matter. 



Dr. Ward would perhaps think it scarcely fair if we were 

 to point out to him that thtre are many men who "find more 

 pleasure in taking advantage of the instinct which the 

 Creator has implanted in dogs" to fight other dogs, than in any 

 other mode of using these animals. If we were to make this 

 suggestion it would only be to show that his graceful 

 method of introducing his points could be used in more ways 

 than erne, and not for the purpose of comparing deer hound- 

 ing with dog fighting. We are not discussing the brutality 

 of Dr. Ward's favorite pastime. 



If Dr. Ward will calmly reread the objections to which he 

 takes exception, we are confident that in this cooler moment 

 he will see what must be patent to every one else, that we 

 nowhere questioned his own individual veracity. Our 

 remarks were applied to the pamphlet itself, and the truthful 

 or untruthful character of lhat document was a perfectly 

 legitimate subject of discussion. Dr. Ward's assumptions 

 to the contrary may be ingenuous, but are they fair? 



Taking up the points of Dr. Ward's reply we will endeavor 

 to show him in language very mild and not at all abusive 

 that he is in the wrong. Come now, let us reason together, 

 Dr. Ward. 



1. Dr. Ward acknowledges that, of the replies received in 

 response to his letters of inquiry, he suppressed the portion 

 unfavorable to the bounders, and explains that be did this 

 because he thought the Forest and Stream could be de- 

 pended on to give "the other side." Now we mean no of- 

 fense when, in the kindliest spirit, we point out that this ex- 

 ply nation of the reason of the suppression does not dispose 

 of the suppression itself; nor does it answer our charge that, 

 because of that suppression, tiie document which professed 

 to be fair and impartial, was, in fact, partial and one-sided, 

 and therefore, as au expression of public sentiment, mislead- 

 ing and deceptive, 



We did not question the regularity of the meeting of the 

 Eastern Association, we simply intimated the suspicion, 

 which Dr. Ward's acknowledgment goes to confirm as a fact, 

 that the association was shrewdly organized by active deer- 

 hounding advocates to influence the le peal of the present 

 wi-e law. 



2. We cheerfully accept the explanation of the omission 

 of Mr. Clifton's letter aud are willing to make the same ex- 

 cuse cover the entire omission — from a pamphlet purporting 

 to represent public opinion — of every written and printed 

 statement of fact and opinion adverse to the cause of the 

 bounders. The fact remains that there was such an omis- 

 sion, and for this reason again— however ingenuous the action 

 of the compilers— the document was misleading and decep- 

 tive as an exponent of public sentiment. 



If Dr. Ward imagines that this incident of a doe being 

 devoured alive by a hound is one of similar "occurrences 

 far too rare to be used as a legitimate argument against 

 hounding," we congratulate him on his ignorance of one 

 phase of the subject; but again, without meaning any offense, 

 we suggest that however biissful that ignorance may be to 

 its possessor, it is unbecoming in one who undertakes to in- 

 struct the Legislature on the subject of Adirondack deer 

 hounding. Perhaps the dog was not "put out." It is well 

 known that dogs go off "by accident" to pull down venison 

 for themselves; but is that any valid argument for maintain- 

 ing a horde of half-starved hounds in the North Woods? We 

 do not expect any reply to our characterization of the state- 

 ments as false and preposterous, for we honestly believe that 

 there is no reply to be made to it. 



3. We said that the statement that "hounding is objected 

 to only by those pot hunters and still-hunters who desire to 

 kili the most deer in the shortest possible time" was mis- 

 leading and deceptive; and we cited'names to prove it. Dr. 

 Ward says it was "a little sweeping." For Messrs. Sher 

 man, Hotaling, Richards, Litchfield, and the others whom 

 we named, he has the highest respect. Do you commonly 

 show your respect for your friends, dear Dr. Ward, by dub- 

 bing them pot-hunters, eager to kill all the game they can for 

 a few paltry dollars? But the statement did not refer to 

 these men ; it referred only to those who replied to the cir- 

 cular. Well, let us see who they were: 



In this State it [hounding] is objected to only by those pot- 

 hunters, etc —Dr. Ward in pamphlet. 



We were thinking * * * only of those who replied to our 

 circular, or who kill enough deer every year to have some 

 tangible effect ou the number left.— Dr. Ward supra. 



With one single exception the correspondents were all in 

 favor of rescinding the laws of last year and of permitting 

 the hounding of deer.— Dr. Ward inpamphkt. 



The only opponents of deer hounding are "those pot-hun- 

 ters," who were "those who teplied to our circular, " who 

 were "one single exception." It is "a little sweeping," 

 beautifully sweeping, it sweeps away the whole army of 

 deer hounding opponents, and reduces them to one man. 

 Now, tell us, Dr. Ward, are you not giving yourself alto- 

 gether unnecessary vexation of spirit in writing pamphlets 

 and letters to combat the opposition of all those one 

 single exception? Would it not be more sensible to go to this 

 individual and ciuietly reason with him, than to pay printer's 

 bills aDd wony the members of the Legislature with your 

 documents? Or why not whisper the name of all this single 

 man to Mr. Howe, who is reported to have gone to Albany 

 provided with money to put the hounding bid through. Do 

 you not indeed honestly believe, Dr. Ward, that Mr. 

 Ilowe would be more successful in an appeal to that one 

 mercenary pot-hunter than he will in trying to find any mem- 

 bers who wdl need bis blandishments? If this host— one 

 man— who are making this opposition at Albany cannot be 

 disposed of in any other way, why not corral him until the 

 excitement is over, or use more severe measures? Why 

 leave to the valiant Little Tailor of Duleek the proud boast 

 "I'm the only one of all min, that killed three score and tin, 

 at a blowi" 



Dr. Ward argues that the anti-hounding law should be 

 repealed because be has discovered that Gen. Curtis who 

 introduced the bill last year is not a spoitsraan. Will Dr. 

 Ward ask us to repeal all our game laws if it shall be dis- 



covered by some one who wants to shoot a-ame in May that 

 the bills were not introduced by members who were sports- 

 men? Shall we repeal all our banking laws bpcause the 

 bills were not introduced by bank presidents? If the com- 

 munity were threatened with a scourge, would you, Dr. 

 Ward, seriously ask the repeal of all legislation relating to 

 contagious diseases, unless it could be shown lhat the bills 

 bad been introduced by members who could produce medi- 

 cal diplomas? Believe us, when we say that we do neit think 

 you would, Believe us also when we express our sincere 

 cenviction that if every member of the present Legislature 

 were a practical deer hunter, the bill lo permit hounding 

 would promptly meet the fate of the bill offering a bounty 

 on Indian scalps, introduced into the Colorado Legislature 

 9ome years since, and promptly in accordance with an unani- 

 mous vote, "chucked under the table " 



4 We are glad to know that Dr. Ward is not an advocate 

 of killing hounded deer in the water, but if he will make in- 

 quiries on that point among the deer bounders, he will find 

 himself in a very lonely position, almost lonely enough to 

 pair off with the "single exception." Dr. Ward knows as 

 well as we do that however much he may desire an anti- 

 water-killing law, such a measure could not be enforced; 

 and in all kindness we warn him that if he attempts to secure 

 a law of that nature, he will speedily lose the support of the 

 very men who are now working with him. 



5. Well, not to be outdone in magnanimity, let us admit 

 that the estimate of nine hundred out of a thousand may be 

 "a little sweeping." Call it eight hundred. As to the N. Y. 

 Association we have a letter from a member stating that 

 the members present at the meeting the other night which 

 indorsed Mr. Hadley's bill did not represent the sportsman 

 element of the association. 



6. If the correspondents taken by chance from Stod- 

 dard's Guide Book think that the deer of the Adirondacks 

 have annually increased in number beyond the annual de- 

 struction, we advise Dr. Ward to learn the truth bv applying 

 to some others whose names do not happen to be in the Guide 

 Book. We urge him to broaden the fieJd of his inquiry, and 

 to give in the next document sent to the Legislature the 

 fruits of this broader inquiry. Hi re again it is ingenuous- 

 in Dr. Ward to assume that because we declared the. con- 

 clusions drawn from a limited inquiry misleading and decep- 

 tive, we called him and all his correspondents bars. We did 

 no such thing. We are now even quite willing to modify 

 our characterization of the pamphlet itself. Let us call it 

 not misleading but "a little sweeping " 



7. Dr. Ward did not state it as his "belief" that "hound- 

 ing is one of the least destructive methods of hunting deer." 

 He stated it as a fact. We did not question that he believed 

 it; we questioned the statement as a statement of fact. We 

 still question it. We have read the letters and have found 

 them "a little sweeping." As to calling these men liars, we 

 have not done so. Dr. Ward, as a physician, knows that 

 there are some things that cannot be handled with kid gloves. 

 While it is sometimes perfectly piacticable to kill deer from 

 a boat without soiling one's gloves.it is not always advis- 

 able to discuss such a piactice gingerly. Aud we have not 

 "lost" this "case" yet. 



Dr. Ward recollects a series of eiaht hunts with bounds iu 

 which not a deer was taken. Well, we can match it with 

 one single hunt in which eight deer were driven into t tie 

 water by the hounds and killed, and another in which in 

 one day three fawns were killed. The advocates of d< er- 

 bounding will do well to let cold figures alone. Dr, Ward 

 asks us to dispose of the statement that single still-hunters 

 killed from thirty to fifty deer on the snow last winter, and 

 that there are many carcasses hanging there now. Before 

 undertaking to dispose of this, we beg to ask, no you. Dr. 

 Ward, seriously mean us to infer that you believe it your- 

 self? 



There i3 more fascinating ingenuousness in Dr. Ward's 

 evident endeavor to put the Fgrebt and Stream among 

 the advocates and defenders of jack-hunting. If among any 

 of his acquaintances there happens to be one who has read 

 this journal for the past six months, we begof him to inquire 

 respecting our attitude, past and present, on tue jacking 

 question. 



That Dr. Ward may have no further misconception on 

 this point, we make what seems to us to be a perfectly far 

 proposal, viz , if the members of the Eastern New York Fish 

 and Game Protective Association honestly wi»h to prohibiit, 

 jack shooting in order to protect the deer, and not simply to 

 trade off jacking for bounding, they can readily show this 

 by causing to be introduced a bill for the total abolition of 

 jacking — but not giving permission to bound. We here 

 pledge ourselves to support that bill and to work for its 

 passage; we also pledge to its active support most of the 

 advocates of the present law with whom we are acquainted ; 

 and if the Eastern Association will do their share we think 

 we are safe in promising that the bill shail pass. If they 

 refuse to do this, they cannot reasonably object to the charge 

 that in their present efforts they are less anxious to forbid the- 

 jack than to replace the hound on the trail. 



It is unfair to attempt to blind the Legislature by the flare 

 of the destructive jack-light. 



8. Dr. Ward is aggrieved because we do not accept the 

 ridiculous assertion that more deer were killed by still hunt 

 ing last fall than in former years by still-hunting and hound- 

 ing combined. If the Boonville statistics are not without 

 foundation, will Dr. Ward kindly inform us if he knows who 

 avows their paternity? And will he tell us whether he ac- 

 cepts the proposition they are intended to bolster up? 



9. Ingenuous again. We did not deny that deer are made 

 shy by hounding. On that point there is absolutely no dif- 

 ference of opinion between us and Mr. Fuller and other 

 woodsmen. We do differ from Mr. Fuller in his notion that 

 the deer is such a tame creature and so sure to rush, from 

 afar off, into the arms of the 6till-hunter, that hounds and 

 guides and boats full of "sportsmen" equipped with maga- 

 zine rides, and repeating guns loaded with buckshot, and 

 oar butts and clubs and sheath knives must be employed to 

 make this abnormally tame creature "shy." That is where 

 we differ. And of the letters the Forest and Stream 

 did not publish, and out of the refusal to publish 

 which Mr. W. Denny and Dr. Ward have made so 

 much capital, one was from Mr. Fuller, of Meacham 

 Lake, submitting this "shy" argument, and the other 

 from Mr. Denny repeating the same "sby" argument. 

 We do not question that these men may honestly believe 

 what they say, but how can they ask us or anybody else 

 (except a pamphleteer trying to "sweep" the Legislature) 

 to print such stuff? That they are even so honest iu their 

 conviction as to put it into practice, we do not deny. The 

 spectacle of Mr. Jno. T. Denny, in a boat on Mtacham Lake, 

 pumping bullets out of a Winchester magazine rifle at a deer 



