26 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[AXTG, 5, 1886. 



New Hampshire Non-Export Law.— The law enacted 

 June session, 1885, prohibiting the exportation of game 

 from the State, meets the general approbation of the 

 sportsmen of the State, and has been of great assistance 

 in preventiiig the destniction of game by illegal snaring, 

 which was largely encouraged by the dealers of game in 

 Boston. Owing to the more stringent enforcement of the 

 law, deer are rapidly increasing in the northerly and 

 easterly parts of Ihe State, and it is a common occvu'rence 

 for them to be seen in the central portion of the State, 

 which has not been known before for many years. The 

 Commission dtu-ing the year have, made and caused thirty 

 arrests; have secm-ed as "many convictions for snaring par- 

 tridges, killing deer, catching fish in closed season, and 

 ha ving in possession short lobsters. These con-victions have 

 had a salutnry effect throughout the State, which has very 

 largely assisted the commissioners in sustaining the laws, 

 although in some localities the commissioners have made 

 quite a number of arrests from information kindly fui'- 

 nished them by citizens who favor tlie law of protection 

 in the breeding season. Without this protection our 

 waters and woods will become barren of llsh and game. 

 Our own citizens and the thousands of visitors who each 

 summer freiiuent oiu- borders to inhale its inAdgorating 

 atmosphere, to view the beautiful scenery of our moim- 

 tains, catcbing fish from tbe mormtain streams and lakes, 

 hunting the game from tbe woods, will seek these varied 

 pleasures and pastimes of health and recreation in other 

 portions of New England, where it is found in greater 

 profusion, and is only maintained and fostered by the 

 strict enforcement of the fish and game laws of tlrose 

 States. — Re/port of Msh and Game Commissioners, June, 

 1886. 



The Modoc Rabbit Curse. — ^Fort Bidwell, Cal., July 

 20. — Editor Forest and Stream: Tliree montlis ago the 

 supervisors -of Modoc county offered a. bounty of three 

 cents per scalp for rabbits. 'At the last meeting of the 

 board the sum of $826.77 v\^as allowed on this account, 

 representing 27,559 scalps. One of the supervisors told 

 me that about 25,000 of these were killed on a tract of 

 land six by eight miles in extent. Mr. Nelson brought 

 water by ditches from the river six miles distant and re- 

 claimed 2,000 acres of sage brush land, on which he sowed 

 grain and alfalfa. The rabbits liked the change of diet 

 and took the crop. Upon this representa,tion to the board 

 of supervisors they offered the above reward, and Mr. N. 

 hired Indians, paying them five cents per scalp and fur- 

 nishing them witii ammunition at one-half cost price, one 

 installment of which, it is said, cost him upwai-d of |280. 

 As enough rabbits are left for seed, this would be a good 

 field for some of our Eastern friends, who are at a loss to 

 know where to find good sliooting. Bimnie's instinct of 

 self-preservation is well developed, and wlien dodging 

 betw^een the sage bushes is no "sure tiling" to the novice. 

 Should any one accept this invitation, let liim ship a car 

 load of ammunition in advance, and we wiU guarantee 

 that he will not be hindered by notices of "No Shooting- 

 Allowed on these Premises." In addition ai-e to befoimd 

 praiiie chickens, sage hens, ducks and geese; deer, ante- 

 lope and an oocasioiial Ursus horribilis. All but the lat- 

 ter in goodly quantities. — ^A. C. Loavell. 



Maine Deer.— .Ed^or Forest and Stream: I send you 

 an extract from a letter received to-day from a well- 

 known guide and deer warden living near Eustis, Maine. 

 It illustrid-es the benefit of the stringent game laws of 

 that State; "Deer never were as plenty as this year. 

 Lately one came into a neighbor's barnyard in the day 

 time, and they are seen very often out in the fields and 

 pastm-es." They don't seem, to believe in Maine that dogs 

 and clubs make deer tamer. — ^A. G. McKee. 



Mr. Geifein Smith, of Longmont, Col., claims to have 

 shot a mountain lion on the Little Thompson, which meas- 

 ured 9ft. from the end of its nose to the tip of its tail. 



Robins and Meadow Larks are protected at all times 

 in New York State by the new law. The full text of the 

 statute was printed in our issue of July 8. 



Greene, N. Y.— The prospect for bird shooting is better 

 this fall than for vears.— L. C. Silternail. 



MUZZLE VS. BREECH. 



in Ave consecutive shots, and tlie otTierlcill five out of six shots, 

 off-hand too. 



I saw a turkey shoot at Kingman, Arizona, last January, in 

 wluch a gentleman connected with the Pueblo Smelting and Ke- 

 nning Works used a .45-60 Winchester repeater a.nd killed two tiu'- 

 keys in succession, shooting 200yds. oft-hand. I think that he 

 could have killed five out of six turkeys at that range. Nor is a 

 Winchester rifle the best turkey gun in the world, either. 



Mr. Merrill would have a hard time in this country were he to 

 depend upon that muzzlelouder as .a practical weapon. 



i hfl,ve known a great many instances where a man's life M-as 

 saved by nottiing else than the faot that he had a breechloading 

 and not a muzzleloading j-ifle at the time. I knew of a hunter in 

 the San Francisco mountains who surprised a large cinnamon 

 bear in a place where there was no chance for retreat nor escape. 

 He killed the bear, but not until he had shot seven govei-nment 

 bullets from a .45>-70 Marlin repeater through him, and the hunting 

 coat that the man wore was tore to shreds so close were tlie two 

 combatants. Nor is tliis an isolated case. I knew of one man 

 from the East who came out here with a large caliber muzzle- 

 loader. After staying around Kendrick's Peak a f e\v days he w*ent 

 into Albuquerque for a new gun. Ho saw a card in one of the 

 wholesale houses displaying samples of all the cartridges made by 

 the U. M. C. Co., and pointmg to one of them evidently intended 

 for a Gatling gun, he said: "I want you to order me a repeater 

 using that big shell." 



The fact is, nearly all the standard makors are turning out 

 breechloading rifles that are jiLst exactly as accurate shooters as 

 muzzleloaders, to say nothing at all of their superiority as a prac. 

 tical weapon. 



Editor Forest and Stream : , , , 



I notice in your issue of .Tuly 1 a letter fi-om Mr, Napoleon Mer- 

 rill, iji wiiicli he makes some statements of a rather misleading 

 character. I think that yoiu- report fails to show any such great 

 advantage for the muzzleloaders as he claims. The Merrill rifle 

 may be called a hunting rifle, and it did splendid shooting. It shot 

 a charge of 98grs. of powder and 213 of lead, and made a curve of 

 1.306in. at 100 vards. It beat the Bland .024iu., the Hepburn .32 cal. 

 .497in., and the Ballard, .10-a5, .755in. If it had been tested at 200 

 yards I doubt it it could have equalled the breechloader, as the 

 lead was too light for the distance. It was loaded for the 100yd. 

 test, and its owner took good cai'e that it should not bo tested 

 further. , , 



The Romer muzzleloader was a young cannon witn a cliarge oi 

 ISlgrs. of powder and 267 of lead. It, of course, beat everything by 

 virtue of its charge, but it was not a hunting rifle. . 



I have studied weU the report of Fohest and Stee a m, as advased 

 by Mr. Merrill, but fail to And that the breechloaders were beaten 

 in regard to accuracy. The Merrill rifle made a string of ..587in. in 

 five shots; tlie Ballard .40-85, a string of .230in.; the Hepburn .32, 

 a string of .108, and the Bland a string of .204in. without cleaning. 

 These ought to be the wildest shooters among the breechloaders, 

 for Mr. Merrill says that they do their worst when a flat trajectory 

 is attempted. They all beat the Merrill rifle in accuracy, and it 

 did not beat any of them an inch in trajectory. 



The way I get my string is to take the average height on the 



guns that were built for a practical purpose as well. 



It may bo a bitter pill foi- some to swallow, but it is nevertheless 

 true that the day of the muzzleloader has passed; the rapid ad- 

 vance jnade in breechloading arms wthin the past ton ycai-s will 

 justify this assertion. However, to cou\4nce an unbel!e\'er of the 

 general uselessness of the muzzleloader in this age, let him come 

 West among the large game and see for himself. Bevd. 



NAVA.JO Springs, Arizona. 



SOME POINTS OF LAW.* 



THE Oommittoe on the .ludiciary, to whom have been referred 

 House bill 4,690 and several petitions in favor of the passage 

 of the same, have fully considered the same, and report as follov,-s: 

 The proposed bill would give by act of Congresss to the citizens 

 of the several States of the Union equsd right with the citizens of 

 each State to fish for floating fish in the navigable waters and 

 lakes of the latter. The question involved depends on the title to 

 the waters and lakes referred to. 



For purposes of navigation they are free to all the citizens of the 

 seyeral States alike, aiid the power of Congress to regulate com- 

 merce between the States includes the right to prevent any hostile 

 legislation by any State against the equal rights witli its own 

 citizens of the citizens of all the other States; or it is forbidden by 

 the clause of the Constitution which gives to the citizens of eacli 

 State the privilege and immunities of citizens of the several States. 

 (C. U. S., Art. 4, § 2.) 



But it IS right to inijuire whether the citizens of a State acquire 

 their right of fishing in its waters as a privilege derived from the 

 grant of the State, or as \'es(,cd \n iliotn i)y virtue of ownership as 

 members of the body politic. 



It has been settled by the highest authority in the English courts, 

 that ever since Magna Cliarta, tlie Crown cannot grant to a sub- 

 jecl ;i several fishery in an arm of the sea,, or in navigable waTers, 

 iDut that all suchwaiers and the beds thereof are vested in the 

 Crown for ilie benelit of tlicsubjects thereof, and not to he used in 

 any manner to derogate from the right of navigation licli belongs 

 to the subjects of (.lie realm. (Free Fishery, etc., vs. Gann, 113 E. 

 O. L. K. 803 House of Lords Cases, per Lord Cliaiicolhir West- 

 bury and Lord Wensleydale (Baron Parke); S. C. in Exch. CIllito- 

 ber, 106 E. C. L. E., 853; S. C, 103 E. C. L, R., 3.S7 Common Pleas.) 



This royal title held for the benefit of tlie .subject of iJie Crown, 

 which cannot be aliened to their detriment, has been thus recog- 

 nized ever since Magna Oharta. 



In this counti-y, by a series of decisions, the Supreme Court of the 

 United States has settled the law in accordance with the English 

 courts, that upon the Revolut ion the rights of the Crown in naviga- 

 ble waters and inclusive of arms of the sea. de\-eloiied upon each 

 State as to all such waters within the territory of eacli of them. 

 (Martin vs. Waddell, 10 Peters, 807.) 



In Pollard vs. Hagan (3 Howard, 212), the same doctrine was 

 maintained as to new States, as well as to the original States; and 

 the right of the State fixed to all the beds of rivers below high- 

 water mark. 



In Smith vs. State of Maryland (18 How., 71) the right of the State 

 of Maryland to the shellfish and floi^ting fli3h in Chesapeake Bay- 

 was established as the sovereign right of the Commonweallh 

 devolved upon her from the Crown at the Revolution, a right 

 which she could control without violation of the Constitution by 

 such regulations as were needful to secure this public right ivith- 

 out interfering with the navigation of the waters, Mr. .Justice Cur- 

 tis delivering the un 



aiid^ast shot's put "tTe" the 75yd._ screen than on 



the 50yd one. None of the breechloaders mentioned above aia 

 that except the Bland, and that but once, so the gyration seemed 

 to be on the aide of the muzzleloader. . ,r -n, i 



I cannot explain why the breechloader m Mr. Merrill's tm-key 

 shoot did not get more turkeys, but suspect that it was the fault 

 of the shooters. C. L. b. 



FoBT Clark, Texas. 



JEditor Forest and Stream: . , , ii,, i 



I have taken a great deal of interest m the controversy Muzzle 

 vs. Breechloaders," which has been running for some tune j)ast m 

 the Forest and STEEAJt. I have seen some turkey shootmg my- 

 self , and I have noticed that the .breechloaders generally got their 

 share of tlie turkeys. In the year 1880 I attended a tiulcey shoot, 

 where tlie birds were placed on a box on the ice, with the wind 

 blowing a gale across the range at nearly right angles. The turkey 

 man was getting rich. Shots were 25 cents each, and it took from 

 10 to 20 shots at' 200yds. to hit a tarkey. Three of the guns used 

 were muzzleloaders, two of them fitted with globe and peep sights. 

 The other guns were Winchester rifles, repeaters of .44-cal. ine 

 turkey man vvas feeling pretty good until along about noon, when 

 two brothers named Best, who had been employed as hunters for 

 the grading outfit, came to take a hand with their breechload.ers. 

 Two or three sliots w ere fired by eooh to get about the right allow- 

 ance for the wind, after which 1 saw one of them kill five turkeys 



„ unajiimous opinion of the court. (Accord 3Ium- 



ford vs. Wardwell, 6 Wall., tlO; Weber vs. Harbor Commissioners, 

 18 Id., 66.) 



In McCready vs. Virginia (94 U. S. Pvcports, 391) the unanimous 

 judgment of the court was deli\'ered hy Mr. Chief Justice Waite, 

 by which the right of Virginia to use and appropriate the naviga- 

 ble waters of Virgina for tlie benct of lier own people for the 

 taking and cultivation of fish as a proijcrty riglit, and not as a 

 privilege or immunity of citizenship, is established, though tlierehy 

 the citizens of other States are excluded from the same rights. 

 The right is one of property in the citizens of Virginia, and not a 

 privilege or immunity of citizenship. 



It is true the la«t decision, though in the opinion made to apply 

 as well to floating fish as to shellfish, only applied in fact to sheU- 

 flsh; but your committee see no reason why the principle of these 

 decisions should not apply to both. 



Fish are ferce natural, and an absolute property in them can only 

 be asserted when restrained of their liberty. This, it may be said, 

 is the case with oysters which, when planted, have no capacity to 

 move, and distinguishes them from floating fish, which may move 

 out of the reach of the State in whose waters they may temporar- 



^ ^lut upon this distinction of nature no ground can be maintained 

 for changing the decision applicable to the one when the case of 

 the other is adjudicated. , ^ , , „ 



In the case of Riggs vs. The Earl of Lonsdale (1 Hurlst & Nor- 

 man, 923), it was decided in the Exchequer Chamber that the 

 owner of land had a right of property in game killed on his land 

 by a stranger. The fact that the game was /erce naturm did not 

 take from the owner of the land the property therein, oven in favor 

 of a stranger who hunted and killed it tliore. 



This case was considered very fully in Blades vs. Higgs (104 E. 

 C. L. R., ,30), where the decision of Justice Willes i\t imipritis, 

 overruling Riggs vs. Lonsdale, was reversed by the Court of Com- 

 mon Pleas; and on appeal to tlie Exchequer Cimmber (t'.in E. C. L. 

 R., 844), the Court of Common Pleas was unanimously sustained; 

 and the judgment of the Exchequer Clianiher was aflirmed by the 

 House of Lords in S. C, 106 E. C. L. E., 866. The judgment in the 

 House of Lords was sustained by the high authorit y of Lord Chiui- 

 cellor Westburv, Avifch Lords Oranswortli and Cliclmslord, both 

 ex-Chancellors,' concurring. That case decides clearly and di.s- 

 tinctly that if A, a hunter, finds, kills and carries otf in one con- 

 tinuous act, any game, ferce naturw, on the land of B, tlie dead 

 game is the absolute property of B, rationc soli. 



That the same doctrine is applicable to^flsh caught aad taken 

 from the waters of the owner cannot be questioned; and the eases 

 referred to by the judges in the discussion of the cases above cited 

 mention fish as of the same character as animals and birds. 



Your committee, therefore, being of opinion tluit the navagablo 

 waters within each State belong to it, subject to the paramount 

 right of navigation, for the benefit of its own people, it has the 

 right to secure the exclusive right of fishing m tliem to it own citi- 

 zens by virtue of their common property in said waters, and that 

 the citizens of other States have no constitutional riglit, nor can 

 Congress confer any, to participate in tliem. , ^ ,. ,-, 



Your committee re< ommcnd tliat the bill referred to lie on the 

 table, and the prayer of the petitioners be denied. All of whicJi is 

 respectfully submitted. 



♦Report presented to the House of Representatives by Hon. J. E. 

 Tucker, May 13, 1886. 



BOOKS RECEIVED. 



Oon. Fancy Pigeons, and rambling notes of a naturalist. A 

 record of fifty years' experience in breeding and observation of 

 nature. By George Ure. Dundee: Jas. P. JMathew & Co. (Jlotli, ill. 



The Battle for Bread. A series of sermons on the relations 

 of labor and capital. By Rev. T. DeWittTalmage, D.D. New York; 

 ,J. S. Ogihde & C o. Paper, 25c. 



See the advertisement elsewhere of LTpthegrove c&McLellan 

 Valparaiso, Ind. Send your address for their .catalogue of sports- 

 men's wear. — ^dv. 



;M mnmiiavicatims to Gtb Forest and St/ream Fiib. On 



THE SUNAPEE LAKE TROUT.' 



Editor Forest and Stream.: 



Business matters have prevented my replying to those 

 who iiave made the claim tliat the trout wMch I brought 

 to tbe notice of iclithyologists last fall are not natives of 

 Sunapoe Lake, New Hampshire, but arc the result of ;i 

 small plant of Eangeley blne-ba,ck trout fry tua.de in 188 1 , 

 by Mr. A, H. Powers, at that time one of "tbe Fish Com- 

 niissioners of the State. Tliis claim is made by Col. Wcl> 

 ber, Living.ston Stone and Dr. J. D. Quaclcenbos. I sbal] 

 endeavor to prove that this fish is a native of thi? lake 

 and that I first brought it to the notice of ichthyologists. 



This fish has been pronounced by Dr. T. S, Bean, of the 

 National Museum at Washington, to be identical with the 

 little blue-back trout of Maine, In this I must differ 

 from Dr. Bean. He has a.lso pronouncpi i it a true Salvia 

 fotitinalis. If he tnade such a mistalio as tliat with a 

 fresh 61b. specimen before Irim, may be not still be in the 

 wrong when he nays that this gigantic trout is identical 

 with the little fingevlings cauglit in the .Rangeley waters. 

 Tliis trout in form, color, size and habits, is so entirely 

 different from the Rangeley blue-back tliat I do not be- 

 lieve any one who has seen tliem in their native waters in 

 large numbers, and who has had anoppoi Lunity ,of watch- 

 ing them in confinement, can think that they are one and 

 the same fish. In form they are much thicker set and 

 deeper tlian tlie ilaine trout, lie;id very small and short, 

 mouth much smaller than the brook trout. The males, 

 after reaching Slbs. and upward, are a ver^'^ light olive on 

 the back, and the larger tlie fish the lighter the cohjr, 

 until in October a male of 8 to lOlbs. would be alioost 

 cream color. The females Avaxq a uniform brownish back. . 

 Tlie rod spots are wanting. On tliis point I have exatn- 

 ined several fresh specimens within a few days, and I n.m 

 unable to detect tlie red spots. I have taken specimens 

 of 71bs. weight and have liad them that woidd v\'eigli 

 lOlbs., swimming about my boat in from 1 to 3ft. of (dear 

 water, and so near that they could have been taken with 

 a gaif; 



, t is a well known faot that there is a limit to the 

 growth of every species. That is, an animal of a ceiiain 

 species may exceed his feUows 4 or 511)^. in weight, but 

 there the limit ends. Tliereforc, a.s vhe average weight 

 of the Rangeley blue-back is 3 to -hiz., dik? of 21bs. would, 

 lie a monst^n-, a giant among the brdthei s. v.^]iile one of 

 8 or PUbs, , 40 times larger than the a-s er;ige, would be a 

 physiological imiiossibiiity under any conditions of food 

 ;ind water. One -s^Titer on tliia subject has advanced thei 

 idea that Sue a pee Lake i;5 riclier in the abundance and 

 quality of to(M\ tlian other waters, and that is Avliat li^is 

 made tlie little hngerlings cliange into fish that tases tJxe 

 skill of the Hjiortaman to bi-iug them to the net^ Now it 

 is a well kncnvn fact that the Eangeley waters are noti' 

 for the large brook ti'out they ctmtain, and as tliQ bh^ 

 back is a native of these same waters, liaving tlie sau 

 food, why slionld he remain so sruall as to be t'uwortli 

 the notice oi.' the angler ^vhile liis brother the fontinol 

 reaches the enormous weight of 10 to iSlbs.? TJie saniL 

 food iliat malces one grow should force the other. - 



In Stmapee Lake tlie brook trout and tlie so-calh r 

 oqimssa, reach about the same weight, specimens 

 from 4 to 81bs. being taken every summer. In many j 

 spec ts tMs hsli differs from the blue-back in its habii 

 The blue-back always seeks the brooivs and rivers f' 

 spawning and they are not caught Avith fly or bait eillie 

 in the rivers or lake to any extent. The Sunapee trout 

 are lake spawners and are iieA'er Icm.^wn tn enter the brooks 

 with tlie brook trout. They take bah roadUy when on 

 tlieir spawning beds, also in" the deep water of the lake in 

 June. Jvdv and August, aud I Imve no doubt but whnt 

 they might be taken in May by trolling as at that time • 

 they follow the smelts up "from the deep water. They 

 take food readily from the liottom. A rough, VQcky 

 bottom is selected for a spawniing bed instead of smd 

 gravel. 



Now the question naturallv arises, if "these fish are 

 natives of the lake, whv liave they never been brought to 

 notice before? Previous, to the introduction of the black 

 bass in 1869 or '70 the lake was not kno\%'n to any extent 

 as a fishing resort, and only two or three old boats could ' 

 be found on its waters. The fishing was done from cer- 

 tain points and rocks from the shore. Grill nets were used, 

 aud when the fish entered the brooks in the fall they wer6 . 

 killed with clubs, guns and spears. No one thought of 

 fishing for trout in the deep water where they are now 

 caught. It was known to a few in tlie vicinity that large 

 trout could be caught from certain pomts and rocJcs in 

 May and June, and it is so t()-d;ty, but only the common 

 brook trout are taken in these places. I give below the 

 answers m;ide to a feAv .juestions that I asked Mr. Moses 

 Gould, a gentleman who has had a long acciuaintance 

 with the lake and its inhabitauls. 



Plymouth, N. H.^^ April, W< 

 Mosea (ioidd Esq., Bmaioril, II.: ^ , _ . 



My Dear Sir— WiU you hfi ve thf kindness tci answer f ca- me tlic 

 following ciiisstions in regard fo Sunapee Lake and the troitt tjuitit 

 contains? Yours vcr^/ truly, -E. B. mmGis, 



How Imis liavfi voii been acauainted with and familiar with Su" 

 napeeLakeV Ans. About forty-thrce^years. ^ 



Ho^v long sini c you first began to fish its waiters? Ana. Auout 



**^Whai°w'aR the weight of the largest trout catJghtin tlie lake that 

 you have knowledge of pi-evioas to im'i Ans. 1 had one in my 

 possession, caught ill 1S5;,\ wriuiil i)i4lbs. , ^.^ . 



In \vhat part of the lake \\'as it Gustomary to fish for trout? 

 Ans. North Point;, Pike's ,'Shore, Rowe's Landing and Newbury 



'^'Pi'eldous to isvo or 'T2 was it the custom to fish for trout in deep 

 water, Na->- from TU to 90ft. V Ans. Ko. , , ,n 



Have von ever caught ;i trout in Sunapeo Lake alraoi?t milk- 

 white, or known of their being caugbtY Ans. I have catight them 

 very liirht colored. , , 



In V. hat vcar .lid you first see any of the trout like those shown 

 yon bv Mr! Powci s and m)'self in November, 1S85? Ans, I had two 

 of tliem in tf.Tfi, weighing about Slbs. each. 



Havi- rou seen them between these yeai-s. Ans. I iiaye. 



How hu ge ones have you known of being taken previous totho' 

 year 1882: Ans. .'itolbs. , . , , . 



■ I^a^ n yon v er known of anv ox these trout being talceii in the 

 places or ground v\ here it was" castomari to llsh for ti'out m tho 

 summer? Ans. I nc\"er have. , • i i i 



Have you e\ er known of tlifise l^rouL being taken m Shoal Wftter 

 and did' you ever know of their entering the brooks to spawn •. 

 Ans. I ne^ er rjid, except native trout [meaning brook troutj. 



Previous to m\ shoeing you the spaT^-niug bed last >oVeniber , 

 had vou anv knowledge of one in that part of the lake? Ans, 

 I No. ' 



