Sax. m, 1887.J 



FOREST AND STREAM, 



811 



and missed. Tom then roaded some 50yds. and established 

 a heautiful point on a single, but flushed. Not shot at. 

 Steady to wing. Moving on, Tom pointed, then moved on. 

 Judges following, flushed the bird. Post, to order, shot and 

 killed. Janet, ordered to retrieve, brought the bird in 

 handsomely. Swinging around to right, Jo,net drew back 

 and pinned a bird in nice style. Tom, brought up. backed 

 inimitably. After the crowd had come xip, as usual, and 

 enjoyed the scene, bird was flushed. Post shot and killed, 

 Janet, to order, retrieved well. At 18:40 P. M. dogs were 

 ordered up and heat awarded to^Tom. Dovvu one hour and 

 twenty uunutes. 



Tie for First Place. 



TOM PINCH AND SWEETHEART, 



At 1:45 p. M., after a bountiful lunch had been dispatched, 

 a start was made for new grounds, and at 3:30 a bevy of birds 

 was located and the above brace put down to run the decid- 

 ing heat for first prize. The day was getting cooler with a 

 pleasant breeze from the west. The dogs started oft: at a 

 clipping gait, which they maintained throughoiit the heat. 

 Proceeding in the direction of the birds Tom drew to a point, 

 discovered his error and moved on. Heart, working cau- 

 tiously, pointed, drew on and pointed staucbly. Tom not 

 up to back, bird Hushed but not shot at. Pi-oc«edi'ug a little 

 fnrther both dogs flushed at about the same time. Moving 

 on Tom pointed a bird that fluslml iimncdistely. Birds 

 were running' and would not lie to the dogs. Casting off to 

 right Tom ^vheeled to a point when the bird flushed wild. 

 Tom broke in but stopped to order. Moving on Heart 

 pointed, drew on and bird flushed, Tom going down wind 

 drew back a few feet and pointed; bird flushed wild. Des- 

 pairing of getting any satisfactory w'ork on these birds, tbcy 

 were left, and after some search another bev.v was found, 

 and at 8:30 the dogs were cast olf and worked in the direction 

 of the birds. Heart going do%vn wind flushed a single, cast- 

 ing off to left she suddenly wheeled and dropped to a very 

 stanch point. Tom, brought up, backed in grand style, 

 birds flushed, not shot at, both dogs steady to wing. Moving 

 on a few yards Tom pointed. Heart, brought up, backed 

 stanchly; no bird foxtnd. Casting off to the ri,ght Tom 

 jumped" into a beautiful point. Allender flushed and killed. 

 Tom, ordered to retrieve, brought the bird in alive, being 

 only winged. Moving on Tom drew to a point, discovered 

 his error and moved on. Considerable ground was now 

 drawn blank and at 4:10 the dogs were oi-dered up and heat 

 a.nd first prize awarded to Sweetheart. Down one hoxrr and 

 fifty minutes. 



THURSDAY. 



The morning opened cold and foggy, and the ride to the 

 grounds was by no means comfortable, but it was amply 

 compensated for bv a cooler day and a better condition for 

 the scent to lie. 



Tie for Second Place. 



TOM FINCH AND LASSIE. 

 Lassie having been selected to run against Tom Pinch for 

 second prize, the brace were put down at 9:50 near where a 

 bevy of birds had been located. Lassie, casting off to right, 

 fiushed a bird, Allender shot and killed. Toin ordered to 

 retrieve roaded some distance, pointedj and drawing a few 

 yards further caught a winged bird which he retrieved verj' 

 nicely. The birds being wild and the cover unsatisfactory, 

 the dogs were ordered up and. proceeding about three miles, 

 they were put down again on a fresh bevy in excellent 

 ground for working the dogs. Tom, casting off to right, 

 pointed a rabbit, smnging to left he jumped into a beautiful 

 point on a single, when the bird rose wild. Moving on a num- 

 ber of birds flushed, Las.sie casting to right down wind flushed 

 several birds, Tom advancing with great caution esta blished 

 a beautiful point. Lassie broxight up backed to order, but 

 the bird had run. Lassie casting off to left pointed. Tom 

 brought up backed in his u.sual style, Allender flushed and 

 killed. Lassie, sent to retrieve, flushed a single, advanced a 

 few feet, pointed and tben retrieved handsomely. Moving 

 on Lassie wheeled to a point; bird flushed wild. The ground 

 was now drawn for some distance A-vithout finding. Turn- 

 ing back Allender flushed two outljdng birds. Lassie mak- 

 ing a rapid cast to right, suddenly wheeled and pinned a 

 bird in tine style. Tom brou.tiht up made one of his charac- 

 teristic backs, Allneder flushed and killed. Lassie sent to 

 retrieve drew to a point, moved on a few few feet, located her 

 bird and retrieved it in fine style. At 11:50 dogs were ordered 

 up and the heat awarded to Lassie._ DoAvn one hour and five 

 minutes. The final heat of the trials between Tom Pinch 

 and Dashing Money for third pri^;e was postponed till after 

 the running of the Derby to allow Tom a chance to get his 

 wind. 



Tie for Tliird Place. 



The Derby having been quickly disposed of, the dogs that 

 were to run the last heat of the All-Aged Stake and of the 

 trials were brought to the score. 



TOM PINCH AND DASHING MONEY. 



At 4 P. M. Tom Pinch, handled by Allender, and Dashing 

 Money, handled by Foster, were put down vfhere the last 

 heat was finished. A few birds having been pre\iously 

 located, the dogs were worked toward them. Allender 

 flushed a single, shot and killed. Tom, to order, retrieved 

 well. Swinging off to the left, Dash roaded a bevy some 

 50 or 60yds., when just as he established his point the birds 

 rose some distance ahead. Foster shot and killed, when 

 Dash broke in and retrieved. Moving on, Tom pointed. 

 Dash, brought up, backed staunchly. Tom moved on. 

 Judges, following after, fiushed the bird. Proceeding cau- 

 tiously, Dash drew to a point. Tom, brought up, backed. 

 No bird found. Casting off to the left, Tom pinned a single 

 bii-d in elegant style. Dash not up to back. Allender shot 

 and killed. Tom retrieved handsomely. Turning back 

 20yds., Tom drew to a point, when the bird fiushed. Steady 

 to wing. Swinging around to right, Dash flushed a single. 

 Moving on, Tom pointed. Dash, broiight up, backed. No 

 bird found. Moving on some 505'ds., Oash drew to a point. 

 Tonij brought up, backed, di-eAv on and backed staunchly. 

 No bird found. It was evident that the birds were ranning, 

 and it being late, there was little prospect of their being 

 brought to cover. At 4:40 the dogs were ordered up and the 

 heat and third prize awarded to Tom Pinch. 



Following is tlie 



SUMMARY, 



Hanford, Cal., Dec. 13.— Fourth annual field trials. All 

 Aged Stake, open to all setter sand pointers owned or bred on 

 the Pacific coast. Purse entrance money; l.st pi-ize, 50 per 

 cent. ; 3d prize, 30 per cent. : 3d prize, 30 per cent. $20 en- 

 trance. Cflosed Dec. 1, 1886, with ten entrie,s, of wMeli seven 

 came to the score and were run as follows: 

 First Herles, 



'Will. Schreiber's lemon and white pointer bitch Lassie 

 (Prince— Forest Lilly), heat 



3. B. Martin's orange and white English setter dog Dash- 

 ing Money (Dashing Monarch— jVrmida). 



California Kenuel's blue belton English setter bitch Janet 

 (CoUQt Noble— Dashing Novice), Tjeai 



Wm. Schreiijer's lemon and white pointer dog Mountain 

 Boy (Grouse— Nell). 



J. Martin Barney's lemon and white pointer dog Tom 

 Finch (Tom— Beulah), heat 



,T. Gr. Edward's blnck. white and tan English setter dog 

 Royal Duke II. (Regent— Dolly). 



California Kennel's blue belton English setter bitch 

 Sweetheart (Count Noble — ^Dashing Novice), a hye. 



Sccon4 Series. 

 Sweetheart beat Lassie. 

 Tom Pinch beat Janet, 



Tic for First Place. 

 Sweetheaj-t beat Tom Pinch and won first prize. 



Tie for Second Place. 

 Lassie beat Tom Pinch and won second pi-ize. 



Tie for Third Place. 

 Tom Pinch beat Dashing Money and won third prize. 



THE DERBY. 



At 13 o'clock Mr. Chas. Kaeding's blue belton English setter 

 dog Shot (Regent— Fannie) and Mr. E. W. Briggs's lemon 

 and white pointer Climax (Bang Bang— Bellona), both 

 handled by Allender, were put down where the last brace 

 finished. After drawing considerable ground blank, it was 

 decided to lunch and then proceed in search of a fresh lot of 

 birds. After beating about for an hour or more, a few birds 

 were discovered at the ed^e of some timbers, and at 2:45 the 

 dogs were put down and worked toAvard them. Allender 

 made the first find by fiu.shing a single, which he shot and 

 killed. Shot, ordered to retrieve, brought the bird to hand 

 nicely. Running at a i-apid pace along a fence, Climax 

 wheeled and drew back to a point just as the birds flushed, 

 then smnging out to the left, flushed a single in some sun 

 flowers; .steady to wing. Crossing a fence ,'!t tlie edge of a 

 hop patch, AJl'ender flushed a sin.glCj shot, and bird dropped 

 but could not be retrieved. Drawing the ground for some 

 time without finding, the dogs were ordered up and heat and 

 first prize aAvarded to Shot. 



Shot is a beautiful blue belton, rather under size, with a 

 compact body ond massive head, plenty of style in motion 

 and fast enough to suit the most critical, and gives ju'omise 

 of becoming a grand field dog. Climax does not impress 

 one favorably at first sight, his nose being rather short and 

 inclined to turn up, but nevertheless that may be .a merit 

 rather tha,n a faultj but in the field and in motion he is very 

 attractive; his stylish upheaded way of going, his rapid 

 pace and perfect independence and business-like way of cut- 

 ting out his work and keeping at it, are remarkable and 

 pleasing in a dog so young. In puce and ranging they were 

 about ec^ual, if anthing the pointer had the best of it. In 

 quartering and style in motion the pointer excelled. There 

 was no opportunity to judge of their merits on pointing, as 

 no point was established by either. 



SUMMAJaY, 



Fourth annual Derby, open to all setter and pointer pup- 

 pies whelped on or after Jan. 1, 1885, Purse, entrance money, 

 iirst prize 50 per cent., second prize 30 per cent., third prize 

 30 per cent.; $5 forfeit and S15 addditional to start. Closed 

 May 1, 1886, with eleven entries, of which but two came to 

 the'score, namely: 



Chas. Kaeding s blue belton English setter dog Shot (Re- 

 gent— Fannie), whelped April 20, heat 



Mr. E. W. Briggs's lemon and white pointer dog Climax 

 (Bang Bang— Bellona), whelped April 14. 



Shot won first. 



Climax won second. 



THE BEN HILL-LILLIAN HEAT. 



WE have as yet received no communication from Mr. D. 

 Bryson in relation to his insinuations published last 

 week regarding the integrity of reporters, but presume that 

 he will immediately give us an opportunity to lay before 

 the public the facts upon which his insinuations were based. 

 It must, of course, be understood by every one that Mr. 

 Bryson's insinuations amounted to charges of so serious a 

 nature that they must be either substantiated or with- 

 drawn; the public will demand one thing or the other, and 

 will not be content with anything less. 



Ediior Forest and Stream : 



Mr. Bryson, of Memphis, Tenn., is recognized by all who 

 know him a.s being an honorable gentleman, and he no 

 doubt believes he is doing the cause of justice a sendee by 

 his defense of Mr. Stephenson in the matter of pulling in 

 the Ben Hill — Lillian neat at the recent trials at Grand 

 Junction. As this matter has gone to the press for con- 

 sideration by the friends of Mr. Stephenson, and no doubt 

 with his knowledge -And consent, I feel at liberty to ask Mr. 

 Bryson Avhether it is true or not that Mr. Stephenson did 

 not pay the entrance money of Ben Hill, w^hether he did not 

 get another gentleman to do so with the agreement that 

 Ben Hill's winnings should go to the man who paid the en- 

 trance. We AAdsh also to ask Mr. Bryson whether Mr. 

 Stephenson stated to the judges in the field (at the time 

 the protest was entei-ed by Mr. Ro.se) that he (Stephenson) 

 was interested in the winnings of LUlian, and he (Stephen- 

 son), therefore, was to that extent her owner ; and if he did 

 so state and claim, why should not the man who paid for 

 the entrance of Ben Hill lor his winnings, be considered, to 

 the same extent, Ben Hill's owner, so far as that heat was 

 concerned ? And did Mr. Stephenson state at the Handlers' 

 meeting, as reported, "that he entered Ben Hill merely for 

 the purpose of showing that he was broken and a good dog, 

 although he did not think him good enough to win." If he 

 thought so and so stated, Avhy should he let another pay his 

 money for entering a dog "not good enough to win, ''^ and 

 further, did Mr. Stephenson say at the Handlers' meeting, 

 " I offered as a matter of friendship to take her (Lillian), 

 prepare her and handle her in the trials ; I would not be 

 benefited a dollar in her winnings." If Mr. Stephenson 

 claimed at the time the protest was made in the field that 

 he owned Lillian to the extent of being interested in 

 her winnings, and then stated, as alleged, at the Handlers' 

 meeting, he had no interest in her wdnnings : which state- 

 ment is correct, and how shall we reconcile the two state- 

 ments ? Besides, is it true that Stephenson went to a house 

 the day the heat was ran for the first place between Bob 

 Gates and Daisy P., during lunch, and kept the judges and 

 Mr. Rose waiting an hour; and is it true that Bob Gates was 

 with him by the fire ? Is it true or not true that a man 

 whom Mr. Bryson knows, gave a certain other man one or 

 more revolvers and told him to be ready in case of an emer- 

 gency, at the adjourned meeting of the National Field 

 Trials Club? If this is true, should such a person belong to 

 the dull P What relation was one of the judges to Mr. 

 Stephenson, and did this judge decide the place for fii-st 

 money in the Derby ? Some of these questions we believe 

 should be answered in the uflirmative. If so, might not the 

 Executive Committee have becouie aey miinted with the facts 

 and been iiiflnenced in the interest of justice and fair play to 

 act as they did V I have not read the rule referred to. except 

 in Mr, Bryson's letter. What was tlie rule for ? Its pur- 

 poses and .spirit should be considered, i did not attend the 

 meeting at Grand Junction, but I have heard every one of 

 these points diseussed by gentlemen who were there, and ask 

 the questiun.'s in good faith, so that the Avhole facts may be 

 brought out and con-ect information promulgated. I wish 

 to say that I have no personal acquaintance with Mr. 

 Stephenson, never saw him and have no personal feelings in 

 the matter at all, but, as Mr. Bryson has undertaken to 

 represent the case ia the press, it is 'but fair that he answer 

 my questions, -whether he knows anything about the matters 

 inquired into personally or whether he heard any rumors 

 concerning any of them, Inquisiti\':e. 

 TCnoxvilu];, Tenn., Jan. 13. 



DOGS ARE PROPERTY= 



FRANKFORT. Jan. 8,— The Court of Appeals to-day, in 

 the case of the Commonwealth vs. George Hazlewood. 

 of Woodford county, rendered a decision of great interest 

 to owners of dogs, who are anxious to have their animals 

 recognized in law as propert,y. It is of importance because 

 itis the first case of tlie kind that has ever reacbed the Ap- 

 pellate Court., and the opinion will govern hereafter the 

 rulings of lower courts, especially in such cases as that of 

 Unz vs. Oswald, in which the German mastiffs were sold in 

 Louisville recently under execution for debt, and in vfhicb 

 Judge Field held that dogs were property, and the sale 

 therefore valid. 



Hazlewood was indicted by the grand jury of bis county in 

 April, 1884, for unlawfully and feloniously carrying away st, 

 dog belonging to Warren Viley, The defendant demuiTed 

 to the indictment on the ground that dogs were not a stibjecfe 

 of larceny, and the lower court sustained the dem-iiTer, Th& 

 Attomey-(jeneral in his brief on the appeal says tluit : 



" Dogs are assessed and a tax collected on them (stipple-- 

 ment to Revised Statutes, page 189). This is entirely Lncon- 

 sistcnt with the view that they are among the things fcrm 

 natnrCB. Our law certainly would not tax things the right 

 of property in and enjoyment of which it did not recognize. 

 The statute therefore that imposes a tax on dogs neoessaiily 

 says that they are property. * * There is no -"eason that 

 might be given for eonsidering any other doniestic ;iriimal 

 the subject of j^roperty that would not apjdy with equal 

 force to dogs. * * They afford amusement, service and 

 protection, and are often the subject of sale and profit. 

 Again, our statutes should hold a man responsible for any 

 damage his dog may do to the property of others (General 

 Statutes, IV!!,).^' 

 Judge Holt, in the opinion of the Court, says: 

 "The only question presented by this appeal is whether 

 under the law of this State a. dog can be the subject of lar- 

 ceny. Undoubtedly the rule was otherwise at common law. 

 By "it larceny could be comuiitted of such doniestic animals 

 a.s cattle and sheep, and ot such domestic foAvis as hens and 

 ducks, because they seiwe for food, and were, as Lord Hal© 

 says, 'under propriety.' " 



''This was time also as to beasts or birds /croj ?ioturce,when 

 made tame, if they served for food, such as deer and pheas- 

 ants, provided the thief knew them to have been reclaimed. 

 Larceny, however, could not be committed of some things in 

 which the owner even had a lawful property and for an 

 injury to wliich he conld maintain trespa.ss, as mastiffs and 

 spaniels, by reason, as tlie common lav/ v,-riters said, of the 

 business of their nature; nor of some animals wild by 

 nature, but rendered domestic, as foxes and bears, because 

 thev served for pleasure and not for food, 



Blackstone says; "As to those animals that do not serve, 

 for food, and which, therefore, the law holds to have no 

 intrinsic value, as dogs of all sorts, and other creatures kept 

 for whim and pleasure, though a man may have a base prop- 

 erty therein, and maintain a civil action for loss of them, yet 

 they are not of such estimation as that the crime of .stealing 

 them amounts to larceny."— 4 Bl, Cora. ;iiJ6. Coke, Hale and 

 the other common law writers are to the same effect. 



It seems difiicult to give a sound reason for the old rule, in 

 view of the indisputable fact that many dogs axe esteemed 

 of great value and justly so considered. It was adopted, 

 however, when following the Dracoidan law, gr^md larceny 

 was punishable with death ; and upon the gi-ound, perhaps, 

 that a dog conld have no determinate value. This, however,, 

 in this day is not true ; nor is it necessary to hold that a 

 dog is of so base a nature that he cannot be the subject of 

 larceny in order to save the life of a man. 



Property is clothed with value by the laws of society and 

 public opinion. In a state of nature j)roperty does not ex- 

 ist. What one, then, retains and uses, depends upon his 

 powers. When, however, he enters into society, objects be- 

 come property, because they are impressed by its usages with 

 certain qualities, among which is the right of the owner to 

 their exclusive use aiid the power to dispose of them. 

 If it be true that v/hether an object be property de- 

 pends upon the usage or notion of "society, then surely it 

 has impressed upon the dog all the attributes of property. 

 The master is entitled to the exclusive use and vested wim 

 an absolute power of disposition, while the present public 

 estimate of this faithful and useful animal, coupled with 

 the recognition of him as property in vaxaous ways by our 

 statutory laws, forbids the assumption that he cannot be the 

 suijjeet of larceny, because of a sunposed base nature. 



If it be the object of the criminal law to protect t:he citizen 

 in that which is useful and valuable, as well as punish oiie 

 who, for Jiicri ccf ('..s'tt, takes it from him, then we fail to see 

 any sound reason why this animal, so varied in its .species 

 and so valuable and useful to man, should not be protected 

 by the law. It is domestic in its nature ; it guards the pro- 

 perty of its master ; it serves as a companion ; it assists the 

 drover in the management of his stock, and renders itself 

 useful by way of amusement, service and protection. We 

 should be slow, however, to dissent from the ancient common 

 law" rule so long established and so universally concurred in 

 by common law writers in the absence of statutorj^ abroga- 

 tion of it. Our statute pro\ddes for the punishment of " per- 

 sons guilty of the larceny of goods and chattels." Gen. 

 Stat., 333. The tenn '* chattel " IS a broad one. Bounder, in 

 his law dictionary, says that " chattel is a term including all 

 kinds of lJropertJ^ except the freehold and things which are 

 parcel of it." 



The question noAV rises whether our law so far recognizes 

 a dog as jproperty as to bring him within the meaning of this 

 term. If so, then he may be the subject of larceny. By an 

 act of our Legislature of January 31, 1865, dogs were ma4e 

 liable to assessment and taxation ; the tax arising therefrom 

 not to be expended in pajdng for sheep killed by them or in- 

 juries done by them, but to become a part of "the common 

 school fund.. Myers' Supplement, 1S9. The form of tax- 

 book given in the General Statutes provides for this assess- 

 ment. General Statutes, 717, It seems to us that the im- 

 Xiosition of a tax on them necessarily recognizes them as. 

 property; otherwise, the law taxes them and yet fails to re- 

 cognize the right of ownersb.ip. 



In 3 Wharton's Grim, Law, sec. 1,755, it is said that as to 

 all other animals which do not serve for food, such as dogs 

 and ferrets, though tame and salable, or other creatures kept 

 for whim and pleasure, stealing these does not amount to 

 larceny at common law. It is ottierioise, however, ivhen they 

 arc taxed. 



Our .statute makes a man liable for damage done by his 

 dog, tims recognizing that a dog has an owmer and that the 

 thing owned is property. It expressly speaks of " the owner " 

 and provides how, uud.er certain circumstances, he may be 

 deprived of him. For every evil purpose, not only our 

 statutes, but the decision.s of our courts, recognize a dog as 

 property. The owner may sue in trespass for an injury to 

 iiim, or bring repleAdn or trover for his eniiTersioh ; and 

 no .stronger reasons exist for holding, as has been done, that 

 canary birds, or tame pigeons, or bees, may be the suljjcct of 

 larceny, than those relating to dogs. 



These view^s are supported by the cases of the People vs. 

 Maloney, 1 Parker's Crim. Rep. 593 ; the State vs. Brown, 9 

 Baxter 53, and the People vs. Campbell, 4 Parker's Crim. 

 Rep. 386. 



Before one can be convicted of stealing a dog, the value 

 must be shown. It can not well be m-ged that there is 

 danger of persons being confined in the penitentiary for 

 stealing "mongrel whelps of a low degree," because under 

 our .statute, before one can be so punished, it must be proved 

 that the stolen property was worth cjlO or over. 



We have not readied the conclusion above indicated in 

 forgetfulness of the act of the last Legislature, approved 



