FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Feb, 3, 1887. 



Vhe Menml 



F IXTU RES. 



DOG SHOWS. 



Feb. 8 to 11.— Southern Massachusetts Poultry Association Dog 

 Show. Fall River. A. R. G. MosJier, Secretary. 



March 8 to 11.— Second Annual Dog Show at Buffalo, ST. Y. J. 

 Otis Fellows, Secretary, Hornellsville, N. Y. 



March 22 to 25, 1887.— Spring Show of the New Jersey Kennel 

 Club, Newark, N. J. A. C. Wilmerding, Secretary, Bergen Point, 

 N. J. 



March 29 to April 1, 1887.— Inaugural Dog Show of Rhode 

 Island Kennel Club, Providence, R. I. N. Seabury, Secretary, 

 Box 1333, Providence. 



April 5 to 8, 1887— Third Annual Show of New England Kennel 

 Club, Boston. F.L.Weston, Secretary, Hotel Boylston, Boston, 

 Mass. 



April 12 to 15, 1&S7.— Thirteenth Annual Dog Show of the Western 

 Pennsylvania Poultry Society, at Pittsburgh, Pa. C. B. Elben, 

 Secretary. 



Mav 3 to 6, 1887.— Eleventh Annual Show of the Westminster 

 Kennel Club, Madison Square Garden, New York. James Morti- 

 mer, Superintendent. 



FIELD TRIALS. 

 Feb. 15, 1887.— Inaugural Trials of Tennessee Sportsmen's Associ- 

 ation. Entries close Jan. 10. R. M. Dudley, Secretary, No. 84 

 Broad street, Nashville, Tenn. 



A. K. R.-SPECIAL NOTICE. 



THE AMERICAN KENNEL REGISTER, for the registration 

 of pedigrees, etc. (with prize lists of all shows and trials), is 

 published every month. Entries close on the 1st. Should be in 

 early. Entry blanks sent on receipt of stamped and addressed 

 envelope. Registration fee (50 cents) must accompany each entry. 

 No entries inserted unless paid in advance. Yearly subscription 

 $1.50. Address "American Kennel Register," P. O, Box 2832, New 

 Fork. Number of entries already printed 4606. 



THE BEN H ILL— LILLIAN HEAT. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Careful investigation of this National field trials business 

 has forced nie to the conclusion that Forest and Stream 

 has not demonstrated its usual clear-sightedness in dealing 

 with one of the offenders. 



Your able and fearless report of the disgraceful proceed- 

 ings was nothing more than one expects from a paper which 

 occupies the protid position of indisputable pre-eminence in 

 matters canine. It is not over that report we differ, nor yet 

 over your lucid and forceful editorial, furnished at a time 

 when at least one of your contemporaries was dodging about 

 in search of its overcoat. But I do think, as do others with 

 whom I have conversed on the subject, that certain parts of 

 your footnote to Mr. Bryson's letter, as well as subsequent 

 requests for information, lack the generosity of feeling 

 usually employed by you when seeking or distributing 

 knowledge. 



We have recently been informed that Mr. Bryson is an 

 "honorable gentleman," and he probably feels aggrieved 

 and discouraged by the course you have pursued in trying to 

 force from him facts which, if made public, might lead to 

 the punishment of the givers of "something valuable" as 

 well as the receivers. 



Mr. Bryson has done more than any other man for field 

 trials in this country: he is a practical man, aud he knows 

 more about the vulpine doings of certain persons than any 

 other being, excepting, perhaps, the Chicago leader and 

 editor. Tired of having to shoulder the responsibility and 

 disgrace which association with these people naturally in- 

 volves, Mr. Bryson's conscience yields at last to the ever 

 increasing pressure put on it, and he comes forward and 

 frankly tells what has been done in the past, and what may 

 be done again in the future. The boodle alderman who 

 turns State's evidence earns immunity and saves his bacon; 

 and yet you insist that this "honorable gentleman," after 

 having disclosed facts such as have never been divulged by 

 any other person, is doing wrong just because he doesn't find 

 it convenient (I think that is the proper word to use) to let 

 you have the last link in the chain of evidence— the link that 

 might bind the future and the past by an inseparable, if not 

 uncomfortable, bond. 



I feel confident that Forest and Stream, after having 

 given more careful consideration to some of the facts in this 

 case, will become a generous advocate of pardon for Mr. 

 Bryson, and will exonerate me of any intention of attempts 

 ing a defense of an unworthy subject. Mr. Bryson writes: 

 "Lillian will beat him (Ben Hill) ninety-nine times in every 

 hundred," and, "I contend the circumstances which caused 

 Mr, Ste phenson to have Ben HD1 pulled was a greater wrong 

 " iCali jfei smiling." Here is a straightforward and manly 

 acknowledgment of things which have hitherto been held 

 sacred by certain parties. Mr. Bryson, a successful com- 

 petitor at National trials, knows that dogs which cannot 

 fairly win more than "one heat in a hundred" have by some 

 mysterious (to us) process been transformed into winners, 

 and he and his friend, Mr. Stephenson, in order to avert a 

 ninety-nine-to-one-chance victory in the Ben Hill — Lillian 

 heat, ordered Mr. Bevan to pull Ben Hill. Messrs. Bryson 

 and Stephenson having a big "say" in the appointment of 

 the judges at these trials, should know when it is necessary 

 to make sure doubly sure. Don't you see? Remember, 

 please, that I know nothing of the judges at these trials, 

 and don't wish to. My defense of Mr. Bryson is based solely 

 on evidence supplied by prominent members of the club. 



If ninety-nine-to-one-chance dogs had not been successful 

 at previous trials Messrs. Stephenson and Bryson would not 

 have had reason to fear Lillian's defeat. Ben Hill would not 

 have been pulled and the dog-loving community would have 

 been spared disgraceful exposures. Undoubtedly, as Mr. 

 Bryson states, "the circumstances which caused Mr. Steph- 

 enson to have Ben Hill pulled was a greater wrong than the 

 pulling." Thanks to Mr. Bryson, all this is perfectly clear. 



Now sir, perhaps you can tell us where to find full recorded 

 particulars of these ninety-nine-to-one-chance victories. I 

 have not examined the back numbers of your esteemed con- 

 temporaries, the Turf, Field and, Farm' and Breeder and 

 Sportsman, but of the other old established papers devoting 

 a column a week or more to dog matters, only one (Forest 

 AND Stream) has a record for having exposed trickery and 

 fraud at field trials. The evidence supporting this statement 

 is voluminous and conclusive. 



Do you, sir, suppose that Mr. Bryson is ignorant of these 

 facts? There is not a grain of evidence to show why he 

 should be. By your courtesy I will continue my queries and 

 ask, have you forgotten that within the last few years cer- 

 tain snipe-nosed, dish-faced, light-eyed, prick-eared, tucked- 

 up, small-boned, ring-tailed, leggy rabbit-coursing dogs 

 have been entered for competition at our shows, and under 

 ninety-nine-to-one-chance judgments have been juggled to 

 the front when competing against English setters? How 

 these worthless looking brutes were written up by a certain 

 paper, their defects magnified into sterling qualities, and 

 the judges who placed them complimented for their sound 

 judgment, must be fresh in your memory. Forest and 

 Stream and Sporting Life effectually put a stop to that 

 business; but how about the other papers? 



When and where did they ever give particulars of tliis Un- 

 savory business? These facts, the astounding ones disclosed 

 by Mr. Bryson's letter, and perhaps many others of the 



same color, are in Mr. Bryson's possession; his insinuatious 

 are founded thereon. Certain papers failed to report crooked 

 work of which Mr. Bryson was an eye-witness. The re- 

 porters were either blind, or incapable, or they were silenced 

 by some means. No newspaper woidd send a blind reporter 

 to a field trial or to a dog show, and at least one of our 

 papers which has always withheld information that was uot 

 complimentary to a certain clique, has frequently advertised 

 its reporters as practical men. To what, then, does all this 

 point? It seems to me that Mr. Bryson instead of insinuat- 

 ing should have affirmed. His reasons for not having done 

 so are best known to himself and the delinquent reporters. 

 Mr. Bryson has told so much that it is only lair to suppose 

 he would tell the balance could he do so without personal 

 inconvenience. His conduct is most commendable inasmuch 

 as he has clearly shown that ninety-nine-to-one-chance dogs, 

 when owned by the right parties, do scoop in the boodle at 

 certain trials;' and that a dog may be niuety-nine-times 

 better than an opponent and yet not be able to win unless 

 the heat is made absolutely airtight by fixing the handler of 

 the ninety-nine-to-one-chance dog; and that at least one re- 

 porter has been "sweetened. " Truly "the circumstances which 

 caused Mr. Stephenson to have Ben Hill pulled was a 

 greater wrong than the pulling." Mr. Bryson has told his 

 share; let some other penitent supply the missing link. It's 

 the "circumstances" you want to be after. Chas. H. Mason. 

 New RoCHEtLE, Jan. 29, 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I have never attended a field trial, but have read your re- 

 ports with a great deal of interest. The Ben Hill— Lillian 

 affair appears to me to have been an outrage and 1 sincerely 

 hope that the National Association will deal with the per- 

 petrator of it in a manner that will prevent such occur- 

 rences in the future. Mr. Bryson's letter in your issue of 

 Jan. 20 leads me to believe the matter to be worse than your 

 report of it makes out. We are given to understand that 

 Ben Hill is a very ordinary dog, yet his owner found it ne- 

 cessary to "pull" him in order that he might not beat Lillian. 

 Is it possible that the field trial merit of Lillian that we have 

 heard so much about has all been earned under similar con- 

 ditions? If so a very great wrong has been committed, as it 

 is well known that it takes a lot of money to purchase a dog 

 of the breeding she represents, and a portion at least of the 

 value is supposed to be represented by actual field merit 

 proven by honorable competition in public. Is it possible 

 that other records have been obtained in like manner? Mr. 

 Bryson's insinuation about "pay-me handsomely" reporters 

 leads me to believe that there are strong grounds for suspi- 

 cion in the case and that he may know something of the 

 matter. I therefore second your demand that he make a 

 clean breast of it and give us all the facts in order that we 

 may know just where we stand, and so far as possible make 

 a revision of the records. Altoo. 



Brooklyn, Jan. 26. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



You are quite Puritanic in your ideas, and want "an eye 

 for an eye and a tooth for a tooth," and contend that air. 

 Stephenson should be punished regardless of the cause that 

 provoked the act. I think in every case the cause should 

 first be well weighed before the act itself is reached. Sup- 

 pose a burglar should enter your room, and in a struggle 

 with him to protect your property he should kill you: his 

 crime would he murder and punishable by death. But sup- 

 pose you should kill him, would you think you had com- 

 mitted murder and deserved the same punishment he did? 

 Although yon had committed the same act he had you 

 would be honorably acquitted and he hanged. In reply to 

 the. criticism of "Inquisitive," I will say Mr. Stephenson 

 refused to make any charge for handling Lillian, both before 

 and after the trials. What he did receive was a preseut 

 some days after the trials, and he was perfectly ignorant of 

 what it would be until he received it. His interest in Lillian 

 was a handler's, which is often regulated by the winnings. 

 His interest in Ben Hill was an owner's, and could not he 

 lessened by his being handled by another. I received all the 

 entries in the All- Aged stake and Mr. Bedford received the 

 money. I knew Mr. Stephenson entered Ben Hill, Lady C, 

 Noble G, and Minnie S. in person, and the entrance money 

 came out of Irfs pocket. I did hear another person claim to 

 have entered Ben Hill, but I now have written evidence from 

 six of this man's nearest neighbors, who are the best citizens 

 of the county, which convinces me to the contrary. Mr, 

 Stephenson was at a fire, soaking wet and threatened with 

 a chill (but Bob Gates was not with him; what if lie had 

 been?); it was raining and totally unfit to run the heat. As 

 one good turn deserves another, why was not Mr. Rose, 

 Daisv F. and the judges sent to hunt him up if he had 

 bolted? 



Dr. Young is not related to Mr. Stephenson, but is a cousin 

 of Mrs. Stephenson. If his winning first prize is due to this 

 relationship would it not be well to inquire if his grand- 

 father did not at some time give the grandfather of one of 

 the judges at High Point a chew of tobacco, or some of his 

 remote ancestors" trade horses with the ancestors of one of 

 the judges at Grand Junction in '85 and Canton in '84? "In- 

 quisitive's" informant must have been quite nervous about 

 the revolvers being handed around. The first I heard of 

 them was when I saw it in print. If they were being handed 

 around they failed to give me one or notify me "to be ready 

 in case of emergency." Drowning men catch at straws, and 

 frightened children scream at their own shadows. Straws 

 are saw logs compared to the imaginary cobwebs "Inquisi- 

 tive" clutches at whenhe suggests these surmises to be facts. 

 If the committee based their decisions on such facts (?) as 

 these no wonder they made such a blunder. They should 

 have dealt with facts' and not the fancies of a frightened 

 brain, which could see phantom revolvers floating in the air 

 "ready for an emergency, " The rule is exactly as I quoted 

 it, and for once I agree 'with "Inquisitive" its purpose and 

 spirit should be considered. I have answered all of "Inquisi- 

 tive's" questions to the best of my ability, and wish to ask 

 him only one, which he can easily answer without betraying 

 his identity. Do you reside at Kuoxville? If you do, mail 

 me a card from there with "inquisitive" written on it by 

 yourself. 



Now, a few words about reporters. I do not think my ex- 

 pression conveyed the idea that all reporters could be 

 bought. I had no such intention, as I have the highest re- 

 gard for an honest, independent reporter, one who would 

 scorn any attempt at bribery and treat it as an insult; one 

 who would consider it base to eulogize an advertiser's dog 

 above its merit and detract from the well-earned laurels of 

 another from spite or revenge. Whenever a paper unjustly 

 writes up some dogs and writes others down it matters not 

 whether it is from favoritism, envy, jealousy, revenge or 

 bribery, its report should be treated with contempt by the 

 public and looked on as an imposition on their confidence. 



D. Bryson 



Memphis, Tenn, 



ANOTHER LARGE MASTIFF BITCH PUPPY. — Editor 

 Forest and Stream: I have a mastiff bitch puppy, sired by 

 Ilford Caution, which, at 7mos. of age, weighed 1061bs. Why 

 won't Mr. Haldeman give us the measurements of his 

 puppy? Weight is not all we are striving for. Below are 

 .some of the measurements of mine: Length from tip of nose 

 to stop, 3%in.; girth of muzzle, 13in.; girth of skull, 22iu.; 

 girth of neck, 22in.; girth of body behind forearms, 33in.; 

 girth of loiri, 28in.; girth around stifle joint, 19>j in. ; girth 

 below elbow, lOKin.; girth of forearm, 9in.;: girth around 

 pastern, fVkfin. This puppy is not for sale.— E: H. Moo rk 

 (Melrose, Mass., Jan. 28). 



A PLEA FOR PUPPIES. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



We sent our promising puppies to the shows last spring, 

 healthy, strong, and so full of life that they could hardly be 

 persuaded to take any pace slower than a gallop. During 

 the first day they were frisky and jolly, excited by the 

 strange sights and babel of sounds, and quite wide awake 

 until 10 o'clock emptied the hall of people. Then they 

 seemed to think it was cold and very far from home. The 

 next morning they were brought into the judging ring, but 

 already the novelty had departed: teazing and caressing 

 visitors had worried them, breakfast had not had its usual 

 relish, they had missed their early game of romps out in the 

 exhilarating morning air, and with utter indifference most 

 of them faced the judge, one or two even declining to stand 

 up and greet him. Then back to their stalls theywent, very 

 proper and quiet, without tugging at their chains or giving 

 the attendants any trouble. The day wore away and with it 

 all their energy. Sleep, happy sleep, was all they craved, 

 and visitors could hardly rouse them for a friendly hand 

 shake. A kind friend whom they remembered enough to 

 greet with hoarse bark of welcome, gave them a run around 

 the hall, and even took them out into the street for a blessed 

 half hour, so that they were quite fresh and bright when 

 evening thronged the hall with people again. But how 

 wretchedly weary and forlorn were the poor things when 

 the third day began. So meek and apathetic had they be- 

 come that they swallowed pills without a murmur, and even 

 submitted to the administration of a generous dose of salt 

 with which a wiseacre sought to revive them and make 

 them "show up" better. Two walks they had, out of doors, 

 and one in the hall, besides other kind attentions, and really 

 seemed like themselves for a time. But at night they pined 

 for a change of air, and all the tedious hours of the fourth 

 and last day they were so dull and stupid that visitors found 

 them very uninteresting and openly wondered that such 

 dogs had won any prizes. At last the show came to an end, 

 the pups were hurried from their benches and into their 

 crates to catch the midnight train, homeward bound. More 

 weary hours in the crowded car, and home at last, drooping, 

 dispirited, worn out, thin and languid. In a day or two 

 they seemed to regain something of their former condition 

 and spirit, but within a week all were ill with distemper, 

 and the disease had also attacked some of their stay-at-home 

 kennel mates. For months our kennels were only a series 

 of hospitals, and several besides the unfortunate prize win- 

 ners succumbed to the dire disease. 



This is no fictitious case, but a statement of sad fact. How 

 many other breeders can tell a similar tale? The spring 

 shows are at hand and more victims are being prepared for 

 the sacrifice, for what breeder worthy the name lacks ambi- 

 tion, and what breeder thinks he has no puppies to show? 

 Since there will be puppy classes and puppy entries to fill 

 them can we not do something to ward off distemper? Gen- 

 tlemen of the bench show committees, will you not think of 

 the puppies as well as the grown dogs in making out your 

 schedules? Would it not be a good thing to let all puppies 

 go home at the close of the second day, while they have some 

 strength with which to combat distemper should it attack 

 them? I am told that this plan has succeeded admirably, 

 and I wish it might be tried at our shows this spring. 

 Brother breeders, have you all resolved never to show any 

 more puppies after the losses of last year? Or have you for- 

 gotten your trials and are you ready to exhibit a few more 

 grand puppies presently. What do you say to a two-day 

 limit for puppies and a four-day limit for grown dogs? Or 

 would you prefer to have no puppy classes? A Sufferer. 



OUR FIELD TRIAL. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



We, who live so far from the scenes of the great field trials 

 that we cannot conveniently avail ourselves of the oppor- 

 tunities to judge of the merits of our dogs that those contests 

 would afford, concluded recently to inaugurate a series of 

 local field trials to decide which of us possessed the best 

 trained dog. Christmas day, selected for our first meet, 

 dawned clear and balmy as May, Many of the owners and 

 handlers of the dogs entered had been up late the night 

 before assisting in the distribution of presents to the children 

 from the various Sunday school Christmas trees in the city 

 (so they said), and in consequence of the fatigue incidental 

 to these festivities, failed to appear in time for the start. 

 However, two enthusiastic individuals with their canines 

 were promptly on hand, and nothing daunted at the paucity 

 of contestants, determined to cany out their part of the pro- 

 gramme. As the negroes, with their "Zulus," have potted 

 all the birds in the ihimediate vicinity of town, it was neces- 

 sary to go some distance to find suitable grounds for the con- 

 test. The dogs that came to the scratch were Webster's 

 celebrated liver and white pointer Dash Blank and "Guada- 

 lupe's" famous English setter Count No-Account. 



A little difficulty was experienced at the outset, as the 

 dogs on being put into the back part of the wagon at once 

 began to fight like a couple of Kilkenny cats. They were 

 separated eventually, after having been admonished with a 

 club, one was left, in quiet and safe possession of the rear 

 part of the wagon, and the other given a seat in front. Ar- 

 riving on the ground, the brace was put down (I believe that 

 is the correct phraseology) near an extensive hedge, and im- 

 mediately got to work. After a short run Dash Blank 

 pointed and drew on, working out a bevy that was running 

 in the hedge. The Count lay down to bite a grass burr out 

 of his foot. He was kicked up by his handler, and exhibited 

 a fine burst of speed getting out of the way. Seeing Dash 

 standing rigidly on a point and looking in his direction, the 

 Count evidently concluded it was a challenge and went for 

 him in fine style. Alarmed at the tumult the bevy — a large 

 one — flushed with a great racket, which attracted the atten- 

 tion of the fighting dogs, who left off chewing each other 

 and lit out after the birds. After runniug the best part of 

 half a mile, unmindful of the vigorous blowing of whistles 

 aud shouting on the part of the handlers, the dogs having 

 failed to catch any of the birds, returned and lay down in 

 the shade to rest. One chase was scored against each flog. 



After cooling off they were sent on and shortly came to- 

 gether on a point close to the hedge. Webster, to order, 

 flushed, but it was a cotton tail rabbit which he missed very 

 neatly with both barrels. He also missed the dogs, but it 

 was a close call for all concerned, After the dogs discovered 

 they could not catch the rabbit they returned, got down to 

 business again and, in a short time, were racing up and 

 down the hedge in pursuit of a bevy that would neither flush 

 nor stand still long enough for the dogs to get in a respect- 

 able point. Webster was ordered to flush. Tout he couldn't. 

 The hedge was of Cherokee rose, 12 to loft, wide and aver- 

 aged about 8ft. high. In the expressive language of Dash's 

 owner, "if they didn't want to flush, they didn't have to." 

 He also suggested that a mark be scored against the birds, 

 but as that was a proceeding I could not recollect ever hav- 

 ing seen chronicled in the published reports of field trials, I 

 objected, and advised that he fire into the hedge and scare 

 them out. This advice being acted upon proved entirely 

 successful. The birds were marked down in the middle of 

 the field, but as soon as they touched the ground they set out 

 in a run for the hedge on the onposite side and succeeded in 

 getting there ahead of the dogs. It was a pretty race, but 

 the birds won by about five dog lengths. One mark was 

 scored agaiust each dog for not beating the birds and get- 

 ting between them and the hedge. 



Arriving there we fotmd -both dogs pointing beautifully. 

 The bevy was flushed without much difficulty, and as . they 

 rose four- shots rang out almost, simultaneously- One bird 

 j dropped, winged and started to run, but Dash had his eagle 



