30 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[Aug. 3, 1888. 



THE SOUTHERN FIELD TRIAL CLUB. 



Editor Forest mid Stream; 



As much as I am averse to neAvspaper controversies I am 

 compelled once more (and for the last time I hope on this 

 subject) to ask space in your columns. 



When, in consequence of my official connection with the 

 Southern Field Trial Club, it became necessary in vindica- 

 tion of the club and its members to publish the truth and 

 thus expose the fallacy of the Chicago paper in refusing to 

 publish our paid advertisement, I trusted and believed it 

 would be my last, for I had no doubt but Dr. Howe would 

 hasten to make honorable amends through the columns of 

 his paper. But I was mistaken in the man, for to the con 

 trary, notwithstanding he had a true statement of the facts 

 before him, he iudustriously and, as he thought, quietly, cir- 

 culated the manifold Brumby letter among sportsmen all 

 over the country two weeks before my communication forced 

 him to publish it. After learning of its secret circulation it 

 becaroenecessary that I should write a second letter, wherein 

 I specifically charged the Doctor with opposing the Southern 

 Field Trial Club by letters, and otherwise exposing the 

 flimsy pretexts upon which he declined the paid advertise- 

 ment of our club, and showing his inconsistency. In re- 

 sponse to my second letter the Doctor published a card, in 

 which he says: "I have not written a letter to anv one re- 

 garding the entries for the Southern Field Trial* Club in 

 any way, shape or form." Again recognizing the resem- 

 blance of the Doctor to the "quietest, dog in the show," I 

 accept his silence as assenting to the correctness of every 

 charge I made against him, but that of having written let- 

 ters, etc., to the prejudice of our club, and of that one I 

 submit indisputable proof— his statements to the contrary 

 notwithstanding. 



This manifold Brumby letter, which was so industriously 

 circulated, charged that "the chief object of the Southern 

 Field Trial Club was to break up the American Field Trial 

 Club," and also that if ours succeeded the other must fail. 

 In fact, the whole tenor of this letter from beginning to end 

 is opposition to the S. F. T. Club, and the organization of it, 

 that it ought not to exist, that it was conceived in sin and 

 born in iniquity, and must not be patronized. No one can 

 pretend that the circulation of this manifold Brumby letter 

 was for any other purpose than to prejudice the S. F. T. 

 Club by preventing parties from entering their dogs and 

 otherwise patronizing it. Can a club exist without entries ? 

 Is the circulation of this letter among sportsmen saying 

 nothing "regarding entries in the S. F. T. Club" in any way, 

 shape or form ? 



This is not all. 1 am convinced of the fact that other let- 

 ters and means were used to prevent entries in the Southern 

 Field Trial Club; which conviction is supported by indis- 

 putable evidence. Now for the proof. I have in my posses- 

 sion a letter from Mr. L. C. Bruce, of New York, in which 

 he says that a prominent member of the A. K. Club had 

 shown him a letter from Dr. Rowe two weeks before my 

 communication appeared, and which was accompanied by 

 the mauifold Brumby letter. I also have in my possession 

 a letter from as honorable a gentleman as this country 

 affords, in which he says that in a conversation he had with 

 Dr. Rowe, he (Rowe) admitted having seut the manifold 

 Brumby letter to a number of persons, giving the names of 

 several of them. This I defy the Doctor to deny. If he 

 should 1 will give the name of my informant. 



I am also in possession of a letter from Mr. B. M. Stephen- 

 son, in which he says, "Mr. Bevan told me he would enter 

 three dogs in the S. F. T. Club, but subsequently declined, 

 and gave as a reason that lie would do nothing that Rowe 

 objected to." Ia further support of this, I am informed by 

 Mr. Jas. L. Anthony, of New York, that Mr. Bevan would 

 not run his (Anthony's) dogs in the Southern Field Trial 

 Club, and that he (Bevan) gave as a reason, "That he loved 

 Rowe, and would be a snake if he handled dogs in the South- 

 ern Field Trial Club;" and thus he (Anthony) was forced to 

 take his dogs from Bevan and place them in the hands of 

 another handler. 



I have still more evidence to support my statement, but 

 this will suffice. The individual's methods are too well 

 known by sporfsmeu in general to need more; all his virtu- 

 ous pretensions are a sham. 



The fact that the Southern Field Trial Club has more 

 Derby entries for this year than any other club, demonstrates 

 the fact that a club can succeed without the support of the 

 Chicago paper: yes, and even do so with its active opposi- 

 tion. 



We tender our gratGful thanks to the sportsmen from all 

 sections of the country for their generous support. With an 

 apology for having trespassed upon your columns, we dis- 

 miss the subject and the Western paper from further consid- 

 eration. J. W. Renfroe. 



Atlanta, Ga., July 28. 



THE TWO DOG CLUBS. 



NEW YORK, July 31— Editor Forest and Stream: 1 ob- 

 serve Dr. Perry has again delivered himself of a very 

 exhaustive defense of the N. D. C. In trying to prove, how- 

 ever, the absence of the only really bad and fatally weak 

 feature of his club, viz., antagonism to A. K. C, he lament- 

 ably shows the cloven foot. He says: "A snail may compass 

 the earth, but there are none who desire to follow in its 

 course." In this metaphor the snail is the A. K. C. Evi- 

 dently without intention Dr. Perrv took his mask off. He 

 could have said nothing to better illustrate the contempt of 

 the N. D. C. for the A. K. C, as a leader or competitor. How 

 then can anybody believe that the close companionship and 

 accord can possibly exist which Dr. Perry endeavors to show 

 his club was organized with the avowed intention of cultivat- 

 ing with the A. K. C. 



And that all these "catch support" expressions and fair 

 words mean nothing at all but clever dust throwing in the 

 eyes of sport-loving breeders and exhibitors of the country, 

 is proved by the indisputable fact that at no time since its 

 inception has the N. D. C. had any communication, official 

 or unofficial, with the A. K. C. with a view to co-operation. 

 On the contrary, it has ignored the A. K. C, and its pro- 

 motors have, claimed that the N. D. C. was called into being 

 as a crying necessity to do everything well which is now 

 done so badly. "Everything that is done so badly" is shown 

 by the regulations, dog show rules, constitution and its in- 

 terpretations of the N. D. C. to comprise the entire field of 

 operations of the A. K. C. Consequently the A. K. C. is by 

 the most unmistakable implication unfit and incapable for 

 the proper discharge of its duties and should in that case be 

 superseded by a worthier institution. 



But Dr. Perry admitted that the majority of his members 

 expressed themselves to him as in sympathy with the A. K. C. 

 when they were importuned to join, and many of the N. D. C 

 committee distinctly stipulated that they would only act 

 provided absolute assurance was given that the A. K. C. 

 would not be antagonized. That assurance was given and is 

 to-day most inconsistently repeated. Then why does not the 

 N. D. C. confine itself to its proper field? 



Dr. Perry has seen fit to insinuate that some of the present 

 officers of the A. K. C. were bought off by the tender of 

 office in the A. K. C. from support of the* N. D. C. How 

 absurd! As I was invited by Dr. Perry to become a member 

 of the executive committee of the N. D. C, he must refer to 

 me as one of these. His communications to me on this sub- 

 ject were all marked "personal." This was odd; still I 

 treated them so and declined for the best of reasons, viz., 

 that I did not approve of the foundation of a club on the 

 lines indicated by Dr. Perry, fearing, notwithstanding his 

 assurances, that it would bring discord and conf'usiou into the 



doggy world, and feeling that if any reforms were necessary 

 they could be made through the A. K. C, and where its 

 duties were too restricted they could be so enlarged as to 

 satisfy the requirements of breeders; and that an association 

 of breeders could he formed in connection and in thorough 

 sympathy with the A. K. 0, 



I sincerely believe that the breeders do require an associa- 

 tion of their own, and I, as a breeder and exhibitor, desire 

 one greatly and would have supported the N. D. C. heartily, 

 but the N. D. C. was not what was represented or required, 

 and if I interpret the wishes of the breeders and exhibitors 

 at large correctly, not what they really desired either. The 

 A. K. C. was organized as a court of appeal and last resort, 

 and the local clubs belonging to it are intrusted with their 

 own disciplining. The system was intended to extend 

 throughout the country. 



Rivalry, which Dr. Perry considers so healthy, should grow 

 as between kennol clubs organized for holding shows, field 

 trials and improving dog breeding, but to have two dog 

 courts of last resort and rivalry between these two, seems to 

 me as likely to defeat justice, as if our National Constitu- 

 tion provided for two Supreme Courts of the United States, 

 one Democratic and the other Republican. 



Dr. Perry speaks of prejudice, abuse, etc., of the N. D, C, 

 since its inception. Where, pray, did he see this or hear it ? 

 On the contrary, I think the N. D. C. was received by all 

 with great fairness and most sportsmanlike good-will, but it 

 has recently belied the avowed objects of its original pro- 

 moters. Words cannot explain this away. 



If so friendly to the A. K. C., where is the proof of it ? Is 

 it by asking a lot of prominent A. K. C. gentlemen to lend 

 their names as figureheads to act as an unconscious mask to 

 the N. 1). C. batteries ? Who does not understand that 

 worn-out political device. Dr. Perry has not well coated his 

 pill. August Belmont, Jr. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



Your correspondent in last week's issue is right iu assum- 

 ing that the letter of M r. Hamilton Busbey to Mr. C. J. Ham- 

 lin was written in haste. 



The facts, as I learn from Mr. Busbey himself, are, that 

 the letter was addressed with one eye on the clock to avoid 

 missing the afternoon train, to an old personal friend, not 

 with a view of publicity., but simply by way of suggestion, 

 which had been solicited. 



The chirography was not good, as is proved by Mr. Robin- 

 son reading "Coptic" tor Graphic; the object was not to stir 

 up controversy, but to quietly check a growing spirit of an- 

 tagonism, and that, while the editorial "we" was absent 

 from the scrawl, the sentiment expressed in it was formed 

 after a pret ty thorough discussion ot the question with prom- 

 inent dog breeders and members of the A. K. C. It was the 

 use which was made of the letter which gave to it a warlike 

 tone. 



Mr. Busbey, I am told, is not unfriendly to the N. D. C. so 

 long as it stands on the platform announced by its president 

 in his inaugural address; but he objects to all attemps on 

 the part of a few fractious spirits to use the machinery of 

 the club to weaken the ranks of the A. K. C, 



Your correspondent concedes Mr, Busbey's "eminence in 

 turf affairs," but sneers at his judgment on the management 

 of bench shows. How much the real question at issue will 

 be helped by this sneer, will be demonstrated by coming 

 events. It is true t hat Mr. Busbey has given in latter years 

 the larger parts of his thoughts to breeding theories and the 

 turf, but I recall the time when he assisted at the establish- 

 ment of field trials, gun trials aud bench shows in this 

 country, and that was prior to the spring of 1881, when Mr. 

 Chas, H. Mason landed in New York, and it was before Mr. 

 James Watson began to Sx his eye on kennel organization 

 and dream of getting his fine Italian hand into Yankee 

 flesh pots. Mr. Busbey has owned and shot over some of the 

 best dogs in the country-, and I would be willing to risk a 

 trifle that he can kill more birds iu the field or at the trap 

 than the critic who signs himself "One who will show at 

 Buffalo." 



It is well known t hat Mr. Busbey has not been a trader in 

 dogs or made a profession of judging at bench shows for 

 hire. Neither is he a member of the tickle-me, tickle-yon 

 clique, but he is none the less qualified to detect a battery 

 masked by so flimsy a thing as an open rail fence. 



As an owner, breeder aud lover of dogs, I am anxious for 

 peace between the two kennel clubs, and it seems to me that 

 Mr. Robinson and his kindred spirits have done all to stir 

 up strife. It certainly was not a non-partisan act to circu- 

 late in the manner that he did, and without the knowledge 

 of the gentleman to whom it was addressed, a strictlv pri- 

 vate letter. A Lover of Fair Play. 



[All of which is published as a matter of news, "important 

 if true."] 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



1 notice in the list of "approved shows" of the National 

 Dog Club that no year is given for the following shows: 

 New York Fauciers, Toronto, Ont., London, Out., St. John, 

 N. B., Ottawa, Out., Pacific Kennel Club, New Bedford, 

 Stafford Springs, Montreal. Do all wins count at the above 

 shows ? Why is the Cinciunati '88 show ignored with 362 

 entries, and other shows with 100 entries approved ? 



A. C. COLLINS. 



Hartford, Conn. 



"DISGRUNTLED ASSOCIATES." 



HORNELLSVXLLE, N. Y., July 27.— Editor Forest and 

 St ream:— In your issue of July 26, Mr. August Bel- 

 mont, Jr., goes out of his way to give the Hornell Kennel 

 Club a whack as "disgruntled associates." Well, we will 

 admit that we are "disgruntled," but Mr. Belmont should 

 remember that some of our club were breeders and known 

 to the world as such, before he ever thought of the fancy, 

 and they did not make their name either by buying the 

 best in England. 



He should go further into the subject and let all know 

 why we are "disgruntled." As I do not suppose he will do 

 it, I will give a few facts, so that other clubs may know 

 what to expect unless they vote as they are told to by the 

 grand moguls at 44 Broadway. 



First fact— A member of our club exposed the "Chicago 

 special steal." 



Second fact — A member of our club exposed the Pitts- 

 burgh "pewter medal steal." 



What, I wish to ask Mr. Belmont, did the A. K. C. do 

 about it? Did they suspend or expel the Piitsburgh or 

 Chicago Club or disqualify any one connected with, the 

 stealing:-' But there is no need of any answer. All know 

 what the A. K. C. has done for the breeders of America. 



Third fact— Our superintendent caught one Farley steal- 

 ing here and at Buffalo. He reported him to the A. K. C, 

 but they said they would not disqualify because the Buffalo 

 Kennel Club was not a member; and that, I must say, was a 

 fine decision for a body that wishes to govern the canine in- 

 terest of our big country. Our club, then a member of the 

 A. K. C, disqualified Farley, but we had a delegate who 

 was so unfortunate that he iiad a brain, and the A. K. C. 

 would do nothing about it, but waited until the Westmin- 

 ster Kennel Club caught Farley at more crooked work and 

 then disqualified him. 



Fourth fact— All the above were but a fitting introduction 

 to the crowning offense of depriving our club of the right to 

 be represented by the only delegate who had ever been able 

 to show himself capable of understanding what his duties 

 were. We instructed our secretary to tefl the A. K. C. the 

 above facts and also about their violating the rules in recog- 



nizing Atlanta just to please Mr. Belmont. So they arose in 

 their might and expelled the Hornell Club, and now Mr. Bel- 

 mont says we are "disgruntled." 



We are willing to leave it to the breeders of America to 

 say if we did not have sufficient provocation, 



"Disgruntled associates" is not, after all, a bad term for 

 us. I may say to Mr. Belmont, as Gratiano said to Shylock, 

 "I thank thee, Jew, for teaching me that word." 



William Rewalt, Jr., 



Pres. Hornell Kennel Club. 



"A BIT OF KENNEL HISTORY." 



NEW YORK, July SO.— Editor Forest and- Stream: In 

 &n editorial ot your last issue you speak of negotia- 

 tions having been conducted by Mr. Peshall with Mr. 

 Mason for the publication of an A. K. C. periodical by him. 

 As you desire to add this matter to "Kennel History," per- 

 haps it would be more accurate to couple with the story 

 that I as President of the American Kennel Club said that 

 no negotiation of the kind was ever conducted on the part 

 of the A. K. C. I distinctly desire to make no reflection 

 upon Mr. Mason and his abilities, or say what the A. K. C. 

 would or would not do in such a connection. Your inform- 

 ant was mistaken.— August Belmont, Jr., Pres. A. K. C. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In your last issue I notice an editorial headed "A Bit of 

 Kennel History." Permit me to say that I never asked Mr. 

 Mason upon what terms he could be induced to take the posi- 

 tion then held by Mr. Yred en burgh as editor of the American 

 Kennel Club Stud Book. The only conversation I have any 

 recollection of having with Mr. Mason upon the subject was 

 about the time the late Kennel and G u n went off; and Mr. 

 Mason and myself were discussing the subject, when I said 

 something about some of us starting a dog paper, and Mr, 

 Mason asked, "Who is going to edit it?" and I, in a jocular 

 mood, replied, "I guess we will have to get you." I think 

 my course in the American Kennel Club in regard to Mr. 

 Vredenburgh is sufficient to brand your statement absurd. 

 Ih regard to the derisive letter you mention which I wrote 

 about the English Gentleman, it was simply an answer to 

 a very vindictive letter which appeared in your paper in re- 

 gard to the American Kennel Club; and if you will take the 

 trouble to examine the files of your own paper, you will see 

 that such is the case. 



So far as your not publishing my letter is concerned, I 

 will say that I met your Mr. Hammond at the New York 

 show, and while the letter had appeared in the Turf, Field 

 and Farm it had not appeared in your paper. Mr. Hammond 

 spoke to me on the subject and said that it had come too 

 late, but that it was all in type and would appear in the 

 next issue. He seemed to construe the letter in quite a 

 different light from the way I intended it, and he advised 

 me not to have it published. Your Mr. Hammond will, I 

 think, bear me out in this statement. In regard to Mr. 

 Mason, I have often said that he possessed the ability to 

 ably edit a kennel paper; I have always been on friendly 

 terius with him and I have never had any controversy with 

 him of any name or nature, except to answer his attacks on 

 the A. K. C, or to make a few pleasant remarks in a jocular 

 way over his dog Beaufort, or in reply to some of his highly- 

 tinted statements about old Jimmie. C. J. PESHALL. 



OUR BOSTON SHOW REPORT. 



AT the meeting of the American Kennel Club Mr. August 

 Belmont, Jr., took occasion to question the accuracy of i 

 the Forest and Stream's report of the Boston show. The 

 following correspondence explains itself: 



Office of Forest and Stream, 318 Broadway, New 

 York, July 25.— Mr. August Belmont. Jr.. 86 Wall Street, 

 New Yorlt: Dear Sir— At the recent meeting of the A. K. 

 C. I was greatly surprised at your statement that the report 

 of the Boston dog show iu Forest and Stream was un- 

 truthful and misleading. As the writer of that report I 

 request that you will please to state wherein, in your opin- 

 ion, that report contains any justification for your criticism. 

 An early answer will greatly oblige, Yours truly, 



S. T. Hammond, Kennel Editor Forest and Stream. 



New York, July 30.— S. T. Hammond, Esq.: Dear Sir— 

 I have but just returned from a trip West, finding yours of 

 the 25th on my desk. You can call upon me if you desire to 

 learn why I stated at the meeting of the American Kennel 

 Club that the Forest and Stream misrepresented the actual 

 quality of the Boston dog show. If you are responsible for 

 the statement in the report that "the quality in some of the 

 classes was superior to that of any previous show which we 

 have attended, while two or three classes were not quite up 

 to the mark," I will rest my assertion as justified by that 

 alone, if nothing else; as the pointer, collie and fox-terrier 

 classes, the largest, as a rule, of all, were thin in quality 

 and numbers. The entries were padded a great deal, even 

 in these. 



The whole intention of your report was to give the impres- 

 sion to readers that the Boston show was exceptionally good, 

 both by comparison with its own previous shows and those 

 of other prominent clubs; and as this was not the case, I re- 

 peat what I said at the A. K. C. meeting, regretting that I 

 have not the time to afford you a very minute elaboration of 

 my reasons. August Belmont, Jr. 



If Mr. Belmont will read the special reports written by the 

 judges. Miss AnnaH. Whitney, Dr. Wm. Jarvis and Messrs. 

 ( "has. H. Mason, Wm. Dunphy, N. Elmore, Thos. Dawson 

 and Ed. Lever, he wull see that they fully corroborate the esti- 

 mate contained in the sentence to which he makes specific 

 allusion. That estimate was the honest opinion of the ken- 

 nel editor of this journal, who was present at the show, and 

 is recognized as competent to form an opinion. Mr. Bel- 

 mont, we are advised, was not at the show; nor if he had 

 been there would his opinion on any one class be accepted by- 

 anybody as worth a rap. This critic's original statement 

 as to the accuracy of our report and his second statement 

 as to its purpose are alike impertinent and void of truth. 

 —Editor Forest and Stream. 



MR. BELMONT'S CHARGES. 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



In your issue of July 26 appears a letter signed "August 

 Belmont, Jr., President A. K. C," in which the following 

 statement is made: "The incessant plottings which arebeing 

 conducted against the A. K. 0. through the N. D. C. by 

 such parties as Mr. Jas. Watson," etc. For the present I 

 will content myself by requesting the writer of that letter 

 to substantiate' his statement by evidence, for no person, 

 whether he be a "party" or a gentleman, should make such 

 a charge unless he knows whereof he is speaking. 



Jas. Watson. 



NEW ENGLAND FIELD TRIALS.— Editor Forest and 

 Streeim: Why cannot we New Englanders have a field trial 

 here in New England? There are, no doubt, many persons 

 here that cannot afford the time and expense in visiting the 

 Southern trials. I am of the opinion that we might organ- 

 ize a New England Field Trial Club that would benefit those 

 breeders and owners who wish to demonstrate that they have 

 got good field dogs. The writer thinks that the pointer, set- 

 ter, spaniel and beagle breeders and owners might join 

 hands and do themselves proud. Gentlemen, speak up, and 

 name the objections to this move.— A. C. Collins. 



