432 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



[June 19, 1890. 



shot should be all on the sweep of the gun as it follows 

 the bird. I don't know why this is, but I know if you 

 shoot my way you can't tell but what you have killed 

 your bird by crooking your finger. I must say that I 

 have at one time tried that holding-ahead business, and 

 as I wasn't killing any ducks I quit it and began to hold 

 close to my bird, and now I get them. On very long 

 shots, as I said, I go a little ahead, but never so much as 

 the "authorities" say is right. I do not shoot a very 

 coarse or slow powder. 



In another thing I suppose I am old-fashioned also, and 

 that is in the way I load my shells. It is the fashion 

 now to put very heavy wadding on the powder, and some 

 shooters seem to wish their shells were longer, so they 

 could put in more wads. My regular load for ducks, 

 for a ten-gauge (I shot a Daly, then a Greener, and now 

 one of old uncle Tommy Hasdale's guns) was always 

 4Jdrs. of FFG. American Deadshot in a brass shell, 

 with just one pink-edge wad, and that always an Ely 

 pink and not an American wad. On top of this I use 

 just loz. of shot, either No. 5s or No. 7s. I never 

 shot No. 6s very much, because there isn't much dif- 

 ference between them and the 5s on the one hand, or 

 the 7s on the other. No. 7 is a very good duck shot, and 

 plenty heavy enough, especially for teal. The larger 

 and wilder ducks need the 5s. 



On top of my shot I always used an Ely black-edge 

 wad. I never use a cardboard wad in my shells at all, 

 and I never shoot an American wad at all. They fly to 

 pieces too easy — unless you should take the extra heavy 

 felt wads they are making now. You will notice how 

 much harder and firmer the Ely wads are. You can't 

 blow them to pieces. I used wads two sizes larger than 



the shell, and shot brass shells. You hardly see a shell 

 now not loaded with a card wad on the shot, but I never 

 load mine so. I want my shot held tight till they get out 

 of the barrel, and the tighter the better. I never shoot 

 but an ounce of shot at ducks, and if I can't kill a bird 

 without using an ounce and a quarter, I don't want it. I 

 do not claim to know all about shooting, or all about 

 loading, but that was the way I loaded my brass shells in 

 the old duck-shooting days. In the late match at live- 

 pigeons between Chicago and Kansas City, I won the 

 prize offered for the highest individual score, 47 out of 

 50, but then I shot paper shells, heavier wadding and 

 l^oz. of shot. If my theory of holding is wrong, I must 

 have been favored very steadily with good luck. I have 

 not been shooting very long at the trap, and I do not 

 claim to be very much of a pigeon shot. 



I am sometimes asked how far a shotgun will kill a 

 duck, or how far I usually kill the ducks that I shoot. I 

 hear a great deal about shotguns killing 50, 80 or 100yds. 

 The gentlemen owning these guns are very fortunate. I 

 am free to confess that mine is no such gun. The dis- 

 tances at which game is shot are usually over-estimated. 

 It should be borne in mind that a duck rarely falls 

 straight down, and where he falls may be quite a way 

 from where he is shot. Now, the outer edge of your 

 flock of decoys is only about 30yds. from your blind, and 

 you shoot most of your ducks clear inside of that line. I 

 mostly prefer to shoot at a duck when he is about 25yds. 

 off, and then I mostly get him, and don't just scratch 

 him down; but really, taking duck shooting as it actually 

 runs on the marsh, there are a great many more ducks 

 killed at 25 and 30yds. than are at any greater distance. 

 It is quite a way 30yds. up in the air. There are not 



many trees that tall, and when you are getting ducks 

 from over tbe treetops you usually think you are doing 

 pretty well. I will say that where one duck is killed at 

 50yds. ten ducks are killed inside of 40yds. The dis- 

 tances are not measured, and so are not always known. 



I suppose a great many shooters would think that I 

 always got out early in the morning, if I made any very 

 good bags. To the contrary. I never was a very" early 

 riser when hunting, and I do not believe in either bef ore- 

 breakfast or before-daylight shooting. It is that kind of 

 business, shooting all night, and away before daybreak 

 in the morning, that has done much to drive away our 

 water fowl. The birds have got to have some time to 

 feed, and if they are disturbed all the time, morning and 

 evening, they can't feed and they will leave. I never 

 shot late in the evening as a practice, and never very 

 early in the morning, and I think I really got more birds 

 by it, because I did not drive them out of the country. 

 Seven o'clock in the morning was about as early as I got 

 out usuolly. Some of the clubs here have rules forbid- 

 ding shooting after sundown. That is all right, too. 



I have seen some wonderful shooting in my time, and 

 the like of it we will none of us ever see again. We may 

 console ourselves that the flight has gone further west, 

 and all that, but the fact is, there is not one duck now to 

 where there were one hundred when I was younger and 

 was shooting around these lakes. There will always be 

 some birds on the Mississippi if the water is high, but the 

 duck supply in our old spots in this inland country will 

 remain small or uncertain unless such papers as Foeest 

 and Stream can devise some way to increase them. I 

 have killed a good many ducks in my life. I wish I 

 could bring some of them back to life again. 



SHOT COUNT AND WEIGHT. 



No. 10 Shot. 





CHARGE 



No. 1. 



Charge 

 No. 2. 



Charge 

 No. a 



Charge 

 Nc.4. 



Charge 

 No. 5. 



Charge 

 No. 6. 



Charge 

 No. 7. 



Charge 

 No. 8. 



Charge 

 No. 9. 



Charge 

 No. 10. 



AVERAGE. 



Three Charges 

 100 pellets each. 













































j 



















eight 

 •ains. 



a! 



eight 

 'ains. 







c S 



eight 

 ains. 



ount 

 llets. 



eight 

 ains. 



k 



eight 

 ains. 



u 



eight 

 ains. 





,5 

 ■2: c 

 'E 5 



11 



u - 



)unt 

 lets. 



■w . 



Z2 



11 



Weight 

 grains. 



II 



Weight 

 grains. 



+-> 



s 

 g 









i> w 







51 



t? 5 



0 p. 





°S 





OS 







is M 



os 



i£3 



0 s 



£ 5. 



os 



& M 



os 





C Mi 





AMEK1CAN CHILLED. 























































Leroy Shot Company 



New York. 



i 

 I 



920 



m 



934 



592 



932 





954 



597 



930 



505 



947 



m 



942 



590 



92 7 



597 



943 



597 



933 



690 



936 



593 



65 





64 



64 



Oohvell Lead Company.. 

 New York. 



I 

 1 



i o;28 



581 



102 3 



680 



1052 





1 03 « 



581 



1033 



588 



1053 



596 



1043 



593 



1053 



§96 



1041 



590 



1039 



588 



1040 



589 



57 



57 



57 



57 



Jas. Robertson & Co 



Baltimore. Md. 



1 



1103 



592 



1105 



m 



1103 



5!10 



1094 



592 



1089 



589 



1090 



6% 



1 086 



580 



1083 



579 



1113 



595 



1060 



572 



1092 



587 



54*4 



54 



54}$ 



54*6 



Bailey. Farreli & Co. ... 

 Pittsburgh, Pa. 



1 



n 72 



552 



1148 



567 



1150 



567 



1131 



560 



1111 



548 



1140 



570 



1109 



552 



1 103 



547 



1136 



551 



1166 



563 



1136 



558 



m 



48 



49^ 



48^ 



Cnieago, I1J. 



t 



1 



1185 



597 



11 S3 



600 



1207 



mi 



1170 



591 



1196 



602 



1184 



595 



1195 



60! 



1213 



608 



1338 



615 



1208 



605 



1197 



002 



m 



50 



50 



50 



New York. 



I 



1. 



i %m 



550 



1198 



581 



1190 



577 



1198 



579 



1186 



576 



J 193 



578 



1210 



583 



1213 



585 



1190 



581 



1238 



690 



1202 



578 



48 



48^ 



49^ 



483^ 



Collier Shot Tower Co. . . 

 St. Louis. Mo. 



i 



1209 



607 



1197 



606 



11 SI 



598 



1214 



616 



1328 



619 



1212 



615 



1 206 



010 



1208 



fill 



1301 



606 



1314 



615 



120*? 



(510 



52 



51 



51 



51 



Merchant Shot Tower Co } 

 Baltimore. Md. ( 





H02 



12 SO 



600 



1212 



602 



1338 



QQ9 



1245 





133 7 



605 



1238 



596 



1350 



602 



1223 



604 



1124 



607 



1227 



603 



47 





45 



48 



St. Louis Shot Tower Co. J 

 St. Louis, Mo. ' 



121 7 



582 



12 12 



580 



1230 



587 



1203 



577 



1262 



600 



1334 



591 



1357 



595 



1337 



595 



1340 



590 



13O0 



604 



1240 



590 



47 



m 



« 



47^ 



Thos. W. Sparks 



Philadelphia. Pa. 



j 



1232 



592 



1 24 1 



598 



1327 



587 



1328 



589 



123 7 



595 



1353 



601 



1337 



589 



1341 



590 



1346 



590 



1361 



604 



1240 



593 



47^ 





49 



48 



Cincinnati Shot Works. 

 Cincinnati, O. 



! 



1 201 



570 



125 7 



568 



1251 



562 



1 199 



565 



1234 



561 



1369 



572 



1353 



561 



12 78 



676 



1 353 



565 



1373 



573 



1253 



567 



m 





44K> 



45 



Selhy Lead Company 

 San Francisco, Cal. 



1 

 / 



i 365 



585 



1250 



584 



1251 



588 



1350 



581 



1358 



584 



1358 



£86 



1353 



583 



1359 



587 



1243 



583 



1 368 



588 



1256 



5K5 



46 



m 



m 



47 



Chicago Shot Tower Co.. 

 Chicago, 111. 



I 

 1 



1 318 



594 



1 342 



501 



1329 



588 



1332 



593 



1322 



587 



1313 



585 



1306 



585 



1 331 



590 



1331 



587 



1 335 



688 



1329 



588 



44 





44 



44 







































Avfirawes . . . 



1183 



588 









50 



AMERICAN SOFT. 



















































North Western Shot Co. 

 Omaha, Neb. 



j 

 1 



10 71 



till) 



1003 



1114 



1063 



609 



1948 



598 



1075 



620 



1046 



604 



1072 



t;ir; 



1054 



608 



1 059 



607 



1057 



605 



1060 



619 



59 



m& 



58 



58 



ENGLISH CHILLED. 





973 



595 



979 



593 



967 



587 



951 



582 



956 





973 





964 





902 





953 





967 





964 













England. 



i 













583 





586 





588 





587 





583 





585 



586 



62^ 



61HS 



62 



62 



Abbey Shot 



England. 



J 

 1 



737 



55:5 



739 



578 



735 



373 



743 



582 



731 



576 



736 



531 



737 



580 



731 



577 



738 



575 



734 



569 



732 



5 76 



79 



78^ 



79 



79 



SHOT COUNT AND WEIGHT, 



IN a case in the office of Forest and Stream is a series 

 of bottles. They are filled with shot, and it is about 

 them that we propose to have a talk with our readers. 

 Some months ago a series of heavy little boxes were pre- 

 pared. They were stoutly made to stand hard travel. 

 They were felt-lined to care for the delicate glass vials 

 placed in them. Each box had fifty of these little bottles, 

 arranged in five rows of ten bottles each, and in the end 

 was placed a standard measure of the American Shoot- 

 ing Association marked l^oz. One row of bottles was 

 marked 10, the next row 9, next 8, next 7 and the last 

 No. 6. These boxes were sent out to every prominent 

 American shot company, and as each company got its 

 box, there went also a note from the office of Forest and 

 Stream asking that the shot company take from a recent 

 dropping of chilled shot a series of charges of the num- 

 bers of shot named and that, using the measure sent, one 

 charge of lioz. be placed in each bottle. There was no 

 explanation of the why and. wherefore of the request, but 

 in each case the boxes came promptly back, shot-laden, 

 and in each case, too, a courteous note offering the shot 

 and expressing a readiness to do anything else to assist 

 the leading sportsman's paper in any measure it might 

 have on foot. 



Away to England went a commission for samples of 

 shot from the two most prominent makers of shot in the 

 United Kingdom. The shot came in small bags, "origi- 

 nal packages," from the manufacturing companies, and 

 the measuring out of the charges was done in this office. 



Each charge was accurately weighed on the delicate 

 balances used in our laboratory in all gun test and other 

 trials. Each charge, too, was counted, pellet by pellet, 

 with no small assistance from an infallible but simple 



apparatus, specially devised to lighten the task of counting 

 out nearly a thousand charges of shot. This brought out 

 in a strong comparative table the variations of the dif- 

 ferent makers, but in order to bring the comparison down 

 to a strict mathematical basis, 100 pellets were counted 

 out promiscuously from each lot and a careful weight 

 taken of them. This was repeated three times to gain 

 the advantage of a fair average. 



The contributing companies are shown in the first 

 column of the very interesting tabular statement con- 

 cerning No. 10 shot. In each instance chilled shot was 

 asked for and regular numbers, avoiding those mislead- 

 ing half sizes which have been introduced to meet the 

 demand of trap-shooters. There was no short cut taken 

 by reaching an average on one charge. Each one of the 

 ten charges called for is given in the first part of the 

 table by count of pellets, and in weight by grains, and 

 then the full-face type tells the company's average both 

 in weight and count. 



In the case of the Northwestern Shot Co. answer came 

 that the works did not turn out chilled shot, and soft 

 shot was taken in its stead. It has not been placed in 

 conjunction with the other class of shot in making up 

 the averages, nor has the English shot been thrown in 

 with the American product, but placed separate, show- 

 ing at once the sharp variation which exists on either 

 side the ocean, and also incidentally how English sports- 

 men get along with a scale of shot sizes which is any- 

 thing but uniform. 



In fixing the order of the companies the one showing 

 the lowest average count has been placed at the head of 

 our own companies. The LeRoy Co. puts but 936 pellets 

 in the measure, while the Chicago Shot Tower Co. gets 

 no less than 1,329 in the same ljoz. receptacle. In a 

 match then where the size and measure of the shot were 



specified, the man using the LeRoy shot of this number 

 would handicap himself nearly 40 per cent, as against an 

 antagonist using the Chicago-made shot so far as the 

 shower of shot pellets was concerned. Yet it will be seen 

 that so far as weight of charge was to be regarded, the 

 lesser number of pellets run hea vier. In average weight it 

 will be noticed that tbe charge runs from OlOgrs. down to 

 566, nor does the smaller weight go with a smaller count, 

 but just the reverse. In fact the whole subject is full of 

 seeming contradictions, and did we not know that every 

 figure shown is the result of counting or weighing, we 

 should be inclined to doubt their showing. 



On the whole the charges run very even from each 

 company, yet show variation of 33 to 87 pellets between 

 the different ones of the ten charges sent and counted. 

 There is so much in handling the measure, in the way of 

 getting more or less into it, that the close count shows 

 good measuring experts in each case. 



The variation between the two English samples is 

 something very great. The Newcastle shot passes that 

 made under the Abbey patent by nearly 32 percent., 

 while the variation between the lowest English average 

 and the highest American is nearly 1 00 per cent. 



Taking the table in its entirety it is worthy of a good 

 deal of study, and those who follow the use of "a shotgun, 

 with close regard for its possibilities as a scientific weapon 

 of precision, will find in the table points which may ex- 

 plain some of the apparent contradictions so often met 

 with shot when taken merely by measure and num- 

 ber without knowing that whether a number means 

 much or little depends on the name of the maker. With 

 the results of the work done by Forest and Stream it is 

 easy to see why it is necessary to make count and take 

 weight of your charges if you care to know just what you 

 are using, and understand your results intelligently. 



