April 1901.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



249 



will go cautiously, and wade the stream and come out by 

 the edge of the woods and see what he is doing. Then I 

 will pass up by the side of the fence to another pair of 

 bars and take the moss out of the bell and tinkle it. 



Thin plan was carried out to the letter, I knew there 

 would be a stone wall between myself and the bull of at 

 leat 44ft. high by 4ft. broad. So I walked to the edge of 

 the woods and looked out, and there was the bull quietly 

 waiting for t lie strange cow to appear. He was 200yds. 

 from me now, and when I got to tlie upper bars he would 

 be 500. Here I determined to have my fun. The moss 

 was taken from the mouth of the bell and I gave it three 

 or fom- tinkles. That was enough. Again he came as 

 fast as be could, while 1 plugged the mouth of the bell 

 and made off in very good time. That is the last I saw 

 of him. 



The bell experiment is one that I do not care to repeat. 

 It was too successful as a help to stalking partridges and 

 too dangerous to one who has no ambition to engage in a 

 bull fight. Stillaboy. 



MAINE'S NEW LAW. 



'"pHE Maine Legislature has adjourned, and the game 

 jL la ws ha ve been vastly improved in several respects. 

 Deputy sheritls, constables and policemen have been em- 

 powered lo enforce the game and fish laws. Any of the 

 officers or any game warden can arrest without process 

 any person at any time if found breaking or having 

 broken the laws, but he is bound by a heavy penalty to 

 use all diligence in bringing the arrested parties before 

 the nearesc trial justice for examination. All trial 

 justices are also empowered witli juri-idiction of such 

 cases. Tne law agamst hounding i"s made more plain 

 and stringent, and dogs that are known to be in theScatf 

 or kept for the purpose of hunting moose, deer or caribou, 

 may be destrovi^d and the owner fined. Cow moose are 

 protected at all seasons by a fine of |lOO. The having in 

 possession of any game in the legal close season is made 

 a penal offence, but provision dealers, having a place of 

 business in the State, may have on sale at retail during 

 the open season, one moose, two caribou and three deer, 

 which they are pprmitted to retail to their trade. When 

 these animals are used up they may replenish their stock 

 with the same number again. Transportation is forbid- 

 den of moose, deer or caribou in the State, except openly 

 and i)roperly tagged with the owner's name and resi- 

 dence. Transportation of partridges from the State is 

 forbidden at all times. These birds can only be had in 

 possession to be Uhed in the State, and then no person is 

 permitted to have more than thirty at one time. 



The fisb laws have bpen so amended that the spoon 

 hook, for taking trout or landlocked salmon, is not pro- 

 hibited, or at least it is not included in the list of pro- 

 hibited articles, as it was in the old law. The new law 

 gives the proceeds of fines for infractions to the cause of 

 fish and game protection in the State. These fines do not 

 go directly to the wardens or Commissioners, it is true, 

 but the trial jastice who imposes the fine must immedi- 

 ately pay the money over to the county treasurer where 

 the case is tried, and the county treasurer must in turn 

 immediately piss it over to the State treasurer, who must 

 accredit to the fish and game fund, to be u-^ed in enforc- 

 ing the laws. This gives the money virtu illy for the en- 

 forcement of the laws, but removes it from the nature of 

 a bribe direct to the wardens and oflicers. Perhaps this 

 is well, for the reason that there has been a good deal of 

 complaint in the pabt that the zeal of wardens and offi- 

 cers has led them to commit injustices for the sake of a 

 share in the fines, But the incentive of a reward direct 

 is removed. Tiie game and fish wardens are to be ap- 

 pointed by the CJovernor and Council, on the recommen- 

 dation of a majority of the three Commissioners, and 

 they are to hold office for three years, unless sooner re- 

 moved for cause. They have the same power as sherifl;s, 

 so far as the enforcement of the game and fish laws are 

 concerned, and rtceive the same pay. It is also providt d 

 that no person shall use any sort of explosiA^e or poison 

 for the purpose of taking fish, under a penalty of |lOO 

 and two 'months imprisonment in the county jail for 

 each oitense. Special. 



"PA'TRIDGE." 



FRANKFOET, Ky., March 22.— Editor Forest and 

 iStream: A writer in your issue of March 19, from 

 Kirwin, Ktnsas, asks the difference between ruffed grouse 

 and partridge or pa'tj-idge. Your reply, to my mind, 

 "ain't altogether satisfyin';" as Jeems Mackerel would 

 say, alter feedin' on pickerel, "it don't altogether fill the 

 aching void," 



I've hunted partridge since I was old enough to lift a 

 gun on a straight line — and don't know but what even 

 befoi'e that I rt-sted on a stump or rad fence to get a bee 

 line on a squirrel. But the partridges I hunted and the 

 ruffed grouse or partridge you are talking about are not 

 the same thing, by a long jump. In our country— down 

 here in ©Id Kentuck— partridges, except in mating season, 

 go in flocks or coveys from S or 10 to 15 or 20. Some people 

 call them quail— that is, people from other States, and 

 what right have they to name our game birds. Hasn't a 

 man a right to name his own children and his own horses, 

 and why not our wild game? If your mind is bent and 

 fixed on calling a ruflied grouse a partridge, and nothing 

 else, why cair 1 1 call a partridge a partridge, and nothing 

 else? 



Seems to me there is in your reply a scent of boyhood 

 days coming across the clover. That's the way you were 

 born and raised, and that's the way, consequently, you 

 are going to have it. Well, I was born and raised where 

 ruffed arouse were never heard of and where the thing 

 you call p ir fridge were never known — unless it was hiding 

 under the nick-name of "pheasant." May be it was. 



Down here we call a little striped animal that is found 

 in the Michigan Avoods by the thousand — a ground squir- 

 rel. Up there they call him a chipmunk. Dawn here we 

 call a little stream' 6ft, wide a branch or creek — up there 

 they call it a river, Down here we call a pool of water 

 100yds, long a pond — up there they call it a lake. Down 

 here we call a brown-colored, long-billed, uneatable bird 

 that hangs about muddy banks a "shite-poke" — up there 

 they call it a water-hen.' Do%vn here we call a comely, 

 eatable fish with a full optic and golden, hickory or lead 

 color, a salmon — up there they call him a wall-eyed pike. 

 When "Kingfisher" was ruminatin' down in Tennessee a 

 year or two ago he caught a fish known universally down 

 there as a "jack-fish." Sending it to one of your big 

 scientists, he pronounced it a "muscalong." 



^ow, who'9 goin' to give way aad surrendar hi« natural 



born rights? IVe seen partridges by the thousand and 

 killed "era by the hundred— in fact, with the help of 

 another Kingfisher, have killed as many as 20 out of one 

 covey (nary one on the ground) and what's the use saying 

 they weren't partridges? If a ruffed grouse can be a par- 

 tridge, why can't a xiartridge be a partridge? 



I believe" in equality on game matters- equal rights to 

 all and exclusive privileges to none. If a Kansas man 

 calls a certain bird a ruffed grouse and the Foeest and 

 Steeam calls a certain bird a partridge (in the memory of 

 shootin' days) and a Kentuckian calls a certain bird a 

 partridge — who's right and who's going to win the pot? 



It don't make any difference if the birds are not ex- 

 actly alike. What I'm after is, who's got a right to give 

 the name and call them by the name they giv. ? Aren't 

 we all sovereigns— and can a sovereign be hampered on 

 the matter of partridges? From the time I was born till 

 I got to readin' books published somewhere else, I never 

 knew the plump, neat, shy, quick, toothsome bird we 

 found in the stubbiefields, woods and brier thickets as 

 anything else than a partridge. I claim that name as a 

 natural, indefeasible, undyin' right thnt shall last for- 

 ever and ever. If a woman on "Hell-for-Sartain" Creek, 

 in Kentucky, calls her offspring that kicks and yells as 

 she spanks him. a "brat," and an Indiana woman calls 

 her offt^pring "a baby," and a Few York woman calls 

 hers "an infant," aiid a Montana woman calls hers a 

 "pappoose," who'd goin' to hinder 'em or make 'em 

 afraid? Who's goin' to swear they don't know what they 

 are talkin' about? If there's any discrimination at all, it 

 ought to be given to the one who can show he first named 

 the bird and gave it identity, and let him crowd out the 

 balance. If that propo=itiou is accepted I'm goin' to 

 strike for Dm'l Boone, and Simon Kenton and the other 

 buckskin fellows who came from Virginia, until I reach 

 Gporge Washington, and that ought to settle it. If Noah 

 Webster is mixed on the partridge question, as our 

 Kansas friend says, ain't every other man entitled to his 

 free opinion in tliis glorious countiy of ours? 



Why, up in Varmount they call a cow a ke-ow; down 

 in East Tennessee they call a regiment a reegement; over 

 m Indiana they call pies cookies; up in Pennsylvania 

 they call a polecat a skunk; over in Connecticut they 

 call a bar a bruin; and in West Virginia they call silver 

 perch by the name of Campbellites. Then what's to hinder 

 me from stickin' to things as they were and callin' a par- 

 tridge a partridge, or if you want it that way for euphony 

 sake, a pa'tridge? Old Sam (of the Kingfishers.) 



[Reference to a map of the United States hanging on our 

 office veall shows chat Rockingham, N, C, lies southwest 

 from Frankfort, Ky., in a beeline less than the width of 

 this line of type. If "Old Sam" will buy a ticket for 

 Rockingham and there hunt up our correspondent 

 "Wells," he will go back to Kentucky and ever after call 

 his "partridge" a "Bob White."] 



TO HELP OUT THE POT. 



AT a recent dinner of the Boone and Crockett Club Mr. 

 E. P. Rogers, of Hyde Park on the Hudson, exhib- 

 ited a very neat device, of his own invention, by which 

 the big game hunter can without change of rifle shoot 

 birds without making noise enough to disturb large game 

 that may be near at hand. Ail large game hunters 

 know that it of ten happens that days may elapse after 

 starting into the woous or mountains before any fresh 

 meat is killed. It is therefore the practice of some hunt- 

 ers to carry a shotgun or a small rifle for the purpose of 

 killing grouse, which are frtquently met within hunting. 

 It is a bother to carry a shotgun, which is very noisy, 

 and it is a bother too to carry a second rifle. To do away 

 with the need of a second gun Mr. Rogers invented the 

 attachment which is figured below. 



It consists of a solid steel shell with a chamber in the 

 butt large enough lo hold a .22cal. shell and a rifled bore, 

 very short it is true, yet long enough to cfirry the .v!2cal. 

 ball with reasonable accuracy for a distance of 10 or 

 15yds. 



Mr. Rogers has used this apparatus with great satisfac- 

 tion and success, though of curse the range of the little 

 ball is comp.iratively short. This is not important, how- 

 ever, when we consider that in a wild country birds, 

 whether they are ruffed, blue or Canada grouse, are ex- 

 tremely gentle. 



With regard to the device Mr. Rogers writes us as 

 follows: 



When hunting in the Rockies and Canada, it has been 

 a source of considerable bother to have to lug along an 

 extra outfit for feathered game, generally a 22cal. rifle, 

 and while moose hunting one fall, when there were lots 

 of partridges about, it occurred to me that a reducer could 

 be made that would obviate the above difficulty. The 

 accompanying sketch of a grouse illustrates its success 

 and its exe<;ution. The reducer shown herewith is for my 

 .45-85 rifle. It is 2fin, long and weighs l|oz. It dis- 

 charges a .22 central fire cartridge. Icari-y 4 to 6 of these 

 steel shells loaded in my belt with the larger rifle shells, 

 and before the last one is fired my Indian can have the 

 discharged ones reloaded and ready again. I have fired 

 over 100 shots from one reducer. I should never think of 



going after big game without a supply of these iiseful 

 ttle fellows to "help along the pot." 



SIX YEARS UNDER MAINE GAME LAWS. 



IV.— ON THE WASTE OF GAME BY SPORTSMEN, 



Editor Forest and Stream: 



I think that in my last paper I brought forward evi- 

 dence enough to show that sj^ortsmen from outside the 

 State have been influential, if not mainly efficient, in 

 bringing into the code of Maine game laws many of their 

 present features. I asserted that, though equally respon- 

 sible with us for the proposition and framing of these 

 laws, sportsmen as a class had brought discredit upon 

 themselves by inexcusable violations of the laws, involv- 

 ing the waste of large quantities of game and that, more- 

 over, though this was known, they had not been held to 

 account for their deeds in the same way as residents of 

 the State— two circumstances which have aroused bitter 

 feelings against sportsmen, the first because it is a direct 

 aft'ront to our ideas of economy, the latter because of its 

 unfairness. 



That laws have been proposed and partly carried 



through by outsiders no one will have the temerity to 

 deny in the face of the facts that might be furnished, but 

 it may be claimed that I have not proved either the waste 

 of game by sportsmen or the partiality in the execution 

 of the law. For the latter, since the Commissioner's 

 silence may be taken as presumptive proof of the asser- 

 tion, it is enough to ask if any one ever knew a sports- 

 man, visiting in the summer or fall the section of which 

 I write, to be arrested on evidence that the warden gained 

 personally in the woods without the aid of an informant, 

 excepting only that case at Gassobeeis where the three 

 wardens arrested, by mistake, on a warrant sworn for 

 "■Jonathan Darling and others," three spnrtsnipn who 

 gave their names as Doe, Roe and Poe, supposing that 

 they were capturing Darling also, who proved not to 

 have been of the party at all. Rarely wardens have gone 

 into the woods iu the fall to make seizures of hides, and a 

 few times to Nicatowis to watch for Darling; but none 

 have been stationed at important points to patrol the 

 game country and pi event the illegal destruction of 

 game. Prevention never has been sought, but only the 

 occasional capture of an offender after the harm was 

 done. 



On the former of the two points— that sportsmen kill 

 large quantities of game illegally — I can satisfy even 

 the sportsmen themselves. They will hardly challenge 

 the statement that nearly all the game that is wasted is 

 killed by non-residents — in summer, sportsmen; in winter, 

 Canadians. But betore taking up this point, a word may 

 be necessary to e^iplain why residents of the State seem 

 to put less stress on the illegality of breaking game laws 

 than on the wickedness of wasting game. 



In our eyes, however good it may be, a game law is not 

 founded on moral distinctions; to break it is a misde- 

 meanor, but not a crime nor a felony, and no wrong is at- 

 tached to the violation when it is done to supply neces- 

 sities. At the most, it is a transgression of a standard put 

 up arbitrarily, whose violation involves no moral wrong 

 doing, except the technical one of acting differently from 

 the tacit agreement made at the time of its enaction. That 

 this is a wrong is not to be denied; but here comes in one 

 of the bad t fleets of having laws of doubtful origin. 

 With the increase of the conviction that our laws have 

 been tampered with by those outside the State, has spread 

 the denial of the moral authority of those laws, until at 

 present it is frequently asserted that it is not wrong to 

 break a law which was not made by one's representatives. 

 That the laws are good, in the main, does not materially 

 alter the public opinion on this point. The present situa- 

 tion is sometimes compared to that in Boston just before 

 the Revolution, and it has been notunwittily said that the 

 cau-e of the discontent is the same as then, taxation 

 icithout representation. Be that as it m:iy, there is very 

 little compunction felt here about breaking a game law 

 whtn any one wishes to do it — sportsmen and residents 

 are at or e in this. But the residents are restrained in one 

 way which does not seem to aftect visitors. The people 

 of Maine consider it a sin to waste food. They might break 

 the law with untroubled consciences; but they could not 

 persuade themselves that there is any excuse for 

 wasting what they got, even if they obtained it 

 legally. Sportsmen" evidently do not feel so, and here 

 arii-es a difficulty. To illustrate: We can understand 

 perfectly the temptation to a sportsman who sees 

 a cow moose splashing through the lily pads a 

 few rods away — how the destructive instinct of 

 curiosity, as in a child, almost foices him to shoot 

 unless there is a wholesome certainty of detection and 

 punishment— 1 hat is the temptation to an illegal act. 

 But how a man can shoot at a moose when he knows he 

 can use but oOibs. of the meat and that he must leave 

 several hundred pounds equally good to spoil, is beyond 

 even cur imagination; that is a positive sin, and if the 

 man is a man he will not do it. We never forgive those 

 who have done it. We never quite trust them afterward. 

 The man who has not sufficient self-control to hold him- 

 self from taking life unnecessarily, lacks the poise which 

 makes a man well-balanced and trustworthy, and by a 

 subtle undercurrent of thought is set down as lacking 

 courage al-o. He is a "sport" (the word is abominable, 

 but it supplies a lack and tells the kind of man meant 

 and the feeling entertained towartl him). 



The mistake that seems to have been made by many 

 visitors is that they have paid for the game and are at 

 liberty to get as much as they can— as if it were a lottery, 

 the amount of the prize not depending on the value of 

 the ticket but the luck of the drawer. We claim, and we 

 certainly are right, that they have paid nothing at all for 

 the privileges they enjoy, and have no right to any more 

 of the game and fish than they can use or legally carry 

 away. They have paid the raihoads a certain sum — for 

 transportation; they have paid the hotels — for board, 

 which they must have paid at their homes if not here; 

 they have paid the guides— but it was for transportation 

 and personal services. If they had been capable and 

 willing to undergo the hardships, they might have walked 

 hither carrying their ovvn packs and eating wayside ber- 

 ries, with theoretically no expense to themselves. Would 

 they have been paying for the game then? Not one cent 

 has any one paid for the right to fish and hunt; it is a gift 

 from the people of Maine, We say that the sportsman 

 has no more right to kill game on account of what he 

 pays out while he is here, than he has to shoot farmers' 

 sheep and cows when he is on a railroad train on the score 

 that he has paid for his ticket and meals. Whoever owns 

 the game, the man who lives outside the State certainly 

 dQ9s not; but he is given the same rights which tho prob- 



