AnttL 30, 1891.] 



FOREST AND STREAM. 



289 



of a 20-bore. and at the same time that BOin, are beat for 

 a 12- bore. The latter is usually loaded with only | of a 

 dram more powder than the former. The inteiior 

 capacity of a 30m. 12-bnre barrel isnearly 12^ cubic inches, 

 and that of a 28in. 20 bore is very slightly more than 8 

 cubic icichcs. If 8 be sufficient for burning 2^ or 2i drams 

 of powder, surely 12 are not required for burning f of a 

 dram more. 



Some of our best gun makers and practical sportsmen 

 assiert that they get as hard hitting with barrels of S6iw. 

 or shorter a?) with those of 30in. Other makers and 

 sportsmen, probably quite as reliable, state that even 

 SOin. barrels 'Jo not give so much penetration as larger 

 ones. DDugali, the London maker, says in his book 

 "Shooting Simplified," that he once made some guns of 

 36 bore with barrels 36 to 40In, long for an Arctic traveler 

 to take as presents to the JCsquimaux, and that these were 

 afterward found to bill wild geese at ranges far beyond 

 the reach oi" ordinary sized guns. 



One of your correspundents who signed his name 

 "Cyrtonix," wrote three letters to Foeest and Stream 

 about small-bore guti?, and said that lie found a 16-bore 

 with 'ijdrs, of powder gave more penetration than a 

 lO-bore with odrs, If he used a, reliable test for the pene- 

 tration, the extra power of the lt> must haye been due to 

 the length of barrels— 34in. 



Mr. G. T. Farmer, who wrote two extremely interest- 

 ing articles in Fokest and Stiieam last July, about the 

 Hudson's Bay teriitory. mi^ht be able to enlighten us as 

 to the kiiUng powers of tiie guns supplied by the com- 

 pany for their Indian trappers. Tiie-e were when I lived 

 in Canada in 1864, of 26-gauge, and had barrels from 36 

 to 40in. long'. 



One point, which certainly oiight to be settled, is 

 whether the recess choke or the muzzle choke is to be 

 preferred. I have several times been surprised at writers 

 in Forest akd Stkeam complaining that chokebores do 

 not carry large shot, and especially buckshot, as well as 

 cylinders. Three of my own guns, two 16 and one 12- 

 bore, choked on the recess system, have been remarkably 

 good with large sliot, but the behavior of the Maynard 

 28-bore, and the left barrel of the 12 bore used in my last 

 experiments, make me think that perhaps the complaints 

 are not unfoitnded as applied to muzzle chokes. The 28 

 scatters all large shot badly. The left barrel of the 12- 

 bore makes very close and regular patterns with Nos. 8, 

 6 and 4 shot. It throws No. 3 in patches, and with such 

 sizes as BB or A shot it is absolutely useless. With a 

 moderate cylinder, on the other hand , both the 16-bores 

 are splendid performers with buckshot, whether due to 

 their being recess-choked, or to some peculiarity of their 

 boring, I am itnable to say. 



The weight of the 12-bore, 61b. 9oz., will be thought 

 ridiculous in A merica, but with the ordinary charge of 

 3drs. of powder and l^oz. shot it is not unpleasant at a 

 target, and when frring at any game the recoil is abso- 

 lutelv unfelt. Perhaps this is due to there being plenty 

 of metal in the breech and to t he barrels' being about the 

 weight of those in 71b. guns, viz., 31bs. S^^oz, 



Here in England we think that our brother sportsmen 

 in America sadly overload themselves with iron. When 

 a man shoots only for health and recreation he surely 

 ought not to have a heavier wea.pon than he can carry 

 and handle with pleasure at the end of a fatiguing day's 

 tramij. Of twelve shotguns which I have ovvned during 

 the last 30 years none ever gave me greater enjoyment 

 than a cylinder 16 bore of only ejlbs. weight. I used it 

 for years at everything, including ducks, and only gave 

 it up when taking io breechloaders. For all immd pur- 

 poses, including duck shootina:, I prefer a 12-bore of 71bs., 

 and would not buy one exceeding Tjlbs. at any price, for 

 a gun of that weight will cai-ry the largest charges that 

 the shells will hold without uncomfortable recoil. 



J. J. JVlE^KICK. 



Devonshihe, England. 



SIX YEARS UNDER MAINE GAME LAWS. 



v.— VARIOUS MINCE MATTERS. 



THE last paper was on an unpleasant topic and needs 

 the relief of the brighter side to prevent misunder- 

 standing, for some will say : Are there no good sports- 

 men then? And those who have come here and left a 

 record of honorable acta will ask in discouragement. Has 

 all that we have done counted for nothing? 



Far from it! to both. There are such honorable sports- 

 men — to them these papers are addres8ed._ They have 

 done well and it is remembered for them. We look for 

 some of them every year, and are glad to see that they 

 have returned; when finally they shall cease to come, 

 among those who regret their loss most deeply will be 

 some at this end of their accustomed haunts. A man is 

 prized here for what he is, and is judged by what he does; 

 nor need the one who has lived honorably and spoken 

 truly ever fear the judgments of Maine backwoodsmen, 

 or an uncordial welcome to Maine. 



I have a cnriou,? matter to present, which I can in no 

 way explain without taking into account the influence 

 of such men as these. In the four counties of which I 

 speak there is one that in some ways is so different from 

 the others that at first it would seem it ought not to be 

 counted with them. In area it is one of the largest in 

 the State; in population the smallest of all. More sports- 

 men go there than to all the other three; and in proj^or- 

 tion to its area more such enormities as were described 

 in the last article are committed than in any of the other 

 counties. And yet the residents of Piscataquis county 

 do not, so far as" I have been able to learn, either feel or 

 speak upon game matters in the same way as those of 

 the other eastern counties. I have not so far found that 

 they were greatly disturbed by the present unhappy 

 state of affairs. At first it would seem that this county 

 ought to be classed with the western part of the State; 

 but in aU its interests it belongs to Penobscot waters, 

 and so a different explanation must be sought. 

 What? In the first pla.ce some of the grievances 

 of the eastern pai't of the State have scarcely 

 touched this county: but even so, why should it not 

 sympathize? In the supposition by which I have been 

 able to explain the matter I may be wholly or partly 

 wi'ong, but it is the only one by which I can account for 

 a noticeable difference. I think that the character of the 

 summer visitors who go there largely explains it, That 

 county includes Moosehead Lake, Katahdin Iron Works 

 and many other resorts more or less known. It is visited 

 by people who go for recreatiou, for fishing and for hunt- 



ing. Now, of those who go for the two former purposes, 

 a very large part stay at hotels or near enough the settle- 

 ments for the residents to know them piersonally or to 

 know of them, and a better class of visitors than most of 

 these could not be desired. The people there form their 

 opinion from these. Of those who go to hunt most pass 

 beyond the settlements into the deep woods, and they are 

 the ones whose misdeeds are so widely reported, The 

 eastern counties hear of these principally — much less of 

 those who stay on the borders of civilization. But Pisca- 

 taquiB people know the latter also, and while no less 

 severe in condemnation of such waste and slaughter as I 

 have reported, do not blame the whole class of summer 

 visitors, but the individuals who are responsible. In this 

 way the presence of these well-disposed, honorable men 

 coming to stay for a time and not merely to pass through 

 the country, seems to me to account in part at least for 

 this manifest difference in feeling, and so to be its own 

 reward. Lest a mistake should occur, I will say that by 

 "sportsman" as I have used it, and as it is used in this 

 locality, I mean those with whom hunting is the princi- 

 pal object — not fishermen nor tourists, but those who wish 

 to kill large game. In using it I do not intend to include 

 any other class of summer visitors. Of those who come 

 for this purpose, observation and consultation convince 

 me that the majority come and go in close time and kill 

 what they get illegally : but there are certain honorablf^ 

 exceptions of whom it would be a pleasure to speak if 

 space permitted, but who surely are no more condemned 

 with the majority t'aan are these others of whom we have 

 spoken above by the p»eople of Piscataquis county. 



Lest there sliotdd be a misunderstanding on another 

 point, I wish to state again that in what I have said so 

 far I have tried to represent other people's views rather 

 than my own, and to give their reasons for these opinions 

 instead of tho.se which I might hold personally. For 

 my own opinions on most of these matters I conceive to 

 be of little value. That I sympathize fully with the peo- 

 ple who say these things is most true, but does not make 

 it necessary for me to believe all these charges correct, 

 even thotigh they may not be baseless. I do not believe 

 that our Legislature is wholly corrupt, nor that the game 

 laws have been unfair, nor that all visitors are lawless 

 and all residents are saints — nor, it may be added, that 

 the people here all think so. What we all hold is that 

 grave wrongs have been done — and T will show some of 

 them in the forthcoming papers — which have greatly dis- 

 turbed a very large number of people, which ha-ve caused 

 loss of property and loss of life, which still endanger 

 both and are fully sufficient to account for all the com- 

 plaints that have been made and for others yet more radi- 

 cal. I might claim even more and be fully able to sustain 

 it, but this is enough. In the papers which have preceded 

 I have tried to represent the' state of public feeling at 

 present, thus preparing by anticipation for those which 

 follow which will tell the causes and deal with facts 

 instead of with theories. 



If it should be asked after this part, Where is the good 

 sportsman? it will certainly be asked after the second, 

 Where is the good warden? He is not very abimdant 

 here, but in this immediate vicinity we have one man 

 who deserves sjjecial mention. Mr. Eben Gr. Morse, of 

 Eddington, is a wai-den whose justice, faithfulness and 

 honesty are believed in by the people here, I have never 

 but once heard him accused of doing anything which was 

 not honorable, and that he did not do, although there was 

 reason for the suspicion. I may make this personal men- 

 tion here, for it is he who has suggested that I should ex- 

 plain more fully some points regarding my article pub- 

 lished on April 2, mainly those relating to the holding of 

 game animals alive. This I am the more happy to do, as 

 it may not only bring: out some facts clearly, but will 

 illustrate an interpretation of the game law which caused 

 trouble three years since. 



Mr. Morse writes: "The law making it subject to fine 

 for hunting and keeping alive is of recent date, and was 

 not in eifect nor passed at the time that the deer kept at 

 the Bangor House were caught; and Mr. Bealor any other 

 person, rich or poor, had a lawful riaht to catch and keep 

 such animals. But later on, and before Davis caught the 

 caribou, the law was amended so as to prohibit the hunt- 

 ing in close time." Mr. Morse thinks that insufficient in- 

 formation was given on these cases, which was indeed 

 necessary at that time on account of lack of space. 



Regarding the Bangor House deer, I may quote the fol- 

 lowing letter from their owner: 



"To the best of my. memory I bought my first deer in 

 the spring of '8iJ, buying two at that time. The next 

 winter I bought another, and then raised several. In the 

 spring of '84 I bought an albino buck, the other btick 

 having escaped. I had them every year until I sold 

 them in the fall of '88. My impression is that those 

 which I bought were in captivity but a short time. 

 Trusting that this is the information which you desire, I 

 remain, very respectfully, F. O. Beal." 



The point of my reference to these deer was that they 

 were allowed to be kept in Bangor at a time when 

 other people were required to release deer and other 

 animals which they had captured, and that this gave 

 rise to the complaint that one man was favored more 

 than another. The complaint was made. I did not 

 seek to discuss its justice though I tacitly admitted it; 

 nor did I try to give the whole facts. These, as the letter 

 shows, were that one deer was undoubtedly legally held , 

 having been taken before 1883; and that the white one 

 was not legally held as the law wa,8 afterward interpreted, 

 though supposed by the owner to be so; that neither was 

 disposed of until after other people had been forced to 

 liberate animals, and that then they were not set free 

 but sold. The facts have borne out the statement which 

 I made. It would be interesting to trace their history 

 from this date. 



But respectmg the change in the law to which Mr. 

 Morse refers. There was no change in the law from 1883 

 to 1891, but there was a change in the interpretation 

 which is what Mr. Morse means. This occurred in 18»8 

 or a little earlier, but was not legally established until 

 1889. Until last month there was no explicit law against 

 holding live game taken in close season, and it very 

 rarely can be taken when there is no snow on the ground. 

 Since our game laws were first originated in 1830 there 

 have been but two passages which could apply to such a 

 case. 



Sec. 11, passed in 1878, reads: ."Whoever has in his 

 possession the carcase or hide of any such animal, or any 

 part thereof, between the first days of January and 

 October, sball be deemed to l^ave hunted and destroyed 



the same contrary to law," etc. Sec. 9 on moose and 10 

 on deer and caribou (both passed in 1883) say; "And no 

 person shall, between the first days of January and 

 October, in any manner hunt, kill or destroy," etc. The 

 two are not mutually inclusive. On the one hand it is 

 forbidden to kill large game at a certain season, and also 

 to hunt it. On the other it is forbidden to have in pos- 

 session dead game taken at that time, but nothing is said 

 about live game captured then. If it is legal to have the 

 game alive in close time, why is it illegal to hunt it then 

 for the purpose of keeping it alive? If it is illegal to 

 himt it for this ptirpose, why is it legal to have the game 

 so taken? It is evident that all depends on the definition 

 of hunting if we are to construe the law in the strictest 

 way. 



But at first it was not so interpreted. For nearly five 

 years it was admitted that any one could capture and 

 keep live animals taken in close season. Hence the keep- 

 ing of the albino deer at the Bangor House. In 1888, or 

 a little earlier, the opposite interpretation was unexpect- 

 edly put upon the law, and it was declared illegal to keep 

 any game animal taken in close time. Did this refer 

 merely to those taken after this decree, or after 1883, or 

 after the decision of the court in 1889? It would be hard 

 to say: btit there are a number of instances of animals 

 being let loose before the law court gave its decision on 

 the James vs. Wood case. 



The grounds of this change in interpretation are inter- 

 esting. There was no possible reason except what coitld be 

 educed from theoneword "hunting." The one who held 

 a game animal taken in close season could be prosecuted 

 for hunting it, but not for having it. As Mr, Morse says: 

 "The having it in possession was not taken into account, 

 only to prove the hunting. I admit that the law did not 

 prohibit having live deer, moose or caribou, if tsMen in 

 open time or if obtained in aiiy way without hunting it 

 in close time." This sudden change in the meaning of 

 the law caused some trouble. The Davis case occurred 

 about this time, and in the western part of the State 

 there was a famous one which was carried up to the law 

 court— Isaac H. James vs. Thomas P. Wood, a game war- 

 den, who, without process, released or caused the plain- 

 tiff to release from his own inclosure, a moose and a deer. 

 The moose was captured by Mr. James in March, 1888; 

 the deer bought by him the same month. In the lower 

 court Mr. James was awarded f 125 damages. The case 

 was then carried to a higher court, and the opinion of 

 the law court given Dec. 11, 1889, was in favor of the 

 defendant warden. 



Mr. James's moose and deer were set at liberty June 

 6, 1888. As evidence that the interpretation of the law 

 which allowed this to be done was considered very doubt- 

 ful, I may say that on Sept. 14 of the same year (1888) I 

 saw a full-grown caribou, with fair-sized horns, confined 

 in a pen near the railroad station at Winn in this county. 

 I was told that it was taken in close season. I was also 

 told that a warden had been sent to release it; that the 

 possessor had refused to allow him to do it; and that the 

 warden had yielded. What became of the animal after- 

 ward I do not know. The Bangor House deer were kept 

 somewhat later than this, I am very sure. Mr. Morse 

 tells me that he has knov/n several to pay fines for keep- 

 ing live game "after it became unlawful," which I under- 

 stand to be previous to Dec. 11, 1889, as I have heard of 

 none since then, though some who had captured deer 

 have let them go. 



In support of my definition of hunting, a,nd to show 

 that Mr. Morse did not proceed as too many wardens 

 have done here in pursuance of plans that no court would 

 uphold, even when he released the caribou on the ground 

 that to put on snovv^shoes to follow it constitutes hunting, 

 I will quote from the James vs. Wood case. Law Reports 

 82, Maine 179: "The plaintiff followed the moose in the 

 forest until it became snow-bound, and then, by the use 

 of a rope, tied it to a tree, and finally bound it upon a 

 sled and hauled it some fifteen miles to his home, where 

 he confined it until it was released by defendant. With- 

 out doubt this conduct resulting in capture was in violation 

 of the statute. The plaintiff did not destroy or kill the 

 animal, but he did hunt and thereby capture it." 



This matter which from one side is unimportant, from 

 another has weight. It shows a law changed from a 

 looser to a stricter interpretation. In my next article I 

 will show another which has had just the opposite history 

 during the eight years past. 



Mr. Morse calls my attention to an error in one of the 

 cases mentioned, i wrote partridges "legally killed in 

 December" when I should have said November. I am 

 likely to make other similar mistakes, and will correct 

 them when brought to my notice, if not too trivial or 

 having no real bearing upon the point in question. 



Since writing the above I notice the following in the 

 Bangor Daily Whig and Courier, April 25: 



"A buck caught at Moose River has been brought to 

 Portland and placed in Deering Park as a companion to 

 the fawn presented to the city by Captain Winslow last 

 spring. A yard will soon be built for them." 



If true, this is an ample commentary on what has been 

 said, Are there any deer in Deering Park? If so, by 

 what right? Fannie Peaksok Hardy. 



Kansas Game.— Hutchinson, Kan., April 19. — Editor 

 Forest and Stream: We have had splendid goose and 

 duck shooting this spring. Trap shooting is getting to 

 be a very popular sport in the West; our State meeting, 

 to be held at Salina, May 19 to 21, promises to be a large 

 one. We have had an extremely mild winter; the quail 

 have fared well; chickens are scarce, but we will have 

 fine quail shooting tliis fall.— Shady. 



Halifax, N. S., April 21. — I was out this afternoon 

 trying my new setter dog. I put up a woodcock, and if 

 you could have heard them "whistling" you would have 

 thought their "outer primaries" pretty well developed for 

 April birds. Killed five sea trout afternoon of 18th; tliey 

 were a small run, from 1 to lilbs.— H. Austen. 



Forest and Stkeam, Box 3,833, N. Y. city, lias deseriptlve Illus- 

 trated circulara of W. B. LefflngweU'a book, "Wild Fowl Shoot- 

 ing," wMeh will be mailed free on request. Tte book Is pro- 

 nounced by "Nanit," "Gloan," "Dick Swlveller," "SyblUene" and 

 other competent anthontles to be tbe Iwet treatise on the siibleot 



