816 
FOREST AND STREAM; 
[April 18, 1896. 
acter of these birds, would hesitate a moment as to which 
bird he would select. 
There is nothing very difficult or requiring long prac- 
tice to enable any one to successfully breed pheasants. 
Given the right conditions, no bird is more easily raised. 
Let our sportsmen look at this matter in a common- 
sense way, avoiding all personalities. Here is a breeder 
of Eaglish pheasants who says that during the last twelve 
years be has handled nearly 100,000 of them. Enough, 
if they are worth anything, to stock the whole United 
States, and he is only one of many who are breeding and 
turning out these birds. To this may be added many im- 
portations of these pheasants during the last twenty 
years. 
Now, Mr. Editor, you are in a position to know some- 
thing about game. Look on the map of North America 
and put your finger, if you can, on a single Sbate or county 
where these birds abound; and then turn to Oregon, where 
in 1881 Judge Danny set loose only eighteen Mongolian 
pheasants, and consider the marvelous increase of that 
variety. Here is an object lesson more conclusive than 
all that has been or can be said in behalf of the Eaglish 
pheasant in this country. 
Facts are stubborn things. The more the breeders 
boast of the thousands they have lpt loose, the worse their 
case appears. A hundred thousand Eaglish pheasants 
liberated during the past twelve years and where are 
they? Is there a single public domain stocked with them? 
Eighteen Mongolian pheasants set free in Oregon, and the 
State is overrun with them.' 
Personally it is a matter of no interest to me how much 
time and money my brother 1 , sportsmen spend in trying to 
introduce here a bird that thus far has proved of no value 
except on private preserves, where they are obliged to feed 
them in winter. 
Again I repeat that I must decline all controversy on 
the subject. Satisfied beyond a question of doubt of the 
superiority of the Mongolian pheasant as a game bird, 
this State will make a thorough experiment in introduc- 
ing them. E. A. Brackett, 
Chairman Board of Com'rs of Fish and Game. 
woodcock in his mouth. Thinking it might be a bird 
that some one else had killed, or perhaps one the dog had 
caught, we examined him and found several shot in him. 
We came to the conclusion that he got up at the same 
time that the quail did. E. B. 
REARING PHEASANTS. 
I have read with much pleasure and interest Mr. E. A. 
Brackett's report and indorse the whole of it. 
I have been interested in pheasant rearing for the past 
five years and have had many ups and downs, but I have 
learned a lot of things by experience, and if I may add a 
little to pheasant culture which may be of use to others I 
am only too happy. 
And I would suggest, in addition to what Mr. Brackett 
has given in regard to the hatching out of the young 
birds by bantam hens or any kind of hen, the great ad- 
vantage it is to have an incubator. 
I place the eggs after being under the hen twenty -two 
or twenty-three days in an incubator, where the birds 
hatch out more quickly and are not able to get into any 
place where they could be chilled, nor do they run the 
risk of being trodden on by the hens. I have sometimes 
found that the eggs do not hatch out at the same time and 
consequently the hen gets very uneasy and she does not 
sit close enough on the unhatched eggs, which may re- 
main for two or three days chipped without breaking 
because they were not hot enough; but if placed in an 
incubator heated up to 101° F. they will break in two or 
three hours. Another object gained is that it gives a 
splendid opportunity to completely asepticise the hen 
and free her from any insects. Also it prevents the 
young chicks from being infected, as thevecan be none in 
the egg and the incubator should be completely free of 
them. And in the warm days in the beginning of June 
it is very hard to keep the nests completely free of the 
insect pest. 
I leave the young birds in the incubator till they are 
able to run about freely and then place them under the 
hens again, who have been sitting on dummy eggs. 
I think also I may be allowed to add to the very excel- 
lent cuisine of Mr. Brackett and others Spratts game 
meal. This I have found most excellent when added to the 
custard and the chicks thrive on it. Spratts crissel takes 
the place of the maggots, which are hard to get in this 
climate during the month of May and early June, when 
the most of the birds are hatched out. 
I begin with very little of it and increase daily, say for 
every twelve chicks begin with a teaspoonf ul and get up 
to a tablespoonlul about the end of the second week. I 
think Mr. E. A. Styles's manner of feeding is about the 
best of any, but I don't wish to be invidious; they are all 
good. 
But the watchword in pheasant rearing in this country 
certainly should be "eternal vigilance." Watch the cats. 
Be on the lookout for rainstorms, Count your birds two 
or three times a day, and by these means you will save a 
great many, at least this is my experience. 
J. S. NlVEN. 
London, Oat. 
SHOOTING PHANTOM BIRDS. 
Providence, R. I.— Editor Forest and Stream: I am a 
constant reader of Forest and Stream. I read about 
J. E. B.'s unexpected luck, shooting at and killing a sin- 
gle grouse and his dog retrieving two; also of J. K.'s 
luck, shooting at a single quail and killing four. I have 
a true incident that happened some time ago. A friend 
by the name of F. C. M. is a very enthusiastic hunter, 
but a very poor shot, as a great many hunters are. He is 
also a member of our local fish and game association, 
with the privilege of hunting all the year round. He was 
the possessor of a very good dog, named Jeff, at that 
time. I was out one time with my friend F. C. M. and 
one-armed Bill S. to a place where they knew there were 
several bevies of quail and some grouse. After hunting 
over some cover, my friend's dog Jeff made game in an 
open field. Calling us up after trailing some distance, 
the dog came to a point at the edge of a thick swale, my 
black and white setter Blink and one-armed Bill's red Irish 
Bruce backing— as pretty a picture as ever I saw. We 
watched them as long as we dared to, as my dog Blink 
being jealous, was getting uneasy. I told my friend F 
C. M. to go in and flush, which he did. A large bevy of 
quail got up. He, not believing in shooting at singles, 
let go in the bunch afterward, claiming he saw one drop. 
I did not shoot, as I was so much taken up by the dogs. 
One-armed Bill did not shoot, as he averred he could not 
get a shot from where he stood. However, F. C. M. sent 
his dog Jeff to retrieve, and to our surpiise he brought a 
THE PETIT MANAN DEER CASE. 
(From the Kennebec Journal.} 
Bangor, Me., April 10. — A most important opinion 
was handed down from the law court to-day. It was 
drafted by Chief Justice Peters, and the document is one 
that will be of special interest to sportsmen. Through 
the courtesy of Gen. Charles Hamlin, reporter of deci- 
sions for the Supreme Court, the Journal is able to pre- 
sent it in full to its readers. It is as follows: 
State vs. Parker, Peters, C. J. The respondent was 
complained of for killing a deer in close time, and the 
question of his liability to be prosecuted therefor is pre- 
sented to this court upon the following statement of facts 
agreed to by the parties: 
"The respondent had in his possession at Steuben, in 
Washington county, on June 19, 1894, parts of a deer, 
which said respondent killed on June 15, 1894, being in 
close season, to wit: Between the first day of January 
and the first day of October, in the inclosed deer park on 
Petit Manan Point, in said Steuben; said park being the 
property of the Petit Manan Company, so called, and said 
respondent being the owner of one-fifth of the deer in 
said park, in common with said company; said deer was 
caught alive, when a fawn, on Township No. 29, M. D., 
by Charles Haycock, in the month of June, 1888, being 
the close season, as aforesaid. That said Hay- 
cock sold said deer the following year after his 
capture to Horace F. Willey, of Cherryfield, 
by whom it was kept until the month of No- 
vember, 1890, when he, said Willey, sold it to the said 
respondent, who then put it into the park aforesaid in 
company with other deer therein confined, and it was in 
his possession continually until killed by the respondent 
as aforesaid. The respondent was arrested by game war- 
den Charles I. Corliss, and on July 5, 1894, was arraigned 
before Jacob T. Campbell, Esq., a trial justice in and for 
said Washington county, at said Cherryfield, on complaint 
of said Corliss, charging said respondent with having in 
his possession at Steuben, June 19, 1894, one deer and 
parts of a deer killed in close time, as aforesaid, where- 
upon said respondent waived examination, and was found 
guilty by the magistrate, and sentenced to pay a fine of 
$40 and costs, from which sentence respondent appealed. 
The law court to affirm or disaffirm the deoision of said 
magistrate, as the law and facts in the case warrant." 
The respondent contends upon the strength of the cases 
of Allen v. Young, 76 Maine 80; James v. Wood, 82 Maine, 
173, and State v. Beal, 75 Maine, 289, that the deer was so 
far within his dominion and control in open time as to 
have become his absolute property, with which he could 
at any time do as he pleased. The doctrine of the above 
cases has been lately emphasized somewhat by the deci- 
sion of the court in State v. Bucknam, 88 Maine, 385, in 
which it has been distinctly held that, under our statutes, 
one who lawfully obtains the ownership of game in open 
time, in that case carcasses of deer, is not criminally 
liable for having the same in his possession in close time 
afterward. Some of the States have decided that laws 
which do make such act criminal are not constitutional, 
but that question did not arise in the case referred to. 
We think, however, that, giving the respondent the 
f ullest scope of protection which the doctrine of those 
cases can afford him, he fails to find them any sufficient 
justification for his act. We refer to the act of killing 
the deer within close season, waiving now all question of 
illegality in capturing the animal alive originally . 
Probably it would not be questioned that in particular 
instances feroe natural may be so far reclaimed and do- 
mesticated, or if not reclaimed may be so closely sub- 
jected to confinement by a person as to be regarded as 
under his dominion and control and to become his prop- 
erty. And, if captured or obtained at a proper season 
and in a lawful manner, there might be no reason why 
such person should not control such property at all sea- 
sons as he might at any other, subject, however, to any 
restraint upon the use of the same which may be imposed 
by our game laws. 
But we think that a proper construction of the statute 
applicable to the facts in the case at bar does not admit 
ot a conclusion that the deer in question was under such 
dominion and control of the respondent and his associates 
as to allow them to kill or hunt such animal in close time. 
Their so-called possession was not actual and complete 
enough; was more fictitious than real. The deer was 
roaming wildly over a park covered mostly by woods, as 
was stated when the case was reported, containing be- 
tween 700 and 800 acres of territory, and surrounded on 
all sides by the sea excepting at a narrow strip or neck 
connecting this, an almost natural park, with the main 
land. And artificial structures are placed across this neck 
to prevent the escape of the animals therefrom. Ani- 
mals kept within these wide boundaries cannot be said to 
be thereby either reclaimed or held in close confinement. 
Should they escape from the park either by sea or land 
into other woods it would be preposterous for the pro- 
prietors of the park to set up an ownership in such ani- 
mals against other persons who might kill or capture 
them off their premises. The most of the proprietors 
can reasonably claim is that they possess by some artifi- 
cial means some facilities for capturing or recapturing 
deer within their woods, and perhaps for obtaining actual 
possession of the same either dead or alive; and, while 
that may be denominated an approach toward possess- 
ion, a step in the direction of possession, to style such a 
condition of things as an absolute actual possession, 
thereby giving the respondent complete property in the 
animals, would be far-fetched and visionary. 
The ideas which we entertain on this subject are aptly 
illustrated by the remarks of the court in Commonwealth 
v. Chace, 9 Pick. 15, a case involving the question as to 
how far and under what conditions doves might be the 
subjects of larceny, and we quote largely therefrom: 
"it is held in all the authorities that doves are ferae, 
natural, and as such are not subjects of larceny, except 
when in the care and custody of the owner, as when in a 
dovecote or pigeon-house, or when in the nest before they 
are liable to fly. If, when thus under the care of the 
owner, they are taken furtively, it is larceny. 
"The reason of this principle is that it is difficult to dis- 
• nguish them from other fowl of the same species. They 
often take a flight and mix flocks with the doves of other 
persons and are free tenants of the air, except when im- 
pelled by hunger or habit, or the production or preserva- 
tion of their young, they seek the shelter prepared for 
them by their owner. Perhaps when feeding on the 
grounds of the proprietor, or resting on his barn or other 
buildings, if killed by a stranger, the owner may have 
trespass, and if the purpose be to consume them as food, 
and they are killed or caught or carried away from the 
inclosure of the owner, the act would be larceny. But in 
this case there is no evidence of the situation they were 
in when killed, whether on the flight, a mile from the 
grounds of the owner, or mingled with the doves of other 
persons, enjoying their natural liberty. Without such 
evidence, the act of killing them, though for the purpose 
of using them as food, is not felonious." 
Judgment below affirmed. 
CHICAGO AND THE WEST. 
Spring. 
Chicago, 111., April 11. — This week warm showers have 
softened the marble heart of the earth. The young man 
with turn-down stockings is visible in the land, as also the 
young woman with trousers. On the curb at the corner 
an ancient crone is offering sassafras to the public, and at 
the cheery banquet board the wild, Bweet fragrance of 
the tender onion is apparent. Spring has come. 
The Flierht of the Snipe. 
The weather of the past few days has been such that 
we should have a fine chance at jacksnipe hereabouts for 
the coming week. The flight even of golden plover was 
in lower Arkansas and west on that parallel last week, 
and the snipe precede the plover by many days, Mr, E, 
P. Maynard, a Chicago gentleman just back from Arkan- 
sas, says that he and a friend put in two days on the 
famous prairie near Davoll's Bluff, in eastern Arkansas, 
but saw only few snipe. The weather was rainy and they 
thought the birds must have passed on north, which is 
probably the case. A week ago to-day some fair bags of 
snipe were made on the sloughs near Wheaton and Hins- 
dale, Chicago suburbs, and some birds have been killed 
also along the Sag and out near Blue Island, but the warm 
days have been followed by cold ones and no great num- 
ber of birds have been in. The weather of the past three 
days has been warm and rainy, and will without doubt 
bring the remainder of the birds up to stay — so far as such 
capricious fowl can be said to stay anywhere. At Fox 
Lake, fifty miles north of here, some shooting has been 
had. I should expect to hear of good bags at jacksnipe 
en the Kankakee near Koutts and Shelby to-day and to- 
morrow. The lucky ones will get it. Then a few days 
later others will go to repeat the performance of their 
friends and will find the birds are not there. They do not 
stay very long if the country is warm and open to the 
north, but pass on up along their line of migration. 
Golden plover are usually to be expected at their best in 
this vicinity about May 1, perhaps earlier if the grass gets 
green and the days are warmer. None are reported at 
this writing. At any place adjoining Chicago though 
one would expect them very soon if the warm spell holds. 
Oilman, 111,, is a favorite place for the plover shooter, 
and some good bags are made there. Often the very 
edge of Chicago is equally good, but the shooters are 
abundant there always. 
Ducks. 
The old Kankakee this season showed a little sport to 
the duck shooters who like spring shooting, and a few 
birds were killed on the Illinois, the shooting at both 
places being of the patchy and irregular nature which 
now characterizes all our shooting here at any season 
whatsoever. At Fox Lake a great many deep-water 
ducks came, and tried to light the best they could for the 
ice and the shooters. Some of the-lower lakes of Wis- 
consin held the fowl for a time, and at Koshkonong the 
deep-water ducks, redheads, bluebills and canvasbacks 
fairly swarmed for a time, and are even yet not all gone. 
Eddie Bingham took a couple of his Chicago friends up 
with him to his old home on Koshkonong, and they had 
three days of very pleasant sport and got a nice lot of 
birds. I do not hear of any better bags than these any- 
where for this region this spring. 
New Koshkonong Club. 
The Carcajou Club, with a good membership of Wis- 
consin men, A. M. Valentine, of Janes ville, president, 
has been added to the clubs already holding preserves on 
the famous Koshkonong waters. It will control three 
miles of lake front, including some of the best of the 
deep-water duck shooting. 
The Wisconsin Law. 
The Wisconsin law on duck shooting is peculiar and 
convenient. It prohibits spring shooting of snipe, plover 
and marsh ducks (mallard, teal, etc.), but allows shooting 
of deep-water ducks in the spring (redheads, bluebills 
and canvasbacks). Such a mixed law is not of very much 
use, as many careless native shooters will kill any sort of 
duck they can. It is the July woodcock shooter who does 
for most of the young (and illegal) wood ducks along the 
Kankakee Eiver. Legislators have a touching confidence 
in human nature. But then the Wisconsin legislators 
have declared that when Illinois has prohibited spring 
shooting on all sorts of ducks, it will do the same! (Illinois 
has no close season on ducks or snipe in the spring.) There 
is some human nature in that too. Meantime Illinois 
shoots all over both Illinois and Wisconsin in the matter 
of such ducks as Wisconsin makes legal, and heeds not 
the voice of Wisconsin saying that Illinois is real mean 
not to abolish spring shooting for the sake of Wisconsin. 
Our divers State laws "protecting" game are good subjects 
for a comic opera, 
Grouse Grounds. 
The great grouse grounds of Wisconsin are in the upper 
part of the hardwood region, or where the hardwood tim- 
ber begins to give way to the pines. Marshfield, Wis., is 
at just such a point, and Mr. J. A. Kerr, who lives there 
and. who this week made Forest and Stream a pleasant 
call, says that in the fall the ruffed grouse shooting is 
quite good. That is also a very good deer country, though 
most of the hunters go further north in the deer season. 
Mr. Kerr has killed four bears since his residence in 
Marshfield, and saya they have lots of fun running foxes 
