June 8, 1895.] 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
467 
This is what he says, but not what I wrote. If he will 
refer to my article he will see that I wrote lake trout, 
and not trout. His omission of this one word, which 
probably was not by accident, alters the force of the 
whole. Now, as to this, I say squarely that I did see lake 
trout openly displayed for sale in close time. There are 
a great many things which I have yet to learn, but I 
believe that I know a togue when I see one. I stopped 
and examined these, and they were togue. Just such 
togue are caught in Borne of our Maine lakes. I cannot 
say that these were taken in Maine, but I can say that 
they were for sale, fresh, on one of Augusta's principal 
streets. Mr. Stanley's or Mr. Chandler's seeing any other 
kind of fish in Augusta does not prove that I did not see 
lake trout just as I stated. When I asked Mr. Stilwell to 
look this matter up I expressly stated to him that they 
were lake trout. In his answer to me he said that there 
had been no trout in the market. 
He well knew that I told him "lake trout," but he 
dodged the question in the same way which Mr. Stanley 
does when he leaves out the word "lake" in quoting 
from my article. I not only say that these were lake 
trout, but I say that at the time I first saw them he 
admitted this himself. Mr. R. G. Leonard, now a mer- 
chant at Passadurnkeag, Me., but then a teacher in the 
Commercial College at Augusta, wrote Mr. Stanley about 
these togue. Here is what he states in a letter lately 
received: 
Passadtjmkeag, Me., May 16.— Mr. Manly, Hardy: Dear Sir— In 
reply to your letter of the 15th inst., will say that I did write Mr. 
Stanley about the togue on sale in Augusta that winter. He wrote 
me that he knew of no arrests being made there for the illegal sale of 
such fisb, and said that they were not caught in this State, but came 
from Lake Ontario. Yours truly, R. G. Leonard. 
To which may be added the following affidavit: 
This certifies that I, the undersigned, saw Commissioner Stanley's 
official reply to Mr. Leonard's complaint above mentioned, and the 
same was seen and examined by others interested in game matters; 
also that the Commissioner's letter admitted the justice of the com- 
plaint, stating that lake trout had been sold in Augusta in close time 
as affirmed, but examination showed that the fish were taken in Lake 
Ontario; therefore the matter had been dropped. 
• This further certifies that at that date the law absolutely forbade 
the sale of lake trout in close time; that Mr. Stanley's colleague had 
prosecuted the proprietor of the Bangor House in Bangor, for serving 
on his hotel table trout taken in a pond exempted by special law from 
the usual close time; and that the Supreme Bench, to whom the case 
was carried, decided that the law forbade selling in close time fish 
taken legally — as may be seen by reference to the Maine Law Court 
decisions, case of the State vs. Flavius O. Beal, Maine Reports, vol. 
75, p. 289. Fannie Hardy Eckstorm. 
Pbnobscot, ss.— Brewer, May 24, 1895.— Personally appeared Fannie 
Hardy Eckstorm and took oath that the foregoing statement is correct 
according to her best knowledge and belief. 
Frank H. Wickerson, Justice of the Peace. 
These statements prove that Mr. Stanley either was 
ignorant of the laws relating to the sale of togue at tjhe 
season or that he knowingly allowed them to be violated 
with impunity. 
Mr. Stanley next states that the man arrested for sell- 
ing salted Newfoundland trout was not fined. Mr. Eben 
C. Morse — a warden who told me that he was paid $200 a 
year by Mr. Wentworth specially to look after game 
matters— told me that he went on the market, bought two 
trout, arrested the man, brought him before Judge Vose, 
and that the man was fined $10. Now Mr. Stanley says 
he was convicted, but not fined. Why? Because he ap- 
pealed! This does not disprove my statement that he was 
fined. What are they prosecuting the case for now? 
Why — for the fine the man refused to pay. I am pre- 
pared to prove that salted trout had been openly ex- 
posed for sale on Broad street in Bangor for weeks 
previous to this, but the warden arrested the peddler and 
not the merchant. 
Mr. Stanley states that the charge that the rich man 
has been allowed to kill to waste, while the poor man 
who kills to feed his family is arrested, is ridiculous, and 
that I know better. I simply stated what I know to be 
true, and few respectable men who know me will say 
that I ever knowingly make a false statement. I will ask 
how it happened that the warden who went to Chesun- 
cook when Col. Seigler's party of some forty or more per- 
sons were encamped within a few miles of there — and as 
one of the party afterwards wrote in a newspaper article 
were ' living on the best of fish and game," though it was 
summer— did not trouble this large party, but arrested 
Charles Smith and Thomas Gero, of Chesuncook, for kill- 
ing meat for their families and lodged them in Bangor 
jail; and collected a heavy fine of Geo. C. Luce, of North- 
east Carry, for having meat on his table; and arrested Mr. 
Scribner and took him down the lake for killing a deer for 
his family, leaving his wife and her babe nine miles from 
the nearest neighbor, as a- guide wrote me at the time? 
This to me looks a little like favoring the rich. 
In regard to my statement that a prominent Bangor 
merchant offered to testify that he paid money to a war- 
den not to see a deer he was shipping a friend, and that 
he gave the name of the warden to whom he paid it, Mr. 
Stanley says: "All I can say is that I think he is making 
an assertion that he cannot back up and I believe is un- 
true." * * * "Can you believe a merchant can be found 
who is fool enough, even if he had done what Mr. Hardy 
says, to testify to anything of that kind?" "I challenge 
Mr. Hardy to produce the proof." 
Well, I accept the challenge, and if it is damaging to 
the commissioners or any warden, it is the fault of Mr. 
Stanley, as I give the proof at his request. 
Bangor, Me., May 14, 1895.— This certifies that the undersigned, C. 
M. Conant. of Bangor, Me , and A. C. Tyler, of Boston, Mass., with 
Jefferson Nealley, of Monroe, Me., killed several deer in the fall of 
1891, and wished to send one to Boston for Mr. Tyler. We went to the 
office of Warden George W. Harriman, of Bangor, and asked if he 
could arrange it so that the deer could be shipped. He replied that he 
could. One of the party paid him $2 and he agreed to meet us at the 
depot when the noon train left. Mr. Harriman came according to 
agreement, and the deer, which was marked for Mr. A. C. Tyler, of 
Boston, was shipped and was duly received in Boston. 
Q. M. Conant, 
Alfred C. Tyler. 
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Suffolk, ss.— Boston, May 16, 
lf-95 —There personally appeared the above-named Alfred C. Tvler, 
and made oath that the foregoing statement by him subscribed is true. 
Before me, Edgar R. Champlin, Justice of the Peace. 
State of Maine, County of Penobscot, ss.— Bangor, Me., May 22, 
1895.— There personally appeared the above-named Charles M. Conant, 
and made oath that the foregoing statement by him subscribed is true. 
Before me, Charles Davis, Notary Public. 
Mr. Stanley further says: "If it is true the Commis- 
sioners will be very glad to know it." If the Commis- 
sioners did not know this long ago it is their own fault. 
Mr. Conant tells me that he told Mr. Wentworth of this 
last fall, and I will testify under oath that I told Warden 
Eben C. Morse of it and offered to prove it by Mr. Conant 
if Mr. Morse would go to Mr. Conant's store with me, and 
t was Mr. Morse who advised me to have the man ar- 
rested if I could prove it. This looks a good deal as if the 
Commissioners wanted to know of such things! 
Now as to the last question: "If Mr. Hardy knows so 
much about the illegal shipping of deer from Bangor, why 
don't he inform the Commissioners, which he has not 
donef (The italics are mine.) 
My answer to this is that, after having in vain tried to 
call the attention of wardens to it, finally at the meeting 
of the Fish and Game Association in Bangor a year ago 
last winter, when both Commissioners and many wardens 
were present, I not only made the same statements of 
which he here speaks, but stated on the authority of a 
member of the Association that at least 200 deer had been 
sold to market men that season, and I gave proof that 
only about twenty were skinned here, showing that only 
these were cut up to sell in Bangor. I also stated how 
the wardens pocketed fines belonging to the State, and 
gave an instance of one who sold me over $100 worth of 
seized hides and who, Mr. Stilwell said, kept the whole 
part of the proceeds belonging to the State; and I said 
that the warden I referred to was then sitting in front of 
me, and I called on him to rise and deny it if he could. 
I ask Mr. Stanley if that is not being interested in game 
protection and "informing the Commissioners?" Does 
Mr. Stanley remember talking in a friendly way with me 
after the meeting and not disputing a word I said? Or 
has he forgotten stating in the store of S. L. Crosby before 
he left Bangor that "nine-tenths of what Mr. Hardy said 
was true?" And I could have proved to him that the 
other one-tenth was also true if he had spoken to me 
about it. 
I am certainly surprised at one of the statements made 
by Mr. Stanley: "There is no law on our statutes to pre- 
vent every deer, moose and caribou brought into Bangor 
being bought, sold and shipped to Boston legally. You 
can go into Bangor in open time, buy two deer, one 
moose and one caribou and ship them to Boston or else- 
where. Any man going to Boston can do the same. 
There is no law to prevent it." I do not question his 
word on the construction he puts on the law; but I won- 
der that a commissioner should in so public a manner and 
in such unmistakable terms inform the public that there 
is really no restraint on the shipment of game from 
Maine. As it now is, every master of a vessel can carry 
twice 'as many deer as he has persons on board; any 
employee on any railroad orBsteamer can carry two at 
every trip. Previous to this it has been understood that 
the person killing must accompany the game, but now it 
seems that any one can carry it. It looks as if market- 
hunting would again be in fashion. 
Having differed from Mr. Stanley on so many points, I 
take great pleasure in agreeing with him in one of his 
statements: "Throwing mud may be all right for boys, 
but not for gentlemen, even if you have the most ammu- 
nition on your side." I do not think that any gentleman 
will do this, and I freely concede his claim to having the 
most of that kind of ammunition on his side, even after 
the liberal expenditure he has made in his article. 
Manly Hardy. 
Brewer, Maine, May 24. 
To Protect Niagara River Fish. 
Buffalo, N. Y., June 1. — At the Broezel House yester- 
day the preliminary arrangements looking toward the 
organization of a branch of the New York State Associa- 
tion for the Protection of Fish and Game were taken, and 
there is reason to believe that the matter will be pushed 
from now on. The meeting was called by Frank J. Ams- 
den, of Rochester, the president of the Association, and 
the call was responded to by some fifty men, including 
the rich man and those in the humbler walks of life. All 
recognized a common issue in the protection of the 
Niagara River fish. Mayor Edgar B. Jewett was made 
president of the meeting and the case was stated plainly 
by Mr. Amsden. He said that the State Association in- 
cluded over one hundred clubs, representing every county 
in the State with the exception of Erie, and he thought it 
was about time that this section of the country woke up. 
The object of the Association was to secure good laws and 
build up a sentiment in favor of the protection of the fish 
under them. The waters of the Niagara were the natural 
home of the bass, muscallonge and perch, and would to- 
day be thickly populated with the fish if it were not for 
the excessive illegal fishing. Mr. Amsden said that 
the local Association would have the support and 
encouragement of the Association and would have 
the interest of the State Commission. Under the 
law which has just been passed, and which it is ex- 
pected that the Governor will sign without delay, the 
Commission has the appointment of thirty-one protectors, 
and Erie county should have one of these protectors. 
Niagara county, well organized, had secured the appoint- 
ment of a capable man in Pomroy, who looks after the 
local end of the matter until another man shall be selected. 
Mr. Amsden called attention to the planting of fish fry 
which is practised by the State Commission and showed 
why the Commission would be more likely to recognize 
a well-organized section in the distribution of this fry 
than to pay attention to a careless community. The 
breeding of muscallonge and black bass would thus be 
encouraged and the population of the waters of the upper 
Niagara increased. 
J. A. Dingens was appointed to select a committee on 
organization, to be composed of nineteen people, and was 
given power to call a meeting. 
The Pennsylvania Grouse Bill Veto. 
Governor Hastings's veto of the bill prohibiting the 
sale of ruffed grouse in market in the State of Pennsylva- 
nia is probably one of the most atrocious acts ever perpe- 
trated by a governor of the State. It is not only a direct 
slap at, but also an insult to the 75,000 sportsmen in Penn- 
sylvania who agreed upon and constructed the bill (con- 
servative estimate places the number of sportsmen in the 
State at 75,000). Furthermore, it means the total extinc- 
tion and extermination of the most noble bird that God 
has ever made (the ruffed grouse). Every man who is a 
man, whether he is sportsman or not, should remember 
this veto of the governor; remember that he signed away 
the life of the game birds of Pennsylvania to please a syn- 
dicate of cold storage men of Philadelphia, who called 
upon him while he had the bill under consideration and 
left Harrisburg, knowing that they had won their victory 
over the sportsmen. What a victory it was, the life of our 
few remaining game birds, We number at least 75,000. 
Why could not the bond of good-fellowship which holds 
us together firmly now unite us politically and make us 
a power, not only in this State, but in every State in the 
Union? The bill which the governor vetoed was adopted 
unanimously by the sportsmen of the State, after which it 
was shown to a number of the best legal minds and pro- 
nounced constitutional by them all. After the bill had 
been approved and pronounced constitutional money was 
collected to help it through the House and Senate. Sports- 
men all realized that this would be their last opportunity 
to protect, and if the bill was defeated the few remaining 
game birds would be exterminated within the next five 
years. We have in Luzerne county a number of miners 
and laborers who are gunners and true sportsmen. They 
realized the importance of this bill and did all in their 
power to help it through, some contributed 25 cents and 
others 50, all unsolicited. A committee was sent to inter- 
view the governor personally. He gave them to under- 
stand that he was a sportsman himself and that any bill 
for the protection of game would meet with his approval. 
The slaughter of the game birds will now go on as it has 
heretofore and the work of extermination will be 
thoroughly done. In a few years the grouse, like the 
buffalo, will be a thing of history, thanks to Governor 
Hastings. — H. M. BeeJc, in the Wilkes-Barre Record. 
fflhe iiemtel 
FIXTURES. 
BENCH SHOWS. 
Sept. 9 to 13.— Industrial Exhibition -Association's "annual bencb 
show, Toronto, Oat. C. A. Stone, Sec'y and Sup't. 
Sept. 17-20.— Orange county Fair Bench Show, Newburgh, N. Y. 
Robert Johnson, Sec'y. 
Sept. 24 to 27.— New England Kennel Club's second annual fox- 
terrier show, Boston, Mass. D. E. Loveland. Sec'y. 
Oct. 8-11.— Danbury, Conn.— Danbury Agricultural Society. G. L. 
Rundle, Sec'y. 
FIELD TRIALS. 
Sept. 2.— Continental Field Trials Club's chicken trials at Morris 
Man. P. T. Madison, Sec'y, Indianapolis, Ind. 
Sept. 10.— Morris, Man.— Manitoba F. T. C. John Wootton, Sec'y, 
Manitou. 
Nov. 5.— Chatham, Ont.— International F. T. Club. W. B.Wells Sec'v. 
Nov. 7.— Newton, N. O— U. S. Field Trial Club's Trials A. W. B. 
Stafford, Sec'y, Trenton, Tenn. 
Nov. 11.— Hempstead, L. I.— National Beagle Club of America, fifth 
annual trials. Geo. W. Rogers, Sec'y, New York. 
Nov. 18— Eastern F. T. Club, at Newton, N. C. W. A. Caster 
Sec'y, Saratoga Springs, N. Y. 
Nov. 25.— Continental Field Trials Club's quail trials at Newton. 
P. T. Madison, Sec'y, Indianapolis, Ind. 
Oct. 29.— New England Field Trial Club, at Assonet, Mass. S. R. 
Sharp, Sec'y. 
SETTERS VS. POINTERS. 
Chattanooga, Tenn.— Editor Forest and Stream : The 
years are not many since when to speak of a pointer was 
to flout him as a field dog. The number who did not do 
so were few, very few. A small band, fewer still, dared 
to breed pointers. Their efforts were often derided, and 
oftener looked upon as wasted. The day of .the setter 
was then at its highest. The fancy of the admirers of 
the pointer was amicably conceded to be a harmless illu- 
sion which could be indulged by the few whose minds 
could not appreciate the nobler and greater setter. Writers 
did not hesitate to publish their contempt for the short- 
haired bird dog. Handlers were reluctant to run him in 
the trials. There seemed to be a certain stigma for own- 
ing a pointer ; not that it was far-reaching or weighty, 
but only so far as it stamped one as it were with an infe- 
riority in sportsmanship. It denoted then that the 
owner of the pointer was in a lower stratum of sport. 
But times have changed. 
A few years have brought forth new history. The 
setter no longer stands on a higher plane of ability than 
does the pointer. And all this has been brought about in 
a few years. So quietly has the change been made that 
but few have been conscious of it. It has come without 
the tooting of horns and tumultuous bustle which has 
marked the improvement of the setter. It is better so. 
Real merit is sure to triumph in the end. The pointer has 
that merit. He has triumphed. 
So common was the support of the English setter a few 
years ago that the pointer always competed against great 
odds. There was a lively public prejudice against him, 
which was not a small matter. If two dogs are against 
each other in a race, the more popular one has the advan- 
tage even though all else be equal. Through such preju- 
dice the pointer was struggling through many years. His 
honors when won were his without sympathy ; they were 
on nothing else but merit. To be beaten by a pointer, 
even though the beaten setter was a good one, carried 
with it more than mere defeat ; it was disgrace. There 
was*io praise for the pointer. The pointers were in pop- 
ular opinion all on the same dead level of inferiority. A 
victory over a good setter did not raise the pointer up to 
the high position such won him of right, nor did it win 
the generous praise which was his due, but rather it low- 
ered beyond pardon the standing of the setter, for by 
common consent the whole race of pointers was inferior, 
and a dog beaten by a pointer must plainly be still more 
inferior. 
The higher merit of the setter was and is claimed with 
a steadfastness which never lessened. Owners of setters 
have held forth his high claims incessantly. The setter's 
victories were grand and adorable, his defeats were 
smothered in excuses or had every thing to condone them. 
There was everything to explain the setter's defeat except 
one thing — the pointer's superiority. The setter's victo- 
ries have been paraded ; they have been enumerated and 
many times painted ; they have been admired and made 
much of ; they have been used as a mark of merit for the 
sale of puppies and the multiplication of stud fees. It has 
been held that the setter's long coat was good in serving 
to keep him warm in winter [and cool in summer, and 
that it was not out of place in burrs which stuck to it nor 
in mud which grossly soiled it. 
But how great now is the change ! The pointer has 
risen to a point of merit which no one can deny him. 
He reached it by hard work. He reached it against great 
odds. He reached it by a courage which could not be 
shaken. 
In the American world, where is there to-day a setter 
which has such brilliant and numerous victories as Rip 
Rap? Where i3 one which ran with such honors aB a 
puppy, and added new honors in his old age? Each 
of his competitions but confirmed, added to and 
graced his victories which had gone before. What 
setter ever held such form? or what one ever ran without 
