Aw. 14.18970 . FOREST AND STREAM. 131 
merry twinkle of the stars, and did not return to the house 
until after the folks had been home some time and Charles 
had gone to bed. In the morning Charles kept his bed and 
our host went up to see what was the matter. Upon his re- 
turn he reported that Charles was quite sick with a terrible 
headache and that I was to go shooting alone, as he would 
be unable to accompany me. When I returned at night 1 
learned that Charles had felt so badly that he had hired a 
iuRn to lake him home, and when I got home I found that 
he bad started on a trip west, and it was nearly a month be- 
loie 1 saw him again. When 1 did meet him he was more 
cold and distant than I had ever known him to be, and to 
this day the coolness — on his part but not on mine — still re- 
mains, and 1 often grieve over the fact and often wish that 
his disposition was as sweet as mine, as, except for this one 
fault, Charles is a very good sort of a fellow. 
'Jw Mmmt 
FIXTURES. 
FIELD TRIALS. 
Aug. 25.— Continental Field Trial Club's Nortliwest Stake, Brown's 
"Valley, Minu 
Aug. 30.— Western Canada Kennel Club's trials. 
Sept. 1.— Continental Field Trials Club's chicken trials, Morris, Man. 
Sept. 6. -Manitoba Field Trials Club. Morris, Man. 
Sept. 7.— Northwestern Field Ti'ial Clnb"s Champion Stake, Morris, 
Man. 
Oct. 25,— Brunswick Fur Club's ninth annual trials. 
Nov. 1.— Dixie Red Fox Club's third annual meet, Waverly, Miss. 
Nov. 1.— New England Beagle Club's trials, Oxford, Mass. 
Nov. 2.— Monongahels Valley Game and Fish Protective Associ- 
ation's trials, Greene county. Pa. 
Nov. 8.— Union Field Trials Club's trials, Carlisle, Ind. 
Nov. 9.— Central Beagle Club's trials, Sharpsburg, Pa. 
Nov. 9.— Peninsular Field Trial Club's trials, Leamington, Ont. 
Nov. 15.— E F. T. Club's trials, Newton, N. C. 
Nov. 16.— International Field Trials Club's eighth annual trials, 
Chatham, Ont. 
Nov. sa.— U. S. F. T. Club's autumn trials. 
1898. 
Jan. 10.— U. S. F, T, Club's winter trials, West Point, Mss. 
Jan. 17. — Continental F. T. Club's trials, New Albany, Miss. 
FIELD TRIALS AND FIELD TRIAL 
JUDGES.-I. 
At the present day the "kicker" is few in number and 
generally wisely circumspect in his kicks as compared with 
the sterling article of past years. Some years ago "kickers" 
were quite numerous and brave. Their vigilance in watch- 
ing for grievances and their activity in airing them were be- 
yond reproach. Being such a clamorous babbler for honesty 
in others, the kicker was inferentially honest himself to a 
degree which put in shadow the honesty of all others. Not- 
withstanding his rectitude, he was constantly the victim of 
the rapacity and dishonesty of others, or a victim of their 
incompetency and ignorance, or all these things combined. 
The fact that he did not win was sufficient proof in itself 
that there was something wrong with the judges or the man- 
agement. Thus he was constantly subjected to hardships 
and losses. It was enough to dishearten a man to be met by 
undeserved defeat^t every turn, in his eiforts to better the 
nublic weal; and all this he has many times feelingly related 
in articles over his own name when he felt a bit brave, but 
oftenest over a nom de plume, which would conceal his 
identity. 
He always had a grievance, l^o proof as to whether it 
had any substantial grounds was necessary. It was sufficient 
that it was so because he told the public it was so. 
He was of the rare few who could compose their own songs 
and sing them too. And yet, notwithstanding that he was 
a constant factor in the competition, a chronic sufferer from 
undi served defeats and an habitual discoverer of deep-laid 
villainies, he before this date has never been specially set 
forth in print to the degree which his importance, activity 
and talents entitle him. Frankly outspoken in his contempt 
and denunciation of those who did not see the merit in his 
dogs which he himself saw, and freely confessing the worth- 
lessness which he saw in all dogs owned by others, and 
promptly earnest in communicating to the public his feeling 
of distress and the story of hig wrongs, affixed to such in- 
structive information concerning the excellence and price of 
his dogs as he could stuff into his article, he has had a 
special field largely to himself. But he has never had a 
good opportunity to see himself as others see him. 
The "kicker" has done incalculable harm to field trial in- 
terests. He has written many columns of contumacious 
writings, directed at judges, management, reporters, com- 
petitors — all, in short, who in any way ran counter to his 
wishes or interests. In the responsible work of doing some- 
thing substantial for promoting trials, few of them ever did 
anything beyond paying their entry fees, and what little 
they did do would not have been much missed had it been 
withheld. " 
Notwithstanding that clubs and judges have done a great 
work in behalf of American sportsmanship, work accom- 
plished only by great outlay in money and laborious care and 
effort, not a single column has ever been written heretofore 
specially in their favor. 
Several journals (Foeest and Stream was not of the 
number) were liberal in the allotment of space to the 
"kicker" who desired the public to participate in his grief, 
to take notice of the bargain sales he could offer, or the ex- 
cellence of the get of his favorite stud dog, and above all, 
to note the rotten and general dishonesty ot clubs and 
judges— and why? Some other man's dog had won. Had 
he not kept the scores himself? Had not his friends, Tom, 
Dick and Harry, assui-ed him that he had been defrauded'? 
Everybody knew that the judges were prejudiced against his 
line of blood. Did not his friend So and So, who had pur- 
chased a puppy of him, by his stud dog Goggle Eye, who 
was available to the pubhc at the low sum of $35, and out 
of the celebrated bitch Suipey Nose, whose last litter he had 
sold for $50 apiece, every one a winner by right, and he 
would soon have another litter of the same breeding to sell 
at a reduced figure— did not his friend So and So note that 
the judges did not give his puppy half a chance? The end 
of trials was near. 
Almost from the inception of field trials, and distinctly 
constant when they became more or less commercial, there 
was an insubordinate element composed of men who, being 
disappointed, lost their heads, or men who, looking solely 
for revenue, made every possibility a matter of cornmercial 
calculation. 
Whatever differences there might be as to th.e cause of the 
"kickers' " grievances, they were a unit in squealing denuncia- 
tion at the judges, at the management which employed the 
judges, and the reporters wlio failed to expose the alleged 
dishonesty. 
Some of the ' 'kickers" were men who were new to any kind 
of competition. They, therefore, were men who had none of 
the discipline or knowledge of sporting etiquette, which en- 
ables men to lose or win with a good grace, and not a few did 
not consider the possibility of losing at all. They were child- 
ishly confident of winning. Some of them were shamelessly 
boastful of the superiority of their own dogs and offensively gar- 
rulous in the recountal of their dogs' wonderf ul performances. 
They also were outspoken in their expression of contempt 
for the dogs owned by others. They were the most persistently 
wearisome of bores. Thej' had but one topic. They could prate 
only on their dogs or themselves, and any attempt to discuss 
one or the other from any other than their egotistical point of 
view was sure to evoke ill temper. They seemed to own the 
prizes before the competition began. They had prejudged 
the trials, and the judges were a mere inert adjunct — a neces- 
sity to formality and official record. 
Whether their dogs were worthless duffers, or excellent in 
some parts of the field work and po(^r in others, or whether 
they were good performers defeated only because they were 
against better ones, no adverse decision of the judges shook 
their unalterable faith in their dogs, or their silly belief that 
defeat could only come from dishonest decisions. 
Some men are constitutionally incapable of joining in a 
competition in a spirit of common fairness. The boy who 
loses at a game of marbles, thrashes his victor, robs him of his 
winnings, or, being weak-hearted, sobs because he lost, is 
likely to Ijecome a man who will boast endlessly and have 
many angry griefs, and will be always treated unfairly — 
when he loses. But some men kick as a matter of business 
policy. By making a hullabaloo they bring themselves and 
dogs into public notice, and, having once derived some finan- 
cial benefit from it, they cultivate it for profit forever after- 
ward. A few seem to take a vain pleasure in making them- 
selves conspicuous, regardless of sense, practice or cause. 
Publicity panders to their egotism. 
Some years ago, at very infrequent intervals, however, 
judges, smarting under the sting of false accusations and 
misrepresentation, would enter a public controversy with a 
kicker on the merits of the awards. Such was always fruit- 
less so far as any definite demonstration was concerned. It 
could not be otherwise. If the kicker was playing for free 
advertising, he was far from desiring a conclusion. If he 
had an egotistical craving for notoriety and sympathy, the 
controversy was an excellent medium. If he loved his dog, 
and was defending him because he loved him, no argument 
could j)revail against a conviction founded on such data — 
that is, his love for his dog. 
As the objection was almost always personal and violent 
and emotional, resting on the owner's judgment of his own 
dog, and on his opinion of the judges, it was called a "kick," 
and the objector was called a "kicker." It was a happy 
term, in that it implied an act which could be done with- 
out sense, right or reason. There were habitual kickers 
who kicked at everything. The juncture at which they 
would kick could be forecast to a nicety under cer- 
tain conditions. They seemed to have a constitutional im- 
pulscj to perceive dishonesty or stupidity in every plan or 
action. They believe that they were singled out for relent- 
less persecution. By premeditation, they asserted, their 
dogs were always cast off at the worst time of day, in the 
worst places, where there were the most briers and the few- 
est birds. Or the poorest course possible was laid out for 
the day's work. It was certain that the management favored 
the other man and his dogs because he made more entries. 
Two of the judges were sure to give the prize to a certain 
dog because they owned a thirty-stccnd cousin of him. An- 
other dog was sure to win, too, for Mr. So and So, a friend 
to the owner, was seen to hold a conversation with one of 
the judges. None of the judges liked a pointer, and it was 
no use running one, except lo get a report in the sporting 
papers for proof to the owner tnat the dog was broken, so as 
to collect the fees for training — and so on ad nausemn. 
The kicker who was able to put his kick in print, dressed 
u.p with all the plausibility that cunning and distortion could 
give it, had an advantage over his fellows. The kicks which 
were published were but a small part of the whole 
number made; yet the kicker who talked and wrote 
publicly was precisely the same as the kicker who 
privately suggested, and boasted and scolded, and 
aired his supreme selfishness when he could secure 
hearers. And yet there have been those who, hearing 
but one side of the case, and that from the party directly in- 
terested, have considered that all the proof necessary was 
piesented, and that the kicker's conclusions were quite cor- 
rect. Three competent judges, an experienced management, 
and the other competitors were therefore all wrong. 
There are men who are mentally unfitted to join in any 
contest. If they play a social game of cards, or checkers, or 
chess, etc., defeat brings ill temper. They wrangle and ob- 
ject. As for unreservedly placing their contentions in the 
nands of a third party for adjudication, and abiding with a 
gracious manner and a good heart to his ruling, they cannot 
do so unless the case is decided in theu' favor. It is but jus- 
tice to say that some wholly new to competition, and there- 
fore undisciplined in considering both aides of the case, im- 
prove with experience, and learn that an interested party is 
not a competent judge of his own case. If one competitor 
could judge his own dog, all competitors would have the 
same right — a pretty sight it would be if they were settling 
the matter among themselves. They should learn the chief 
point of sportsman's etiquette, the one most punctiliously 
observed by genuine sportsmen— that is, having submitted 
the dogs to the judges, to abide by their decision. There is 
a certain dung-nill spirit in a man who squeals because he 
has lost. A man may be a very sweet gentleman in a certain 
environment and stUl make avery indilterent or disagi'eeable 
sportsman. At home, where everything is pleasant, or at 
business wbere everything is routine, he may look and feel 
and think ahke day after day, but in camp, where he must 
suffer some discomforts or do some repugnant work, or at a 
field trial, where rivalries are aroused and his dog is in ques- 
tion, he may show some unlovely traits. 
While there are kickers, they are fortunately but a small 
part of the field trial patrons, and so far as their value to the 
trials are concerned they are of the least importance. Im- 
probable as it may seem to him whose knowledge of field 
trials is gathered from the published articles of kickers, there 
is now no general dissatisfaction with field trial manage- 
ments, nor field field trial judges. Such reform as is needed 
is mostly the reformation of the kicker. Out of all the pub- 
lished diatribes of kickers, no good has ever been accom- 
plished and no injustice has ever been shown to exist. 
That there were and are sterling sportsmen in substantial 
numbers, ones who love sport for its own sake and wh.o have 
steadfastly and uncomplainingly given time, effort 
and money in its support, the history of field trials 
and their standing now amply prove. Nor are 
they the fugitive frazzle edge class of field trial 
supporters or field trial theorists called kickers. They 
are the ones who shouldered the burdens and did the 
thinking and made the way easy. Some of them in the hour 
of need have put their hands in their pockets for $100 each 
to make up a single field trial deficit. Others work faith- 
fully and silently to make the trials a success. And while 
they are doing so, the kicker raises his ululation throughout 
the land, asking the populace to witness his wrongs. Did 
any kicker ever donate $100 to make good a deficit? The 
sterling stuff required to manage field trials, to support them, 
to give them prestige and to judge them is not made up of 
kickers. 
The Pointer as a Workman. 
Spbingfield, Mass. — Editor Forest and Stream: I have 
been a pointer admirer these many years, though not such a 
blind one that I could discover no faults in him. I have 
been interested in field trials, too. They have done much to 
improve both pointers and setters. To them they owe their 
fame; their improvement; their greater popularity; and, 
through the greater knowledge which pointer breeders 
gained from the lessons taught by field trials, came a better 
and more intelligent system of breeding, developing and 
training. If there had been no field trials then there would 
have been no improvement in pointers. There would have 
been no public notice of them either. 
I noted one remark in Eokest and Stkeam of a recent 
issue, referring to the facl that pointer breeders never did 
much for pointers by assuming the responsibilities of a com- 
petition. I thought at first it must be wrong. Surely it 
would seem that the great number of pointer men would 
furnish an active, financially responsible part in fostering 
field trials and in managing them. 
I remember that the Irish setter owners and breeders or- 
ganized a club and held field trials, and that the G-ordon set- 
ter owners and breeders did likewise, but I cannot find any 
record of a pointer club ever having done so. 
To me it seems that if the setter owners and breeders had 
not done all the promoting and managing, fixing things so 
that the owners of pointers could run their do^s, there would 
not have been any pointer trials at all. The trials were what 
gave the pointers their monetary value. They were what 
demonstrated the pointer's field ability. They furnished a 
means for public information. Without them the public 
could never learned anything about the good or bad. And 
without published reports of the trials they would have 
been of limited value. The large prices obtained for some 
pointers was a result of the field trials. I regret tliat some 
pointer owners forget all this, and instead of being grateful 
for the favors and benefits they have received, they "kick" 
because they did not get more. 
Is it not astonishing that they have never done anything 
for themselves, yet bitterly complain of those who have done 
all that ever has been done for the pointer's benefit in com- 
petition? To me it seems ungrateful to accept a favor, and 
then complain that it was not quite so good or so large a 
favor as it should have been. 
I fell in perfectly with the humor of your suggestion to 
the dissatisfied pointer men — to turn to and do something for 
themselves. We all know how cheap everything is when it 
is secured without effort, and how dearly it is prized when 
it represents work, care, expenditure — and when one is 
forced to trust to his own exertion he then does not find 
fault with others. 
I have seen some field trials. It is an impossibility for any 
spectator to make any correct special criticism on them which 
involves the merits of two dogs in competition. No specta- 
tor can see more than fragments of the work; every spectator 
feels competent to pass positive judgment nevertheless; every 
owner is certain to have a pretty good opinion of his dog, nO' 
matter how worthless a brute he may be, and it is an un- 
pleasant incident of the judging that when the judge decides- 
against a dog, the owner suspects not that his dog was not 
the best dog, but that the judge was stupid or prejudiced, or 
had favorites. 
The time has come when tbe "kicker" no longer finds a 
heedful ear in the public. He is classed as he belongs, with 
the ill-tempered, disappointed men who have none of the 
training of sportsmen, and none of the gameness which 
makes a man plucky loser or a pleasant winner. 
Pointer Alan. 
C, F. T. C.'s Entries. 
The entries for Continental Excelsior (all-age) Stake to 
be run at Morris on chickens in September next are as fol- 
lows: 
POINTERS. 
Lady of Hessen — Tabasco Kennels' ]. and w. bitch. 
(Hessen Boy — Lady of Rush). 
Tick's Xid— Del Monte Kennels* b. and w. dog (Tick 
Boy— Lulu K.). 
King Lee — E. H. Osthaus's 1. and w. dog (Kent's Joe — ■ 
Lads Lady). 
Elgin's Dash — F. W. Dunham's lem. and w. dog (Kent 
Elgin — Mack's Juno). 
Lord Buster— B. Gordon's 1. and w. dog (Lord Mount- 
Unknown). 
Top Saw^yer— E. O. Damon's 1. and w. dog. 
Alabama Girl— H. H. Mayberry's 1. and w. hitch (Ar- 
row — Lady Mell). 
SETTERS. 
Hurstbotjene Zip— S. P. Jones's b., w. and t. dog (Tony 
Boy — Dimple II.), 
Christina— Hobart Ames's b., w. and t. bitch (Blue 
Ridge Mark— Lou R.). 
Josie Freeman— C. A. Draper's b., w. and t. bitch (An- 
tonio — Nellie Hope). 
Saih T.— Del Monte Kennels' b.,w. and t. dog (Luke Roy 
— BettieB.). 
Jill — E. H. Osthaus's b., w. and t. bitch (Fauster — 
Nan). 
Swab— A. C. Reid's b. and t. bitch (Manitoba Toss— Pitti 
Sing). 
CiNCiNNATus Pride— E. A. Burdette's b., w. and t. dog 
(Cincinnatus — Albert's Nellie). 
Anne op Abbotsford — E. A. Burdette's b.'and w. bitch 
(Gladstone's Boy— Bohemian Girl). 
Iroquois Chief — Verona Kennels' b., w. and t. dog 
Antonio — Can Can). 
Duke .T.— W. R. Tait's w, dog (Monk of Fumess — 
