68 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
[July 23, 1898. 
That most beautiful of American game birds, the 
ruffed grouse, lives I think entirely upon insects, wild 
berries, wild seeds, and the buds of trees, chiefly birch. 
Farmers in this country sometimes complain of dam- 
age done by game, and of the latter being kept for the 
exclusive use of the landlords, but it must be considered 
that the rent they have to pay is lower than it would be 
if the landlords did not reserve a right to the game; and 
certainly any farmer possessed of ordinary common 
sense, when about to hire a farm, would protect himself, 
by a written agreement from losses due to excessive 
preservation. 
4. Objection No. 4 certainly does not apply to America, 
where it is universally admitted that the birds and ani- 
mals which destroy game are far too numerous. In 
the British Islands it is quite true that they have in most 
places been killed by game-keepers in too indiscriminate 
a manner. Especially is this the case with regard to 
owls and some kinds of hawks, which live chiefly upon 
rats and mice; and the latter also upon grubs and beetles. 
The peregrine falcon and sparrow hawk should, I think, 
be exempted from the list of the condemned. They both 
destroy game, but the former is of great service to the 
cultivator in helping to diminish the numbers of crows 
and wood pigeons, while the sparrow hawk kills multi- 
tudes of the small granivorous birds which have of late 
years increased so as to do very serious damage to the 
cornfields. 
Many game preservers are now well aware of these 
facts and are taking measures to limit the destruction of 
birds of prey. 
5. It is very doubtful whether the game killed by 
sportsmen suffers more pain on the average than that 
which dies according to "nature's" methods — by disease, 
cold, starvation and the attacks of the carnivora. The 
latter are known to frequently cat their prey while 
alive, and in other cases the prey escapes wounded, 
either to recover or to die after lingering a longer 
or shorter time. 
With regard to tame, animals, if we take into considera- 
tion their sufferings when driven on country roads, car- 
ried long distances by rail, hustled through the crowded 
streets of cities, beaten with heavy sticks, worried' by 
dogs, kept purposely without food or water for twelve 
or more hours before being slaughtered, and finally put 
to death by more or less painful methods; if we think 
of all these facts it seems certain that they endure more 
misery on the whole than the game animals killed or 
wounded by sportsmen, for these suffer no terror or 
pain until shortly before they are fired at. There is of 
course unnecessary pain inflicted through using guns 
and rifles deficient in power, firing at too long ranges, 
etc.; but that is the abuse of sport and not a necessary 
part of it. 
6. There Can b,e no doubt that the love of hunt- 
ing is an inheritance from our savage ancestors, but 
what proof is there that indulging in it tends to brutalize? 
We do not find in actual life that sportsmen are more 
cruel or unrefined than other men. The simple fact 
that they would not like to shoot poultry in a farmyard 
or oxen in a field shows that the pleasure of sport de- 
pends not upon killing, but upon exercising the skill 
required in approaching game and handling the weapons 
used for killing it. Some of the most tenderhearted 
and good men in existence have been ardent sportsmen, 
and this is only what might be expected, for shooting 
and fishing bring us into close contact with the wonders 
and beauties of nature, which tend to raise our minds 
above the srdid, money-grubbing spirit of the present 
age. 
Sport is undoubtedly pursued by many who are brutal 
and degraded, but it is not sport which has made them 
so. Such are the men who form the band of "trout 
hogs," the shooters (not sportsmen) who fire at bushes 
which they see moving, knowing well that they risk 
killing a fellow man, or that, if a deer be behind the 
bushes, he is quite as likely to escape with a broken leg 
as to be bagged. 
It is deeply to be regretted that the Christian religion 
has never taUght the necessity of kindness to the lower 
animals; or that it has not inculcated some sort of su- 
perstition which would have the same effect in causing 
us to dislike sacrificing life uselessly. The Hindoos are 
not in themselves more tenderhearted than the Euro- 
pean races, but the doctrine of the transmigration of 
souls, which they have held for countless ages, has suf- 
fused their minds with a feeling of reverence for the life 
of the lower creatures, which prevents bullying or killing 
them without real necessity. The votaries also of the 
Mahometan and other religions in India have, by long 
association with the Hindoos, become largely imbued 
with similar ideas. 
The. result of this has been vividly depicted by Hall 
Caine, the well-known writer. When describing his 
tour in India, eight or nine years ago, he said: 
"Nothing gives more delight when traveling through 
rural India than the bird life that abounds everywhere, 
absolutely unmolested. They are as tame as in a poul- 
try yard, making the country one vast aviary. Yellow- 
beaked minas, ringdoves, jays, hoopoes and parrots take 
dust baths with the merry palm-squirrels in the road- 
way, , hardly troubling themselves to hop out ,of the 
way of the heavy bullock carts. Every wayside pond 
and lake is alive with ducks, wild geese, flamingoes, 
pelicans and waders of every size and sort, from dainty 
red-legged beauties the size of pigeons up to great un- 
wieldy cranes and adjutants 5ft. high. 
"We pass a dead sheep with two loathsome vultures 
picking over the carcass, and presently a brood of 
fluffy young partridges, with father and mother in 
charge/look at us fearlessly within 10ft. of our whirling 
carriage. Every village has its flock of sacred peacocks 
pacing gravely through the surrounding gardens and 
fields; and woodpeckers or kingfishers flash about like 
iewels in the blazing sunlight." 
With regard to argument No. 7, even if it were con- 
ceded that the mere fact of animals being wild gives 
everyone the right to capture or kill them, the question 
is, does it give everyone the right to trespass upon 
the land where the game happens' to be? 
\[ so, then everyone has a right to treapass on any 
man's lawn, garden, or orchard, for such a purpose. But 
it is obvious that any claim to such a right would be 
universally repudiated". If allowed, the comfort of indi- 
vidual owners would be seriously interfered with, and, 
1 . • ■ ■ ■ 1. .... . -.. 1 
the market value of all gardens, lawns and orchards, to- 
gether with that of the houses to which they are at- 
tached, would be very much diminished, thus injuring 
the whole community. But a farm is as much private 
property as a garden, and its market value would also be 
lowered if people had a right to trespass upon it in order 
to destroy game. And when an individual, by industry 
and business talent, saves enough money to purchase 
several adjoining farms and thus form a large estate, it 
is evident that the same rules apply to this as to one 
farm, or a garden. 
Leaving put the question of annoyance to the owner 
and the injury done to crops and fences, there is the 
fact that the game upon the land and the fish in the 
waters upon it are of value either as food for the own- 
er and the enjoyment he experiences in hunting, or else 
because he can raise money by selling the privilege of 
hunting to others. 
I do not know what the popular feeling about poach- 
ing now is in America, but in this country the hatred 
which the Radicals or Democrats have toward large 
land owners sometimes causes them to write upon 
that subject in a manner which would at once be pro- 
nounced absurd if applied to a garden or small farm 
belonging to a poor man. But watching the evil ef- 
fects of poaching upon the property of the poor demon- 
strates clearly how injurious it is to the country at 
large. 
For some years I lived in a part of England where 
there are many farms of only forty to eighty acres, cul- 
tivated by their owners, chiefly with the assistance of 
their wives and children. Poaching was very prevalent 
and the farmers often complained of how much they 
suffered, not only by the loss of the game, but by fences 
being broken so that sheep escaped from the fields, and 
by growing crops being trampled down. One man 
showed me a stream on his land in which trout had once 
been plentiful, but had then been completely exterminat- 
ed by poachers. If he could have protected them he 
might have let the right of fishing annually to his richer 
neighbors. Another man, who owned about eighty acres, 
wanted me to hire the right of shooting. I would gladly 
have done so, together with that upon two adjoining 
farms, but on inquiry I found they were so incessantly 
poached that the right of shooting was almost worth- 
less. My refusal was a disappointment to the farmer, for 
he was very poor and had a mortgage on his land. 
There would have been no game whatever had some not 
strayed occasionally from the grounds of two neighbor- 
ing land holders who could afford to employ game- 
keepers. The few rabbits which the owners of the small 
farms trapped they sold in a neighboring town for a 
shilling each, and might have added considerably to their 
incomes in this way if there had been no poaching. 
Mr. Armin Tenner sent an account last year to an 
American sporting periodical, describing how the small 
land-holders in some parts of Germany co-operate in 
order to preserve the game, and sell the right of shooting 
to sportsmen, dividing the money fairly among them- 
selves. Possibly a similar system might succeed in parts 
of the States where the farmers do not care person- 
ally for the pleasure of hunting. Tn those States where 
game laws do not yet exist much might be done by en- 
forcing the laws against trespass. 
There appear to be some strange ideas, among a 
certain class of politicians, as to the meaning of what 
they term "natural rights." Apparently they consider 
that, as man in a savage or "natural" state, and living in 
an uncultivated country, can kill whatever wild animal 
he desires, the power to do so is a right which is denied 
him by tyrannical legislators in a well populated and 
cultivated country. Even the reason given for claiming 
such a right will not bear the test of examination. Al- 
though, as a general but not invariable rule, an indivi- 
dual savage can kill a wild animal without restraint, he 
can only do so on the hunting grounds of his own 
tribe; and wars are very commonly caused by one tribe 
encroaching upon the land claimed by another. Each 
tribe is, in fact, obliged to fight in order to avoid 
starvation. Here is, therefore, one restriction upon so- 
called natural right. 
Again, if a tribe find that uncontrolled destruction of 
game is seriously diminishing the supply of food, it will, 
if sensible, make some rules to stop such an evil and 
thus place another limit upon "right." In truth, the term 
"right" simply means any action which is permitted to 
each individual by the tribe or nation in which he 
lives; and if a community consider any special action to 
be injurious to its best interests, it is quite justified in 
making a law to prevent it, thus abolishing the right. 
For several generations after America was settled in 
by various races from Europe the idea of establishing 
game laws was unpopular, partly because great numbers 
of emigrants had come from countries where, the power 
being chiefly in the hands of the king and aristocracy, 
the game laws were exclusive and oppressive, and en- 
forced by extremely severe penalties. There was also 
little necessity for game laws in a new country, because 
game was plentiful upon unoccupied land, and if each 
farmer allowed a neighbor to shoot upon his own land 
he was equally free to shoot upon his neighbor's land. 
. The case is quite different in the present day, owing 
to the density of population and comparative scarcity of 
game. It is clearly beneficial to the community for 
each farmer to raise the greatest possible amount of food 
from his land, whether by growing crops, grazing tame 
animals, or encouraging game to breed. But this cannot 
be done unless there be power to keep off trespassers 
and punish those who abstract any portion of the crops 
or of the tame and wild animals. It. must surely be ad- 
mitted, in common fairness, that if any portion of the 
population Vave a right to capture game, it should be 
those upon whose lands the game feeds and not those 
who neither own the land nor pay rent for it. 
That game laws rationally framed and enforced would 
be highly beneficial to the mass of the population seems 
certain for the following reasons: 
1, The farmers in countries like the States, where 
they own the land, would make a profit out of the 
game whether they shot and captured it themselves, or 
sold the right of hunting to others. 
2. The prosperity of countries with extensive manu- 
facturing and mercantile businesses depends largely upon 
the energy and talents of those who direct and manage 
tjiem. When such men become jfjcJed and worn pnt, pr 
even ill, through excessive mental labor during the 
chief portion of each year, nothing restores their vigor 
and health so much as an outing accompanied with 
hunting or fishing. But when game and fish are en- 
terminated, forest life is so much less attractive that a 
holiday is likely to be spent in yawning about hotels at' 
fashionable watering places, with the usual deteriorating" 
effects of late hours and frivolous amusements. 
A temporary residence in a country district is far 
more beneficial to both the man and his family, morally 
and physically, besides causing money to be spent among- 
the scanty rural population where it is urgently needed, 
3. In all civilized countries there are numerous in-' 
dividuals who, haAang made a competence, decide upon 
retiring from business. If they can obtain a moderate 
amount of sport in the nature of hunting, shooting or' 
fishing, they frequently settle in a country district, other- 
wise, finding rural life too monotonous, thev continue 
to reside in a city or its suburbs. There is a great 
tendency in modern times for the population to crowd , 
into cities, but it is highly advantageous to a nation for 
as large a population as possible to live in the country, 
because the money spent there increases the prosperity 
of the local farmers, trades people and others, and still 
more because the children, having plenty of pure air. 
exercise and wholesome food (besides being in perpetual 
contact with the refining beauties of nature), become far' 
superior, mentally, morally and physically, to those rear-' 
ed in the enervating surroundings of cities, amid drink- 
ing saloons and depraved companions. 
London is one of the healthiest cities in the world, 
yet so deleterious is it to child life that, as statistics 
prove, the population would become extinct in a few 
generations if it were not incessantly recruited from 
those reared in the country. 
4. If the States continue to be denuded of game at the 
present rate, there will in a few years be little or no. 
use for either shotguns or sporting rifles. There must 
indeed now be thousands of men who refrain from 
purchasing guns solely because of the scarcity of game. 
If, by the enforcement of judicious laws, the supply could 
be increased and maintained perennially, a great impulse 
would be given to the gun and rifle trade. The result of 
this would be the training of multitudes in the use of such 
weapons, so that, if required for the defense of the 
country, they could be made into far more efficient sol- 
diers than would be possible in their present circum- 
stances. Nuinerous conflicts between practical hunters 
and highly disciplined troops have proved that the fire 
of the latter is almost incredibly inferior in accuracy to. 
that of the former. 
Mr. H. W. S. Cleveland, in his "Hints to Riflemen," 
published at New York in 1864, remarks: "I have been 
assured repeatedly, by officers who have taken very 
great pains in training their men beforehand, that the 
only men who were to be relied on were those whose 
long familiarity with the use of the gun was such that 
they instinctively held and pointed it in the right direc- 
tion; while those who had -had only such instruction as 
the soldier receives, in estimating distance, arranging 
sights, etc., were often seen in action firing into the 
ground or into the air, quite unconscious of what thijr 
vverc doing." 
5. If game were preserved until it became abundant, 
multitudes of people would be able to buy it who now 
can rarely ever afford to do so. In England the num- 
berless pheasants, artificially reared until old enough to 
take care of themselves, cost the large land-holders From 
ten shillings to a pound each by the time they are 
shot; but, being so plentiful, they are sold in the towns, 
retail, at two to three shillings each. Invalids and com- 
paratively poor people are thus able to obtain a pleasant 
change of diet from the eternal round of beef, mutton 
and pork. 
6. In most parts of the States game has decreased to 
such a degree that the only way of saving it from utter 
extinction appears to be that which Forest and Stream 
has advocated for some time, viz.: prohibiting the sale 
altogether. 
But such a prohibition need not be maintained more 
than a few years, if only public opinion could be so in- 
fluenced as to allow of game protecting laws being uni- 
versally passed and enforced. In a short time the result 
would inevitably be that not only would the native game, 
both large and small, again become plentiful, but the 
various species of foreign pheasants imported of late 
years by some patriotic Americans, instead of number- 
ing, as at present, a few thousands, would exist . in 
thousands of millions. To these may, and it is to be 
hoped will, be added other kinds of foreign game well 
worth acclimatization, such as francolins, bustards, black 
game, capercailzie, etc., so that every variety of ground 
on mountain and plain may have its fitting inhabitants. 
Suppose, in addition to the above-mentioned measures, 
that the fish in all the lakes and rivers of the States 
be protected from being poisoned by the refuse of saw 
mills and chemical factories, and from decimation by 
dynamite and small-meshed nets, the effect must be that 
the total food supply of the country would be increased 
to an extent now incalculable. The poorest part of the 
population would thus be benefited, either directly by 
making butchers' meat cheaper, or indirectly by export- 
ing larger quantities of it than at present to foreign 
nations. J- J- M-eyktck. 
Sat.tekton, Devonshire, Eng., June ?S. 
Quail on Long: Island. 
From all sections of Long Island come reports of an 
unusual number of quail. It was supposed that the cold, 
wet weather of April and May would interfere with the 
hatching of the eggs 'or kill off the young birds, but 
nevertheless the flocks of half-grown quail are met with 
everywhere. On the south side of the island, even with-- 
in the limits of New York city, the whistle of the quail 
is heard, and this is where there have been no quail lor 
several years. It is said that rabbits and squirrels are 
also very plentiful. The outlook for sport in all parts 
of the island seem never to have been better, 
The Forest and Stream is put to pw« ea-h. wesk hn 
Tuesday Correspondence intended fr>r puhllcnt oil 
should reach us at the latest by Monday a^d rfl^rty 
parller ty* pracM&iblf, 
