^94 
FbtlEST AMD STREAM. 
fOct. 7, 1S99. 
while the run of steelhead trout is large. The fish taken 
in that river with nets are sent to the San Francisco 
mai-kets, and very lew Quinnat salmon are to be found 
in these shipments. 
Now, the steelhead will take the fly both in the estua- 
ries and in the streams from September to February, 
though very few of the large steelheads can be taken 
in that way, while I have never known but two Quinnat 
to be taken with the fly in Eel River. I have visited 
that stream several tinies, and have talked with many 
fly-fishermen who go there every year, and can only 
find authentic testimony of the captrue of two Quinnats 
with the fly. They will occasionally take a spoon, and 
I have seen manj^ of them taken that way in Eel River 
and in the headwaters of the Sacramento and McCloud 
rivers, and in Battle Creek. I have never known a 
Quinnat to be taken with a fly in the Sacramento or Mc- 
Cloud River, or in Battle Creek, save a tew grilse from 
the McGloud River, and they seldom exceeded 3lbs. 
in weight. 
From Podgers' communication I am of the opinion 
that he caught steelhead trout, and not salmon, and would 
suggest to him that next time he catches fish in the 
Navarro River he send one of them to Dr. Jordan or 
Dr. Gilbert, of Stanford University, and let them deter- 
mine the species, for even so accomplished a sportsman 
as Podgers could easily mistake large steelhead trout for 
salmon. 
The steelhead which Mr. Henry P. Wells caught at 
Clackamas Station, Ore., must not be considered a fair 
test of their ability as fighters. The fish that he caught 
were certainly "lathy," and with us are termed "spent." 
They all take any moving thing in the water, but have 
no strength with which to fight. If Mr. Wells should 
take these fish when they first enter the coast streams 
-from the sea, he would have an entirely different opinion 
of their fighting ability. They are then undoubtedly 
the grandest fighters of any species. 
Steelhead. 
San Francisco, Cal. 
A New Knot for Gut Lines* 
There is probably nothing new under the sun, and the 
inclosed method of knotting gut may be well known. I 
was tying salmon casts a day or two ago, and was struck 
with the clumsiness of the ordinary knot. The -knot I 
inclose is, as you will see, a sort of double figure of 8 knot, 
and is less than half the size of the ordinary knot. 
Fig. T shows two strands of gut forming the original 
loop. Fig. 2 shows the method of tying the knot. Take 
the end of the dark strand, pass it over dark main line, 
then under, and into the original loop from above down- 
Ward. Take the end of the light strand, pass it under 
//<? /. 
he Mmml 
the light main line, then over, and be careful to pass the 
end into the original loop from below upward. 
It will be noticed that each operation is exactly the re- 
verse of the other. Hold the two ends with thumb and 
first finger of each hand, and draw the main lines tight 
with the other fingers. If the knot is properly tied, the 
two. ends will stand out at right angles to the main 
lines. When the knot has been made secure by holding 
each end between the teeth and tightening the main lines, 
the ends may be cut off flush with the knot. Of course, the 
gut must be well soaked. 
Advantages of the knot are: i. Very little of the gut 
is wasted in tying the knot. 2. The knot is smaller and 
more compact than the ordinary one. 3. The ends are 
at right angles to the cast, and so do not catch. 4. The 
ends can be cut of¥ close to the knot without anj'- risk of 
"drawing." 5. One end or both projecting at right angles 
can be left long for dropper fly. 6. There is a four- 
fold, grip of the loops of the main line on each end, as will 
be seen in Fig. 2. — London Fishing Gazette. 
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS. 
The address label on the wrapper shows the date of 
the close of the term for which the subscription is 
paid. The receipt of the paper with such dated ad- 
dress label constitutes the subscriber's receipt for 
money sent to us. 
Subscribers are asked to note on the wrapper the 
date of expiration of subscription ; and to remit 
promptly for renewal, that delays may be avoided. 
For prospectus and advertising rates see page lii. 
Fixtures* 
BENCH SHOV\?S. 
Oct. 2-6.— Dallas, Tex.— Texas Kennel Club's second annual 
bench show. Sydney Smith, Sec'y. . . 
Oct. 3-6.— Danbury, Conn.— Danbury Agricultural Society s eight- 
eenth annual show. G. M. Rundle, Sec'y. , „ . . 
Oct. 10-13.— Providence, R. I.— iihode Island State Fair Asso- 
ciation. E. M. Oldham, Supt. 
Nov. 15-18.— Philadelphia, Pa.— The Philadelphia Dog Show As- 
sociation's first annual bench show. Marcel A. Viti, Sec'y. 
Nov. 29-Dec 1.— New York.— American Pet Dog Club's show. 
S. C. Hodge, Supt. 
FIELD TRIALS. 
Oct. 23.— National Beagle Club's tenth annual trials. G. Mifflin 
Wharton, Sec'y. ^ , , . , ^ , „ 
Oct. 25.— Hampton, Conn.— Connecticut field trials. John L. 
Bassett, Sec'y, New Haven. , „ ^ ^ 
Oct. 31.— Greene Co., Pa.— The Monongahela Valley Game and 
Fish Protective Association's fifth annual field trial. A. C. Peter- 
son Sec'y, 
Oct. 30.— Oxford, Mass.— New England Beagle Club's trials. A. 
D. Kiske, Sec'v- „ ,„.,..„., 
jjov. 7.— Washington C. H., O.— Ohio Field Trial Club's trials, 
C. E. Baughn, Sec'y. . j„ . . . . * 
Nov. 8-9.— Lakeview, Mich.— Michigan Field Trial*. Association's 
second annual trials. E. Rice, Sec'y. . . ^, . . 
Nov. 12.— Bicknell Ind.— Independent tield Tnal Clues first 
annual trials. George D. Maxfield. Sec'y- „ ^ , ^ . 
Nov. 13.— Egg Harbor, N. J.— New Yojk ^Statc Field Ttrial As- 
sociation's inaugural trials. F. F. Rick, Sec'y. . , , 
Nov. 14.— Chatham, Ont.— International Field ^rial Club's tenth 
annual trials. VV. B. Wells, Hon. Sec'y. 
Nov. 14-17.— Carmichaels, Pa.— Central Beagle Club's fourth an- 
nual trials. T. W. Simpson, Sec'y. , , ^ . , , 
Nov. 17.— Newton, N. C— Eastern Field Trul Club s twenty^ 
first annual trials. Simon C. Bradley, Sec'y. 
Nov. 21.— Lawrenceville, 111.— Illinois Field Tnal Associations 
inaugural trials. O. W. Ferguson, Sec'y. _ , , . , 
Nov. 28. , Mo. — Missouri Field Trial Association s third 
annual trials. L. S. Eddins, Sec'y. 
Dec. 8.— Newton. N. C— Continental Field Trial Club's trials. 
Theo. Sturges, Sec'y. 
1900. 
Jan. 22.— West Point, Miss.— United States Field Trial Club's 
annual trials. W. B. Stafford, Sec'y. 
Feb. 5.— Greenville, Ala.— Alabama Field Trial Club's fourth an- 
nual trials. T. H. Spencer, Sec'y. 
Take inventory of the good things in this issue of 
Forest and Stream. Recall what a fund was given 
last week. Count on what Is to come next week 
Was there ever in all the world a more abundant 
w«@kiy store Dt spoHsmm'§ reading? 
**The Wrong of Dog License/' 
Mrs Sarah K. Bolton, of Cleveland, O., who is well 
known as a. writer on the dog, sends us a lealiet pre- 
pared by her on "the Wrong of Dog License," irom 
which we quote the following paragraphs. It is Mrs. 
Bolton's desire to put the paper in the hands of owners 
of dogs and lovers of animals, and she will be glad to 
send it on request. Mrs. Bolton writes: 
Every day in our cities there are scenes which would 
not be tolerated, if we witnessed them. Dogs loved and 
petted by many a child, noble creatures who would die 
to protect their owners, are terrified by having a net 
thrown over them, or a lasso, and dragged along the 
street, thrown by dog catchers into wagons, hurried ot¥ 
to pounds or shelters, and killed by gas or poison or 
drowning. 
Several vears since a lover of dogs, a member of the 
Cleveland "Kennel Club, Mr. C. M. Munhall, realizing 
how the license law bore heavily on the poor who could 
ill afford to pay, and believing that the dog is "property" 
and that a city has no right to kill it, any more than a 
man's horse or cow, brought suit against Cleveland, and 
a "perpetual injunction" was granted by the court "re- 
straining the city from killing dogs." The license law 
was of no etfect after this decision was rendered. Mr. 
Munhall proved himself by this test case a public bene- 
factor. Mr. Munhall says: "The course pursued is 
the only way to wipe out such illegal laws." If other 
cities would follow his example, through some man or 
woman who is a friend to animals, we might be spared 
the yearly slaughter of thousands in some of our large 
cities. 
A prominent vivisector in Cleveland has urgently ad- 
vocated a dog pound to "prevent pet animals from 
straying into the colleges, and it would give the latter a 
regular channel throitgh which their material might be 
derived." 
Of course one of the chief reasons adduced for license 
is a revenue fpr the city or the humane society. In 
1898 the Cleveland Humane Society, needing money, 
tried to obtain through the Legislature a dog license law, 
l:>ut was not successful. One of the most prominent 
judges in the city wrote me: "I have been pretty well 
informed that the dog license law will not pass the 
Legislature on account of the question of its constitu- 
tionality. I am glad to think that the poor dogs and 
poor people who take comfort in them, are shielded by 
the great constitution of the State of Ohio.* * I do 
not believe in the bill at all. It is inhuman, and the idea 
of a Humane Society entering upon such a 'slaughter of 
the innocents' is repugnant to the purposes of the society 
itself. Our Humane Society is one of the best institu- 
tions in the city, but it would seem to me that funds 
ought to he raised in some other way than through a 
law which would result in destroying thousands of these 
companions and guardians of children, and faithful and 
devoted friends of mankind." 
A letter lies before me from a well-known Ohio man 
who has sixty dogs in his kennels. He says: "I love 
dogs— all dogs — and believe that they have all a right to 
live, and that no law is a just one' that allows thern to 
be killed by any society or any person. I ^ believe in 
humane societies for the "good they do, and it is not good 
they do when they destroy the life of any dog or other 
animal, unless said animal has been hurt, or is diseased 
and cannot live.'" ' 
One of the old arguments that license is necessary to 
prevent the increase of dogs is refuted by the experience 
of this city of 400,000, inhabitants. There is no surplus 
of dogs in Cleveland except possibly to a few persons 
who dislike animals. There are always some horneless 
creatures, but' comparafively few v\'here there is no 
license, 
Wlienever n tax is imposed s-onie dogs will be turned 
upon the street._ because rriany o'.^Tiers- cannot or wi!l_ not 
pay the tax. When the license' reaches the exorbitant 
suni of $7.15 for female dogs, as in Hartford, Conn., or 
as in Boston, many persons who would gladlj^ keep a 
dog or give a stray animal a home find it well nigh im- 
possible to do so. 
A kind woman in Boston, seeing a dog catcher run 
ning after a homely little creature, who, frenzied almost 
to madness, sought refuge in her cellar, was so touched 
by the helplessness of the lost animal that she paid the 
$5 fee, and though not well able to do so, has paid it for 
some years, and been rewarded by a remarkable devotion. 
A¥hat use for a license law which causes all this suf- 
fering? Does a city or a humane society need a revenue 
which comes from the death of devoted animals? 
If we are anxious to prevent "mad-dog" scares, license 
and muzzling are not the remedies. There are not so 
many supposed cases of hydrophobia in Cleveland as in 
places where the license law is enforced. _ In Constanti- 
nople, where a man is fined $50 for abusing a dog, and 
not allowed to kill one, hydrophobia is said to be un- 
known, Fortunately, in America muzzling is not com- 
mon, as most people know it is harmful and cruel, the 
dog needing the open mouth for perspiring as well as 
breathing, and that the muzzle promotes madness rather 
than prevents it. 
"If license with its dog catching and killing has such 
abuses under city management, turn these matters over 
to humane societies," say some persons. This has been 
done in some cities, and if the cruel work be carried on 
as humanely as possible the results are appalling. In 
New York city, where the Society for the Prevention 
of Cruelty to Animals collects the license money and 
kills- the unlicensed dogs, the increase of deaths is 
startling from the rigid enforcement of the law. In 
1895 over 46,000 do'gs and cats were killed by the S. P. 
C. A. In 1896 over 70,000. In 1898 over 91,500, about 
four times as many as when the city had charge of the 
license and killing. New York city, twice as large as 
Philadelphia, kills more than ten times as many small 
animals; New York city, six times as large as Boston, 
with half a million population, kills forty-five times as 
many small animals. Boston kills 2,000 unlicensed dogs 
during the three summer months ; New York dty kills 
cats and dogs the whole year through. 
No persons can realize the pity and the horror of 
such killing unless they visit the Shelter at the foot of 
One Hundred and Second street. New York, and see the 
poor creatures in the pens, not for the most part "home- 
less or disabled past recovery," or diseased, but un- 
licensed setters, fox terriers, black and tans, who look up 
to you and whine piteously, asking for release from their 
prison and sure death. Alas ! that so few have any time 
to visit the Shelter, or to ask if there is no remedy for 
this destroying of useful, affectionate creatures. 
The Humane Society of Cincinnati, O., following the 
example of New York, obtained the license fees and 
killed the unlicensed dogs. A Dog Owners' Protective 
Association was formed, and one of its members brought 
suit to restrain the Humane Society from killing his 
dog, on which he had not paid the license. The dog 
license law with fees collected by the Humane Society 
was declared unconstitutional by the court, "because the 
dog is private property and cannot be taken without due 
process of law without violating both State and National 
constitutions." The law which gave the Humane Society 
power to collect license fees 'has been declared illegal 
not only in Ohio but in New York as well. The Appel- 
late Division of the Supreme Court of New York de- 
clared in 1898 that the "Legislature cannot vest a societ} 
with power to kill or dispose of other people's property.' 
The Legislature gave this power to the S. P. C. A. of 
New York city in 1894, four years previously. 
A well-known humane official of New York State 
writes me: "New York city has a State law of its own 
which is practically the same as the one defeated. The 
New York city law is doubtless invalid, but they continue 
to enforce it, as no test case has been brought to de- 
termine its validity.'" 
The Dog Owners' Protective Association of Cincinnati 
helped to obtain the passage of the O'Nei! bill in the 
Ohio Legislature in the winter of 1897-S, which gave an 
unqualified property right in the dog. "Any animal of ' 
the dog kind shall be regarded as, and shall for all in- 
tents and purposes whatsoever be, property," and if killed 
or carried or enticed away, "damages by way of compen- 
sation for the dog, as well as exemplary damages, may be 1 
allowed." Whoever steals a dog is guilty of larceny. 
The O'Neil bill also repealed a most inhuman law on 
our statute books which permitted "any person to kill 
any dog away from home unaccompanied by his master." - 
Nearly similar laws are among the statutes of Massachu- 
setts, New Hampshire, New York, New Jersey, Minne- ' 
sola and elsewhere. Such laws are a shame to a civilized 
people, and show how carelessly and unfeelingly we 
have dealt with the most devoted and truest friend of 
man, who would die for him as no human being would. 
Our humane societies could do noble work in effecting 
changes in these laws. ^\ 
. In Indiana a female dog over ninety days; old is taxed 
$3, "more than a mari is taxed on his fifty or one hundred , 
ewes and lambs. Jtistice says such a law is a disgrace to 
all voters of our State," writes a man from Indiana. A 
lady from that State writes me : "Here in the city an : 
additional tax of one dollar makes the keeping of a ■ 
female dog a very great burden upon poor people. Even 1 
the rich are unwilling to pay $4 a year for tax on a dog. 
The result is, female puppies and dogs are dropped all.' 
over the city. We find them homeless and starving," 1 
It is difficult to see why a dog should be taxed any - 
more than a pet cat or a pet bird, but if licensed and the 
tax not paid, why the dog should be killed, any more than 
a man's horse or ox. j 
For whom are sitch cruel license laws made? For' 
creatures without voice or vote, whose devotion has no 
equal, whose sensitive appreciation of our approval or' 
disapproval is a marvel, who guard us and our children ^ 
with their lives. 
With all this affection and sensitiveness, found alike in 
the homeless waif and the household pet, we hunt them 
in highways and bj'ways, and if their license fee has not I 
been paid vve kill them, without a word of compassiori 
and without burial, and this in a Christian land ! , 
There is a growing conviction that this wholesale' 
slaughter is wrong, and that we have a duty to animals, 
as to orphans and aged, which we have never fully 
realised. I« London, England, where the police gather. 
I 
