163 
1875 _ 
stantly sold, and wlien the kennel has a deservedly good 
reputation, the prices paid are sufficient to render 
breeding decidedly remunerative. There is not a gen- 
tleman in this or any other land who would not rather 
deal with a man of his own class, where position would 
be a guaranty for honorable action, than with one who 
had nothing to lose, and who would regard a dollar 
more than a good name. Some of our sportsmen look 
upon this matter in its proper light, and have alreadj' 
imported dogs for the pu.-pose of breeding them; and 
though theyma 3 ’' have been prompted in the first in- 
stance by a desire to improve their kennels through the 
blood which they will thus obtain, they still expect and 
intend to cover their expenses, and get a good interest 
on their money by selling what whelps they do not 
need. 
A few years from this time will see as great a 
change in the feeling regarding dog breeding as 
that which has marked other branches of sport- 
ing, and when the barriers of false pride have 
been broken down, those gentlemen who have been 
pioneers in this movement, will reap their reward 
in the recogni'ion of their superior kennels, a matter 
placed beyond question by the record of their victories 
over others who have depended upon the old system for 
their dogs. 
It is easy enough for individuals to claim for their 
enimals superiority of blood and qualities, and as we 
have yet no test for these, there can be no waj’ of prov- 
ing or disproving the assertion. Hundreds of degs are 
annually put into the stud, and their services sought by 
sportsmen who depend upon the owner’s statement, and 
in this way the number of worthless animals is con- 
stantly increased. It must be remembered too that it 
is possible for a dog to be of pure lineage, yet dishonor 
it by cur-like attributes, and either vanity or lack of ex- 
perience prevent the owner detecting this. Unpreju- 
qiced and positive tests are therefore great!}' needed, 
and these can only be found in shows and trials under 
judges who have the common interest so keenly in view 
that they will allow neither friendship nor personal bias 
to control their awards; men who will bear ever in 
mind that upon their decision will greatly depend the 
future reputation of the animal in the stud, and who 
will therefore examine earefully each specimen before 
them, giving due credit to beauty and blood, but in all 
cases where possible requiring also performance ere 
they pronounce a favorable verdict. 
It is just and proper that field trials should outrank 
mere shows, as the former afford a practical test of the 
dog’s abilities, but for a while at least, there will be one 
obstacle met with in these, viz., the entrance of dogs 
bred from native stock, having only the most general, 
and therefore entirely inadmissible pedigrees, which 
are nevertheless good workers, and whose owner* will 
expect to win on this merit alone, and make a great out- 
cry if their favorites are not successful. To escape 
this it must be made a une qua non that every winner 
shall present an irreproachable pedigree, and no matter 
what work may be displayed, no prize shall be awarded, 
or honorable mention made, where this requisite is not 
present. Experience fully sustains the aphorism that 
“ blood will tell,” and the best and most successful 
English breeders select dogs of the purest descent, even 
if not quite up to the mark on work, rather than extra 
workers which bear the bar sinister, and the wisdom of 
the choice is shown in the great increase in the number 
of eanine wonders which each year brings out. Ho 
rule can be more absolutely essential to us than this, 
and at no time more so than at the oufstart, as the win- 
ners at the first shows will very naturally be eagerly 
sought for as stud dogs, and if proper attention and 
great judgment are not shown in conferring, this honor, 
our breeding kennels may be filled w'ith a set of curs 
with gilded reputations entirely beyond their deserts. 
If we start right, and show convincing proofs of this by 
the production of superior animals from our prize win- 
ners a few years will demonstrate the advantages of 
blood to the most sceptical of all scoffers, and there will 
be a corresponding support given to judges in their ef- 
forts to make just awards, but if we fail in the begin- 
ning, there will be a grand triumph for the friends of 
mere field performers, and proclaim (hat they caro 
nothing for the blood provided the dog will only work. 
We have reached a most important crisis in the his- 
tory of our kennels, and the emergency can only be 
met by the establishment of adequate, tribunals which 
will exercise the most rigid severity in judging, and the 
utmost impartiality in making their first awards. 
OUR G.\ME LAWS. 
In Hos. 13 and 14 of the Twentieth Volume of the 
lurf. Field and Farm, (issaes bearing dates HIarch26th 
and April 2d. 187.1, respectively) is published a bill fora 
"Hational Game Law” prepared by “Gloan,” which he 
proposes “to submit for approval to the National Con- 
vention in June next to be recommended for adoption 
by the various States ” “Suggestions of amendment 
and free expressions of opinion and sentiment are earn- 
estly invited from all having an interest in the subject.” 
In accordance with which I respectfully submit the fol- 
lowing. I shall not attempt a long review of the merits 
or demerits of each of its separate provisions, but shall 
deal briefly as possible with such sections only as seem 
to me may with benefit be altered, or entirely stricken 
out as uncalled for in the requirements of such a bill. 
Section 2 reads as follows: “It shall be unlawful, be- 
tween the 1 jth day of April and the 15th day of Febru- 
ary, to trap, catch, kill, or to pursue, on the premises 
of another, any muskrat, mink, or otter, or at anytime 
to deposit or place any poison for the purpose of poison- 
ing said animals; and it shall be unlawful for any per- 
son, at any time, to enter upon the premises of another 
without his consent, with intent to trap, hunt, kill or 
pursue, any such animal; and it shall be unlawful for 
any person to enter upon the premises of another, with- 
out his consent, and destroy, tear down, or in any man- 
ner injure the muskrat heaps or houses on such prem- 
ises. Any person violating any one of the provisions 
of this section shall be fined in any sttm not exceeding 
$25 for each offence, nor less than $2; and, moreover, 
any trap or traps which may be set or placed on the 
premises of another, without his consent, with the in- 
tent to catch any such animal or animals, shall be for- 
feited by the owner thereof, to whomsoever may find 
the same. This section shall not be construed to pre- 
vent the catching or killing of any animals specified 
therein where there is danger of their doing injury to 
property, either public or private; but this defence 
must be affirmatively proven in all prosecutions.” 
How it is well known to all who have given the subject 
•Itention that the trapping of fur bearing animals is per- 
mitted by law much too early in many States, in some, 
while the fur is almost worthless, an error which should 
certainly be rectified. The law proposed by “Gloan,” 
however, is, in my opinion, equally as objectionable as 
any now on the statute books, for to allow trapping 
only during the time therein specified would be virtually 
in many States to allow no trapping at all. It is almost 
impossible to visit in winter many of the best trapping 
regions of the extreme northern States, and the trap- 
pers who now resort there, go before winter sets in, 
build their s’nanties, and go to work. If they were 
compelled by law to remain idle three or four months 
before they might catch anything, such places would be 
severely let alone, and of profit to no one. Fur begins 
to thicken and grow better very fast after cold weather 
comes on, and though most valuable when taken in 
spring, the skin is thinner and of poorer quality than 
that taken earlier, and there is not sufficient difference 
between the market value of spring and winter fur to 
warrant specific legislation. From my own experience 
in trapping and handling fur, which has been consider- 
able, especially in the western States, I think protection 
between April loth and Hovember 1st, would prove a 
sufficient preservation and be found in the main satisfac- 
tory to people of all classes. The provisions to prevent 
trapping, or injuring rat-houses in any manner on the 
premises of another without his consent are entirely un- 
called for. (A law which would, for instance, render a 
man while in pursuit of ducks liable to a fine of $25 for 
making a blind of, or simply stepping upon, a rat- 
house.) Laws defining trespass and penalty therefor 
have been already provided amply sufficient for all pos- 
sible cases. 
By section 5, it is made unlawful to kill any rabbit or 
hare before October loth, or after January 15th. There 
is displayed in this section a very comspicuous igno- 
rance of the habits of the animal considered. In fact 
its habits in many places call most loudly for its exter- 
mination, for rabbits ofttimes make sad havoc in nurse- 
ries and young fruit orchards, by knawing the bark 
from the trees and thereby killing them. The turnip, 
lettuce and cabbage crops also *ufler severely from their 
depredations, and even without any legislative protec- 
tion, and notwith.standing the ellorts of their numer- 
ous enemies, there is little fear of their extermination, 
80 rapidly do the}' multiply. 
Sec. 10, next calls for especial attention and reads as 
follows: “It shall be unlawful at, any time to shoot at 
any water-fowl while bedded in flocks, either upon their 
feeding or roosting grounds, or elewhere, or to shoot at 
them by firelight, or to shoot at them after the hour of 
sundown, or before day-light, or to build or to use any 
blinds, boxes or batteries in any of the waters away 
from the marshe.s, or shore proper; or to sail for wild- 
fowl of any kind in, or to shoot at them from any ves- 
sel propelled by steam or snds, or from any boat or 
other structure attached to the same; or to use any 
floating battery or machine for the purpose of killing 
wild-fowl, or to shoot at them out of any such floating 
battery or machine. The penality for- violating this 
section shall be a fine of not less than five dollars, or 
more than twenty dollars.” IVhat depth of wisdom 
and prbfoundne.ss of thought is here manifested, and 
what a death-blow to bushwhackers and such as are not 
skilled in the art of shooting flying. All true sportsmen 
are crack-shots (?) and when this bill is passed they can 
enjoy themselves in peace. The rude horny-handed 
farmer, or artisan, (whose occasional habit it now is to 
crawl stealthily upon the unsuspecting wild-fowl in 
hopes of securing a brace or two to serve as a change 
of diet) will no more trouble them for being unable to 
hit the ducks when on the wing and prohibited by law 
from shooting at thorn sitting “in flocks anywhere,” he 
will be compelled to stay at home and content himself 
with pork, beef, or such other lawful meat as he may 
be fortunate enough to secure. "WheH it is made un- 
lawful to build any blinds away from the shore proper(?) 
and to shoot at them sitting, the ducks will have things 
pretty much their own way. In the Spring, such rivers 
as the Illinois and Mississippi, will be like a paradise to 
them. The water then usually reaches in most places, 
from bluff to blufl two to twenty miles in width. 
Blinds built along the shore wiU scarcely bother them 
at all. There will be plenty of feeding territory upon 
the overflowed ridges and flats, and ducks that will 
then venture near blinds built on ishore, should be 
killed without mercy, and I am almost inclined to think 
a small reward should be offered by the state for their 
scalps. I will forbear eulogizing the provision prohib- 
iting the shooting of ducks from a sail-boat, but will 
simply express the conviction that in merit it is fully on 
a par with those immediately preceding it. 
Section 16 is another “killer” to the rude plebeians, 
such as are in the habit of using paper, leather, or 
“ any other wadding than the manufactured wad of 
commerce.” The great benefits aecruing from such 
wise laws to deserving wad manufacturers can hardly 
be over estimated; but wouldn’t it be fair and proper to 
add a clause modifying, in a slight degree, the offence 
in the case of such as never saw or heard of a manufac- 
tured wad (there are many such persons in the sparsely 
settled sections of our country.) Following is the 
“ killer” referred to: 
“Section 16 — It shall be unlawful at any time to use 
any wadding in a shot gun other than the manufactured 
wad of commerce. The penalty for violating this section 
shall bo a fine of not less than $1, nor more than $5.” 
A further provision, which Gloan perhaps inadvertently 
omitted, would follow well in this section, making it 
unlawful to use any other gun than the breech-loader 
manufactured by James Dalziel Dougall.” 
Various other “ suggestions of amendment” occur to 
me, but so many are they it seems to me the better plan 
for Gloan will be to dismiss the idea of amending the 
old bill, and commence a new one; or, what is better 
still, to be still, and trust for a better one t» the com- 
bined wisdom and experience of those persons to be ap- 
pointed by the convention. 
Ax IXTEUESTED PEKSON. 
Tufi Father op all Trovt.— The Napa Jijgister of May ITth tells 
of a “sockdolager”: We have been shown by James H. Goodman a 
tront caught yesterday in Milliken canyon, which for size and re- 
spectability lays all other trout completely in the shade. It is, in 
fact, the “boss trout” of this or any other country, and we confi- 
dently back him aeainst all the world. He is twenty-eight inches 
long, and weighs seven and a half pounds. Ilis presence in the 
creek has been known for some time past, and numerous attempts 
have been made to catch him, heretofore, in vain. Yesterday, how- 
ever, he was hooked, and oven then, hut for the presence of a com- 
panion and the happy conjunction of a limb over the water, on 
which the assistant was able to walk out and get hold of his trout- 
ship, the fisherman would have lo.st him. He i.s agennine brook or 
spotted trout, as his shape and color abundantly prove, and be has 
been examined by numerous .experts and adjudged to be the gen- 
uine article. It is a pity he could uat be stuffed and preserved in 
some museum, but we are informed that he hod become too dry be- 
fore it was thought of to make it practieable, and;the happy possess- 
ors will content themselves with a photograph by Brayton. 
