640 
SFHE RURAI> NEW-YORKER 
September 14, 
profit left after paying all working expenses is the 
person who made that profit possible, namely the Con¬ 
sumer. 
The phrase so well known as the “divi” in time 
came to be applied to the sum returned to each con¬ 
sumer at the end of every quarter. It was calculated 
at so many cents in every dollar’s worth of goods 
purchased by the member during that quarter. It 
went up or down in proportion to the effectiveness 
or otherwise of the management of the cooperative 
store. The enemies of the cooperative movement, 
and they are many, assert that without the "divi” 
there would be no cooperative movement. Doubtless 
they are right. The papers following this one will 
deal more fully with the consumer, the “divi,” the 
shareholder, the store, and so on. e. t. 
THE NEW YORK GAME LAWS. 
How They Work Injustice. 
The following note was printed in the Poughkeepsie 
Enterprise of August 15: 
Charles Juckett, of Amenia, deposited three fines of 
$9 each in the justice’s court Wednesday afternoon for 
slaughtering three otters who had practically destroyed 
his flock of ducks. Juckett got off with the $27 fine 
because of his ignorance of the law and the fact that the 
otters had destroyed 27 fine ducks. 
When Juckett began to miss his ducklings he set a 
trap for the animal, but failed to catch it. However, 
as he was passing over a bog near his home several days 
later he saw an otter surveying the landscape from his 
hole. Juckett surveyed the otter through the sights of a 
rifle and the otter toppled over with the crack of the 
gun. Several days later he set a trap at the hole and 
caught a fine female otter and a young one. 
Game Protector Richard Maher, of Dover Plains, 
chanced to hear of the otters Juckett was exhibiting, and 
made a trip to Amenia in his car Wednesday afternoon 
to place the farmer under arrest. When he heard the 
farmer's story, however, he presented him with a sum¬ 
mons to appear in' the Amenia court house instead of 
taking him into custody. 
The young farmer explained to the justice the shooting 
and the capture of the otters. While the justice sympa¬ 
thized with Juckett, a State law had been broken and 
he was forced to inflict some sort of punishment. The 
fine of $27 was the lowest that could be imposed for the 
offense committed. Juckett was ordered by the justice to 
free the two otters he had in captivity. The farmer took 
the animals to a stream a mile from his duck farm and 
set them free. 
In order to get at the exact facts we wrote Mr. 
Juckett for his side of the story. He sends us the 
following statement: 
Mr. Charles Juckett’s Statement. 
It is an outrage the way I have been used about 
this otter question. What has been printed in most 
of these papers is two-thirds false. The fact is I 
found something was taking our ducks, and thought 
it was a coon; and the following day, after seeing 
tracks in the mud along the stream, while on a stack 
of hay I saw three otters crossing from one ditch 
to another. Leaving the stack, I called my farm 
hand. After hammering them with a pitchfork we 
succeeded in getting the old mother and one young 
into a milk can, and the other young one disappeared 
while we were getting the other two. There was 
no gun used nor any in the field, and none of them 
killed. I brought them to the barn and put them in 
the silo. This was August 9, about 3.30 p. m. I did 
not wish to keep them in the silo, so built a cage and 
put them in. I did not have them on exhibition, but if 
anyone came along and wanted to see them they did. 
I thought at first I 'would keep them until the fur was 
good, but found it too much trouble to get frogs for 
them. I thought of giving them to the Bronx Zoologi¬ 
cal Garden, and this is what I told Richard H. 
Maher when he showed up on Wednesday, August 14. 
He came from Dover Plains, accompanied by Mr. Lee 
from Albany, saying some one had made a complaint 
and they came right out from Poughkeepsie. Justice 
James Chaffee, of Amenia, passed by and I called 
him, and Mr. Maher told him what he wanted him 
to do. He placed the fine or judgment at $25 and I 
gave Mr. Chaffee a check for $25. 
I told him to liberate the otters, but no; he said I 
must do that, and I did. I feel as if I was in‘ the 
right, as I was trying to protect my property. The 
15 ducks were worth $25, as they were imported 
ducks or raised from imported stock—the Aylesbury 
duck. CHARLES H. JUCKETT. 
We also have this statement from R. Ii. Maher, the 
game protector who followed the case: 
The Game Protector’s Story. 
In regard to a recent case of mine against Mr. 
Juckett, of Amenia, would say that while I sympa¬ 
thized with Mr. Juckett in the loss of his ducks I had 
to uphold the law. He claims to have lost 26 ducks, 
and yet he never found evidence (feathers, entrails, 
bones, etc.) that would prove that the ducks were 
taken by otters. Yet he caught the otters and in¬ 
tended to keep them until such a time as the fur be¬ 
came salable. In doing this he unintentionally vio¬ 
lated the game laws in keeping in captivity animals 
for which the State provided no open season. The 
penalty for this offense is $60 and an additional 
penalty of $25 for each quadruped taken and pos¬ 
sessed, which would make a total in his case of $110. 
The leniency of Justice James Chaffee was due to 
the fact that he lost the ducks and was really ignorant 
of the law. I wish to refer you for additional in¬ 
formation on this case to sections 175 and 176 of the 
Conservation law. I regret that my action, or this par¬ 
ticular clause of the law, is liable to subject both 
myself and the Commission to adverse criticism. 
RICHARD F. MAHER, 
Dutchess Co. Game Protector. 
In order to see what the State had to offer in this 
case we sent to the Conservation Commission. Here 
is the reply: 
What the State Authorities Say. 
In reference to the conviction of Charles Juckett, of 
Amenia, N. Y., referred to in your letter, the Depart¬ 
ment is in reecipt of a report from Game Protector 
Richard F. Maher, of Dutchess County, whereby it 
appears that Juckett was arrested by the protector 
under a charge of keeping two live otters in captivity 
in violation of sections 175 and 176 of the Conserva¬ 
tion law, and that Juckett pleaded guilty and was 
fined $25, which he paid. In reference to your sug¬ 
gestion that there was evidence showing without ques¬ 
tion that these otters had been destroying Mr. Juckett’s 
ducks, you are informed that the report makes no 
reference to any such evidence, and the Department 
knows nothing about it. 
The Conservation law, section 158, provides as fol¬ 
lows : 
In the event that any species of birds protected by 
provisions of section 219 of this article or quadrupeds 
protected by law shall at any time in any locality become 
destructive of private or public property, the Commission 
shall have the power in its discretion to direct any game 
protector or issue a permit to any citizen of the State to 
take such species of birds or quadrupeds and to dispose of 
same in such manner as the Commission may provide. 
Such permit shall expire within four months from the 
date of issuance. 
It would seem that this provision should be ade¬ 
quate for the reasonable protection of all persons 
against injury from destructive birds or quadrupeds. 
GEO. P. DECKER, 
Assistant Counsel. 
We regret not to agree with Mr. Decker, but we 
cannot see that this gives anything like “adequate pro¬ 
tection !” The whole thing is a jug-handled contract 
with the Commissioner in complete possession of the 
jug. We print this case so that farmers may see how 
these “game laws” work out. The “sports” and the 
“naturalists” are well pleased, but the farmer must 
stand by and see his property destroyed with no rem¬ 
edy except a “permit” with a short string tied to it. 
HAIL PREVENTION BY ELECTRICITY. 
The French Government is now studying a new 
system of preventing hail damage, consisting of a 
very large copper lightning rod grounded by means 
of a copper conductor. The theory of the inventors 
is that these instruments, by their effect upon currents 
of atmospheric electricity, are capable of preventing 
the formation and fall of hailstones. France suffers 
greatly from damage by hail and lightning, the annual 
loss being estimated at $20,(XX),000 to $30,000,000. 
The important vine-growing districts are often sub¬ 
ject to heavy loss. A chain of these hail destroyers 
is to be established for experimental purposes in the 
vineyard sections. 
The belief that electricity is largely responsible for the 
formation of and precipitation to the earth of hailstones 
has long been held by some French savants, and efforts 
to utilize lightning rods for purposes of protection have 
been previously made, but it is now believed that the in¬ 
struments heretofore employed were of an imperfect type. 
It is claimed that the new “paragrfele” with its multiple 
points and perfected apparatus is capable of drawing 
down such great quantities of electricity from the clouds 
as to render them innocuous as to hail and lightning. Al¬ 
though this may not be a generally accepted theory as to 
hail, it can at least be said that experiments along the 
lines indicated will be of interest for scientific purposes. 
The new device is comparatively inexpensive to con¬ 
struct. In a general way it may be described as a rod 
of copper at least 130 feet high terminating in a crown, 
or aigrette, of copper blades. The base terminates in a 
large pool of water, preferably flowing water. Church 
steeples, factory chimneys, or structures specially built 
may be utilized for obtaining sufficient elevation, but care 
is necessary in fulfilling all the requirements as to con¬ 
ductivity. According to the plan now followed the rods 
are erected at intervals of about six miles along a line 
transverse to the usual path of hailstorms. It is stated 
that encouraging results have been obtained thus far 
wherever the instruments have been placed 
THE FARM HELP PROBLEM. 
In various farm papers I have noticed attempts to 
explain the difficulty of keeping good, reliable help 
on the farm. I have had opportunities to study this 
trouble at close range; and I am persuaded that 
much of it is due to the farmer not making proper 
allowance for human nature. Some farmers, who 
cannot afford to pay even fair wages, can always 
obtain better help than others who pay popular prices. 
The only visible cause for this is that the former are 
not always finding fault with the work nor swearing 
at the men. The human animal is peculiarly con¬ 
structed. If he is capable of going it alone—and a 
farm hand must be capable, if he is to be called re¬ 
liable—he will not stand being driven or cursed. He 
expects to be told, comprehensively, wtfat the farmer 
requires of him, and in decent, common-sense 
language. Frequently, it has been my lot to act as 
foreman for farmers who did not properly control 
their tongues, and I have proved that the best hands 
will do more work and better work when they are 
treated with proper consideration, and are not ex¬ 
pected to be mind-readers, and know precisely how 
the farmer wants his work done before they are 
told, because each farmer has little ways, peculiar 
to himself, about doing things. No wage will induce 
the quick, intelligent, capable, trusty farm hand to 
stand being cursed or browbeaten. LIuman nature is 
opposed to it, and perhaps there is more of nature’s 
freedom in the blood of farm help than in office 
and factory help. 
There is another curious fact about human nature, 
as related to the farm help, that will give the farmer 
plenty of trouble, unless he possesses the necessary 
judgment and tact for managing men. Farm work 
differs from most employments in that the men are 
compelled to be constantly changing from one thing 
to another. Now some farm work is less pleasant 
than others, and, therefore, the farm manager must 
possess clearer judgment than managers in other lines, 
because men are only grown-up boys, and if one be¬ 
lieves that another is favored and is having more 
than his share of the more pleasant jobs, there will 
be dissatisfaction, followed, perhaps, by slighted work, 
or the loss of one, or more, men in a busy time. It’s 
human nature. The farmer may say that he pays his 
men and expects them to do anything he asks. True 
enough; but, that will not satisfy the men, nor keep 
them on the place; nor will it get their best out of 
them. Put yourself in his place. Would you stand 
it, if you believed you had been given most of the 
unpleasant jobs? I have seen so many cases of it, and 
heard so many complaints, that I know what you 
would do. If someone could invent steps of pro¬ 
motion for farm help, each step carrying a better 
salary and more pleasant work, the farm help prob¬ 
lem would be solved. E. a. wendt. 
Maryland. 
SEEDING LOW LAND TO GRASS. 
I read with much interest the article on page 865, “The 
Clark System Reviewed.” I have a proposition somewhat 
different from J. H. L.’s, but possibly more serious. 
About 70 acres of my farm is on an island in the 
Chemung River. Rarely a Spring passes but what the 
island is under water. A strip of 10 to 15 acres across 
it is somewhat lower than on either side and is subject 
to washing out. For this reason this strip has not been 
plowed for, I think, 12 to 15 years. It (the whole island) 
is natural grass land, but the hay on this particular 
strip has become quite weedy, and very little Timothy 
left in it, yielding four to five tons per acre, two cuttings. 
In the driest season these fields yield a heavy second 
crop, if the first crop is taken off early in July. How 
can I get a better quality sod on this low strip? Would 
it be practical to break it up early this Fall, and if so 
would you use a sharp disk before plowing, to help break 
up the tough sod; sow to rye, then next June cut rye 
for hay or let it ripen before taking off and then pro¬ 
ceed according to the “Clark system” ? As this island 
collects a good coating of sediment (manure) every 
overflow, I hardly think it needs much commercial fer¬ 
tilizer. I propose, however, to send a sample to our 
experiment station and find out what it needs, d. j. m. 
Lowman, N. Y. 
This looks like the possibility of one of the “bo¬ 
nanza farms” we read about. It might even pay in 
time to dyke this island, or part of it, by plowing 
up a ridge or small levee around it. As for the low 
part the thing is to seed at such a time that the soil 
will be well protected by a thick sod before the flood 
comes. We should plow that low ground at once. 
If possible use a large disk plow first and tear up 
the old sod. Then plow at right angles to the disk¬ 
ing and sow two bushels of rye per acre, covering 
quite deep. This ought to give you a thick, solid 
mat of growth which can stand the flood next Spring. 
Then cut the rye next year and at once follow with 
this Clark system, or as near to it as you can, and 
seed to grass early. In this way you ought to get 
a thick, lawn-like seeding which will not be washed 
out too much by the floods. We think that sooner 
or later some cheap system of banks or levees to hold 
the water back will pay. You will no doubt find 
upon examination that this soil will respond freely 
to lime. 
