FOREST AND STREAM 
143 
“Horns Versus Pedicles” Again 
Game Commissioner Phillips of Pennsylvania Gives his Version of the Celebrated Dickinson Deer Case 
Game Commissioner John M. Phillips, of Pennsylvania, in the article below, presents the Game Commission’s side of the famous Dickinson deer 
case, zvhich has stirred up so much controversy in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. FOREST AND STREAM in an earlier issue printed the other 
side 6 f the case and now, having given both sides, feels that it has done its full duty, and so far as this paper is concerned, the debate must be re¬ 
garded as closed. The sportsmen of the United States, having thus had all the facts placed before them, can form their own conclusions as to 
whether the prosecution was justified or not. 
Pittsburgh, Pa., Feb. 22, 1915. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
My attention has been called to an article 
entitled “Horns vs. Pedicles, the Famous Dickin¬ 
son Pennsylvania Deer Case,” in your issue of 
December 26th, 1914, written by Mr. Frank G. 
Harris, President of the Crystal Springs Rod and 
Gun Club of Clearfield, Pa. This refers to the 
case of a Pittsburgh physician who was accused 
of killing a fawn in Clearfield County on Novem¬ 
ber 20th, 1911, in violation of a law of the State 
of Pennsylvania which reads that no deer “except 
a male deer with horns visible above the hair” 
should be killed. As one of the Game Commis¬ 
sioners of Pennsylvania, I wish to make a plain 
statement of the case. 
When this case developed, I was out of the 
State, and the first I heard of the matter was 
upon my return to Pittsburgh on December 14th, 
1911, when I found a letter from Mr. Harris com¬ 
plaining that one of our Game Protectors, accom¬ 
panied by a State Policeman, had invaded the 
property of the Crystal Springs Club over tres¬ 
pass notices and examined a yearling spike buck 
hung on the porch of the clubhouse, which they 
claimed was an illegal deer. 
I was not acquainted with the accused, but upon 
communicating with him he assured me that he 
had killed a legal buck with horns, that it had 
been passed in Pittsburgh by a State Policeman, 
and that he had placed the head in the hands of 
his taxidermist, Mr. Gustav A. Link of the 
Carnegie Museum, for mounting. So I felt con¬ 
fident that our officers had made a mistake, as 
during the first year of life male deer have no 
horns, but before censuring our officers I arrang¬ 
ed with the accused to see the head so that I 
could speak with assurance, and he instructed his 
taxidermist to allow me to examine it. When 
Mr. Link notified me that he had brought the 
head from his private workshop and had it at 
the Museum, in company with others I inspected 
it and found it to be the head of a male fawn, 
6 to 8 months old, as indicated by the small head, 
fragile bones and the pedicles or buttons which 
projected less than % of an inch above the fron¬ 
tal bone, and on which the horns grow and from 
which they are shed annually. We noted alst 
that the hair had been removed from off and 
about the pedicles to make them visible. 
I immediately placed the case in the hands of 
Dr. Kalbfus, the Secretary and Executive officer 
of the Game Commission. When he arrived in 
Pittsburgh, we interviewed the accused and in¬ 
formed him that he had killed an illegal deer and 
submitted to him the option of settling as allow¬ 
ed by law or going to trial. The accused stated 
that he was aware the deer in question was a 
fawn and that if he was the only one concerned 
he would pay the fine but inasmuch as the Club 
the accused and I was called on the telephone by 
Governor Tener asking for information on the 
subject. I informed him of the result of the in¬ 
vestigation when he naturally directed us to do 
our duty. The next development was a letter 
had told him not to do so and that it would take 
care of the matter he asked for time to consult 
the Club, which was readily granted. 
Mr. Harris, as President of the Club, im¬ 
mediately took an active part in the defense of 
written by Mr. Harris on February 8th, 1912 to 
Senator Oliver complaining of the action of the 
Game Commission, claiming that the law was in¬ 
tended only for the protection of female deer, 
that the members of his Club were fighting Re- 
The Upper Head is That of the Fawn as Offered in Evidence by the Commonwealth. The Lower 
Head That of a Mature Buck Killed in the Same Region. 
THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE. 
