Year: 1879

Sportsmen are making q great outcrv


and sporting papers are filled with Trades
against the owners of land, because they


are not willing to permit the broadest IL


cense IN tramping with guns and dogs


over their fields, and as if there was
neither right or feeling upon the other


side. From their standpoint the farmer
and Granger has no business to omen


his mouth in objection, no matter now


much crops may be injured. fences


destroyed and stock alarmed. 1t matters


not that they have paid for the land: ex-
pended large sums in cultivation and


taxes. They are to have nothing TO say


as to who shall hunt over their fields,
and are to have no more claim upon the


birds they have fedfrOm theirgrain than
the man who lives hundreds Of miles
away and if he shoots for his table. or to
reimburse himself, is to be dubbed "pot
hunter" and abused in the most round
terms.


1t strikes US this is quite jug-handled
vieW-aN upon one side. We are fain TO


believe that the owners and tiIlers of the
soil have some grounds for complaint.
and that their occupation is quite as


honorable and necessary to the welfare
Of the country as those who pass a few
weeks every year in shooting. Not that
we have anything TO say against men so
passing time, if they have the inclination
and means; but it does seem as if those
who gain their substance BY the sweat
Of their brOws should not be made mere
keepers Of preserves for others to shoot
over, without giving the slightest aud
pro quo.


There used to be a law that thus forci-


bly, entering upon the land of another
was trespass. Wonder what has become
Of 1t? Thatathe owner had as much right
to its sole occupancy and use as his
house, and that any breaking the law
were liable to the penalty. Possibly
such an enactment has been repealed,
else how can spOrtsmen claim as a right
what before was sought as q favor?
True, there should be a certain amOunt
Of liability, and would be much more
than at present, If there was not quite so
much arrogance and dictatorship. The
of farmers would willingly
grant permission (at proper times and
under proper cOnditiOns) if requested,
and we are old fogy enough to believe
that anything worth having is worth the
asking for.


As the matter now stands, antagonism
is growing stronger every day, and Judi
Cial aid is being evoked. That it will
(if preSsed) end against the sportsman
is not difficult to foresee. The mere
pleasure of hunting can scarcely hold its
sway, as against ownership and right;
and the fee simple is stronger than any
theory Of birds belonging TO any one
who chooses to shoot. Suppose they do;
the wild fowl are as much yours
as any ones, does that give the requisite
to tresspass upon the land of
and tTample down all interests
and feelings? We would be Just foolish
enough to answer in the negative, and
with the title deeds in cqr pockets, some !
what strenUOusly insist upon having our
possessions respected.


Il may be we are entirely wrong. 1t
may be that the owner of a dog and gun
is greater in authority, and his pleasure
higher than any ownership; but we fail
10 see it, and would hint, in the most del
cate manner possible, that a little less
If OVerbearing and assertion and def
lnce and disregard of the rights of 9TH
rs, would be likely to smooth the way
o a satisfactory adjustment OF the ques>.
ion that now is developing considerable !
ceiling. There is even yet law in the |
and, and it Is not all upon one side, and !
mere sport has not as yet Become so !
mighty as to crush honest labor and its |
Inheritance.