LETTER XVII
Fox-hunting, an acquaintance of mine says, is only to be followed because you can ride hard, and do less harm in that than any other kind of hunting. There may be some truth in the observation; but, to such as love the riding part only of hunting, would not a trail-scent be more suitable? Gentlemen who hunt for the sake of a ride, who are indifferent about the hounds, and know little of the business, if they do no harm, fulfil as much as we have reason to expect from them; whilst those of a contrary disposition do good, and have much greater pleasure. Such as are acquainted with the hounds, and can at times assist them, find the sport more interesting, and frequently have the satisfaction to think, that they themselves contribute to the success of the day.1 This is a pleasure that you often enjoy; a pleasure without any regret attending it. I know not what effect it may have on you; but I know that my spirits are always good after good sport in hunting; nor is the rest of the day ever disagreeable to me. What are other sports, compared with this, which is full of enthusiasm! Fishing is, in my opinion, a dull diversion, shooting, though it admit of a companion, will not allow of many: both, therefore, may be considered as selfish and solitary amusements, compared with hunting; to which as many as please are welcome: the one might teach patience to a philosopher; and the other, though it occasion great fatigue to the body, seldom affords much occupation to the mind; whereas fox-hunting is a kind of warfare; its uncertainties, its fatigues, its difficulties, and its dangers, rendering it interesting above all other diversions. That you may more readily pardon this digression, I return to answer your letter now before me.
I am glad to hear that your men have good voices; mine, unluckily, have not. There is a friend of mine who hunts his own hounds: his voice is the strangest, and his halloos the oddest, I ever heard. He has, however, this advantage—no dog can possibly mistake his halloo for another’s. Singularity constitutes an essential part of a huntsman’s halloo: it is for that reason alone, I prefer the horn, to which I observe, hounds fly more readily than to the huntsman’s voice. Good voices certainly are pleasing; yet it might be as well, perhaps, if those who have them were less fond of exerting them. When a fox is halloo’d, those who understand this business and get forward may halloo him again;2 yet let them be told, if the hounds go the contrary way, or do not seem to come upon the line of him, to halloo on more. With regard to its being the hunted fox—the fox which every man halloos, is the hunted fox in his own opinion, though he seldom has a better reason for it than because he saw him. Such halloos as serve to keep the hounds together, and to get on the tail hounds, are always of use: halloos of encouragement to the leading hounds, if injudiciously given, may spoil your sport. I am sorry to say, view halloos frequently do more harm than good: they are pleasing to sportsmen, but prejudicial to hounds. If a strong cover be full of foxes, and they be often halloo’d, hounds seldom take much pains in hunting them: hence arises that indifference which sometimes is to be perceived in fox-hounds while pursuing their game.
You ask me, If I would take off my hounds to a halloo? If they be running with a good scent, I most certainly would not; if otherwise, and I could depend upon the halloo, in some cases I would; for instance, when the fox is a great way before them, or persists in running his foil; for such foxes are difficult to kill, unless you endeavour to get nearer to them by some means or other. When you hunt after them it will frequently happen, that the longer you run, the farther you will be behind.
If hounds be out of blood, and a fox run his foil, you need not scruple to stop the tail hounds, and throw them in at head; or, if the cover have any ridings cut in it, and the fox be often seen, your huntsman, by keeping some hounds at his horse’s heels, at the first halloo that he hears, may throw them in close at him.3 This will put him out of his pace, and, perhaps, put him off his foil. It will be necessary, when you do this, that the whipper-in should stop the pack from hunting after, and get forward with them to the huntsman. I have already given it as my opinion, that hounds may be halloo’d too much. If they should have been often used to a halloo, they will expect it, and may trust perhaps to their ears and eyes, more than to their noses. If they be often taken from the scent, it will teach them to shuffle, and probably will make them slack in cover: it should be done, therefore, with great caution; not too often; and always should be well-timed. Famous huntsmen, I think, by making too frequent a use of this, sometimes hurt their hounds. I have heard of a sportsman who never suffers his hounds to be lifted: he lets them pick along the coldest scent, through flocks of sheep: this is a particular style of fox-hunting, which, perhaps, may suit the country in which that gentleman hunts. I confess to you, I do not think that it would succeed in a bad-scenting country, or, indeed, in any country where foxes are wild. While hounds can get on with the scent, it cannot be right to take them off from it; but when they are stopped for want of it, it cannot then be wrong to give them every advantage in your power.
It is wrong to suffer hounds to hunt after others that are gone on with the scent, particularly in cover; for how are they to get up to them with a worse scent? Besides, it makes them tie on the scent, teaches them to run dog, and destroys that laudable ambition of getting forward which is the chief excellence of a fox-hound. A good huntsman will seldom suffer his head hounds to run away from him; if it should so happen, and they be still within his hearing, he will sink the wind with the rest of the pack, and get to them as fast as he can. Though I suffer not a pack of fox-hounds to hunt after such as may be a long way before the rest, for reasons which I have just given; yet, when a single hound is gone on with the scent, I send a whipper-in to stop him. Were the hounds to be taken off the scent to get to him, and he should no longer have any scent when they find him, the fox might be lost by it. This is a reason why, in large covers, and particularly such as have many roads in them, skirting hounds should be left at home on windy days.
Skirters, I think, you may find hurtful, both in men and dogs. Such as skirt to save their horses, often head the fox. Good sportsmen never quit hounds but to be of service to them: with men of this description, skirting becomes a necessary part of fox-hunting, and is of the greatest use. Skirters, beware of a furze-brake! If you head back the fox, the hounds, most probably, will kill him in the brake. Such as ride after the hounds, at the same time that they do no good, are least likely to do harm: let such only as understand the business, and mean to be of service to the hounds, ride wide of them. I cannot, however, allow, that the riding close up to hounds is always a sign of a good sportsman; if it were, a monkey, upon a good horse, would be the best sportsman in the field. Here must I censure (but with respect) that eager spirit which frequently interrupts and sometimes is fatal to, sport in fox-hunting; for though I cannot subscribe to the doctrine of my friend ****, “that a pack of fox-hounds, would do better without a huntsman than with one, and that, if left to themselves, they would never lose a fox;” yet, allowing them their usual attendants, had he objected only to the sportsmen who follow them, I must have joined issue with him. Whoever has followed hounds, must have seen them frequently hurried beyond the scent; and whoever is conversant in hunting, cannot but know, that the steam of many horses, carried by the wind, and mixed with a cold scent, is prejudicial to it.4
It sometimes will happen, that a good horseman is not so well in with hounds as an indifferent one; because he seldom will condescend to get off his horse. I believe, that the best way to follow hounds across a country, is to keep on the line of them, and to dismount at once, when you come to a leap which you do not choose to take; for in looking about for easier places, much time is lost. In following hounds, it may be useful to you to know, that when in cover they run up the wind, you cannot in reason be too far behind them, as long as you have a perfect hearing of them, and can command them; and on the contrary, when they are running down the wind, you cannot keep too close to them.
You complain that foxes are in too great plenty: believe me, it is a good fault. I should as soon have expected to have heard our old acquaintance, Jack R——, complain of having too much money: however, it is not without a remedy—hunt the same covers constantly, and you will soon disperse them. If your pack be strong enough, divide it; hunt every day, and you will catch many tired foxes. I remember to have killed a brace in one morning in the strongest season; the first in ten minutes, the second in half an hour. If your own pack be not strong enough to hunt more than every other day, get a pack of harriers to hunt hare in the cover the intermediate day. Foxes, thus disturbed, will shift their quarters; they know their enemies, and smell in the night where they have been in the day, and will not stay where they are likely to be disturbed by them. Follow them for one week in this manner, and I do not think you will have any reason, afterwards, to complain that they are in too great plenty.
When covers are much disturbed, foxes will sometimes break as soon as they hear a hound. Where the country round is very open, the fox least likely to break, is that which you are hunting: he will be very unwilling to quit the cover, if it be a large one, unless he can get a great distance before the hounds. Should you be desirous to get a run over such a country, the likeliest means will be to post a quiet and skilful person to halloo one off, and lay on to him. The further he is before you, the less likely he will be to return. The best method, however, to hunt a cover like this, is to stick constantly to it, not suffering the hounds to break, so long as one fox shall remain: do this two or three hunting days following; foxes will then fly, and you will have good chases.
Nothing is more hurtful to hounds, than the frequent changing of their country: should they change from a good-scenting country to a bad one, unless they have luck on their sides, they may be some time without killing a fox; whereas, hounds have always a great advantage in a country which they are used to: they not only know better where to find their game, but they will also pursue it with more alacrity afterwards.
This Letter began by a digression in favour of hunting; it will end with the opinion of a Frenchman, not so favourable to it. This gentleman was in my neighbourhood, on a visit to the late Lord Castlehaven, who, being a great sportsman, thought he could not oblige his friend more, than by letting him partake of an amusement which he himself was so fond of; he therefore mounted him on one of his best horses, and showed him a fox-chase. The Frenchman, after having been well shaken, dirtied, tired, run away with, and thrown down, was asked on his return, “Comment il avait trouvé la chasse?” “Morbleu! Milord!” said he, shrugging up his shoulders, “votre chasse est une chasse diabolique.”
