HUNTING

HUNTING, the exercise or diversion of pursuing four-footed beasts of game. See the article GAME.

Four-footed beasts are hunted in the fields, woods, and thickets, and that both with guns and gre-hounds.

Birds, on the contrary, are either shot in the air, or taken with nets and other devices, which exercise is called fowling; or they are pursued and taken by birds of prey, which is called hawking. See the articles FOWLING, HAWKING, FALCONRY, SHOOTING, BIRD-CATCHING, and DECOY.

F. de Launay, professor of the French laws, has an express treatise of hunting. From those words of God to Adam, Gen. i. 26. and 28. and to Noah, Gen. ix. 2, 3. hunting was considered as a right devolved or made over to man; and the following ages appear to have been of the same sentiment. Accordingly we find, that among the more civilized nations it made one of their diversions; and as to the wilder and more barbarous it served them with food and necessaries. The Roman jurisprudence, which was formed on the manners of the first ages, made a law of it, and established it as a maxim, that as the natural right of things which have no master belongs to the first possessor, wild beasts, birds, and fishes, are the property of whomsoever can take them first.

But the northern nations of barbarians who overran the Roman empire, bringing with them a stronger taste for the diversion, and the people being now possessed of other and more easy means of subsistence from the lands and possessions of those they had vanquished, their chiefs and leaders began to appropriate the right of hunting, and, instead of a natural right, to make it a royal one. Thus it continues to this day; the right of hunting, among us, belonging only to the king, and those who derive it from him.

The hunting used by the ancients was much like that now practised for the rein-deer; which is seldom hunted at force, or with hounds; but only drawn with a blood-hound, and forestalled with nets and engines. Thus did they with all beasts; whence a dog is never commended by them for opening before he has discovered where the beast lies. Hence, they were not in any manner curious as to the music of their hounds, or the composition of their kennel or pack, either for deepness,

deepness, loudness, or sweetness of cry, which is a principal point in the hunting of our days. Their huntsmen, indeed, were accustomed to shout and make a great noise, as Virgil observes in the third of his Georgics: Ingentem clamore premet ad retia cervum. But that confusion was only to bring the deer to the nets laid for him.

The Sicilian way of hunting had something in it very extraordinary.—The nobles or gentry being informed which way a herd of deer passed, gave notice to one another, and appointed a meeting; every one bringing with him a cross-bow or long-bow, and a bundle of staves shod with iron, the heads bored, with a cord passing through them all: thus provided, they came to the herd, and, casting themselves about in a large ring, surrounded the deer.—Then, each taking his stand, unbound his faggot, set up his stake, and tied the end of the cord to that of his next neighbour, at the distance of ten feet from one another.—Then taking feathers, dyed in crimson, and fastened on a thread, they tied them to the cord; so that with the least breath of wind they would whirl round.—Which done, the persons who kept the stands withdrew, and hid themselves in the next covert. Then the chief ranger entering within the line with hounds to draw after the herd, roused the game with their cry; which flying towards the line, were turned off, and, still gazing on the shaking and shining feathers, wandered about as if kept in with a real wall or pale. The ranger still pursued, and calling every person by name as he passed by their stand, commanded him to shoot the first, third, or sixth, as he pleased: and if any of them missed, or singled out another than that assigned him, it was counted a grievous disgrace. By such means, as they passed by the several stations, the whole herd was killed by the several hands. Pier. Hieroglyphic. lib. vii. cap. 6.

Hunting formed the greatest part of the employment of the ancient Germans, and probably of the Britons also, when they were not engaged in war. We are informed by some ancient historians, that this was the case even as late as the third century with the unconquered Britons who lived beyond Adrian's wall; nay, that they subsisted chiefly by the prey they took in this way. The great attachment shown by all the Celtic nations to hunting, however, proceeded most probably from its being a kind of apprenticeship to war. Thus their youth acquired that courage, strength, swiftness, and dexterity in handling their arms, which made them so formidable in time of war to their enemies. Thus also they freed the country from many mischievous animals which abounded in the forests, furnishing themselves also with materials for those feasts which seem to have constituted their greatest pleasure. The young chieftains had thus likewise an opportunity of paying court to their mistresses, by displaying their bravery and agility, and making them presents of their game; nay, so strong and universal was the passion for hunting among the ancient Britons, that young ladies of the highest quality and greatest beauty spent much of their

time in the chase. They employed much the same weapons in hunting that they did in war, viz. long spears, javelins, and bows and arrows; having also great numbers of dogs to assist them in finding and pursuing their game. These dogs, we are also told, were much admired among other nations, on account of their swiftness, strength, fierceness, and exquisite sense of smelling. They were of several different kinds, called by different names, and formed a considerable article of commerce. They were highly valued by all the Celtic nations, insomuch that some very comical penalties were inflicted upon those who were convicted of stealing them (A). From the poems of Ossian also it appears, that the Britons were not unacquainted with the art of catching birds with hawks trained for that purpose; but they seem to have been absolutely ignorant of the method of catching fish; for there is not a single allusion to this art in all the works of that venerable bard. Their ignorance of this art is both confirmed and accounted for by Dio Niceus, who assures us, that the ancient Britons never tasted fish, though they had innumerable multitudes in their seas, rivers, and lakes. "By the bye (says Dr Henry), we may observe that this agreement between the poems of Ossian and the Greek historian, in a circumstance so singular, is at once a proof of the genuine antiquity of these poems, and that the Greek and Roman writers were not so ill informed about the affairs and manners of the ancient Britons as some have imagined."

The Mexicans, whatever imbecility may be imputed to them in other respects, were very dexterous in hunting. They used bows and arrows, darts, nets, snares, and a kind of tubes named carbottane, through which they shot by blowing out little balls at birds. Those which the kings and great men made use of were curiously carved and painted, and likewise adorned with gold and silver. Besides the exercise of the chase which private individuals took either for amusement or to provide food for themselves, there were general hunting-matches, sometimes appointed by the king; at others, undertaken with a view to provide plenty of victims for sacrifices. A large wood, generally that of Zacatlapec, not far distant from the capital, was pitched upon as the scene of these grand hunting-matches. Here they chose the place best adapted for setting a great number of snares and nets. The wood was inclosed by some thousands of hunters, forming a circle of six, seven, or eight miles, according to the number of animals they intended to take. Fire was then set to the grass in a great number of places, and a terrible noise made with drums, horns, shouting, and whistling. The hunters gradually contracted their circle, continuing the noise till the game were inclosed in a very small space. They were then killed or taken in snares, or with the hands of the hunters. The number of animals taken or destroyed on these occasions was so great, that the first Spanish viceroy of Mexico would not believe it without making the experiment himself. The place chosen for his hunting-match was a great plain in the country of

the Otomies, lying between the villages of Xilotepec and S. Giovanni del Rio; the Indians being ordered to proceed according to their usual customs in the times of their paganism. The viceroy, attended by a vast retinue of Spaniards, repaired to the place appointed, where accommodations were prepared for them in houses of wood erected for the purpose. A circle of more than 15 miles was formed by 11,000 Otomies, who started such a quantity of game on the plain, that the viceroy was quite astonished, and commanded the greater part of them to be set at liberty, which was accordingly done. The number retained, however, was still incredibly great, were it not attested by a witness of the highest credit. On this occasion upwards of 600 deer and wild goats, 100 cajtotes, with a surprising number of hares, rabbits, and other smaller animals. The plain still retains the Spanish name Cazadero, which signifies the "place of the chase."

The Mexicans, besides the usual methods of the chase, had particular contrivances for catching certain animals. Thus, to catch young asses, they made a small fire in the woods, putting among the burning coals a particular kind of stone named cacalotti, "raven or black stone," which bursts with a loud noise when heated. The fire was covered with earth, and a little maize laid around it. The asses quickly assembled with their young, in order to feed upon the maize; but while they were thus employed, the stone burst, and scared away the old ones by the explosion, while the young ones, unable to fly, were carried off by the hunters. Serpents were taken even by the hands, seizing them intrepidly by the neck with one hand, and sewing up their mouths with the other. This method is still practised. They showed the greatest dexterity in tracing the steps of wild beasts, even when an European could not have discerned the smallest print of their feet. The Indian method, however, was by observing sometimes the herbs or leaves broken down by their feet; sometimes the drops of blood which fell from them when wounded. It is said that some of the American Indians show still greater dexterity in discovering the tracks of their enemies, which to an European would be altogether imperceptible.

Hunting was a favourite diversion of the great and bloody conqueror Jenghiz Khan, if indeed we can apply the word diversion to a monster whose mind was set upon the destruction of his own species, and who only endeavoured to make the murder of brutes subservient to that of men, by keeping his soldiers in a kind of warfare with the beasts when they had no human enemies to contend with. His expeditions were conducted on a plan similar to that of the Mexicans already mentioned; and were no doubt attended with still greater success, as his numerous army could enclose a much greater space than all the Indians whom the Spanish viceroy could muster. The East Indian princes still show the same inclination to the chase; and Mr Blane, who attended the hunting excursions of Asoph Ul Dowlah visir of the Mogul empire and nabob of Oude in 1785 and 1786, gives the following account of the method practised on this occasion.

The time chosen for the hunting party is about the beginning of December; and the diversion is continued till the heats, which commence about the beginning of March, oblige them to stop. During this time a cir-

cuit of between 400 and 600 miles is generally made; the hunters bending their course towards the skirts of the northern mountains, where the country is wild and uncultivated. The visir takes along with him not only his court and seraglio, but a great part of the inhabitants of his capital. His immediate attendants may amount to about 2000; but besides these he is also followed by 500 or 600 horse, and several battalions of regular sepoys with their field-pieces. Four or five hundred elephants are also carried along with him: of which some are used for riding, others for fighting, and some for clearing the jungles and forests of the game. About as many sumpter horses of the beautiful Persian and Arabian breeds are carried along with him. A great many wheel carriages drawn by bullocks likewise attend, which are used chiefly for the convenience of the women; sometimes also he has an English chaise or two, and sometimes a chariot; but all these as well as the horses are merely for show, the visir himself never using any other conveyance than an elephant, or sometimes when fatigued or indisposed a palanquin. The animals used in the sport are principally grehounds, of which there may be about 300; he has also about 200 hawks, and a few trained leopards for hunting deer. There are a great number of marksmen, whose profession it is to shoot deer; with many fowlers, who provide game: as none of the natives of India know how to shoot game with small shot, or to hunt with slow hounds. A vast number of matchlocks are carried along with the company, with many English pieces of various kinds, 40 or 50 pairs of pistols, bows and arrows, besides swords, daggers, and sabres without number. There are also nets of various kinds, some for quail, and others very large, for fishing, which are carried along with him upon elephants, attended by fishermen, so as always to be ready for throwing into any river or lake that may be met with. Every article that can contribute to luxury or pleasure is likewise carried along with the army. A great many carts are loaded with the Ganges water, and even ice is transported for cooling the drink. The fruits of the season and fresh vegetables are daily sent to him from his gardens by bearers stationed at the distance of every ten miles; by which means each article is conveyed day or night at the rate of four miles an hour. Besides the animals already mentioned, there are also fighting antelopes, buffaloes, and rams in great numbers; also several hundred pigeons, some fighting cocks, with a vast variety of parrots, nightingales, &c.

To complete the magnificence or extravagance of this expedition, there is always a large bazar, or moving town, which attends the camp; consisting of shopkeepers and artificers of all kinds, money-changers, dancing-women; so that, on the most moderate calculation, the whole number of people in his camp cannot be computed at fewer than 20,000. The nabob himself, and all the gentlemen of his camp, are provided with double sets of tents and equipage, which are always sent on the day before to the place to which he intends to go; and this is generally eight or ten miles in whatever direction most game is expected; so that by the time he has finished his sport in the morning, he finds his whole camp ready pitched for his reception.

Hunting. The nabob, with the attending gentlemen, proceed in a regular moving court or durbar, and thus they keep conversing together and looking out for game. A great many foxes, hares, jackals, and sometimes deer, are picked up by the dogs as they pass along: the hawks are carried immediately before the elephants, and let fly at whatever game is sprung for them, which is generally partridges, bustards, quails, and different kinds of herons; these last affording excellent sport with the falcons or sharp-winged hawks. Wild boars are sometimes started, and either shot or run down by the dogs and horsemen. Hunting the tyger, however, is looked upon as the principal diversion, and the discovery of one of these animals is accounted a matter of great joy. The cover in which the tyger is found is commonly long grass, or reeds of such a height as frequently to reach above the elephants; and it is difficult to find him in such a place, as he commonly endeavours either to steal off, or lies so close to the ground that he cannot be roused till the elephants are almost upon him. He then roars and skulks away, but is shot at as soon as he can be seen; it being generally contrived that the nabob shall have the compliment of firing first. If he be not disabled, the tyger continues to skulk along, followed by the line of elephants; the nabob and others shooting at him as often as he can be seen till he falls. The elephants themselves are very much afraid of this terrible animal, and discover their apprehensions by shrieking and roaring as soon as they begin to smell him or hear him growl; generally attempting to turn away from the place where he is. When the tyger can be traced to a particular spot, the elephants are disposed of in a circle round him; in which case he will at last make a desperate attack, springing upon the elephant that is nearest, and attempting to tear him with his teeth or claws. Some, but very few, of the elephants, can be brought to attack the tyger; and this they do by curling up their trunks under their mouths, and then attempting to toss, or otherwise destroy him with their tusks, or to crush him with their feet or knees. It is considered as good sport to kill one tyger in a day; though sometimes, when a female is met with her young ones, two or three will be killed.

The other objects of pursuit in these excursions are wild elephants, buffaloes, and rhinoceroses. Our author was present at the hunting of a wild elephant of vast size and strength. An attempt was first made to take him alive by surrounding him with tame elephants, while he was kept at bay by crackers and other fire-works; but he constantly eluded every effort of this kind. Sometimes the drivers of the tame elephants got so near him, that they threw strong ropes over his head, and endeavoured to detain him by fastening them around trees; but he constantly snapped the ropes like pack-threads, and pursued his way to the forest. Some of the strongest and most furious of the fighting elephants were then brought up to engage him; but he attacked them with such fury that they were all obliged to desist. In his struggle with one of them he broke one of his tusks, and the broken piece, which was upwards of two inches in diameter, of solid ivory, flew up into the air several yards above their heads. Orders were now given to kill him, as

it appeared impossible to take him alive; but even this was not accomplished without the greatest difficulty. He twice turned and attacked the party who pursued him; and in one of these attacks struck the elephant obliquely on which the prince rode, threw him upon his side, but then passed on without offering farther injury. At last he fell dead, after having received as was supposed upwards of 1000 balls into his body.

Notwithstanding the general passion among most nations for hunting, however, it has by many been deemed an exercise inconsistent with the principles of humanity. The late king of Prussia expressed himself on this subject in the following manner. "The chase is one of the most sensual of pleasures, by which the powers of the body are strongly exerted, but those of the mind remain unemployed. It is an exercise which makes the limbs strong, active, and pliable: but leaves the head without improvement. It consists in a violent desire in the pursuit, and the indulgence of a cruel pleasure in the death, of the game. I am convinced that man is more cruel and savage than any beast of prey: We exercise the dominion given us over these our fellow-creatures in the most tyrannical manner. If we pretend to any superiority over the beasts, it ought certainly to consist in reason; but we commonly find that the most passionate lovers of the chase renounce this privilege, and converse only with their dogs, horses, and other irrational animals. This renders them wild and unfeeling; and it is probable that they cannot be very merciful to the human species. For a man who can in cold blood torture a poor innocent animal, cannot feel much compassion for the distresses of his own species. And, besides, can the chase be a proper employment for a thinking mind?"

The arguments used by his majesty against hunting seem indeed to be much confirmed by considering the various nations who have most addicted themselves to it. These, as must be seen from what has already been said, were all barbarous; and it is remarkable, that Nimrod, the first great hunter of whom we have any account, was likewise the first who oppressed and enslaved his own species. As nations advanced in civilization, it always became necessary to restrain by law the inclination of the people for hunting. This was done by the wise legislator Solon, lest the Athenians should neglect the mechanic arts on its account. The Lacedæmonians, on the contrary, indulged themselves in this diversion without controul; but they were barbarians, and most cruelly oppressed those whom they had in their power, as is evident from their treatment of the Helots. The like may be said of the Egyptians, Persians, and Scythians; all of whom delighted in war, and oppressed their own species. The Romans, on the other hand, who were somewhat more civilized, were less addicted to hunting. Even they, however, were exceedingly barbarous, and found it necessary to make death and slaughter familiar to their citizens from their infancy. Hence their diversions of the amphitheatre and circus, where the hunting of wild beasts was shown in the most magnificent and cruel manner; not to mention their still more cruel sport of gladiators, &c.

In two cases only does it seem possible to reconcile the practice of hunting with humanity; viz. either when

when an uncultivated country is overrun with noxious animals; or when it is necessary to kill wild animals for food. In the former case, the noxious animals are killed because they themselves would do so if they were allowed to live; but if we kill even a lion or a tyger merely for the pleasure of killing him, we are undoubtedly chargeable with cruelty. In like manner, our modern foxhunters expressly kill foxes, not in order to destroy the breed of these noxious animals, but for the pleasure of seeing them exert all their power and cunning to save their lives, and then beholding them torn in pieces after being half dead with fatigue. This refinement in cruelty, it seems, is their favourite diversion; and it is accounted a crime for any person to destroy these animals in self-defence, as appears from the following passage in Mr Beckford's treatise on hunting. "Besides the digging of foxes, by which method many young ones are taken and old ones destroyed, traps, &c. are too often fatal to them. Farmers for their lambs, (which, by the bye, few foxes ever kill), gentlemen for their game, and old women for their poultry, are their inveterate enemies. In the country where I live, most of the gentlemen are sportsmen; and even those who are not, show every kind of attention to those who are. I am sorry it is otherwise with you; and that your old gouty neighbour should destroy your foxes, I must own concerns me. I know some gentlemen, who, when a neighbour had destroyed all their foxes, and thereby prevented them from pursuing a favourite amusement, loaded a cart with spaniels, and went all together and destroyed his pheasants. I think they might have called this very properly lex talionis: and it had the desired effect; for as the gentleman did not think it prudent to fight them all, he took the wiser method, he made peace with them. He gave an order that no more foxes should be destroyed, and they never afterwards killed any of his pheasants."

In the first volume of the Manchester Transactions we have a dissertation upon the diversions of hunting, shooting, &c. as compatible with the principles of humanity. One argument used by the author is, that death is no positive evil to brutes. "It would perhaps (says he) be too hasty an assertion to affirm, that death to brutes is no evil. We are not competent to determine whether their existence, like our own, may not extend to some future mode of being, or whether the present limited sphere is all in which they are interested. On so speculative a question little can be advanced with precision; nor is it necessary for the investigation of the subject before us. If we may be allowed to reason from what we know, it may be safely conjectured, that death to brutes is no positive evil: we have no reason to believe they are endowed with foresight; and therefore, even admitting that with them the pleasures of life exceed its pains and cares, in terminating their existence, they only suffer a privation of pleasure."

On this extraordinary piece of reasoning we may observe, that it would hold much more against the human species than against the brutes. There are few amongst us willing to allow that the pleasures we enjoy are equivalent to our pains and cares: death therefore must be to us a relief from pain and misery, while to the brutes it is a privation of pleasure. Hence, if it be no positive evil for a brute to suffer death, to a

man it must be a positive good: add to which, that a man lives in hope of an endless and glorious life, while a brute has no such hope; so that, if to kill a brute, on our author's principles, be no cruelty, to kill a man must be an act of tenderness and mercy!

Another argument, no less inconclusive, is our author's supposing that death from disease is much more to be dreaded in a brute than a violent death. Were brutes naturally in as helpless a state as man, no doubt their want of support from society in cases where they are attacked by sickness would be very deplorable; but it must be considered that the parallel betwixt the two species is in this respect by no means fair. A brute has everywhere its food at hand, and is naturally capable of resisting the inclemencies of the weather; but man has not only a natural inability to procure food for himself in the way that the brutes do, but is, besides, very tender and incapable of resisting the inclemency of the air. Hence, a man unassisted by society must very soon perish; and, no doubt, it would be much more merciful for people to kill one another at once, than to deprive them of the benefits of society, as is too frequently done in various ways needless to be mentioned at present. A brute, however, has nothing to fear. As long as its stomach can receive food, nature offers an abundant supply. One that feeds upon grass has it always within reach; and a carnivorous one will content itself with worms or insects, which, as long as it is able to crawl, it can still make a shift to provide; but so totally helpless is man when left to himself in a state of weakness, that many barbarous nations have looked upon the killing of their old and infirm people to be an act of mercy.

Equally unhappy is our author in his other arguments, that the quick transition from a state of perfect health to death mitigates the severity. The transition is not quick. The sportsmen estimate their diversion by the length of the chase; and during all that time the creature must be under the strongest agonies of terror; and what person of humanity is there who must not feel for an animal in this situation? All this is asserted to by our author, who says, "Hard is the heart who does not commiserate the sufferer." Is not this an acknowledgment on his part, that before a person can become a thorough sportsman, he must harden his heart, and stifle those amiable sensations of compassion, which on all occasions ought to be encouraged towards every creature, unless in cases of necessity. But in the present case no necessity is or can be pretended. If a gentleman chooses to regale himself with venison of any kind, he may breed the animals for the purpose. We call Domitian cruel, because he took pleasure in catching flies, and stabbing them with a bodkin. A butcher is excluded from sitting on a jury on account of his being accustomed to sights which are deemed inhuman; but whether it is more inhuman to knock down an ox at once with an axe, or to tear him in pieces with dogs, (for they would accomplish the purpose if properly trained), must be left to the sportsmen to determine.

Lastly, the great argument in favour of hunting, that it contributes to the health of the body and exhilaration of the spirits, seems equally fallacious with the rest. It cannot be proved that hunters are more healthy or long-lived.

lived than other people. That exercise will contribute to the preservation of health, as well as to the exhilaration of the mind, is undoubted; but many other kinds of exercise will do this as well as hunting. A man may ride from morning to night, and amuse himself with viewing and making remarks on the country through which he passes; and surely there is no person will say that this exercise will tend to impair his health or sink his spirits. A man may amuse and exercise himself not only with pleasure, but profit also, in many different ways, and yet not accustom himself to behold the death of animals with indifference. It is this that constitutes the cruelty of hunting; because we thus wilfully extinguish in part that principle naturally implanted in our nature, which if totally eradicated would set us not only on a level with the most ferocious wild beasts, but perhaps considerably below them; and it must always be remembered, that whatever pleasure terminates in death is cruel, let us use as many palliatives as we please to hide that cruelty from the eyes of others, or even from our own.

The gentlemen and masters of the sport have invented a set of terms which may be called the hunting-language. The principal are those which follow:

1. For beasts as they are in company.—They say, a herd of harts, and all manner of deer. A bey of roes. A sounder of swine. A root of wolves. A richess of martens. A brace or leash of bucks, foxes, or hares. A couple of rabbits or conies.

2. For their lodging.—A hart is said to harbour. A buck lodges. A roe beds. A hare seats or forms. A cony sits. A fox kennels. A marten trees. An otter watches. A badger earths. A boar couches.—Hence, to express their dislodging, they say, Unharbour the hart. Rouse the buck. Start the hare. Bolt the cony. Unkennel the fox. Untree the marten. Vent the otter. Dig the badger. Rear the boar.

3. For their noise at rutting time.—A hart belletth. A buck grows or troats. A roe bellows. A hare beats or taps. An otter whines. A boar sreams. A fox barks. A badger shrieks. A wolf howls. A goat rattles.

4. For their copulation.—A hart or buck goes to rut. A roe goes to town. A boar goes to brim. A hare or cony goes to buck. A fox goes to clickitting. A wolf goes to match or make. An otter hunteth for his kind.

5. For the footing and treading.—Of a hart, we say the slot. Of a buck, and all fallow-deer, the view. Of all deer, if on the grass and scarce visible, the foiling. Of a fox, the print; and of other the like vermin, the footing. Of an otter, the marks. Of a boar, the track. The hare when in open field, is said to sore; when she winds about to deceive the hounds, she doubles; when she beats on the hard highway, and her footing comes to be perceived, she pricketh: in snow, it is called the trace of the hare.

6. The tail of a hart, buck, or other deer, is called the single. That of a boar, the wreath. Of a fox, the brush or drag; and the tip at the end, the chape. Of a wolf, the stern. Of a hare and cony, the scut.

7. The ordure or excrement of a hart and all deer,

is called fewmets or fewmishing. Of a hare, erotiles or erotising. Of a boar, leesses. Of a fox, the billiting; and of other the like vermin, the fuants. Of an otter, the sprints.

8. As to the attire of deer, or parts thereof, those of a stag, if perfect, are the bur, the pearls, the little knobs on it, the beam, the gutters, the antler, the sur-antler, royal, sur-royal, and all at top the croches. Of the buck, the bur, beam, brow-antler, black-antler, advancer, palm, and spellers. If the croches grow in the form of a man's hand, it is called a palm'd head. Heads bearing not above three or four, and the croches placed aloft, all of one height, are called crowned heads. Heads having double croches, are called forked heads, because the croches are planted on the top of the beam like forks.

9. They say, a litter of cubs, a nest of rabbits, a squirrel's droy.

10. The terms used in respect of the dogs, &c. are as follow.—Of grehounds, two make a brace; of hounds a couple. Of grehounds, three make a leash; of hounds, a couple and half.—They say, let slip a grehound; and, cast off a hound. The string wherein a grehound is led, is called a leash; and that of a hound, a lyome. The grehound has his collar, and the hound his couples. We say a kennel of hounds, and a pack of beagles.