BLOOD.
With full consideration of the importance of blood for making hounds keen, I must say that the digging out of foxes is a phase of hunting that I greatly dislike to witness. I do not think that any writer has put this question more fairly than Captain Elmhirst, who says:—“We must grant that hounds are glad to get hold of their fox; but we cannot grant that it is at all necessary that they should do so. In a well-stocked country he must be a very bad huntsman who cannot find them blood enough by fair killing; while in a badly stocked one it is very certain you cannot afford wanton bloodshed. Moreover, it is almost an allowed fact that hounds well blooded in the cub-hunting season do not require it to any extent afterwards; and many authorities maintain that a good ‘flare up’ of triumph and excitement over the mouth of an earth is just as effectual and satisfactory to hounds as an actual worry.
“And what do the field think of it? They hate and abominate it, each and every one of them. They neither sympathise with the feeling that prompts the act, nor hold with the expediency of its commission. To them it represents no pleasure, and certainly coincides with none of their notions of sport. They would find much greater fun in seeing rats killed in a barn, and derive from the sight a much higher sense of satisfaction. Condemned, probably, to stand about in the cold, unwilling witnesses of what they heartily detest, they spend the time in giving vent to their annoyance and contempt.... Finally, fox-digging, in the sense we refer to, is a crying enormity, a disgrace to a noble sport, and should be put down as rigorously as vivisection.”
Tearing a poor fox to pieces is a sight which very few women would care to watch, except those manly ones who take a delight in killing wild animals themselves. Such persons would be able to look unmoved at a bullock being pole axed, without losing a particle of their appetite for a cut off his sirloin.