As everyone is aware, a hare is capable of giving a pack of hounds infinitely more trouble to kill than a fox. It is the exception for a hare to run straight away from hounds for any great distance, though occasionally it will take a line as straight as that of a fox. The account of a run with some harriers in one of our Eastern Counties, in which, after affording a rattling gallop, the hare took out to sea in the Wash, was recorded in the Field. The pack referred to was kept by a relation of mine. For those who are able to appreciate the hunting and working of hounds, hare-hunting affords greater opportunities for witnessing the intricate difficulties of hunting by scent than any similar description of sport. The man who is able to hunt harriers well and successfully should be able to account for a fox, although the tactics of the two animals pursued are different; for, whereas a forward cast will generally succeed in hitting off the line of a fox when hounds are at fault, nine times out of ten it is on one of the backward casts that the true line of a hare will be found. It may well be said that the direction a lost hare has taken will most surely be the one which appears to be the least likely. It is the constant “doubling” which renders hare-hunting so difficult. The best pack of harriers I ever saw at work was one belonging to a Mr. Jeffreys. In colour they were black and tan, owing to a strong infusion of the blood-hound cross. These hounds, which were notorious, were exceedingly well handled by their owner, who contrived to account for an incredible number of hares in the course of the season. They were somewhat light-limbed, very speedy, and possessed the most wondrous noses. No matter what the weather or the country might be, they could pick up a scent where other hounds could not own a yard, and even in the driest road or fallow in March.
Hare-shooting is but poor sport, and to my view, even under the best circumstances, vastly inferior to good rabbit shooting. To miss a hare within easy distance in the open is inexcusable, and to shoot at one at a doubtful range still more so.
I am very much inclined to the opinion that, unless coursed or hunted, a hare is by no means deserving of the high repute in which it is held for table purposes, and there is, moreover, comparatively little of its flesh worth eating. The following method of preparing a hare for table may possibly be found useful. After skinning the animal, immerse it in vinegar and water with a few juniper berries for twelve or even twenty-four hours previous to roasting. By this means it will be found little, if at all, inferior to a coursed or hunted hare.
I refer my readers to the Satires of Horace (II. 4):
“Si vespertinus subito te oppresserit hospes,
Ne gallina malum responset dura palato,
Doctus eris vivam mixto mersare Falerno;
Hoc teneram faciet.”
Hare skins are useful for a variety of purposes. The country people make them into waistcoats—chest preservers; the fur from the face and ears forms an admirable body, either natural or dyed, for certain trout flies such as the “Rough Olive Dun,” “Blue Dun,” “Sedge Flies,” etc.
The hind feet are most useful for oiling guns and such like articles. They were—in former days—much used by those ladies who preferred to supply the complexion which they lacked by a use of the rouge pot; and the bones of the hind legs, when scraped and polished, are capable of being converted into very handsome cigarette holders. So, all things considered, a hare may be said to be a most useful animal.