GEORGE PULMAN

33

chance by floating it over a rise. Occasionally a man would change flies merely to get a dry one.* The extraordinary thing is that, having got so far, no one discovered that by whisking the fly briskly through the air it was possible to keep it dry and make it float.

About this time (1851) there appeared the "Vade Mecum of Fly-fishing for Trout." The author was George Pulman, and he gives the most precise instructions for the use of a dryfly. He points out that when trout lie near the surface waiting for floating flies, a wet one sinks beneath their line of vision because they happen to be looking upwards. "Let a dry fly be substituted for the wet one, the line switched a few times through the air to throw off its superabundant moisture, a judicious cast made just above the rising fish, and the fly allowed to float towards and over them, and the chances are ten to one that it will be seized as readily as a living insect. This dry-fly, we must remark, should be an imitation of the natural fly on which the fish are feeding, because if widely different,

The Field, March 3, March 24, April 7, 1907.

Ꭰ

the fish instead of being allured, would be most likely surprised and startled at the novelty presented, and would suspend feeding until the appearance of their their favourite and familiar

We come back to the Itchen in the 'sixties, by which time, if we are to believe old Wykehamists, no one thought of employing any other method than dry-fly. Flies were were got from Hammond in those days, and they were tied to float with upright wings. Mr. Francis, the well-known author of "A Book on Angling," writing a little after this, recommends Ogden's floating mayflies, and a floating fly sold by Hammond of Winchester. † In the first edition of his work, published in 1867, he recommends, when a fish has risen and missed, that the angler should give him a rest.

"If he again comes

George P. R. Pulman, "Vade Mecum of Fly-fishing for Trout; being a complete practical treatise on that branch. of the Art of Angling." London, Longmans, 1851. 8vo. This was the third and enlarged edition of a book first published in 1841.

† Francis Francis, "A Book on Angling," being a complete treatise on the art of angling in every branch, with explanatory plates, etc. London, Longmans, 1867.

short, give him

MR. FRANCIS

35

another rest and try a dry fly

over him. . . . Taking then

Taking then two or three turns of the fly in the air instead of one, so as to dry the tackle, let him deliver the fly straightly and well, a yard above the fish, and merely raising his rod as the line comes home, allow the fly, sustained by the dry hackle and wing and by the dry gut, to float down on the surface like the natural fly, without motion." Mr. Francis had discovered that "it is quite wonderful at times what can be done under apparently adverse circumstances with a dry-fly." At the same time he was far removed from the stern modern purist who would rather catch nothing than use a sunk-fly. For my own part, I become more and more inclined to approve of the sentiments which Mr. Francis gives vent to in the following passage :—“ The judicious and perfect application of dry, wet, and mid-water fly-fishing stamps the finished fly-fisher with the hall-mark of efficiency. Generally anglers pin their faith to the entire practice of either one or the other plan, and argue dry versus wet, just as they do up-stream versus down, when all are right at times, and

per contra all wrong at times. It requires the reasoning faculties to be used to know these times and their application."

Since many anglers believe that the dry-fly is quite a modern discovery, it is worth noting that the passages I have quoted were written more than half a century ago.

It is difficult apparently, even for a philosopher, to engage in controversy without exaggerating the merits of the system he supports and attributing imaginary faults to the school he opposes. For this reason, the battle, if one may use so strong a word, about the advantages of dry-fly and wet-fly fishing, still continues fitfully.

It may, I think, be safely assumed that every angler who is skilled enough, who places size of fish killed above numbers, and who is fishing in water not too rough and rapid, will throw up-stream. The respective merits of wet and dry-fly in such a case will depend a great deal upon the weather and upon what the trout are doing.

The first concern of every fisherman is the weather. The first matter that occupies his attention by the riverside is the force and