THE BOOK OF DUCK DECOYS. | |
| It consisted of a long, low, and gloomy room. On asking for him, his wife pointed to a corner of the room. On looking there I could see nothing but ducks and wildfowl hanging on strings. On repeating the question where Skelton was, some of these strings of wildfowl were taken down, and I found him lying on a four-post bed. These strings of wildfowl were stretched from one post to another all round the bed, so as to form regular curtains, that shut him in completely from view." He died from a thickening of the membrane of the throat, brought on by exposure to damp and cold, and greatly aggravated by his habits of intemperance. George Skelton was twice married, and left one child by his first wife, and five by his second. He had more experience of Decoys and Decoying than any other member of his family, not even excepting his father. The likeness of him in the frontispiece I am able to give through the kindness of the Duke of Leeds, who possesses the original picture. On it is written, "Old George Skelton appearing with the first fruits of the South Acre Decoy, Nov., 1854." | |
 |
|
THE LAW OF DECOYS. | |
| This need only occupy a page or two. A Decoy is considered to be a private preserve containing wildfowl valuable to its owner for food or sale. The Decoy owner expends money and employs skill in taking that which is of use to the public. It is a profitable mode of employing his land, and was considered by Lord Holt as a description of trade. He depends upon his Decoy as a source of profit; if a poor man, for his livelihood. Though he can lay no claim to the ducks, when flying outside his Decoy, he is protected by the law from injury to them when within the precincts of the Decoy. Though Decoys have no special Act for their safety, yet they are protected by Common Law from wilful damage, whether it be to the Decoy, its nets and fences and other accessories, or to the ducks in it. Any wilful act intended to deteriorate the value of the Decoy, can be prevented, or the owner recover damages for, just as he would in any ordinary system of trade, if he were annoyed and suffered loss thereby. | |