The damage done by game on agricultural farms in the Highlands is altogether inconsiderable in affecting the agricultural prosperity of the country. Our opinion is that if the truth were fairly told farmers would confess that where the shoe pinches is in the pressure of high rents caused by their own mutual competitions for farms, rather than the trifling damage done by game. The bringing forward of the game question has been merely the trotting out of a stalking horse. There were no complaints of game or game laws in the good old times when the rents were low. Our grandfathers and great-grandfathers were rejoiced to furnish the laird with a good day's sport, in the fruits of which they generally participated. Game must have done as much harm then as now, but farmers in those days did not feel pushed to meet the rent day. They could live on a smaller income; they did not seek or require the same luxuries, and had less outlay in labour. Of course, a great deal has happened since then, but it cannot be said that for this the lairds are entirely to blame. Then to rent a farm was synonymous with making money; now it as often means losing it. With higher rents, the result of a keener demand, a farmer's profits have been sadly diminished, and he too often exerts his ingenuity in discovering grounds of deduction from a rent he feels to be burdensome. On the sound enough principle of abolishing special privileges of all kinds he can fairly advocate the abolition of hypothec, but when in the same breath he turns his back upon that principle by calling for the creation of the extraordinary privilege of an inalienable right to ground game, he asks too much and has every probability of getting too little.