Sitinnicr Mccfiiii^. 9* 



'^5 



to be heard of again, except to be printed for information. There is 

 where your bird law died, not because any person wanted to see the bird 

 law proper killed, but because this society and the Audubon Society. I 

 believe it is calle^l, permitted the section referring to birds to get intO' 

 bad company, and tlie merits of the bird law were not sufficient to carry 

 the demerits of the game law through. L et me suggest that the next time 

 you try to pass a bird law, you go it alone and let the game law remain- 

 as it IS, if the bird law already upon the statutes does not suit you. The 

 present bird law seems to me to- be a very good law, but I have not 

 studied the subject as you have and probably there are deficiencies that 

 have not suggested themselves to me. 



Again it is possible that this society and the friends of the bird are 

 attached to and look with great favor upon another feature of the bill 

 that was presented lo the last Senate. I might add another, and say two 

 features. Section i of that bill provides for a game warden and gives 

 him a salary of two thousand dollars a year, and I sometimes think that 

 the man who wanted to be game warden wrote that bill, because it seems 

 to provide amply for his salary and gives him the power of a king. Listen 

 to a few of these provisions : "The game warden shall, upon probable 

 cause being shown for believing that there is concealed any animal, bird 

 or fish, caught, taken or killed, or had in possession, or shipped contrary 

 to the laws of this State, search in any place, and to that end may enter 

 any building, inclosure, car or apartment and break open any chest, box,, 

 locker, crate, basket or package and examine the contents thereof," and 

 further it says "Said game warden shall not be liable for damages on ac- 

 count of any search, examination or seizure made in accordance with 

 the provisions of this act." This law, you will notice, gives the game 

 warden more power than a sheriff has in seeking stolen property and 

 then exempts him from liability if he abuses this power. Section 4, 

 reads as follows : "In any case where the prosecuting attorney neglects- 

 or refuses to prosecute any person for the violation of any of the provis- 

 ions of this act, the game warden may prosecute for such offense without 

 the sanction of such prosecuting attorney, and he is hereby authorized and 

 empowered to procure the services of an attorney at law to prosecute or 

 assist in prosecuting on behalf of the State, any person charged with 

 violation of any of the game, bird or fish laws of this State ; and the game 

 warden shall allow such attorney at law a reasonable compensation for his- 

 services, which shall be taxed as necessary expenses of the office of game 

 warden." It looks like some attorney might be interested in having this- 

 law passed. As for myself, I would prefer to leave this power in the 

 hands of the prosecuting attorney, where it now belongs, who has tO' 



