102 



and the Dominion of Canada ; it is only the United 

 States that can join in any treaty, so that it makes it a 

 difficnlt qnestion to solve. That thonght occnrred to 

 me, why this Societ}^ cannot be of some benefit in 

 bringing abont joint state action, not only on the rivers, 

 but the Great Lakes. 



Mr. Mather : The suggestion that Mr. Amsden 

 makes, that the President of this Association do that, is 

 a good one ; but just exactly how the President of the 

 Association shall do it, or where his funds are going to 

 come from, I do not understand. 



Mr. H. Whitaker: His expenses to be paid from 

 his salar}^ as President. 



Mr. Mather : This Association certainly cannot 

 bear the expense of it, unless the President does it out 

 of his salary as President. (Laughter.) 



Mr. Dickerson : I do not believe it is practicable 

 to change the Constitutions of the several states so 

 that the laws could be uniform, as suggested. I think 

 that would be impossible to bring about. It occurs to 

 me that the only wa}^ to do it is to go a little further 

 than the gentleman has suggested, and that is, appoint 

 a committee— I speak now of the lakes bordering on 

 fresh water, the salt water lakes we have nothing to do 

 with — but we need a uniform law for the protection of 

 game and fish in all states bordering on fresh water 

 lakes, and it seems to me the only way to do that is to 

 appoint a committee of three or five, which shall draft 

 a bill, which shall be uniform in all states bordering 

 on the Great Lakes, and then let the fish commis- 

 sioners of the various states see that the bill is intro- 

 duced, and if possible put through their Legislature. 

 In our Legislature last 3'ear, if there was one, there 

 wQve a dozen or more members said to me, "When you 

 can get Ohio, New York, and Pennsylvania to join in 

 a bill that shall be the same as ours, that shall be uni- 

 form on all the Great Lakes, then we shall unite in 



