4 8 PROBLEMS IN WILD LIFE CONSERVATION 



The federal government, of course, may make game laws 

 specifically for Indian reservations but has not done so to 

 date. It is still an open question whether federal game laws 

 and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act in particular apply to 

 Indian reservations when they do not upon their face so 

 state. It is held by the Solicitor of the Department of Agri- 

 culture, acting in behalf of the Biological Survey, that they 

 do apply. A test case is at the present time being brought 

 in the federal District Court for Oregon charging a viola- 

 tion of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act by an Indian on a 

 reservation excepted from state jurisdiction. 



Once an Indian leaves the reservation he becomes subject 

 to the ordinary laws of the state just as any other person 57 

 even though his absence from the reservation be only tem- 

 porary. Should he hunt or fish while off the reservation he 

 may be punished with the same penalties as a white man. 

 The reason for this inconsistency is found in long-continued 

 custom most probably arising from the need of the early 

 settlers for protection. 58 



Federal Conservation Activities under the General W el- 

 jar e Clause: Under article I, section 8 of the United States 

 constitution, Congress is authorized " to lay and collect 

 taxes, duties, imposts and excise, to pay the debts and pro- 

 vide for the ... general welfare of the United States." 

 It has commonly been held 59 that the general welfare clause 

 is not in itself a grant of power but merely a limitation 

 upon the taxing power; thus such taxes as are raised must 

 be used for the common defense and general welfare of the 

 United States. Yet inversely money which is raised by taxa- 

 tion may be used for what Congress determines to be the 



"7 M re Wolf, 27 Fed. 606 (1886). 



58 State v. Big Sheep, supra, note 56. 



w See Binns v. United States, 194 U. S. 486 (1903). 



