STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENTS 197 



a game or fish law during 1931. These 36 however prose- 

 cuted 251 cases. Under the circumstances the department 

 deemed it advisable to terminate all these commissions and 

 to adopt the new policy of issuing commissions annually to 

 a small number who by reason of employment in related 

 work or zeal for the cause are able to give material assist- 

 ance to law enforcement. 47 Were this example followed by 

 other state departments the efficiency of the warden force 

 would be greatly increased. 48 



Fee System of Compensation: The fee system is still used 

 in a number of states as a method of compensating the 

 officer making the arrest, 49 whose fee consists either of the 

 costs or of part of the fine itself. The custom of allowing 

 costs either to the warden or to the justice before whom 

 the case is tried, only in case of conviction cannot be too 

 strongly condemned. Two states, for instance, Alabama 

 and Delaware, definitely provide that the warden making the 

 arrest receives costs only in case of conviction. 50 



The fee system in any form as a means of providing 

 compensation for wardens or justices should be abolished. 

 Whether the hope of obtaining a fee does influence the 

 judge in his decision, or the warden in making the arrest, 

 is immaterial, for undoubtedly the person involved believes 

 it does, and pays his fine laboring under the feeling of in- 

 justice. 



47 2ist Annual Report, New York Conservation Department (1931), 

 p. 216. 



48 See also paper expressing same view by George R. Hogarth, Director, 

 Michigan Department of Conservation, on "Volunteer Game Wardens," 

 Proceedings International Association Game and Fish Commissioners 

 (1932), p. 1 6. 



49 Arkansas, Alabama, Indiana, Kansas, and Delaware. 



50 Code of Alabama, sec. 4209 (1923) ; Revised Code of Delaware, sec, 

 2403 (1915). 



