3 o6 GAME PRESERVATION 



the grumbling on this subject appeared in the columns 

 of the Field and Country Life which is inserted weekly 

 in the New York Forest and Stream, there would be 

 a popular outcry against over-preservation. Curious 

 complications arise from these laws. As each State 

 preserves its own game, and pays its own wardens, 

 it naturally objects to citizens of other States shooting 

 in its forests without contribution or domicile. Con- 

 sequently, certain States imposed shooting licenses on 

 non-residents from other States. The latter then com- 

 plained that this was a breach of the American Con- 

 stitution, which secures equal rights to all citizens in 

 all States alike. An action was brought against the 

 State of Connecticut by a citizen, but the State won. 

 So in the Supreme Court of California it was laid down 

 that * the wild game within a State belongs to the people 

 in their collective capacity. It is not the subject of 

 private ownership, except in so far as the people may 

 elect to make it so, and they may, if they see fit, 

 absolutely prohibit the taking of it or traffic or 

 commerce in it, if it is deemed necessary for pro- 

 tection or preservation.' This judgment thus does 

 not forbid private ownership, but asserts State owner- 

 ship in general. As a matter of fact, private ownership 

 of game does exist in many States, and makes such 

 places as the Corbin Park possible. Shooting licenses 

 will probably be made compulsory on 'outsiders' by 



