XXVIli Trans. Acad. Sct. of St. Louis. 
vote for the bill. In introducing his motion Mr. Wid- 
mann read the following: 
In November, 1905, I had a paper before the American Ornitholo- 
gists’ Union at its twenty-third Congress in New York City, entitled 
“Should Bird Protection Laws and their Enforcement be in the Hands 
of the National Government?” This same question is now put to 
Congress in bill 10,276, introduced into the House of Representatives 
May 28, 1909, by Hon. John W. Weeks of Massachusetts. 
The bill reads as follows: 
“Be it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
the United States of America in Congress assembled, that all Geese, 
Swans, Brants, Ducks, Snipe, Plover, Woodcock, Rail, Pigeons, and 
all other migratory birds, which, in their northern and southern 
migrations, pass through or do not remain permanently the entire 
year within the borders of any state or territory, shall hereafter be 
deemed to be within the custody and protection of the Government 
of the United States, and shall not be destroyed or taken contrary to 
regulations hereinafter provided for. 
Sec. 2. “That the Department of Agriculture is hereby authorized 
to adopt suitable regulations to give effect to the previous section by 
prescribing and fixing closed seasons, having due regard to the zones 
of temperature, breeding habits, and times and line of migratory flight, 
thereby enabling the department to select and designate suitable dis- 
tricts for different portions of the country, within which said closed 
seasons, it shall not be lawful to shoot or by any device kill or seize 
and capture migratory birds within the protection of this law, and by 
declaring penalties by fine or imprisonment, or both, for violations of 
such regulations. 
Sec 3. “That the Department of Agriculture, after preparation of 
said regulations, shall cause the same to be made public, and shall 
allow a period of three months in which said regulations may be 
examined and considered before final adoption, to cause same to be 
engrossed and submitted, to the President of the United States for 
approval: Provided, however, that nothing therein contained shall be 
deemed to affect or interfere with the local laws of the states and ter- 
ritories for the protection of game localized within their borders, nor 
to prevent the states and territories from enacting laws and regula- 
tions to promote and render efficient the regulations of the Depart- 
ment of Agriculture provided under this statute.” 
Experience has shown the impossibility of obtaining uniform and 
adequate legislation for migratory birds from state legislatures. The 
formulating of a good protective law is a task which requires more 
knowledge of the habits of birds than legislators can be expected 
to possess, and there is the danger that with every new session of a 
legislature a good law may be changed, usually through the agency 
of parties who find the law injuring their business. It is known that 
business men with a little money as a persuader have convinced law 
makers in our own state that if certain laws were passed or not 
changed they would have to go out of business, or rather go into some 
other business, less injurious to the public welfare. 
