ILLINOIS AUDUBON SOCIETY 9 



unfavorable decision. From the standpoint of Audubonites the proposed 

 legislation contained some features considerably in advance of the present 

 law. It made the state game laws conform as to closed seasons with the 

 regulations of the U. S. Biological Survey. It increased the penalty for kill- 

 ing of non-game and insectivorous birds and clothed with additional powers 

 field officers seeking to enforce the law. Unfortunately there were serious 

 defects in the phraseology of the bill when it reached the governor's desk, 

 and for these and other reasons the veto was applied. With one exception, 

 the old game laws, therefore, remain unchanged, the manner of their ad- 

 ministration only being affected, as previously pointed out, by the admin- 

 istrative code. The exception relates to House Bill 312, approved by the 

 Governor June 25, 1917, which forbids roadside hunting. The new law 

 forbids the discharge of fire arms upon any public highway by any one 

 other than an officer of the law and provides a penalty of from five to 

 twenty-five dollars for each and every violation of this law. This will 

 doubtless prove a very useful law and one not difficult to enforce. 



As reported in the Spring Bulletin, the enabling legislation necessary to 

 make effective the migratory bird treaty with Canada failed of enactment 

 in the session of Congress that came to an end on March 4th. When the 

 special session called by President Wilson met to consider legislation relat- 

 ing to war activities, the enabling act was brought up in the Senate and 

 pushed to a successful conclusion. Consistent with his previous attitude 

 on the same question, Senator Reed of Missouri opposed its passage with 

 every obstacle he could bring up. The bill properly came from the foreign 

 affairs committee and when Senator Reed opposed its presentation at that 

 time on the ground that the special session was to confine its attention to 

 war matters, Senator McLean declared it a war measure and announced 

 his intention to offer the bill as an amendment to the Hoover Food Con- 

 servation Bill, if necessary, in order to secure its consideration. Senator 

 Marcus A. Smith of Arizona was unusually active in supporting the bill and 

 successfully maneuvered it to a final vote which was forty-three to seven 

 in its favor. Of the two senators from Illinois, Senator Lewis voted for 

 it, Senator Sherman refrained from voting. Unfortunately no action was 

 taken on this measure in the House. The Bill went to the foreign affairs 

 committee of that body of which Representative Flood of Virginia is Chair- 

 man and was still in the hands of that committee when Congress adjourned. 

 It now remains to secure the necessary action by Representative Flood's 

 committee to put it before the House during the present session. Then 

 there must be the line-up of friends of bird conservation from every part 

 of the country to insure its passage. 



Canada has already passed similar legislation. With its passage 

 through the House of Representatives there will no longer be any question 

 as to uniformity and fairness of regulations to conserve bird life in every 

 section of our country. 



