DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE 



UNITED STATES ON THE FEDERAL 



MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY 



No. 609.— October Term, 1919. 



The State of Missouri, Appellant, / Appeal from the District 

 vs. ) Court of the United 



Ray P. Holland, United States (States for the Western 

 Game Warden. 'District of Missouri. 



[April 19, 1920.] 



Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the Court. 



This is a bill in equity brought by the State of Missouri to 

 prevent a game warden of the United States from attempt- 

 ing to enforce the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of July 3, 

 1918, c. 128, 40 Stat. 755, and the regulations made by the 

 Secretary of Agriculture in pursuance of the same. The 

 ground of the bill is that the statute is an unconstitutional 

 interference with the rights reserved to the States by the 

 Tenth Amendment, and that the acts of the defendant done 

 and threatened under that authority invade the sovereign 

 right of the State and contravene its will manifested in 

 statutes. The State also alleges a pecuniary interest, as 

 owner of the wild birds within its borders and otherwise, 

 admitted by the Government to be sufficient, but it is enough 

 that the bill is a reasonable and proper means to assert the 

 alleged quasi sovereign rights of a State. Kansas v. Colo- 

 rado, 185 U. S. 125, 142. Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., 

 206 U. S. 230, 237. Marshall Dental Manufacturing Co. v. 

 loiva, 226 U. S. 460, 462. A motion to dismiss was sustained 

 by the District Court on the ground that the Act of Congress 

 is constitutional. 258 Fed. Rep. 479. Ace. United States v. 

 Thompson, 258 Fed. Rep. 257 ; United States v. Rockefeller, 

 260 Fed. Rep. 346. The State appeals. 



On December 8, 1916, a treaty between the United States 

 and Great Britain was proclaimed by the President. It 

 recited that many species of birds in their annual migra- 

 tions traversed many parts of the United States and of 



