THE EXTERMINATION OF THE AMERICAN BISON. 519 



good one, yet it was mischievous and difficult to enforce, and would 

 also work hardship to a large portion of our frontier people. He had 

 several objections. He also thought a cow buffalo could not be distin- 

 guished at a distance. 



Mr. Hancock, of Texas, thought the bill an impolicy, and that the 

 sooner the buffalo was exterminated the better. 



Mr. Fort replied by askiug him why all the game — deer, antelope, 

 etc. — was not slaughtered also. Then he went on to state that to ex- 

 terminate the buffalo would be to starve innocent children of the red 

 man, and to make the latter more wild and savage than he was already. 



Mr. Baker, of Indiana, offered the following amendment as a substi- 

 tute for the one already offered : 



Provided, That any white person who shall employ, hire, or procure, directly or in- 

 directly, any Indian to kill any buffalo forbidden to be killed by this act, shall be 

 deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and punished in the manner provided iu this act. 



Mr. Fort stated that a certain clause in his bill covered the object of 

 the amendment. 



Mr. Jeuks offered the following amendment: 



Strike out in the fourth line of the second section the word " can " and iusert 

 "shall;" and in the second line of the same section insert the word "wantonly" 

 before " kill ; " so that the clause will read : 



"That it shall be in like manner unlawful for any such person to wantonly kill, 

 wound, or destroy in the said Territories any greater number of male buffaloes than 

 are needed for food by such person, or than shall be used, cured, or preserved for the 

 food of other persons, or for the market." 



Mr. Conger said : " I think the whole bill is unwise. I think it is a 

 useless measure." 



Mr. Hancock said : " I move that the bill and amendment be laid on 

 the table," 



The motion to lay the bill upon the table was defeated, and the 

 amendment was rejected. 



Mr. Conger called for a division on the passage of the bill. The 

 House divided, and there were — ayes 93, noes 48. He then demanded 

 tellers, and they reported — ayes 104, noes 36. So the bill was passed. 



On February 25, 1876, the bill was reported to the Senate, and re- 

 ferred to the Committee on Territories, from whence it never returned. 



On March 20, 1876, Mr. Fort introduced a bill (H. E. 2767) to tax 

 buffalo hides; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, 

 and never heard of afterward. 



This was the last move made in Congress in behalf of the buffalo. 

 The philanthropic friends of the frontiersman, the Indian, and of the 

 buffalo himself, despaired of accomplishing the worthy object for which 

 they had so earnestly and persistently labored, and finally gave up 

 the fight. At the very time the effort in behalf of buffalo protection 

 was abandoned the northern herd still flourished, and might have been 

 preserved from extirpation. 



At various times the legislatures of a few of the Western States and 



