EFFECT OF REPEALS. 77 



and that such direction vested in the informer a right of which he could 

 not be deprived by the governor, who, under the constitution, had the 

 power to grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons after convic- 

 tion for all offenses. The effect of such disposition of fines, it was 

 contended, would be to take away from the governor this constitutional 

 authority. This contention, however, was overruled by the court. 

 In Georgia it has been held that where by statute a part of the fine or 

 penalty is reserved to the informer, his right thereto becomes so far 

 vested upon conviction and sentence that the governor can -not, by 

 pardon, remit that part. (Parrott v. Wilson, 51 Ga., 255.) 



As a substitute for the moiety system several States have authorized 

 the offer of specific rewards for evidence leading to conviction in cer- 

 tain cases. In Kansas the act protecting antelope contains a section 

 declaring that a person giving information leading to the conviction 

 of anyone for a violation of the act shall be entitled to a reward of 

 $25. Minnesota authorizes the commission to pay out of the funds 

 at its disposal a reward of $50 for information leading to conviction 

 in respect to moose and caribou, $25 in case of deer, and $10 in case 

 of birds. The law of Wyoming authorizes the State game warden 

 to pay a reward of $300 for evidence to convict an}^ person of hunting- 

 big game for tusks, heads, horns, or antlers and allowing the carcass 

 to go to waste. 



REPORTS OF PROSECUTIONS. 



In order that game officials may know the progress of protection 

 and the work of deputy wardens, it is expressly provided in some 

 States — for example, Alabama, Colorado, and Maine — that every 

 magistrate or court before whom a prosecution under the game laws 

 has been conducted or an appeal has been taken shall, within a certain 

 time after disposition of the case, report the particulars to the State 

 game officials. Usually this report must contain a statement of the 

 offense and the result of the trial, show whether or not the fine was 

 paid, and if so, what disposition was made of it, and if not, what pun- 

 ishment was inflicted upon the defendant. 



EFFECT OF REPEALS. 



A bill for the protection of game intended to repeal all former 

 game laws should alwaj^s contain a saving clause at the end. Other- 

 wise it might be contended by some defendant who had violated -the old 

 law that a prosecution could not be maintained because the new law 

 had repealed the old and thereby released him from such penalties as 

 attached to the offense under the old law. Such a provision in the 

 Colorado game law reads as follows: 



All acts and parts of acts in conflict with this act are hereby repealed, but such 

 repeal shall not affect or abate any prosecution now pending or hereafter brought 

 for any offense committed prior to the taking effect of this act, but the same may be 

 prosecuted and punished as in said acts provided. (Div. M, sec. 9.) 



