52 DIG-EST OF GAME LAWS FOR 1901. 



been directed toward stopping this source of waste. Wyoming pro- 

 hibits purchase of hides or horns of deer, elk, moose, antelope, moun- 

 tain sheep, and goat; and in some other States dealers are required to 

 obtain special licenses for handling hides of deer and moose or other 

 big game. (For restrictions on shipment of deer hides see page 60). 



POSSESSION AND STORAGE. 



One of the most important features of game legislation has been 

 the gradual increase of . provisions making the possession of game out 

 of season an offense. Prohibitions against killing can be enforced 

 only against the hunter, who iiiay be merely the agent of the dealer; 

 but penalties for possession can be enforced alike against hunter 

 and dealer, agent and emplo3^er. The enforcement of such provisions 

 has given rise to cases which have been carried to the highest courts. 

 Acknowledgment has been slow of the principle that States can 

 impose restrictions on possession of game,^ or that birds lawfully 

 purchased in open season can become contraband simply b}" being 

 kept a few days in storage. It is unnecessary here to review the his- 

 tory of this litigation; but reference may be made to a case recently 

 decided by the supreme court of Indiana, in which the appellant was 

 convicted of having in his possession on February 5, 1900, a single 

 quail, which he had obtained lawfuU}?^ on December 30 previous and had 

 kept in his refrigerator, notwithstanding that the law of Indiana pro- 

 hibited possession of quail in that State after January 1. In deciding 

 this case the court summarized the whole question briefly in the fol- 

 lowing words: 



The individual has no natural right to take- game, or to acquire property in it, and 

 all the right he 2)ossesses or can possess in this respect is granted, him by the State. 



The power to grant embodies the power to imj^ose conditions The 



citizen when he accepts the State's grant, accepts it impressed with all the restric- 

 tions and limitations laid upon it, and when he acquires property under such license 

 he does so with full notice of his qualified right; and so, if he loses that which he has 

 taken, or held possession of, upon forbidden terms, he has lost nothing that belonged to 

 him, and there has been no taking of property without due process of law, or without 

 just compensation. (Smith v. State, 58 N. E. Keporter, 1045.) 



Similar decisions have been rendered in Minnesota (State v. Rodman, 

 58 Minn. 393) and other western States. The supreme court of Mis- 

 souri has even gone so far as to hold that under a law prohibiting 

 possession during the close season, a contract on the part of a cold- 

 storage company to keep game during the close season is illegal. 

 (Haggerty v. St. Louis Ice Co., 44 S. W. 1114.) In Ontario game 



1 Michigan (Acts of 1893, p. 312) and Minnesota (Laws of 1897, p. 413) have 

 declared that birds protected by law shall always remain the property of the State. 

 When their killing is not prohibited, they may be used in the manner and for the 

 purposes authorized, but not otherwise. 



