CONGRESS HAS FULL POWER. 



The following correspondence brings 

 good news to all friends of America's wild 

 animals : 



House of Representatives, 

 Washington, Dec. 5, 1901. 

 Hon. P. C. Knox, 



Attorney-General U. S. 

 My dear Sir: In furtherance of my 

 verbal inquiry regarding your views on the 

 subject of forestry legislation I wish to 

 obtain the benefit of your judgment on the 

 Constitutional powers of Congress to con- 

 trol the various forest reserves where they 

 are situated in the States. 



As to those reserves situated in the Ter- 

 ritories, it seems to me quite clear that 

 Congress can accept the Territorial laws 

 or can modify or change them at pleasure, 

 and that those reserves are clearly within 

 the jurisdiction of Congress. 



As to the enactment of federal laws to 

 punish the setting out of fires or trespasses 

 in cutting or injuring the timber, I should 

 be pleased to have your views as to what 

 constitutional limitations, within the limits 

 of the States, would interfere. In view 

 of the permanent withdrawal of these for- 

 est lands for a general national purpose, 

 would the powers of regulation and control 

 be greater than those which may be exer- 

 cised in the preservation and management 

 of ordinary public lands open to entry or 

 settlement, where the same are covered 

 with timber? 



These questions involve the general 

 power of enacting statutes punishing the 

 persons who may injure the forests, as well 

 as making and enforcing regulations for 

 their case. 



In these forests the wild game have op- 

 portunities to breed and find shelter. 



An enlightened public sentiment, though 

 unfortunately too tardy in its development, 

 has finally led to the enactment of efficient 

 and adequate game protection in nearly all 

 the States and Territories, which laws, if 

 suitably enforced, would in most instances 

 give adequate protection. Unfortunately, 

 in many localities these laws are either 

 wholly or in part disregarded. The Presi- 

 dent, in his message, has asked for the 

 enactment of laws creating game preserves 

 in these forest reserves. This recommend- 

 ation involves the question as to the ex- 

 tent of Congressional power ; also the 

 choice of methods. 



If Congress has no power or control over 

 the subject within the limits of a State it 

 lias unquestioned authority, in my judg- 

 ment, to prevent interstate commerce in 

 the dead bodies or living creatures them- 

 selves. This control Congress has already 



asserted in the federal law prohibiting 

 transportation from one State to another 

 of such game when killed in violation of 

 State laws. 



In the disposition of this question in the 

 forest reserves the custodians of the forests 

 might be directed to make complaints and 

 enforce proceedings under the local stat- 

 utes, thus supplementing the efforts of the 

 State authorities. On the other hand, special 

 federal statutes might be framed, if consti- 

 tutional power exists, to deal directly with 

 the question. Indirectly, protection might 

 be furnished by preventing trespass of all 

 kinds during certain seasons, thus giving 

 incidental protection to the wild inhabitants 

 of these national forests during certain 

 portions of the year. 



In this border land of State and National 

 authority I regard it as of the utmost im- 

 portance that the legislative should keep 

 in view the rights and powers of ■ the 

 States, and that care should be exercised 

 to avoid conflict of jurisdiction where so 

 much depends on having the laws backed 

 up by a friendly local public sentiment. 



I should be gratified to have the benefit 



of your judgment as to how far legislation 



on these various subjects would be within 



the constitutional domain of the Congress.' 



Respectfully, 



John F. Lacey. 



Department of Justice, 

 Washington, D. C, Jan. 3, 1902. 



Hon. John F. Lacey, 



House of Representatives. 



Sir : Complying with the request therefor, 

 contained in your note of December 5, 1901, 

 I here transmit to you some of my views 

 on the questions there suggested. These 

 questions are as to the power of Congress 

 to enact laws for the protection and con- 

 trol of, or relating to, our national forest 

 reserves, when within the limits of a State ; 

 and specifically to make such reserves, to 

 some extent, refuges for the preservation 

 of the remnant of the game in those local- 

 ities. They necessarily involve, also, sub- 

 stantially the same questions as applicable 

 to the general public domain ; for, so far 

 as concerns the question of federal legis- 

 lative power, no difference in principle is 

 perceived. 



I agree with you that, as to those re- 

 serves situated within a territory of the 

 United States, this federal legislative 

 power is ample ; and the questions, are 

 those arising when such reserves are within 

 the limits of a State; but in order to 

 determine those, it may be well to 



197 



