386 
FOREST AND STREAM. 
[Nov. 5, 1904. 
money from you men; you have to work hard for what 
little you do get." 
Yes, he hardly ever got more than a dollar and a half 
a day, and was not getting even that now. These men 
were on a strike just then. 
"Yes, I know," I told him. "Well, you travel off home 
now and put that gun away. If I ever find you with it 
overe here again I will take you to' town and have you 
fined." 
I discharged both barrels of his gun to be on the safe 
side, then handing it to him told him to get it home and 
leave it there. 
About ten days after this I met one of the ward con- 
stables up town and was hailed with, "See here! Do 
you know that you came near having a policeman with a 
warrant after you the other day? That Dago you took 
the gun from over on the peninsula came into our office 
and wanted a warrant for you. The 'Squire would not 
give him one, but told him that you should have brought 
him to him, then he would have given him a fine." 
"I'll do it next time, tell the 'Squire." 
Men never know when they are well off. I did not 
want that man fined on account of his wife and children. 
If I find him and his gun over there again, he won't want 
any warrants next time. I'll provide the warrant for 
him. Cabia Blanco. 
Massachusetts Sportsmen. 
Boston, Oct. 27. ■ — Editor Forest and Stream: It be- 
gins to look as if the old Bay State were approaching the 
point where it will be dangerous to violate fish and game 
laws. The labors of game wardens the past two weeks 
seem to eclipse all previous records. In the fourteen 
days prior to October 27, thirty-five arrests have been 
made by deputies in Massachusetts. Of these, two were 
deer cases, one resulting in a fine of $100; the other_ is 
still in court. Twelve were for killing song and in- 
sectivorous birds, fines $290; eighteen for Sunday hunt- 
ing, fines $180; two for ferreting, $40; one short lobster 
case, $35; making a total in fines of $645. These arrests 
were made in ten cities and towns in different parts of 
the State. This activity on the part of the deputies is 
very encouraging, as it indicates progress toward the 
development of a system of enforcing the laws that will 
eventually be very effective, provided a sufficient number 
of men of the right stamp are put into the field. 
There is no question that public sentiment is very 
strongly in favor of a strict enforcement, nor is there 
any question as to the ability of the State to provide the 
means requisite to secure it. If any of the laws run so 
far contrary to public approval as to render their en- 
forcement an impossibility, they should be replaced by 
such as can be enforced. When a law becomes a "dead 
letter" it is not simply innocuous, it is harmful, it en- 
genders a disregard of all laws. 
Our commissioners and their deputies are doing a great 
work, and during certain periods of the year their hurfi- 
bers should be increased considerably, perhaps to twice 
the number now employed on a salary. 
From Cottage City comes a complaint that a "party of 
Boston gunners" wantonly slaughtered 180 ducks one day 
this week, including some canvasbacks' and redheads. 
This has excited great indignation among the local 
sportsmen, but, under the law, I see no redress^ Such 
reports tend to prepare one to favor putting a limit upon 
the bags that may be killed in a day. Another report 
is that at the place above named and Edgartown the peo- 
ple are "up in arms" at the violation of what they regard 
as the "unwritten law of the county" in regard 
to shooting ducks. There is a mutual understand- 
ing among the local sportsmen, says Mr. J. E. 
White, of Edgartown, that "no gunner shall go out 
into the Great Pond in Edgartown or into any other 
pond in the county and fix up a boat resembling a brush 
stand for the purpose of .shooting ducks." The chief 
offender is the commander of the State police boat, the 
Lexington, who is reported to have said that he cared 
nothing about what the local people said, that he was 
going to "shoot ducks in his own way." It is customary 
for the owners to lease gunning points on the island, for 
which they receive from $20 to $300 a year, which is all 
the income the land yields. The people say they will call 
the attention of the proper authorities to what they term 
the "setting at defiance the rights of the people" by a 
State officer. Aside from the above, your correspondent 
has heard complaints from interested persons m regard 
to the manner in which the Lexington has been used. 
The work for which the boat was designed comes legiti- 
mately under the Fish and Game Commission, but several 
years ago, when the Ocean Gem was used, the boat was 
taken out of the hands of the commissioners and given 
over to the State police under the late Chief Wade. 
From Essex county reports come in that partridges as 
well as quail are scarce, and some sportsmen express the 
fear that the pheasants may be in some degree to blame 
for this scarcity. It may be there is nothing 111 this. If 
the native birds are, in fact, killed by pheasants, it would 
appear reasonable to suppose some of them would be 
found dead by the gunners. Reports indicate more 
pheasants in that county than elsewhere in the State. 
Several letters recently received complain loudly of the 
devastations of foxes and urge the enactment of a law 
providing for the payment of a bounty upon them as one 
of the most effective measures for saving , the game birds. 
One of our good farmer friends, Deputy A. M. Lyman, 
of Montague, writes that he hears of a deer having been 
recently killed in his section, and he is using every means 
at his command to find the guilty party, but he thmks 
it is like "hunting for a needle in the haymow." 
Mr. I. O Converse, of Fitchburg, writes about game in 
that section as follows: "We are having a nice flight 
of woodcock just now, and some very good bags are 
made. Partridge shooting is better than last year ; m fact, 
is very good. Quail are scarce, but still quite a number 
have been flushed, but we have not shot any." The last 
statement is gratifying, and I sincerely hope there will be 
a general abstinence from the killing of quail in our State 
this year. The' circular letter sent out by the State Asso- 
ciation just before the opening of the shooting season to 
the various clubs, requesting hunters to spare the quail, 
appears to have met with a favorable response every- 
where. 
A run through Faneuil Hall Market yesterday disclosed 
a supply of game birds, venison, and bear meat somewhat 
in excess of the amount commonly seen there at this 
season. 
The A. D. Thayer party of two gentlemen and their 
wives returned this week from Moosehead, bringing three 
deer. They went into camp about twelve miles from 
Kineo, on the western shore of the lake. Mr. Thayer 
tells me that in his judgment, from . what he saw and 
heard on this trip, deer are as plentiful in that section as 
they are at points further back in the wilderness. 
President Hinman, just back from a two weeks' trip, 
brought home a moose. 
Dr. Heber Bishop has recently visited his camp at 
Clearwater with two companions. Ex-President Reed and 
Mr. W. N. Boylston are at Princeton for woodcock. 
This is a favorite resort with both of them, and they 
know just where to look for the birds. 
It is currently reported that there are now 2,000 non- 
resident hunters in Maine; probably more than half of 
them hail from Massachusetts. There is so much water 
in the low lands and swamps that the deer are to' be 
found on the ridges, so that hunting them is unusually 
difficult for this time of the year, but the great majority 
of hunters are meeting with fair success, especially the 
veterans. The total shipment from Bangor to yesterday 
(October 28) is 1,092 deer, 64 moose, 26 bears; as against 
1,281 deer, 55 moose, 18 bears for the corresponding 
period of 1903. 
At Lake Debsconeag, Maine, are Mr. and Mrs. J. H. 
Williams, of Boston, several from New York and Phila- 
delphia, and Mr. and Mrs. George Gray and two daugh- 
ters from Oldtown. Mr. L. C. Moody, of Boston, was the 
first to secure a deer. Harold Johnson, one of the 
guides, shot the first moose of the season in sight of one 
of the camps. 
One of the biggest bears ever killed in Maine was shot 
recently at Norcross by the cook in one of the camps. 
He weighed about 400 pounds. Mr. O. W. Bragdon, of 
Boston, in Township 22 on Union River, secured a moose 
said to be the finest of the season. Its weight is given at 
800 pounds. It had a fine set of antlers with very wide 
palms. Mr. Bragdon also secured two fine deer. The 
young man is known in Boston as an athlete, and his 
record as a nimrod will be hard to beat. Central. 
A Hunter's License Decision. 
Springfield, 111., Oct. 28. — Editor Forest mid Stream: 
I beg to hand you herewith copy of a decision of the 
Supreme Court of Illinois, on the constitutionality of the 
non-resident license law, and other questions involved 
in the Illinois law, in a case brought against H. J. Cum- 
in i-ngs, of St. Louis, Missouri, who was convicted in the 
Circuit Court of Greene county, this State, for hunting 
protected game without first taking out a non-resident 
license. 
You will note that the decision is a splendid victory 
for the Game Department of the State of Illinois, and 
will meet with the hearty approval of all sportsmen who 
favor the non-resident license as a splendid means of 
game protection. John A. Wheeler, 
State Game Commissioner. 
The text of the decision is as follows, being given here 
practically in full : 
On October 22, 1903, plaintiff in error, Henry J. Cum- 
mings, was fined $25 by a justice of the peace of Greene 
county for hunting game with a gun without having a 
license, as prescribed by section 25 of chapter 61 of 
Hurd's Statutes of 1903. From this judgment he prayed 
an appeal to the circuit court where the case was heard 
by the court without a jury, upon an agreed state of 
facts, which is substantially as follows : 
"That the defendant, on the 21st day of October, 1903, 
before that day and ever since, has been and is a resident 
of the city of St. Louis, in the State of Missouri ; that 
the defendant, on or about the 21st day of October, 1903, 
was hunting with a gun for game on the premises owned 
in fee simple in said county of Greene by the Grand Pass 
Shooting Club, a corporation organized and acting under 
the laws of the State of Illinois, and that said corporation 
has been so incorporated and acting as such corporation 
for several years past, and has been the owner in fee 
simple of about twelve hundred acres of land situated in 
the Illinois River bottom, in said Greene county, and that 
defendant, on the date above stated, did so hunt for game 
on said land, and at no other place whatsoever; that the 
defendant, Henry J. Cummings, on the day when he was 
so hunting on said premises and for which this prosecu- 
tion has been instituted, and for some time previous 
thereto, was a member of said corporation and a bona 
tide stockholder in said corporation; that said corpora- 
tion, on the 12th day of September, 1903, adopted a reso- 
lution authorizing and inviting each member and stock- 
holder of said corporation, at any time thereafter during 
the ensuing year, to visit said club and to hunt for game 
with a gun on the lands of said corporation above stated, 
and so situated in Greene county ; that the said defendant, 
Henry J. Cummings, in company with one of the direc- 
tors of said corporation, on the date above stated, was 
on said premises, in said Greene county, with said 
director on the above date stated, and with said director 
and by reason of the resolution referred to above, and by 
reason of being a member of said corporation and a 
stockholder therof, on said premises with a gun, for the 
purpose of hunting, and was then and there so hunting. 
It is admitted that the Grand Pass Shooting Club is a 
corporation organized under the laws of the State of 
Illinois, and has been such corporation since August 27, 
1887; that said corporation for- several years last past, 
and up to this date, has been continuously, and is now, 
the owner in fee simple of about twelve hundred acres of 
land situated in the Illinois River bottom, in said Greene 
county, which it has inclosed, and on which it has erected 
a club 'house and other improvements; thaLthe said cor- 
poration, in September, 19&3,' as such corporation, 
adopted a resolution of r&cord inviting all the members 
and stockholders of the said corporation to hunt, at any 
time thereafter during the ensuing year, with a gun, for 
game, during the proper season, on the said premises of 
said corporation, in said Greene county; that the said de- 
fendant. Henry J. Cummings, did so hunt with a gun on 
the said premises on the date ." claimed by the People, 
that is to say, within eighteen months past, for game on 
said premises and by reason of the resolution adopted by 
said corporation, as above stated; that the said Henry 
J. Cummings, at said time last named, had not procured 
from the proper authorities of the State of Illinois a 
license to hunt, pursue or kill with a gun any of the wild 
animals, fowl or birds that were then protected by the 
laws of the State of Illinois." 
Upon the submission of the case on the above state of 
facts, no other evidence being offered by either party, 
the defendant submitted to the court the five following 
propositions of law, which he asked to have held as the 
law applicable to the case : 
1. "That the proviso to section 25 of the act for the 
protection of game, etc., in force July 1, 1903, is valid 
and binding. 
2. "That the proviso to section 32 of the same act is 
also valid and binding. 
3. "That the defendant, Henry J. Cummings, being a 
member and stockholder of the Grand Pass Shooting 
Club, had a right to hunt with a gun on the premises 
owned by the said Grand Pass Shooting Club, and vio- 
lated no law in so doing at the time alleged in the 
complaint. 
4. "That the defendant, Henry J. Cummings, being a 
member and stockholder of the Grand Pass Shooting 
Club, and being invited by the resolution of said corpora- 
tion to hunt on the premises owned by the said corpora- 
tion, in said Greene county, with a gun, for game on the 
lands of said corporation, in said Greene county, and 
having so hunted on said lands within proper season by 
such invitation, is not guilty of the charge alleged against 
him in this cause. 
5. "That under the evidence in this case the defendant, 
Henry J. Cummings, is not guilty of the charge alleged 
against him in the complaint in this cause." 
The court marked the first proposition held and the 
others refused, and found the defendant guilty as 
charged in the complaint. He entered his motions for a 
new trial and in arrest of judgment, but both motions 
were overruled, and thereupon the court rendered judg- 
ment against him for a fine and costs, to which he then 
and there excepted. 
Mr. Justice Wilkin delivered the opinion of the 
court : 
Section 25 of chapter 61 provides as follows: "For the purpose 
of increasing the game protection, * * * no person or persons 
shall at any time hunt, pursue or kill with gun any of the wild 
animals, fowl or birds that are protected during any part of the 
year, without first having procured a license so to do, and then 
only during the respective periods of the year when it shall be 
lawful. Said license shall be procured in the following manner: 
* * * And said applicant, if a non-resident, shall pay to the 
county clerk the sum of $15, together with the sum of 50 cents as 
the fee of the county clerk, and if a resident, shall pay to the 
clerk of any city, town or county the sum of $1 as a license fee, 
together with the sum of 10 cents as the fee of the city, town or 
county clerk for issuing such license; * * * Provided, that the 
owner or owners of farm lands, their children or tenants shall 
have the right to hunt and kill game on the farm lands of which 
he or they are the bona fide owners or tenants,* * * without 
procuring such resident license." 
As shown by the foregoing statement, the court below 
held said section valid at the request of the defendant, 
but it is now attempted to be maintained by his counsel 
that it is unconstitutional and void — -first, because it is 
in conflict with section 2 of article 4 of the Federal Con- 
stitution, which declares that "the citizens of each State 
shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citi- 
zens in the several States," this section of the statute pro- 
viding for a different fee to be paid by non-residents 
from the fee charged to residents ; second, because it is 
in conflict with section 1 of the fourteenth amendment to 
the Federal Constitution, which provides that 'no State 
shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the 
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, 
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or 
property, without due process of law, nor deny to any 
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the 
laws; third, because it infringes upon the exclusive power 
of Congress, under section 8 of article 1 of the Federal 
Contsitution, to regulate commerce among the several 
States. 
An examination of these several objections to the 
validity of the statute will lead to the conclusion that 
neither of them can be sustained, and we are clearly of 
the opinion that the trial court ruled properly in holding 
the statute valid. Upon this record, however, that ques- 
tion is not before us for decision. That a party to a suit 
cannot ask the trial' court to hold a proposition of law 
applicable to his case and then assign for error such 
holding is too clear for argument. The validity of sec- 
tion 25 was not questioned upon the trial by proper 
propositions of law, and it cannot, therefore, be ques- 
tioned here. * * * 
The next ground of reversal is that the decision of the 
court below was contrary to the law and the evidence, 
for the reason that the defendant, being an owner of 
stock in the Grand Pass Shooting Club, was an owner 
of real estate belonging to that corporation, and by virtue 
of such ownership acquired an equitable title to the game 
on the land of the corporation, which he had a right to 
take independently of- the provisions of the statute. The 
proviso to section 25, as shown above, is, "that the owner 
or owners of farm, lands, their children or tenants shall 
have the right to hunt and kill game on the farm lands 
of which he or they are the bona fide owners or tenants, 
during the season when it is lawful to kill game, without 
procuring such resident license." This provision having 
been held valid with other parts of section 25, the de- 
fendant could only -avail himself of the exception by 
bringing himself within its limitations, and this he failed 
to do for several reasons. First, being a stockholder in 
the corporation gave him no right, title or interest in the 
real estate owned by the corporation. "A share of_ stock 
may be defined as a right which its owner has in the 
management, profits -and ultimate assets of the corpora- 
tion." "With reference more particularly to the essential 
nature of shares of "stock, it has been well settled that 
such property is personality, and not realty. It is said 
that a share of stock is not real estate; has nothing to 
give it the character of real estate ; is not land, nor a 
hereditament, nor an interest in either of them." "It 
is now a well established principle that the shares of the 
capital stock of corporations are personal property. And 
this applies equally to all corporations, including those 
whose property consists of real estate, although attempts 
