
FOUNDERS OF THE AUDUBON SOCIETY 

Dr WILLIAM BRUETTE, Editor 
ADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVES 
New York: W. V. HODGE, 221 West 57th Street 
Chicago: P, J. HACKETT, 326 West Madison Street 
St. Louis: L. M. PERKINS, 217 North 10th Street 
United Kingdom: F. J. OSBORNE, 181 Fleet Street, 
E.C. 4, London, England 

Member of Audit Bureau of Circulation 


THE OBJECT OF THIS JOURNAL WILL BE TO 
studiously promote a healthful interest in outdoor 
recreation, and a refined taste for natural objects. 
August 14, 1878. 
wv ow 
SHALL WE HAVE A WAR-TAX IN PEACE 
TIMES? 
HE old Brookhart-Burnham Game Refuge Bill 
which died in the Senate last winter called 
for a government tax on all wild-fowl shoot- 
ers and a new federal bureau of several men in 
Washington to handle the money. The objections 
to the bill were apparent. As originally written it 
provided that 55% of the money was to be for 
executive expenses and 45% for the purchase of 
game refuges. 
At a recent meeting of game commissioners, held 
in Denver, Colo., an attempt was made to revive 
the old bill. It failed completely and a compromise 
was arranged that called for the introduction of 
a new bill, this bill to be known as the Madsen Bill, 
named after Mr. Madsen, State Game Commis- 
sioner of Utah. The principal difference between 
the old bill and the new bill is, that the new bill 
provides that the war tax that sportsmen are now 
paying on guns and ammunition and which it was 
hoped Congress would remove, is to be continued 
and the sums collected, which will run between 
three and four million dollars, be set aside by the 
Treasury Department and handled by a new fed- 
eral bureau. Inasmuch as not more than 25% of 
the money collected is to be used for executive 
purposes, it is an improvement on the old bill. 
We do not question the sincerity of any man 
active in the cause of conservation. It is a subject 
of many angles with a strong emotional appeal and 
all men’s opinions are entitled to respectful and 
serious consideration. We do, however, venture 
to say that a careful consideration of either the 
old bill or the new bill, and an analysis of its pro- 
visions in relation to constitutional provisions of 
government, to which, as a nation, we are com- 
mitted as well as to certain fundamental traits of 
human nature, will lead the dispassionate minded 
to the conclusion that the earnest gentlemen de- 
voted to this bill have lost a certain sense of legis- 
lative values, failed to recognize accepted char- 
acteristics of humanity and turned a deadened ear 
to the spirit of the times. 
The tax which the sponsors of the new bill pro- 
pose to utilize-is a war time tax, and there is 
726 

neither justice nor wisdom in retaining a war tax 
in times of peace, no legitimate industry can live 
under the blight, and irrespective of any concerted 
effort that sportsmen may make for relief from 
this discrimination, there are men in Congress 
deeply concerned with our national future who will 
not long subscribe to singling out groups of men 
or groups of industries as the subject of special 
taxation or the retention of war time taxes in 
times of peace. 
Over a half a century has passed since FOREST 
AND STREAM began its work in the cause of con- 
servation for the preservation of our national re- 
sources and wild life. In those early days the only 
people particularly interested in the out-of-doors 
were hunters and anglers. To them the appeal 
was made and it was through them that Yellow- 
stone Park was saved, Glacier Park established 
and laws passed for the protection of wild life. 
Today the entire nation has its eyes turned lov- 
ingly toward the great outdoors. 
There is no lack of interest in conservation 
among members of our legislators, or our repre- 
sentatives in Washington. The question, however, 
is so big, so broad and of such commanding im- 
portance that it cannot be met by ill-advised mea- 
sures or legislation that runs contrary to consti- 
tutional precedents. The program of the future 
cannot be built on such a make-shift foundation 
as the retention of a war time tax in times of peace. 
The setting aside of marsh lands as national 
reservoirs, the reforestation of waste lands to in- 
sure adequate rainfall are economic necessities 
vital to our agricultural future, and are all a part 
of the great work that will yet be done. 
The Migratory Bird Law, by virtue of our treaty 
with Canada, is a national obligation and it should 
be squarely met with a national appropriation. It 
is idle to say that Congress will not meet this situa- 
tion, for last winter Mr. Dilg and the Izaak Walton 
League wrote their names high in the scrolls of 
conservation when Congress passed the Upper 
Mississippi Refuge Bill and appropriated $1,500,- 
000 for the purpose of purchasing over-flowed 
lands. 
What has been done once can be done again. 
There are great stretches of marshland in the 
West and along our seacoast which should be pur- 
chased for national refuges. But let it be done by 
national appropriations and do not ask the sports- 
men thousands of miles away (not one in a thou- 
sand will ever see these acres) to pay a tax on 
every cartridge they shoot and every gun they buy 
in order to assume national obligations or build up 
preserves and shooting grounds away from home. 
The sportsmen in every state in the Union have 
their own problems in the cause of conservation, 
and the only way they can be met is by the sports- 
men themselves and the officials which they may 
elect to represent them. There is not a state in 
the Union that cannot use to advantage every dol- 
lar that is collected now or may be collected within 
its borders by the present system of license. Many 
of the states have already built up departments o 
conservation which serve the people ably—and al 
other states are capable of doing so. 
If sportsmen are not relieved by Congress o 
the tax they are now forced to pay and the Madse 
Bill becomes a law, it means that the entire caus 
of conservation instead of being placed on th 







