The record-union., 1893-02-24
EMERIC'S BILL.
SPORTsMEN TELL WHY IT SHOULD
OR SHOULD NOT BE AMENDED.
Cut, Slashed, Amended, and Sent Back
to the House Recommended
to Pass.
to Pass.

| The Senate Committee on Fish and
Game met last night and an interesting
session was held. Editor Kyle of the
breeder and Sportsman was present to
urge the passage of the Emeric game bill,
and the noted San Francisco sportsman
and halter, John Stack, was also present.
The bill is to amend Section 626 of the
| Penal Code, relating to the preservation
of game birds and animals, and providing
punishment tor the unlawful taking, kill
ing and transportation thereof.
Each clause of the bill passed swim
mingly with few unimportant amend
ments until the following was reached:
''Qusil, bob-white. partridge, pheasant,
grouse, or any kind of wild duck killed
in this State, shall not be transported to
any point in the State, from any of the
counties thereof, or possessed for that
purpose, except that such birds may be
| transported from the county where killed
| when accompanied by the owner thereof.
| Possession of the birds named, by COM
mon carrier, unaccompanied by the
! owner, is violation OF this section"
1t was at this at this point Mr.. Stack
| called halt. He stated that he had been
/ q lifelong sportsman, but that there were
| thousands of persons in San Francisco
and other cities in the State who were
! not sportsmen, and who were not even
acquainted with the use OF fowling-pieceS.
| 1t should not follow, he said, that because
man could not shoot game, or had no
! time to hunt, he should be prohibited
from purchasing game birds in the open
markets.
! Senator Orr took the same stand, but
! Mr. Kyle took an entirely different view
OF the situation, and argued that the sec
| a in U
| the enacting clause OF the bill. He de-
| clared that the section, and the entire bill,
was meant to preserve game birds, and to
! protect the poor man. He declared it to
| be unsportsmanlilSe for any man to 90
/ into game country and Kill birds for the
market, and that no true sportsman
would do so. The bill was meant, he de-
| clared, to protect game, not from sports
men, but from hoodlums, who slaugh-
| tered birds for the money there was III
| them. The law, he declared, would not
| prevent sportSmen from shooting birds
and presenting them to friends, but it
would prevent birds from being slaugh-
tered for market purposes.
Senator Williams, OF the committee,
declared that the bill could not possibly
pass the Senate, particularly with the
| clause in question EN- bodied in il, and
that not q single member from San Fran
| cisco would support 1t.
on motion of Senator Williams the
! clause was struck out.
| The section which provides that no per-
son who is not bona fide resident, land
! owner or land lessee, shall hunt pame
| birds without first obtaining license
! therefor in such county from the Board
| of Supervisors was stricken out through
the efforts OF ex-Assem blyman Went
! worth and Mr. Borden OF San Francisco.
The section which provides that every
person who upon any grounds which are
/ private property, and where signs are
! displayed torbidding such shooting, shall
shoot any of the game birds above enum-
Grated without first securing permission
from the owner, called for long argu-
ment.
Mr.. Wentworth protested that such a
clause would be TO throw monopoly of
! all ducks in the State into the hands of a
! few men who owned thousands OF acres
of swamp and overhowed lands, and he
| suggested to the committee that the sec
tion be amended to read upon any in
closed or cultivated grounds which arc
private property" The suggestion was
considered good and the amendment in
! serted.
The promoters contended that the
amendment would benefit the farmer,
but Chairman Flint declared that he was
a farmer and knew something about the
effect the amendment would have at his
mountain home. He favored the original
CONTINUED on EIGHTH PAGE.i