The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1895-06-01

As to a poll taX he thought the principle,
that every one enjoying the benefits of gov
ernment should contribute something to its
support, the correct one.
Mr.. T. c. Bond thought with Mr.. Wilson,
that existing laws We're sufficient on the dog
question, if they were enforced. He agreed
also with him as to the obligation of every
one who en- Joys the protection of govern
ment to contribute something to its support.
On motion of Mr.. T. c. Bond, both questions
were referred back to the committee for
further consideration and report
There being no reports of experiments, and
the regular essay being in order, Mr. Duyck-
inck read the following paper
on THE DIFFERENTIATION OF GAME BIRDS.
Mr.. President:-No Nothing can be said on
this question that will impress my hearers
beyond what they now fully realize yet little
or no effort is set forth to overcome the utter
eXtermjnation of our native game birds, and
the remedy is too contracted, too insignin-
cant to be worthy of one expression of con-
demnation. The laws that are passed by
our State are absolutely a farce so
far as to being any safeguard to the per-
petuation of the game Now II few points on
this question will not be amiss. Many of YOU
will remember in 1880 a petition was sent to
our Legislative halls asking for the protection
of the robin. When the bill became Il law it
was found the wood robin, and not the red
breast had received the blessing. Now. Mr..
President, this is sample of the laws for
for game protection. In 1888 the season for
shooting opened November 18th. This did
not suit some of your lawyer poachers To
add greater protection that clause was set
aside, which was to begin fifteen days earlier
and run ten days later, giving twenty-five
days of IA longer season to poach and ey-
terminate the game. Now, Mr.. President,
if it be the desire Of the sporting element to
destroy the game birds Of our State, the
present law as it now stands possesses all
the essential points. On the other hand, if
we desire to protect the game of tins State, a
more stringent law has got to be enacted.
As for myself | am an advocate Of gunner :
license. Some say this is wholly unconsti-'
tutiOnal. That is II point for consideration.
Fish and gam t cannot belong to individuals
They are the States property to look after
and as much in one instance as another.
This is to say, the State regulates the time of
sho )ting, and if the State has jurisdiction
over man in shooting game on their own
property, it certainly has equal right to pro-
tect game by making poachers pay license
we may see the present game law is only Il
farce, and is better calculated to cXtcrmiuatc
;he game than perpetuate it. With proper
protection W" have enough unbrokcn lands
TO allow the game again to rccuperat" by
interiicting shooting for three years and
lfter that only shoot two days in each week
Of the shooting season. This is, in my opjn-
ion the only way we can protect the game of
this county, and anything short Of this will
have but little effect | am more fully con-
vinccd of this plan than ever before. On thh
farm Of Fri Haincs, within the corporation
of Rising sun, Il covey Of birds escaped the
tramp Of the pOachers, knowing the result of
Il trcopass. In this one instance the present
law was sufficient but we cannot feel like
making ourselves conspicuous by deprving
our neighbors OF a privilege another grants.
while general law regulating the day and a
license for the privilege of carrying gun
into the field is the just and proper course for
us to pursue. And am one who will lend
all the aid possible to advocate IA measure of
this kind for the love | cherish for the game
of this county from my early days, and now
Mr.. President, | submit this to your most
earnest consideration, and may go little
further and say, as our European brother, a
penal otlense Tor the game vendcr who offers
game for sale or like the State Of Delaware
which iniicts fine for the one who is known
to carry game over the line, of 5000 cach.
SO you see score of avenues are open for
protection of birds of all kinds, and before it
he too late let US well consider this work.
Comment on the essay being in order, Mr..
Wilson said he was in favor of the general
protection of birds, game and otherwise as he
regarded all birds us the friends of the far
mer. He did not except even the English
sparrow, as farmer only this day called his
attention to the fact that he had found a
sparrow yainly trying TO swallow II cut
worm. This tribute to the value and worth
of the English sparrow was received rather
skeptically by the club
This skepticsm was voiced by Mr. Michiner
particularly. He had frequently observed
the sparrow, and could not give him a certi-
cate of good character. He welcomed the
the return of the wren and the robin but
could not endorse the sparrow.
Mr. Wilson at this juncture to explain him
self in his defence of the English sparrow,
called upon Mr.. Robert Hodgson to endorse
the fact that "A sparrow had been found with
cut worm in its nest. Mr.. Hodgson said
like farmers generally he had not thought the
English sparrow had one redeemng quality,
but recently when engaged in tearing out the
nests of the sparrows, he discovered dead
cut worm. in the throat of dead sparrow.
His great objection to the sparrow was his
pugnacity in driving away other BIRDS and
the discovery Of the dead cut worm in the
sparrow's throat had led him to inquire
whether the English sparrow is really an
insectiverous bird which it has not been
heretofore regarded.
Mr.. Jos. Coudon approved the essay and
| aS tbp Enplish sporroyy bp tbnu,,ht b,t