The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1896-05-01

any close season, but permits fishing
with a hook and line at anytime
Do you believe, as a matter of law,
that the statute of 1895 should be in
effect?' the attorney general was
asked.
"'No, SIR was the decided response.
L still maintain the correctness of my
opinion, but under the circumstances /
can do no less than say that the law of
1895 is in effect. / certainly believe that
the law of 1898 concerning both hunting
and fishing should be in force. In that
case there could be no legal fishing in
May and June within the state
THE position taken by the three
judges who went hunting the last week
of December is this: The omnibus bill.
which expressly continued in effect the
game laws of 1893, was approved on
March 10, 1895. One day later. March
IA, the game law enacted by the last
legislature-the law of 1886 became
law. This law being later than the
other. II is contended, repeats the law
of 1893. Then. too. the two laws are In
direct conflict with each other-at least
in respect to the killing of game. Sec
ton 51s5 of the political code, a part
of the act containing the omnibus sec
ton, expressly says, If any of the acts
or parts of acts herein enumerated are
in conflict, or are inconsistent with any
act or acts passed by the Fourth legis-
lative assembly of the state of Mon
tana, the act or parts of acts passed
by the Fourth legislative assembly
shall be considered and construed as re-
pealing such acts or parts OF acts here
in enumerated That would seem to in
dictate that the law of 1895 repealed and
took the place of the law of 1895 contin-
ued by the omnibus act.
while the fishing laws of the old
code passed by the last legislature Feb.
10, 1895, and those of 1898 do not exactly
conflict, the code statute does not pro-
hibit fishing at any particular season
in the year, while the law of 1898 strict
~ prohibits the catching of fish In May
and June. The attorney geperal says
that the law of 1895 permits the catch
ing of fish at any season of the year
and that IL holds good. There are law
yers who take exception to that view.
A prominent member of the local bar,
who takes an interest in hunting and
fishing, said on that point yesterday;
ITO begin with, there is. strictly
speaking no law of 1895 in respect to
fishing. The old code sections incorpo-
rated into the existing penal code by
the last legislature, Feb. 10, 1895. only
theoretically allows fishing with pole
and line at any season of the year. 1t
cannot be said to be In conflict with
the law of 1898. The old code provi-
sions referred to must have become a
law when the penal code was approved.
They were, in fact. a part of the penal
code Now, section 51S1 of the political
code says that all acts of the Third and
Fourth legislative assemblies shall re-
main in full force and effect in like
manner as II enacted after the adop-
ton of the four codes, Notwithstanding
any provisions to the contrary. That
would seem to indicate that the laws of
1898 took precedence over the sections
of the fish law of the old code. which
contained no prohibition as TO when
fish might be caught and which became
a law with the adoption of the penal
code.
- / have given the matter much
study, and my conclusions are these:
The law of 1895 in respect to the kill
ing of game. approved March IA, 1895,
| takes precedence over the conflicting
sections of the game law OF 1898. which
was approved March 10, 1895. Therefore
| the game law of 1895 is I'm effect. There
| Is no conflict between the law of 1895
and 1898 respecting to the catching of
fsh-there being. strictly speaking no
law of 1895 regarding fishing-therefore
the fish law of 1898 holds good and you
cannot. in my opinion. fish legally in
| Nav or June"