Amador ledger., 1903-12-11
FRIDAY DECEMBER IL, 1903
AN ANOMALOUS POSITION.

The events of the past week have
brought into strong relief the op-
pressive and unreasonable character
of some of the laws now stand
ing upon our statute books. 1t is
not our province at this time to dis
cuss the merits or demerits of any
particular case now awaiting ju-
dicial inquiry. But public discus
sion is always in order when, under
the color and sanction of law, con-
clusions are reached and acted upon
which are subversive of all our ideas
of right and justice, and the literal
and strict enforcement of which
would tend to defeat the very object
sought to be attained by the statu-
tory enactment. The most benefcent
laws are liable to abuse Evil-dis-
posed persons will seek to twist
them from their natural meaning,
making them the vehicles of oppres-
sion aud wrong, in response to the
dictates of their own depravity.
This is inevitable, and must continue
so as long as human nature remains
as it is, with the forces of good and
evil each contending for the mastery
over human kind. The only bulwark
that can be interposed to this men
ace is that sense of right-that re-
volt against njustice-that rarely
fails TO come to the front in the hour
of need.
Law is the very essence of right.
1t is the concentrated wisdom of all
the ages as to what is right and
just between man and man. Any
law the operation of which outrages
our innate sense of right may be re-
garded us unsound. The game laws
are just now provoking much ad-
verse comment throughout the
state. Every successive legislature
thinkers more or less with these laws.
The last conclave of lawmakers made
some changes the utility of which
is hard to understand. A few years
ago the law made it misdemeanor
to kill deer at any time-open or
closed season-unless the killing was
followed by useful appropriation of
the carcass. This was certainly in
line with public policy and humane
feeling. 1t discouraged the slaugh-
ter of these animals from sheer love
OF killing. The last legislature, ac-
cording to the strained interpreta-
tion of some, drifted to the opposite
extreme. It is made lawful to kill
deer, and thereafter a crime to use
the meat. The hunter is enjoined
by law to leave the animal to rot
where it fell, if it happened to be
killed during the expiring hours of
the open season. He is brought
face to face with a choice of evils.
He must either violate his Individual
sense of duty to himself and family
by failure to appropriate the fruit
of his labor, or he must run up
against the letter of the law by tax
ing the meat into his possession.
Under such circumstances, which is
the more dutiful course to pursue?
Furthermore, the Interpretation re-
ferred to tends to encourage slaugh-
ter during the closed season, because
a deer unlawfully killed when the
closed season is about to expire, be-
comes lawfully in the possession of
the slayer Immediately upon the
dawn of the open season. Beyond
this, no matter what quantity of
venison man has stored up for the
use of his family during the open
season, he would be expected, under
this literal construction, to cast the
whole. outfit to the dogs as soon as
the close season arrives, in order to
keep within legal limits. Such are
some of the anomalies, we might say
contradictions, of the literal mean
ing given to this phase of the law
passed this year for the protection
of deer.