Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1913-06-18
Important Decisions
1.-THE following notes OF cases A..
from the West Publishing Company
LAWFULLY KILLED DUCKS.

LAWFULLY KILLED DUCKS.
a question of justice, or rather the
Injustice of a game law. comes up in
State vs. Puios, 1923 Pacific Reporter,
1923 The statute under construction
makes 1t unlawful for one TO kill or
have in his possession between two GER
tain dates the game therein specified.
Defendant had in his possession during
the prohibited time one wild duck. but
claims that he killed it during the open
season. and hence it would be an in
justice to punish him for having In his
possession a bird which was killed
when 1t was lawful to Kill it. He con-
tends that it Is unjust and absurd to
permit man to hun<. lawfully on the
18th day OF February, and to punish
him on the list day Of March for having
In his possession the game SO lawfully
taken on the day previous. In answer.
the supreme court OF Oregon comedies
that such a proceeding would be IN.
jus. if the law compelled him to hunt
on the 18th OF February. but that one
is not compelled to kin ducks on the
last day of the open season. nor to Kill
more than he and his friends can con-
sumo before the seaspn:eIoses.a He has
a choice of mercy to the birds or OF
generosity to his friends" The mis-
chief sought TO be renedied by this law.
the court remarks. was the habi; among
hunters. who killed ducks during the
closed season. to claim. when caught
i. had been killed during the open
season. Experience had shown tina:
IL was mex, 20 impossible. in many in
hfNEs,
killed, except from the statements OF
the spcrtsnen: and. while the veracity
of fishermen and hunters is, of course,
proverbial, experience had probably
demons ,rated to the legislative mind
that in some exceptional cases sports
man might possibly prevaricate rather
than pay a fine OF $780,
LAW FOR WHITES AND BLACKS.
! An interesting comment il brought
forth in ruling upon requested in
struction by the supreme court Of Mis-
sissippi in the case Of Clark VS.. STATE
! SO Southern Reporter. Ss1: The race
question and all of it's vexations and
perplexities should be dropped At the
outer door OF all courts OF justice. When
a black man is on trial for his life, he
Of course. should be tried by the same
law. and convicted or acquitted accord
! ing to the evidence and the law. tina,
would lead a fair and impartial jury tc
convict or acQuit white man. Ons
law and one justice should be the max
i'm. whether the defendant is rich OF
poor, strong or weak. the descendant O
kings or Of paupers; and under no cir
cumstances should the court permit thu
officers of the state to say or do any
thing which might in the remotest de
gree prejudice the jury against the de
fendan, on account OF race or color o
social standing. . 1t is possible de
PENDANT was asking for an instruction
according to the code OF unwritten law
unknown to the courts. and which
should ne unknown to the juries.'
SEAMEN COMPLAIN OF EATABLEs
Under a provision OF the federal stat
utes requiring the master OF vessels t
provide the seamen with food OF tn
kind. quality. and quantity therei
specied. appellees. seamen, bring lioe
in Billings vs.. Bausback. 200 Fedora
Reporter, 523, alleging that during
certain voyage the allowance OF IN
provision to which each OF the seame
was entitled was reduced In certain spe
Gifted ways. and seek to recover cam
ages for this reduction and for the b.
quality of food they were required I
eat. They complain Of the food q
:. follows: No lard. beans, butter. susa
, peas, molasses. onions. and btscuit
Biscuits were served during the las
, fortnight Of the voyage, but IT Is Al
? LEGGED they contained weeyils ana mas
gnts. and the flour with which the
were made was sour, moldy. and lump
a The district court found the facts
v be substantially as alleged and above
i a recovery. On appeal, the circuit coul
of appeals, Ninth circuit, holds that u
;, findings Of the lower court are sue
), tanned by the evidence and anirms Ia
= judgment.
4