The Oakley herald. [volume] (Oakley, Idaho) 1908-1961, 1920-07-09

shoot one, that breaks up the pair for the season
wen, four years after the pigeonholing Of
shras' bill, John b. Weeks introduced in the
house the same bill with slight notifications
Nothing came of it. He introduced IT again in
I9o9' and again in 1911, while at the same time
George P. Mclean introduced similar bill in the
senate In the spring of 1912 committee hearings
on the bill begun
10th these bills mentioned migratory game
birds only. Now, there are only about so game
birds" Mr.. Pearson said medtativelv nufing bia
pipe and there are 1900 kinds of birds in North
America There are 81 warblers alone in the
eastern part of the United States Therefore
the Audubon society urged that the bill be
changed to apply TO all migratory birds and this
change was adopted and put before congress-
The bill became law March T. 1914; ex-
President Taft signed it on the morning that he
gave up his office as one Of his last official acts.
Authority was given to the department of agri-
culture then, to go ahead and make the rules
governing the killing Of BIRDS The department,
on agriculture did not know anything about birds
so they turned it over TO special branch Of the
department, the Biological survey Three men
OF the Biological survey drew up a lot of regula-
tons and announced them to the states Imme-
diately there was of objections from all
over the country and all of the states thought
their rights had been infrnged
Then came a test case Out in Big Lake Ark
man killed a coot in violation of the regulations
lie was arrested and the federal Judge for the
Eastern district of Arkansas declared the fed
era migratory bird laws Illegal The case OF
course, then went to the Supreme court of the
United States The Supreme court was very hos.
tile and the case dragged along for several
months. Finally the Supreme court did a very
unusual thing. 1t asked the department of epr
culture to restate Its case, from which we under
stood that the court was tie, and the case was
referred back to the department of Justice
'In the period Of waiting which followed EIibu
Root came to our asslstances This NAV be de-
clared unconstitutional and everything lost, he
said but we may be able to beat It, treaty
Is not subject to revision by the Supreme court
so why not get these Ideas written into treaty7
Immediately the machinery was set in motion
which would turn the bill into treaty After
a great deal of trouble arrangements were finally
concluded with Great Britain for Canada ana
the treaty was drawn up. But a treaty is .
dead letter unless congress by law states what
department shall enforce it-that is every treaty
requires an enabling act.
Il went down to Washington and snent civ
weeks there trying to arouse interest In the ena-
bling act for our treaty. The treaty was ratified
by congress on September 90 1916 and veoc
or so later the enabling act was passed The,
the government. remembering the tremendous
amount of abuse heaped upon them after the
drafting of the first set of regulations decided
to have a committee to find out what the peopls
wanted, and they appointed a national committee
OF first dozen men and later about 90
"Soon after this In Missouri some men went
hunting anu violated the regulations and were ar
rested. The case was referred to the Supreme
court and on this the present decision is
based, holding legal the enabling act and thus
protecting the treaty"
This very wise decision makes quite clear ths
position of state rights when IT comes to birds
1t says:
'rhe state. as have intimated POUNDS #.
claim OF exclusive authority upon an assertion NJ
title to migratory birds, assertion that is en-
bodied In statute. No doubt 1t is true that as
between a state and Its inhabitants the state NAV
regulate the killing and sale of such birds but n
does not follow that Its authority is exclusive of
paramount powers To put the claim of the state
upon title Is to lean upon slender reed Wild
birds are not In the possession of any one: and
possession Is the beginning of ownership Thu
whole foundation of the states rights Is the
presence within their jurisdiction of birds that
yesterday had not arrived. tomorrow may be in
another state and In a week 1 900 miles away II
we are to be accurate cannot nut the case of