Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1924-10-30
EXCLUDE PREJUDICE

II the hunting in the Maine woods
under the States power or under the
power OF the land owners to regulate?
That Is a question correct answer to
which Ii very important to the State
OF, Maine, 1t may not be answered by
controversy In the newspapers; It
may not be answered by the Great
Northern Paper Company resembling
ito order regulating hunting on It's
lands. as the Governor expresses the
hope It may do. What should be
known Is the location OF the SOW
ereisnty over the hunting and fishing
rights on what are termed the Wild
lands In the State.
For years the State has acted upon
the assumption that 1t had property
rights In the fish and game and the
power to determine the rights OF
sportsmen in the wild lands. Much
money has been appropriated in ad-
vsrtisIng those rights; the sportsmen
who have come to the State to enjoy
those privileges have left much
money in tho State. Investments
havs been made IN sporting camps in
consequence OF this supposition.
Has Maine and her legislatures
been laboring under a wrong concep-
ton? Has the assumption of power
ID regulate the conduct OF sportsmen.
to prescribe procedure. to pass laws.
to demand license fees: to prohibit
limiting in time OF drouth and dan
SIR. have all these things constituted
a. false assumption? Has the exer-
else OF that authority established no
rights?
.The public outside the State will
Wish to know about this before VEN
turing to came here: the people In
the State should know this In order
the better to direct expenditures per-
tanning to Ash and game. The PRES
eht condition OF uncertainty Is very
detrimental to the States best inter-
eats. The more publicity caused by
controversy the greater the injury.
Has the sovereign state no way Of
determining It's rights
Further injury will he inflicted on
the States best interests If the con-
trovcsy develops bitterness. incites
unreasoning prejudice. No one should
itlame the Great NortherR~ Paper
Company for issuing that order II II
possesses the authority so to do. as
the order should be beneficial in It's
effects unless irresponsible guides he
employed In consequence. The peo-
pie Of the state as we'll as the own
dis OF wild lands are concerned for
the safety Of our forests. Anything
tending to iniure that class of pro-
perty Is a serious injury TO the State.
Furthermore. the attitude the
Great Northern Company has mani
Tested has been one o. friendly. help
full interest In tho welfare of the
state. After what its managers have
done. the courtesies they have ex-
tended TO visiting sportsmen and
residents. the expenditures OF money
they have made In the development
Of properties in Maine It should not
be assumed that this concern has in
tention to injure the State. or that
It's order was given otherwise than
to protect its lands from what 1t con-
ccived to be a grave menace. Forest
fres are terrible menace. Every
prccaution should be taken. The pre-.
cautions taken by the company seem
wise. but should these be enforced
by the company or by the State?
It also Is possible that the COM
pany. believing itself within its rights
in issuing that order. as is to be as
sumed, entertains no purpose to ex-
clude sportsmen from the lands.
though authority for the order seems
to presuppose authority for the lat
ter. And the State should know
about this. The public should know
about 1t and the court can tell us.
which conversation cannot do, preju-
dice cannot do. But prejudice can
do a lot Of harm. Let's exclude 1t !
from consideration Of this matter.