Hunting licenses


Material Information

Hunting licenses
Physical Description:
Palmer, T. S ( Theodore Sherman ), 1868-1955
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture ( Washington, D.C )
Publication Date:

Record Information

Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 9039898
System ID:

Full Text





V .

TENN.- y



Inclosed names indicate States which grant special privileges for taking out a limited
of game. States which are ruled do not permit hunting by nonresidents.

" ~o

C. HART MERRIAM, Chiefi~i; ;;;i sli~ i~iii
T Miio oi i ,o;
0l;;;~ li ;; s~l ; u
W;;I; I i i
46win r 6w
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 'i ~,;,,:i A:,;ic~iiisii ilii~~l
1 9 0 4; Is~i~i; ,,iiiiiiii;

shinglo, J). C -A ity i~t 20 1904.
;mit erewth, s Blletin No. 1r 9, a,
r hiss~ory, object, and limitaions,"~f
sistat incharg of garme presrva-
istoreder generally a;J rccessile tlhe
artenton thie subec o rsident
AeS hic he adoptedb the license
g nt revouly ollectetcd are nowp
presented show hat during 1190 the
),00i each f 19 Statcs, and Illinois
Lrly $10,00; the ttal number of
se bot presents and nontlresidents
which attract mos nonresidentn
n, and Wisconsin.

- - -- - - -5--
-- -- - -

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS ar


sident license legislation Frontispiece
dentt license laws in 1900.
ident license laws in 1904.
mt license legislation .......... 18
it license laws in 1900.
it license laws in 1904.
iana, 1903 ......................... 24
Minnesota ........................ 30
licenses in 10 States, 19C3.......... 38
W isconsin ........................ 42
ses-Washington and Wyoming ..... 44

LIMITATIONS,~i ..... +
.,iii~~iii! INTR.....CTION .
Twftemsmotn rolem of prcica gaepoeto
I..... -a eh w t n o c h a sa d h w os c r h u d e e s r o
thpurose Wihu fud ti+aietyimosbeete opo
vieo anantesrice require tocaryte noseiusefor + i T dtoscrcoine ihtha
Iii it
kon~ som syte of thi kidforyitinn the wawsn rie, and
.oh rceie fom i motn diin to thi gapme potctola
nd.Howimprtn suc ar surce sof t i revenue mybcm a
flectd liesnfesaoutngtgmr thi ane $2500,isceoni
0,0, n Ilnis nerl $000. Insome Stats this money is
rived+ principally fromresident, in others fro. nonresident, licenses.
The ~, reurmnt nrrd toI fee an the method of obtainng
nses~ dife wieyi dfent setos of the country, and every
rtmn h rsds na tt which has license laws or who visits
te wer lcess are require is direcly affected by the system.
intret i te sbjctis widepra, it seems desirable to 1ringr
eterdtasown not only the origin and development of hunting
ce.88bu as their adatae a disadvantages. Few questions
gae roetin ae atrce m ore attention in recent yearss, and
ne, erhpshas been moe rutful of discusson or led to mor
'It is comonl supoe tathlices fetr oaertction,
hih ymais reare asu eesr ad nus, is a recent dee
mnii but although most ofi the prsniashvebence
+ 9

during the last ten years, even a hasty review of the subject will
that the system originated at a very early date in the United
and was in reality an outgrowth of a discriminating attitude t
nonresidents. Hunting licenses were required in some of the col
particularly Virginia, more than two hundred years ago, t
their object was somewhat different from those of modern
One of the earliest statutes may be found in "An act for a free
with Indians," passed in Virginia in April, 1691 (3 Hening's Stal
the object of which was stated as follows:
And for the future prevention of such mischeifes as have frequently happ
huntings, commonly called fire hunting and other hunting remote from the
tions, Bee it enacted by the authority aforesaid, and it is hereby enacted, That n
or persons whatsoever shall hereafter presume to goe an hunting remote fr
English plantations without first having obtained the lycense and permission
Majesties leiutenant governour or commander in cheife for the time being
councell of state under such restrictions, limitations and conditions as at the
giveing such permission shall be by them thought fit to be enjoyed and ap
In an act passed on March 27, 1719 (Nevill, 86), nonreside
New Jersey were prohibited from taking oysters or putting t
board a vessel not wholly owned by a resident. The discrimi
against nonresidents in the matter of gathering oysters thus
nearly two centuries ago has been maintained to the present ti
oyster laws similar to the act of 1719 passed in 1820, 1846, an(
A similar discrimination may also be found in an act passed in
Island in 1844.
In the second game law enacted in North Carolina (Laws oi
Chap. III) all persons not possessed of a settled habitation in the
ince were required to' have a certiicate that they had plant<
tended 5,000 hills of corn before they were permitted to hunt d
Section 4 of this act reads:
That every person who shall hunt and kill deer in the King's waste wit
Province, and who is not possessed of a settled habitation in the same
obliged to produce a certificate when required of his having planted and ten
thousand corn-hills, at five feet distance each hill, the preceding year, or se
the county where he shall hunt, under the hands of at least two Justice
Peace of the said county and the hand of at least one of the churchwarder
Parish where such person planted and tended such corn, as aforesaid.
This law, which contains the germ of the hunting license, was an
twenty-three years later (Laws of 1768, Chap. XIII) so as to de
privilege of hunting deer to persons not having a freehold of 10
of land in the province, or not having tended 10,000 corn hills a
the previous year.
a It is sometimes said that the license idea originated in Canada, but th
strictly the case.

durng the fall and w'inter, in the
ofgetprofit to the inhabitants
s, not reients of thi Stat, shoot
at annoyance and detrmerit of the
(Laws of 185, chp .55.)
ot resided in the State f or at
a hunting or killing wild fowl
cently in North Crolina and
in cetan conte have ben
es or boats, in order that this
s alone.
irga prohibited nonresidents
s of the Stt, in order, it was
)mhlding conversation with
Virgnia's exaple, made it
ducks, geese, or other water-
teState, under a penalty of
byact of June 13, 1866, pro-
fre hunting, with or without
counties. 1n 1880 Maryland
nties bordering the Patuxent
Son the waters or marshes of
-es in Queen Anne County, by
mnilar instances ofdicrina
if the State, and culminated in
,Ints of Parsons Creek, Church
SCount, from shooting wild
more severe discriminatin


visions were replace b licns roisos n h gnea
stituted a license fee in 1 904-, so that at prsntMssui t
sa are the onlyb Stat~es which deny th~"i:~e nonreientth p
huntim.g within teir borders.
The hisf~orv of nonreident liene egsltin aybeco
divide(I into there periods, -hich oerlp oe noter:(1
ient of the local license, eginning i 87; 2)deelp
markt-huntin o licnse be~2tginnig i"n 187; ad () dve
the general license;, beginniming in 18:78
The local license bad its rise irr thre EasernSttes T
contRinin a nonresident-licene prvsonws aprntyt
in 1873 in Ne~ Jersev, underthe! tiitle Al ac t inor
W~est,Jerey Gaine Protectie Assoiation." (Acts of 1873,~
p. 5,53.) This association vas incorpoatd for fiften yean
tion T of the act of incorportion providd:
That if any person or person,.: nonredents of this state sal ild
or take anv doe, buck, fawn, prtridge, moor fwl, rusqui, r'
any time within the countie,, of Camnden, Gloucester, tlanic Sle,
t an( Calpe May in this state: without complying ith tilebylwsof hi
tetctive Soci~ty then the person or persons so offefinding shall forfeit and ]
of $50 each for (,ach nd ever offence provided not hin~y in tl
prevent residents of tfiis stt from taking ga-l or fish, subject o th e
of this stte.
I'lie nienbership fec was fixed at 5 fol the first year and
thereafter, and non reside tts were required to pocue in
certifictes before huntino- in the six counties above nientone
cetificates thus became in effect noonresident license. nI
what hi-oader ljrenral actt was pased (1lajas of 1878s, ch. 184j),
to other associat~tions in New J ersey. heDeaar Gm
As.,-caoiation wasa incorporated by actr~ of leisa~tue ain -1879 al
the ani lins. s membership fees Avere te sainte as thli
West -Jersel G"Wml Protect-ve Association, and nonresidents~-n
to Mult ill the State myere. first req uired to secure certifcat.,
bei-sip. (1.,ws of 189, cha~. I H.) he same Ideawaslat
rr11w oli:e inry of Cado Prish, La.,, in Issw, however, passed a r11
hxibitilig 11111tinig Iby nonre,,ident ill that parish (Forest annci Stea
3M,1 Nov. 14, 1896.)

.. .. ..M Pi ii ',, i *:',i,
" i !" : L OCA L. i "i""'i , i" i I *
................... LI EN E 13 90 h | n
'fee~ of mebe,, at $1adtenulde atopose t n191t license
byte tt i t gnrlis e 'lwto ys litt er c
In~ 187 Florid adote a ttt Atf11,cap. 200on5, 1).62
making it unawu foayoreitt hu fothure of ron-e
eying gam beon th liisoteSae without fis otiesiof
In~ 188 Mayaneaihefunain fi cuthice ytem bynte
requirin norsiet toscrelcnseshnt m ntroine
Cony;adin18 etbie l iike reiien ion thonte of
AneAuneBatmreet Prnc Gereuen. Thnne lond
within~ the cony (Law of 1894,03 cha.c13.
In184Ne or pseda speia lcnts la (aser of18, cap.
185), whc reqire lnonrennsidents ofRcmodCuty(ttntd
lia reaie in foc.utioeelden y t nerl sae lanw
of182 egh easaer n s apaenl thh e onylcne ofth
State In 18, Illioishshped a $10 nonresdentcu i len ,ad
Wet ir ii a $22 cont lies (bt of whc ouicebe
chage toSae..ese)...90Iwa.tblse $0nnrsdn

licenses, in most cases good only for the county of issue. With a
exceptions the license fees were comparatively small, usually less
$10. The county license has not met with general favor. It has I
adopted by only a few States, and is now in force in less than one-t
of the States which have the license system.
The effort in some of the Southern States to restrict market hun
and to prevent the export of game from the State for commercial ]
poses brought about a twofold result-the development of the mar
hunting license and the absolute exclusion of nonresidents f
hunting privileges. A correspondent of the American Field,
states that he has observed game conditions in Arkansas for twe
five years, asserts that 90 per cent of the game killed in that State
been killed by market hunters. (Am. Field, LIX, p. 216, Feb.
1903.) In view of this statement, which apparently has strong i:
pendent support, it is interesting to notice that Arkansas seems to I
been the pioneer in restrictions on market hunters. In the ac
March 6, 1875, a tax of $10 was levied on all nonresident trap
hunters, seiners or netters of fish following their calling in the S1
Twenty-two years later, in 1897, the tax was increased to $25. (,
of 1897, p. 113.) In 1903 two bills were passed by the legislature-
imposing a tax of $300 on all nonresidents hunting in the State,
other absolutely prohibiting hunting by nonresidents except in ]
sissippi County. The license bill was vetoed; the prohibition
became a law.
Missouri, in 1877 (Laws of 1877, p. 333), prohibited nonresid
from hunting game for the purpose of selling it or removing it f
the State, and in 1879 extended this law so as to prohibit nonresid
from hunting at all within the State.
In 1879 Tennessee enacted legislation prohibiting nonresid
from hunting deer for profit in some counties, and in 1889 in ot
restricted such hunting to persons hunting on their own lands. Ti
pirovisions were repealed in 1903 by the adoption of a generalg
law which provided a market-hunting license of $25 and author
the State game warden to collect from nonresident sportsmen the s
fee which residents of Tennessee would be subject to in their St-
In 1884 South Carolina enacted a law requiring each nonresi,
engaged in the business of hunting, ducking, fishing, or gathering
ters or terrapin, or in the sale of game in the counties along the
board-Georgetown, Charleston, Beaufort, Colleton, and Berkeley
pay a license at the rate of $25 for each nonresident hand emplo
(Laws of 1884, p. 734.) These licenses were not required of per
hunting or fishing on their own lands or waters included within t
nor, under an amendment passed in 1892, of persons authorized

11n is at present witnout a non-
t 1, p. 96) adopted a law author-
but provided that the act was
recommended by the grand jury
opt the market-hunting license,
ful for any person not a resident
market purposes without having
State game and forestry warden.
, following the lead of Missouri
bition in the case of nonresident
aced in 14 by a $10 nonresident
ing license. Thus at the present
ng in the South have developed
sas and Missouri, into market
market license and modified non-
abolition of all licenses in South
3e of Oregon remains unchanged.
most of these States, South Caro-
7 license system, and that there
on toward $25 as the amount of
had its origin in Canada. The
;picuous in the game legislation
ada, but instead of manifesting
took the more liberal form of a
g big game. New Brunswick
and was followed by Quebec in
in 1888, Newfoundland in 1889,
0, and the Northwest Territories
ended throughout Canada, except
Unorga.nized Territories. Fees
ed in some cases for big game


annual meeting of the National Game, Bird and Fish Protec
ciation at Chicago, at which resolutions were adopted fore:
methods of game protection, including shooting licenses, v
since been incorporated into law.a About this time a bill w,
in the Illinois legislature practically opening the Chicago i
unlimited sale of game from other States.b Whatever may ha
effect of this convention and of the Illinois game bill, thei
served to draw attention to the question of discrimination
nonresidents, and although it may have been only a coincid
resident license laws were adopted almost immediately byfou:
Wyoming in February, North Dakota in March, Minnesota
and Michigan in May. Wisconsin followed in 1897, four oi
in 1899, six in 1901, and eight in 1903.
The history of modern resident hunting licenses prope
with the system of special licenses developed in some of tl
of Maryland in the early seventies and eighties. Shooting
from sink boxes, sneak boats, or in some cases from blind
hibited except under license, and these licenses were issu
residents. The first of these special laws was passed in 187
1872, chap. 54) for the protection of wild fowl on the Su
Flats, at the head of Chesapeake Bay. Section 7 of this act
No owner, master, hirer, borrower, employee of any owner, or other
use or employ any sink box, or sneak boat of any description whatever
pose of shooting at wild water-fowl therefrom, northward of the line
described in section 380 [drawn half a mile north of Spesutie Island I
Point, in Cecil County, to the opposite shore of Harford County],
obtaining a license to so use and employ the same as is hereinafter prox
The license fee for a sink box was $20, and for a snea
The licenses were issued by the clerks of Harford and Ceci
and the clerk was allowed 75 cents for issuing each license.
Under section 11 of the same act applicants were require
oath that they were bona tide residents of the State, and a
to $100 was provided for violating any of the license provi
half of which was to be paid to the informer and one-half to
commissioners of the county. A board of special police war
a Am. Field, XLI I I, pp. 51-52, Jan. 19, 1895.
b House bill 56, commonly known as the 'Blow Bill.' For full text
ur and the discussion relating to it, see Am. Field, XLIII, pp. 123, 14
c A game bill containing a $50-nonresident license provision was also:
the Nebaska legislature, but failed to pass.-Forest and Stream, XLIV,
20, 1895.

3 Bay within the limits of the
ents of the county. These
.. (Laws of 1876, chap. 78.)
'ee of 50 cents) were required
>n the Magothy, Severn, and
that the issue of licenses for
That the owner could extend
-om1 his blind during the open
chap. 366.)
required to obtain licenses, at
Lters of the Elk and Bohemia
I880 similar $10 licenses were
Cecil and Kent counties for
er. (Laws of 1880, chaps. 42
made of a special $5 license
uebec in 1887.a This license
a being issued only for killing
Sprescribed by law. The fee
number of deer and caribou
cg licenses apparently origi-
Sto restrict the slaughter of
,arles S. Hampton, game and
ters, those of our own State being
0mpelled to pay twenty-five dol-
lifferent form of license which was
Licenses were to be iu to inmi-
lo in"g the to kill game during
at a st of $5 or $10. ( Am. Field,

by 1Ilinols, Uolor
season by Indianq
Thus the resident
inches of Canatda.6
At first license
is now a strong t(
States havin re.,
Wyoming, New I
for small gamec, v
waterfowl in the
at first-50 cents
forhily $1, with t
Michigan, the $5
Ontario, anld the
(1In eight of the si)
Hcot, Aroostook, Han

--------- --i
iS C
~ XI~r

-,,) 141f.

to thmmrtr oee yliess nSuhDkt
Wahngo an nSmre ony d. hyaego nyi
0o]it ofiseinNbak-" "W o ig hyaeno eesr
t h e m ..............................................................
'fit r uie n te aseof ctizn hntng|n is own iand
......... OF LIESiEGSAIN
'Theiiiiiii HHH 'IiiI prgrs ofi!HiH"iHi~iH))iIiHiiiiHHH!H H legislation outlined aboveiiiiiimayiiperhapsi beiibiiought
o u .m r l a l y s m a i iiiiiiiiiiiiiii u n d e eh S tate aIIH)II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiii~iiiiii~~i))))iiiiiiiiiii~iii~~i n d P roviiin ceiiiiiiiiiiiii11111111iith e1111111i
............... ..... .............. law a n diii ch a n g esii iiifees.iiiiiIniiiith e iiiiiiiipiiiiind ix ,iiiiiip.iiii55 ,iiiiiwill iiiib eii
ma a hoooia ne ftelc nsfrm 18mmto194
.....................................the l in ofd m ar a i n Fo ti s re so
........ .e statutes~o=Z? ....... s ==ie 1872 areii i ncludedliiiiiiii~ iniiiiiiiiiiiiii the.. su m mary,
- alhog no. sytmtcatmp ha bea d tocletei er.
ons those of mos iners ar reere to on pp 10-12.iiiii
TABLE.......... iiiW IN DATE OF~iiiiiiiiiiiii==i AOPI ONi~~iiiiiiii~i iiiliiiFi LICENS SYSTEMiiii~i AN =I
............. ................................................$ 2 5 ; 1 9 0 3
norsdnspoiie rm hutninteSaeexptnMsispiCo ty
Woao-93 $25........... norsdn eea ies,$ dybr ies $ is a)
$1Ni tesdn license
Dlar. 67, Nrsdn lies,$ is er 2sbeun-yas
- iaiii$5noreidnicunyiicneiorhutnggaeiorepot;189
$10.n., orui l 193 10n rein
i t i censei for any game.= Nonrein licese $1 per dayiiii)iiiiiiiii i n La Faet County
G e r i 8 9 $25= m a k t h u t n l icense.ii ii~ii iiiiiiliii iiiiiiiiii iiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiii ~
H a a i1 8 9 6,, .... h u t n l i c n s i iiii O a h u .iii i iiil i ii ii~ i i i iii iiii ii!i iiii i iiii iii iiii i iiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiii !iiiiiiiiilliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiiiiii iii i ii iiii iiii iiiiiii iiiiiiiiii iii iiii iiii iiii
I dao-93 $5nneietlcnefralgm,ices birds, i reiden
Uob-199 $1 norsdn cont lies;10,$0nneietSaelcne
1 -0 $1 no rsd n lien e $1 re id n lic.................
di a .... $ 2 ................................... l i s, p e m t fo r ..............................
wild) iiiiowl O ctobiieriiliiiiiiiiiiiiieiiiiiiii10iiiisisuedi iitoiiiresidentsi a licensed nonresidents-; 190 ,
$... resident permit for hunting wild fowl October I-November 10 (free to licensed !iliii
n onresiden ts)................ ... ;ii~iii ,i=i i
| oa-90 $1 nonresident ...county.......nse.
iiiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiiilii $25i nonresidentiiiii liceinse;i 1904 var iiii l fee etabished ..... ..........iii
ou=======,,,,, ....................r.h.ibi...diiio miiiiiii ngii iii the State; 190=,,$10
n o r s d n i s qi r e d aiiiiiiiiii iiiiii l soiiiiii o fiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii r e s id e n t s ) $ 2 5 m a r ke h u n t ing
l i c e n s e.., ii ii iiiii ii i ,, i'== ='i i iii iiiiii i iii ii i ii i iil i iiiii i~~~iii ~iii li iiiiii iiii ii~~~~~iiiiiii li liiiiiil ii iii iiiii iii i li i~~iiiii- lii iiiiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iliii iiiiiilli
"N m===,== '=n= = ii 1 8 9 9 $ 6 i iiiiiiiiiii n o n re siid e n tiiiiii $ 4iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilliiil riiies iiiiidiiieint, S e p te m b e r d e e r lic e n se ; 1 9 0 1 law
reetd 93,$5nne iSti ces fo....n ose 5nnrsdn
lies o uk n e ndsoebrsi onis
).) rln.17,$0sn bxad$ na-otlcnsso uqean lt o
redet of Cei n!af onis


1876, $30 sink-box license for residents of Anne Arundel County.
1878, $10 sink-box license on Elk and Bohemia rivers for residents of Cecil County;
fee for sink-box license on Susquehanna flats reduced to $10 in case of residents of
Cecil County.
1880, $10 sink-box license on Sassafras River required of residents of Cecil and
Kent counties; nonresidents of Anne Arundel, Calvert, Charles, Prince George, and
St. Mary counties prohibited from shooting snipe, rail, and wildfowl on Patuxent
River; $10 sink-box license for resident, of Queen Anne County (nonresident not
allowed to use sink box).
1882, $2 'blind' license on M\agothy, Severn, and South rivers in Anne Arundel
County; $4.50 nonresident license for rabbits, muskrats, quail or partridges, wood-
cock, rail, and ducks in Caroline County.
1886, Nonresident county licenses as follows: Anne Arundel and Prince George,
$6 (rabbits, partridges, and woodcock); Baltimore, $10 (rabbits and woodcock); Caro-
line, $19.50 (rabbits, muskrats, quail or partridges, woodcock, rail, and ducks);
Kent, $4.50 (all game); Queen Anne, $4.50 (all game); Talbot, $9.50 (all game).
1888, Caroline County license fee reduced to $4.50; nonresident county licenses as
follows: Charles, $20 (rabbits, partridges, and woodcock), $25 (wildfowl); Dor-
chester, $5 (rabbits, partridges, and woodcock); Howard, $7.50 (all game).
1890, Nonresidents prohibited from hunting wildfowl on Little Choptank River
in Dorchester County; nonresident county licenses as follows: Somerset, $9.50 (all
game); Worcester, $10 (wildfowl).
1892, Nonresidents hunting snipe, rail, and wild fowl on Patuxent River in Anne
Arundel and Prince George counties required to have permission of a majority of
the residents near the river and to employ licensed boat; $2 pusher's license required
on Patuxent River; $20 nonresident license for rabbits, partridges, and woodcock in
St. Mary County.
1894, Citizens of Calvert County allowed to hunt snipe, ortolan, and wild fowl on
Patuxent River in Anne Arundel and Prince George counties; nonresidents pro-
hibited from hunting in Anne Arundel County or shooting wild fowl in Charles
County; sink-box license on Elk and Bohemia rivers in Cecil County abolished and
use of boats for hunting wild fowl prohibited. Nonresident county licenses as fol-
lows: Baltimore, $10 (gray squirrels, rabbits, partridges, pheasants, and woodcock);
Carroll, $10 (squirrels, rabbits, partridges, pheasants, and woodcock); Harford, $10
(rabbits, partridges, pheasants, woodcock, rail, reedbird, and robins); Kent, $15
(rabbits and birds); Prince George, $20 (rabbits, partridges, and woodcock).
1900, $10 sink-box license on Elk and Bohemia rivers reestablished. Nonresident
county licenses for hunting any game as follows: Garrett, $25; Somerset, $9.50.
1902, Nonresident county licenses as follows: Calvert, $10 (rabbits, partridges, and
woodcock); Cecil, $5.50 (rabbits, quail or partridges, grouse, woodcock, reedbirds,
ortolan or rail, and summer ducks); Frederick, $15 (rabbits, partridges, pheasants,
wild turkeys, woodcock, and ducks); Montgomery, $15 (squirrels, rabbits, par-
tridges, pheasants, wild turkeys, woodcock, and ducks); Prince George, $20 (rab-
hits, partridges, pheasants, and woodcock); Washington, $10 (hunting or fishing in
county, except on Potmnac River, not applicable to taxpayers or residents of Mary-
land or District of Columbia); Wicomico, $10 (all game).
1904, Nonresident landowners and guests of resident landowners allowed to hunt
inll Anne Arundel County; special Patuxent River $10 license required of nonresi-
dents hunting thirds (members of certain hunting clubs exempt), and $2.50 pusher's
license required of residents of State; nonresident license in Baltimore County
extended to cover jacksnipe and fee reduced to $5 (photograph of holder required
on license). Nonresident county licenses as follows: Allegany, $10 (all game); Somer-
set, $10 (squirrels, rabbits, muskrats, quail or partridges, doves, woodcock, ducks,
and geese); resident county license, Somerset, $1.

99, $25 nonresident license and 28-cent resident
president license for hig game, $10 nonresident
license extended to cover all game animals and fee
95 repealed.
prohibited from hunting game for sale or export;
sm all hunting in the State.
,ense and $15 bird license required of nonresidents
ent license, $1 resident license (not required in
president deer license.
ent license for huntinu in Atlantic, Camden, Cape
r Salem counties; 1896, license law repealed; 1878,
nting in the State except in compliance with the
citiese; 1902, $10 nonresident license for any game
d hens.
(ent license for hunting on Staten Island; 1892,
silent taking fish or game on fresh waters bounding
as citizen of New York in State of nonresident;
nse restrictions imposed by their own States on non-
by commissioner in case of nonresident from States
lents prohibited from shooting wild fowl from float-
.k and Dare counties; 1895, $25 nonresident license
king grounds; 1897, nonresidents prohibited from
ty; 1899, $25 nonresident license for clubhouses in
ent license ($20 in Cabarrus County).
resident license and 50 cents resident license (land-
perty exempt, and nonresidents cultivating quarter
t license); 1897, resident license fee increased to 75
cultivated lands required to secure resident licenses;
cense; 1904, fee reduced to $15.
market-hunting license.
-esident license (landowners exempt); 1903, same
foreign-born residents.
ise for each nonresident hand employed by nonresi-
, Berkeley, Charleston, Colleton, and Georgetown
to add $25 fee for pursuit of the business; 1888,
$100 additional fee for each nonresident employed
At license for hunting in Beaufort County; market-
>rry County; 1893, $25 nonresident county license
one hunting on their own land exempt); 1902,
silent county license; 1901, $25 nonresident and $1
i of Lake and Obion counties prohibited from killing
oot Lake; 1879, market hunting prohibited in 13
ie county prohibited from market hunting in certain
others; nonresidents of the State prohibited from
ake; 1897, nonresidents of Grundy and Van Buren

similar law for Bledsoe County; 1908, $25 narket-hunting license and nonre
license with same fee as resident of Tennessee is requited to pay in State of apy
Utah.-1903, $10 nonresident gun license.
Virginia.-1886, Nonresidents prohibited from killing wild fowl from ski ffs
boxes in Fairfax, Henrico, King George, Prince William, and Stafford co
1891, nonresidents prohibited from killing wild fowl on lands below head
water, except in Accomac and Northampton counties; 1894, nonresidents,
members of the Eastern Shore Game Protective Association, prohibited from
wild fowl in Accomac and Northampton counties; 1900, $10 nonresident
license for deer and upland game birds in Alleghany, Augusta, Bath, Bot
Highland, and Rockbridge counties; 1903, $10 nonresident license childrene
guests of resident landowners exempt under certain conditions).
Washington. -1901, $10 nonresident county license and $1 resident county
(persons under 16 exempt, and privileges of resident license extended to citi
Idaho and Oregon); 1903, uniform $1 county license for residents and nonres
West Virginia.-1899, $25 nonresident county license; 1903, $15 nonresiden
Wisconsin.-1897, $30 nonresident deer license, $1 resident deer license; 189
resident deer license fee reduced to $25, $10 nonresident license for other ga
resident license for all game.
Wyoming.-1886, Nonresidents prohibited from hunting game animals; 18
nonresident county license for big game; 1899, fee increased to $40; $1 reside
license for hunting big game outside county of residence; 1903, nonresident lic(
increased to $50.
British Columbia.-1890, $50 nonresident license for big game (members of
navy, and Canadian militia exempt).
Manitoba.-1890, $25 nonresident license.
New Brunswick.-1878, $20 nonresident license (fee $5 for officer of army or
1897, $20 nonresident, $2 resident licenses for moose or caribou, nonresidents rE
to give $100 bond, with two resident sureties; 1900, fee for nonresident lice
hunting moose and caribou increased to $30; $30 nonresident license for hun
Westmoreland County; 1903, 25 cent resident license for hunting in Westmo
Newfoundland.-1889, $100 nonresident caribou license (officers of British wa
stationed on coast for fisheries' protection exempt); 1899, caribou license fees re
as follows: $40 for 2 stags and 1 doe, $50 for 3 stags awnd 1 doe, $80 for 5 stage
does; 1902, $100 nonresident license permitting killing of 3 stag caribou; 19
reduced to, $50.
Northwest Territories.-1893, $5 nonresident license for big game or birds (fi
licenses free to guests of residents); 1898, nonresident license for all protected
increased to $15, guest license abolished; 1899, $1 five-day license for hunt
nonresident guest of resident, $15 nonresident license for calendar year (all big
and birds); 1903, $25 nonresident license for all game and $15 nonresident
for birds.
Nova Scotia.-1884, $30 nonresident moose license and $10 nonresident bird
($5 fee for officers of army and navy, members of Game Protection Society ex
1896, $30 nonresident license for hig game, $10 nonresident license for birds,
and rabbits ($5 fee restricted to officers stationed at Halifax, employees of Pro
or Canadian government, persons formerly domiciled in Nova Scotia, and n
dents paying $20 real-estate tax exempt); 19C2, big game license modified t<
all game and fee increased to $40; 1904, special $30 nonresident license requi

'j#*uio.1888 $10nonrsidet liensefor leer(shaeholers f inorpoate
"o~juanyhuntng o lans ofcompny eempt) 189, $2 nonesidnt lcens fi.
Vig, ame o birs; 186, $2resient lcensefor eer; 900, 5 reidentlicene fo
moose, reindeer, or caribou.~
I Quebe.-1882,$20 nonesidentlicense 1884, esident of Ontrio exe pted an
lieuenat-goernr i coucilempwere togran hutin peritsat ()we rae o
grtituly 88,$ lcns eritigrsietst kl 5crbo nd5deral(v
regulr liit, 10 fe tomembrs o incrported unthgandfishng cubs;1895
..~ (l~iC en ~ i~
numerofexta arbouan der llwe uner$5licns rducd o ; nnrsien
licnse a folo s: 30,al gane $2, bg an-e nd ur-eaiti ainils,$2, -il
bids $0,gaiebidsinth GlfofSt Lwrnc; al rte f-) iemer o ic(r
Porte fshan gin cubs 197 nnrsien lcese ee fxe b leuennt
govenorin cuncl, lwerrate fo memersof icororatd fsh ad gine lub
leming hunting reserves.9iii~~~~-; ~i rn
IF ~i .
A. i
IN; ,,,

otisse, and exemptions or privileges.
It is interesting to note the development in the for
Some States, like Delaware, Florid, an ot ao
simple license to hunt or kill gae. Other, like New 1
Jersey, and Pennsylvania, have adJopted forms which, t
fer, contain a desrition of the holder. Illinois in1
f urther and required that the owner's photorp ,
license., fe w years' trial this feature a dis
simultaneously wihits abandonment by Illinos it-
Indiana (see Pl. 111), and in 1904 by Bltimore Coun
Brunswick in 1897 required th lieset ive a $100
resident sureties.
The most complete form of license is the coupon licen
firt eviedby Mihiga in 1897, and since adopted
Maine, Minnesota, Montana, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
to allow shipment of a certain specified quantity of fish
holder, and at the same time to maintai a clec on s
Each license is provided with a number of couponS co
the number of deer or other game which ma.b a
an'd one of these coupons m-ust be attahed to eah hi
skin, before shipment. Several improvements hav be
oping slightly differing forms, but the best is probb
Minnesota. This license contains ain abstract of theI
on cloth and is arranged to fold conveniently sothat it
in the pocket without injury, and each coupon is p
metal eyelet to facility attachment to the game (see P
A form of nonresident license reciprocal in nature hi
in a few States. It originated in Minnesota in 1895, ai
with some modifications by New York in 11900-1902, Ter
and Kentucky in 1904, but has now been abandoned by
further modified by New York. As originally enacted
it was a simple $2.5 nonresident license but applicable or
of such States as have restrictive laws against nonres
New York changed the scheme so as to make the law g(
vided that the fee should be the same as that charged:
the applicant's State. In 1903 it modified the law so
the forest, fish, and game commissioner to fix a fee for

PLATE 111.

board, and folded for mailing or carrying in the pocket.

" have no fees for nonresident licenses. Tennessee and
adopted the gneal plan of the New York law of 1902.
Th reciprocal license is experimental and has been adopted only ill
Which have not yet established a regular license, o- where the
Form of l icense has proved u nsuccessfutl. At fi rst -si gh t it seemins
hve.:mueh in its favor, since it taxes only hunters f rom States
the nonresident license system is in force, buit the requirement
very difficult of enforcement and its inequalities are likely to arouse
resentment. The Minnesota law, which was one of the first in the
,6o1nery providing for general licenses, proved a failure, and thus far
ie New York law has been a dead lette r. Ken tuc ky appare ntly adopted
the plan chiefly because its,, own first high-license law was not a success,
while th Tenressee law was proving more detective. ti nessee is, in
fact, the only State in which this method seems to'have accomplished
its purpose. If each State had a single fixed rate it might be possible
to carry out the idea with some degree of success but -when the appli-
cant is a resident of a State where separate rates are in f orce for large
and small game, as 'in Idaho, Minnesota, Colorado, Montana, North
D~akota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin, it is not easy to do so; and when
he resides in a State like Maryland, where the license f ee varies with each
county, it is difficult to determine what rate he should be charged. The
question is still further complicated by exemptions allowed landowners,
as in North Dakota, or guests, as in Maryland and Virginia. Further-
more, it is not clear what is expected of a nonresident f rom New York
'"hunting in Kentucky or Ten nessee, or vice versa. Apart f romi these
administrative difficulties the law is likely to create friction in a rigid
enforcement of its provisions. Two residents from Maryland, for
example, hunting- in the Adirondacks might think it unfair that one
should be charged $5 and the other $25 because the first happened
to 'be a resident of Dorchester County and the second of Garrett
County; and it would be equally irritating to two residents of Mary-
land hunting on the same estate in Tennessee by invitation of the
owner if one, being from Washington County, should have the privi-
lege without charge, while the other, being from Garrett County,
should have to pay a fee of $2.5, because Washington County exempts
from the license laws nonresidents hunting by invitation on their hos-t'*s
land, *hile Garrett County makes no such exem-ption.
The fees charged for nonresident licenses have varied f rom $1;A to
$500), those for resident licenses from 25 cents to $5. One dollar is the
present rate charged residents and nonresidents alike in WNashingtonl a
(see Pl. VII), and $500-probably the highest game license e fee in the
a6 Although Washington, in 1903, actually established the first low uniform fee for
r-esidents and non residents in the United States, the same principle was ad vocated
eight years earlier in Illinois in a bill which failed to pass the legislature in 1895.
(& ,footnote, p. 17),
4f+:++++++L ++ +: +: : : : : +

world-that formerly required for a nonresident narke
license in South Carolina. Other high licenses are those fc
in Newfoundland, $100, in 1889 and 1902, but now reduce
and the present $50 license fees for big game in British
and Wyoming (see Pl. VII). Apparently the rate is
without regard to the kind of game which the State has to
is influenced more or less by the fees prevailing in neighbors
Thus Indiana and Ohio, which have no big game, require
dents to pay $25, the same rate which is required in I
Montana, where deer, elk, goats, and other big game may be
Maine, which has excellent big game hunting, exacts but
Utah but $10, while South Carolina, which offers little be
birds, until recently required $25, and made the license
in the county in which it was issued. Maine and New I
both have moose and deer and offer much the same oppor
hunting, but the fee in New Brunswick is $30, or exactly
in Maine. The tendency at the present time seems to be in
tion of a license of $25 for big game and $10 for game b
good throughout the State. The only States in which count
still prevail are Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Maryland, South Dt
Washington. In Colorado they are also issued to nonreside
ing birds.
The following table shows the States that require n(
licenses, the amounts of the fees, the officials from whom li
obtainable, the disposition of the fees, and the limitations
amount of game that may be exported.

Details of Nonresident Licenses for hunting game.a

Arkansas ..........

By whom issued. Disposition of fee. Export limit; re
.................... .................... Nonresidents n
m fitted to hun1
Commissioner o f Game protection Export allowed
game. permit. ............ County license ft
2 first day.
Delaware G am e ............ Export of rabbit
Protective Asso- partridges, wo
ciation, robins, Wilsor
Clerk county cir- ............ Export of deer
cuit court. wild turkeys
ited. County
County ordinary... County treasury .. County market
lieense. Ex
quail prohibit
b Licenrse not applicable to counties having special ga


Colorado .......... $25(all game).

$1 per day
85 first year,
$2 thereafter.

Delaware ..........

Florida ........... $10 ...........
Georgia ............ $25 ...........

a For exemptions see pp. 30-32.

'Y .... Export poibite.
toll e er 1 irs
Is, or' Separate county laws,
unty wit varin exor
, provisions.
tion. Export prohibited.
...... 2 deer, 1 moose, 1 cari-
bou, 25 bird.
I rmitted to hunt.
.tion. 6 deer, 2 elk, 6 gasper
i esn; 20 gruse, prai-
rie chickens, fool hens,
pheasant, sage lin,
partrdges, doves per
...... 50 birds.
.tion 2 deer. Export of birds
...... Export of upland game,
except wild turkeys,
prohibit. License
not reqie for water-
fowl, snipe, or miud
y Expo trt prohbited.

proetion .

IW quail.

Deal, f Nowrz

S tat v.Fee.
Oregon ............ $10 ..... ......

By whom Isued.
Gaine and. forest

vispoitio oI lee.
50 pereent countN
treasury; 5per
cent game pro
SGame proetion
State treaury ')
I-'tate treasry,
Game protection

Market hinr
port pro
eelpt thart I
hunter imiI
day' bag

$10 ............ I Cunlty treasurer_

$2(big gme):

- Ao ..............

3 (lee, 1 elk, 1bufalo
1 seep, 5 brds
charge of qualfe
g uide.
State icense
I deer,.50 quail, 10 phas
ants or gos,3wl
turkeys, 30waerfol
25 cch or 10i tl
of plover, sie ad
piper, willettt
lers, and -'res
]Export polbtd x
cept that Oregou. hun-
lier may take1 day'
bag. Count l(Ttse
Export prohbite o
(leer, quail, rfe
grose, pheasns
and Nvild tureys
2 deer, 2 rabbits, 2 squir-
res, 50 birds
2 (lee~cr, 2 elk, 2 atelope,
I sheej 1 goat. Li-
censee loust employ~
10 (leer, 2 elk, 2 moose
5 caribou, .5 oat,
sheel), under license.
N o 1) irds.
f,'xloort prohibited.,
1 moe, I carbou.

...-do ....... *,
Stte game Nvar 'en,
County fish and
game warden.
Countyv cle.......

'V'ir iiii.. .. ..,... .. 1810 ............

W w'blinto ll ....... 1 $1 .............

County auditor ....I Gaie prote(-tion .

West Virgiiiia _..r ............

Stategaie wacrd~n.

State treasury ....

Wisconsin . . .

' 95 (all gane)
,QJO0 (sinall

Secretary of estate -

G~ame~ protection .

Wyomilig ......... 1 q50 ............

Jliti CC Of the lwace-' ........

Britih Colmbfit-I tw ....,....

Alnv Governm~nt ..........
Aliniser of ar i ...........,........
cultre sad im-
Survcyor-genera I u G aine protec~t~tion
chief gamc colli-
missioner, anyl
game Nvarden. .............. ...... ....-. .. .....

MnMitnot~ha ..........
'New v WuwN ick~,.

$25 c.........
30 (111ose
and cnrib:,n).
$3 (decr amlri
game hirdsr),

2 deer. License
oly iIn Wst

a Rate of St~ttc 4of nonrei~dents.

South D~akota ......

, a)

I . ...........

it; remrks
mider icens

Trpheso 3 (ler,

secre- Game protection .

.. o . .. .

game bids i Gulf of
St. Lawrence

t licenes are showon in the

for hntinggame

d.Dsosto of fees
or 25 centrts tocek
25~r cents county
fund, 50 cents~tir
ga ~me fund.,


E'xpires Dee. 31.

Good fr wic year froma
date sE issile
Fpires Feb;I 15.
E'xpire Ju~ne 1. not re-,
quirezd of mic Xnnithiga
oT 1 IIIII(I which lieh
owiislr or occupies.
Ruired fkr waterfol,
OCL i to Nov.~ 118.
IN-er only.r

!n, jus-

Game protection

25 Cnt to clurk,~
25 cn t t 8 t I
25 cn ts to voun-t~
Game protectim

Big game Oril; expire
Dec. 31.

South Dakota ..... 1.00
Washington ....... 1.00
Wisconsin .......... 1.00
Wyoming ......... 1.00
New Brunswick...
. 25
Ontario............ 5.00
Quebec ............ 5.00
One of the chief object
the features which usually
ing nonresident who ou
To meet this difficulty s
in their laws. These e:
show the various solution
Montana exempts tax
real estate within the St
nonresident owners of frc
allows nonresidents own
take out resident license
Pennsylvania, in the act
of real estate, but repeak
no longer in force) and I
in favor of landowners
makes a further exempti<
taxes in the State, and V
of resident landowners t
if the guest is accompani
the host receives no cort

W~~~~ of mreiiool RvilrtBgGm krv
Sal I slj~~Y~ Till "A"
CL I 11'rs NO
03i.czbcnt sigoan
....4. t1 1g I 1
........................................................... Itriar ncGn- irv. o
_W'NtW t10.
LA 2~
'1 -903
dire the ton ba k 49fpon L'Jojljj ey +t21

ecpin readnilnonr ieali
em ocetrConyecpsnorsdn ad
ro 'terrltv ,adrltvs rcnetosb araeo
Ken exmtiorsdnsonn adadtnnsi
possso of rea esae and uneiaic pse i 94 e
Iiiliiiiiiiliiiiiiiiiliiiiiiith se p rso n a re iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiiiiiiii c n i e redl
usfiereidns f h Sae ha elngt ay incroae ut
club whs ebrhpde o xce 0 n hc ws
lese ra etae ihi amieofth rvran hi mprve (its22'
prpryb lbhue
Other... exetosaebsdo te cnieain.Iaorqie
1.n ie s r m w m n n rhbt hlrnu d r1 mob an
,ng iess ymn xet oafd ios ot aoa
.................... un e 16 if th y h v h rte o se to h i a e to
gurin to====== hun; law o 1901 excpte
boy une 16 a provsio whc asdtelwtob elrducn
iutioa 'b h irutcut fSoan ony W sigo
Cn ty dmkstepoiino t ies a nplcbet
hunting.lo...theP.tom.c.iver.....exemp...e..dent.of.the isrc
ofClmi swela ayad
--oi isre aprvso inislwpritn no eid ntst
hunt~ wihu a lies ntelnd faohrb iniao. Thi
proviso. ................ ............... void...... by a t r e g n r l o ie S a e u
merely ~ ~ ~ beas fabgiy@wn oislcto ntelw
.....r exm to fget frsdnso adwesi nfrei
maycute fMrlnadvsiigsotmnotnscr ni
ttosisedo iess4K nCu yM .iseslcnsato -
thir th regular rat to norsiet inie by ladwes
n som ofteCnda rvne xetosaemd n fvro
aryadnv fies o xmpe rts oubade o
reur liene of... ofieso hiryad ayo fteCnda
mii a in........... acua service,.... Ne fudadalw fi eso rts a
veslittoeinte os o h rci o fishrestiepo
uniesdgi n ohn a i wihu liene an NoaSoia
exet fiessainda aiapoie hyaemmeso h
Gam and IlnFihrPotconcey

adjoining States, regardless of the ownership of property.
The North Dakota exemption in favor of nonresidents ownir
cultivating a quarter section of land has been made use of to eva
payment of the license fee. The came warden of the second di
of this State says:
I believe that all nonresident hunters should be required to pay the ful fee
and see no good reason why an exception should be made in favor of those w
the owners of land in the state. "A fraudulent use, I think, is frequently made
latter clause, as it is an easy matter to temporarily transfer the title of land in
to evade the payment of $25, for a permit. It would only be fair in case al
residents are charged the $25 fee if they were granted some privileges in re
shipping game out of the state.
Of the Wyoming provision exempting from the payment o
resident license fee citizens hunting in their own counties, the
game warden says in his report for 1903 (pp. 3-4):
The law as it stands is difficult to enforce, produces but little revenue and
less as a means of identification.
With a nonresident gun license of fifty dollars, the temptation is strong for
pulous hunters to sneak in from adjoining States and pose as citizens of Wy,
and an officer must rely upon his acquaintance with the people of his own cou
detection of such fraud.
Whatever may be said of the injustice of requiring nonreside
take out licenses to hunt on their own property or on the land:
club to which they may belong, the contention that such a pro,
is unconstitutional in depriving a person of his property has not
sustained in the single case which has been tried in the higher ci
(In re Ebei'le, see p. 48.)
Another provision frequently regarded as an unnecessary har
is that even after securing a license nonresidents are sometiime,
hibited from carrying home any of the 1game which they secure.
restrictions are in force in Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Mari
Michigan, New Jersey, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Utah, and
Virginia, and also in Manitoba. In other States which issue no
dent licenses an exemption in the nonexport law allows the hol,
take with him out of the State a certain amount of game for hi
use, usually on condition that it shall be carried openly. Some
provision seems no more than just when the State exacts a fee of
$5 to $50 for the privilege of securing game, which, in some ca
least, can not he fully enjoyed unless the owner can take it home
The absence of such a provision and the failure to permit
resident landowners to hunt on their own property account for
of the irritation aroused by nonresident license laws. The shi
privilege can be easily arranged and has already been recognize
most "States. The other obstacle is not so easily overcome, and a
f~ctory solution has not as yet been devised.

muin~, especiauy o
areno ctien o
)hil~itd from hnting
(3h ch by experience has
(I act; man ffisorderl
J other verin, are fe
on and defence of ec
kely to e overrun
rly ubjct todele
[t'lies fee affords
ng) in the ajoining

requiring not only every nonresident, but also every unnatural
foreign-born resident of the Commonwealth to take out a license ft
the treasurer of the county in' which he proposed to hunt, for wl
he must pay a fee of $10. (Acts of 1903, p. 178.) This provisi
which has recently been adopted by Louisiana, seems to offer a pl
tical solution of the problem of controlling the ever increasing ni
ber of foreigners of certain classes who destroy birds and game ol
kinds in the neighborhood of large cities despite laws and wardens,
The principle on which the nonresident license is founded, besides
general one of protection of the game from irresponsible and unit
tifiable hunters on which all hunting licenses are based, is the pre;
nation of the benefits of residence within a community for the usi
its own citizens. The game of a State is held to belong to the pe<
of the State and is preserved primarily for their own use. W1
therefore, nonresidents desire to enjoy the privileges of residents t
are required to pay a reasonable fee for such concession on the I
of the State. This requirement is the one which is considered Er
important by some States. Thus Illinois in the game law of 1,
section 26, declares:
For the purpose of increasing the game-protection fund, and preventing unaut
ized persons from killing game and birds, no person, not a resident of the Sta
Illinois, shall at any time hunt, pursue or kill, with gun, any of the wild anin
fowls or birds that are protected during any part of the year without first ha
procured a license so to do, * *
In several States, notably Maine, North Carolina, Washingi
and Wyoming, the State depends largely upon the income from
source for game protection; in most States although the returns
considerable they do not by any means constitute the chief source
income for the game-protection fund. Efforts have been made
ascertain the income derived from licenses in the several States
well as in the Provinces of Canada, for the years 1902 and 1
Difficulty, however, has been encountered in obtaining satisfact
statistics owing chiefly to the different methods of issuing licenses
the fact that in some States the issue is intrusted to local officers
that the full returns for the State are practically inaccessible. '
following table shows the number of licenses and amount of :
received therefor in 22 States and 6 Provinces during the past
years. In several States license laws were not in force in 1902,
in others statistics for 1902 are not available, although they have t
furnished for 1903.
a The figures for Washington are inseparable from those for resident licenses and are given i
table on p. 8A. The States and Provinces from which no returns were received are: New '
Pennsylvania, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, South Dakota, Oregon, Hawaii, British Columbia,
Quebec. In New York no licenses were issued, and in Oregon the law requires none excep
market hunting by nonresidents. The receipts were probably small in all the other States e.
possibly in South Dakota.


iventl license.
Bir license,S] Iw pr
day (92 fin't day).

(a 20 5W.00
t 27 00
.5W-5. 00 2,50 3,750.00
100.00 .. .. . .
(a) 1,0697 25, 4,V-.00
151.50 . .. . .

.. 14
5*I. 0 4,
K) 911




).001 17
5.00 36
1.00 30
1.00 3:38
1-00 7 2
.00 17
).00 259


3, 2,75. 00)
2, 02000
165. 00
1, 350. 00
9,02. 00
7.50. 00
3, 600. 00
2V5. 00
6, 45. 00

1, 735. 00
25, 45V6.0M

Rate ill 190:3, 815,
4 counties.

131.50 Total munber 25 in
1902, '25 in 1903.

1, 690.00
840. 00
It3,075. 00
2,540. 00
435. 00
3, 600. 00
2,V5. 00
I1, 3S0.00
6, 475.(0

First district.
[Second district.

Total includes 5
market hunters"
licenses, S125.

All game.
Small game.

Rate in 1903, SW.

Ind Times-Dispatch of August 21,190A,
ig are the number of licenses i ,ued in
iv,1; Augusta, 4: Amelia, 16; Midi, 4;
~2; Cullwper, 2: Dinwidldie, 1; Essex, 7:
r, 2; Greensville, 4; Hlenrico, 8; isle of
um, 6; Middlesex, 13; 'Montgomry, 1:
Prince (eorge, 12, Princess Amine, 44:
Sinytth, 2: Southiamlpton, Ix ptisyl-
junntiw not heard from are Accumac,

as roiiows: -in -ft iz, I, 4I a nz censes mny' mates anat t04 neens
Canadian Provinces, or a total of 2,212 licenses in 15 States an
inces; -in 1903, 5,779 licenses in 21 States and 764 licenses in 6 CE
races; .in 193, 5,779 "iesi "
Provinces, or a total of 6,543 licenses in 27 States and Pr
While the receipts from nonresident licenses in 1903 exceeded
of the previous year, they ran above $1,000 in only 14 State
Provinces, and exceeded $5,000 in only 5 States and 2 Pr
Maine collected the largest amount ($25,455) and Wisconsin t
largest ($12,005). The smallest amount was $131, collected in
land, where licenses were issued in only 5 of the 23 counties.
Investigation of the disposition of the funds will show thatI
cases receipts from licenses are utilized for the protection of
Maine, in 1903, provided that the money received from nom
licenses should be expended for protection of moose and deer
compensation for "actual damage done growing crops by deer.
few States, however, the proceeds are turned into the genera
ury or the school fund. Thus, in New York, West Virgini
tucky, Tennessee, Oregon, and Utah they are covered into the
treasury, and in Georgia into the county treasury. In Penns
one-half of the total receipts is paid into the county treasury. I
Dakota 20 per cent goes into the general treasury, 10 per cent
to the county auditor, and 70 per cent is added to the game fu:
Maryland (except in a few counties) and Nebraska the recei
turned over to the school fund. Again, examining the table fr
standpoint, it will be noticed that the States which turn the
over to the school fund-or to the general treasury are the one
show the smallest returns. Thus, in 1903, Maryland collected or
and Nebraska $840 for the school fund. Utah collected $300 an
Virginia $435 for the general treasury. Where the money
applied to the protection of game, which is the ultimate source
income, less interest seems to be taken in enforcing license la
the license system as a source of income makes but a small sl
Again, the experience of some States shows that interest is at
lax if the proceeds from the sale of licenses are turned into a
State fund instead of being retained in the county in whi<
accrue, even though such general fund is devoted to the enfoi
of game laws, and it has been suggested as desirable to all<
county to use for its general expenses at least 50 per cent of 1
ceeds, and thus give it a direct financial interest in the amount
Resident licenses, unlike those issued to nonresidents,
intended so much to restrict hunting as to regulate it. The ch
they subserve are raising funds for the protection of game a-

follows: Anne Arundel, 1902,
boat, $335; 1903, 19 sink box,
$340; 1903, 34 sink box, $680;

7 cent
>f col-

nt licenses issued in
there or:


First district.
Second district; total

Moose and caribou.

averce fee of *10 to *25 frnonresident licenses the
nari- collected from residents is far in excs of tha r
nonresidents. Thus, in Wisconsin in 1903 the returns
lenses ($78,164t) were m-ore than six times as gret asth
resident licenses ($12,005); in Colorad, where" th a
$15,1 8a and $1-46, respectively, the resident wee ner
times as large as the nonresident; and in 11inois, the a
$5,000 and $3,750, respectively, more than twentyfive ti
(2) 2,7ttmbt1er of licensed kunters.-In the following tal,
the number of lcenses issued (indicating the number of
ters) and the amounts received therefrom (see Pl. V) in
States for which statistics are available for both residnl
dent licenses:
Number of Licen)sed lfunters and Receipts from Liene, P'
State.Residet Nonresi-
State Resient.dent.
Colorado ................................................... 15,18 34
Idaho ............................................. ... 12, 370 267
Illinois ....................................................... 95,000 250
Michigan ................ .................................... 19,06 45
Minnesota ................................................... 8, 910 333
Nebraska ................................................... 3, 744 S
North Dakota ................................................ 11,574 123
W ashington ................................................. .. 14, 982 (a)
W isconsin ......................................... ....... .. .. 18S,16 4 659
W yoming .................................................... 299 158
Total ................................................... 259,288 1,953
a Nonresident licenses inseparable from resident licenses.
The most interesting fact brought out by this table is t
ber of licenses issued. This number shows that in theabo
ten States more than a quarter of a million hunters were lil
the past year. This total, however, is less than the acttu
hunters in these States, foi- the reason that in Mlichigran
no licenses are required from residents for anything exc(
and in Nebraska and Wyom ingr a resident is not requir(
license unless he shoots outside his own county.
The only State which shows larger returns from non
f rom resident licenses is Wyoming, which has a very hig.
fee of $50, 10nd requtiires rsident licenses only in the ca
a,~utill( the fees, for issue the amount was $9,90


Ng gaeotieo h onyo rsdne(e .3)hs
n naSaes hnystld n ihlrecute ol
ilaturall makeiii iii~il the: retrn from reidn licnse very small.
3)Nuie of Uy ga'i ie n se s ...s some of the State r eq ir s
hutn big .Th iursfi9 Stae an 4Poics areshon
+ ,?~~~ ..... ... .. . . .
Coord ........... 9 02Iym n .......... 15 79
Id h . . . . .. .2 e r n w c . .. ..3 8 1 ,4
Motn ..... _---- .,1s n1esal ore2So
west Teritoie, in wihlcnefob i aen not be sprted
Daot, rii Coumi,,+h+|o h+ i+ and Qubc f 1 hc o eot r
avalale an VemnN we kaliforn ad Orgn inwhc
3,336| norsdn b n+++ utnig gaine liesswrisudatacsif$225
that~~~~~~~~~~ Mieisemoetaon-afthcese cn seandcllce
mor tanon-tir o t fe and tha Ne Brnwiksoo seon
in, pon of lies eeps fw su e ns a alhennrein
lie"ssi ersa ot aotUaW s igna aioa

gan, 8,910 in Minnesota, 299 in Wyoming, 1,858 in New Brunswio
and 5,860 in Ontario, making a total of 35,888; or nearly ten times
many as were issued to nonresidents in the nineteen State and Pro
inces mentioned above. The u mount paid for the resident license
however, was only $39,100, or about 50 per cent of the fees for t
nonresident licenses.
(4) Stattics of forie years.-Still another inquiry suggested
the table is whether or not the figures for 1903 are abnormal. On t
point few statistics are available for a term of years, but in Michig
and Ontario the returns are complete for the entire time the reside
license system has been in force. Michigan inaugurated its lice
system in 1895; Ontario began to issue nonresident licenses in 18
and resident licenses in 1896.a The rates are about the same 25 f
nonresidents in each case and 75 cents for residents in Michigan a
$2 in Ontario. Situated as they are, adjoining one another, wi
much the same kind of hunting, this State and Province are admire
adapted for a comparison of this kind.
Following are the figures for each year since 1895:
Number of Licensesissued in Michigan and Ontaio,a 1895-1903.
Michigan. Ontario.
Year. Nnei
Resident. Nonresi- Total. Resident. Nonrs Toi
dent. dent.
1895 ....... .... ..... ... ..... ............ 14,477 22 14,499 .......... 60 .......
1896 ............. .. ....................... 12, 904 20 12, 2 4 3, 452 49 3,
1897 ..................................... 11,867 44 11,911 2, 300 53 2,
1898 ............................... .. I. 11, 585 48 11, 633 3, 00 52 3,
1899 ................... ... ...... ... 12, 758 93 12,851 3, 917 80 3,
1900 ..................................... 13,366 77 13,443 4,200 90 4,
1901 ..................................... 15,687 49 15, 736 5,090 1 100 5,
1902 ..................................... 18,621 53 18,674 5,1G5 200 5,
1903 ..................................... 19,06 1 45 19,106 5,707 259 5,
Total ............................. 130, 326 451 130, 77 33,131 943 34,
Average .... ... ....... ......... 14, 481 50 14, 531 b 4,141 105 b4,
a Ontario also established a $5 resident license for moose and caribou in 1900. Comparatively
of these licenses have been issued-105 in 1900, 150 in 1902, and 153 in 1903-and as Michigan har
corresponding license, they have been omitted from this table.
b Average for 8 years, 1896-1903.
This table shows th ththe total number of hunters licensed in Mic
gan since 1895 was 130,777, and in Ontario since 1896, 34,0-
Although the number varies from year to year, there has been a stea
increase in resident licenses for six or seven years-in Michigan fr<
11,585 in 1898 to 19,061 in 1903, and in Ontario from 2,300 in I1
to 5,707 in 1903. The number of nonresident licenses shows consid<
able fluctuation in Michigan from '20 in 1896 to 93 in 1899, in
from 49 in 1896 to 259 in 1903.

W ethisuofnnidn liene inOtroha nrae
'realaly ndt lagrpootosta inMciahesue f
reietlcne a lasbe osdIal mle.T i I
TVeplie i at b h atta n19 tegvrmn ea h
imu o feestlers emtalw ,oemme fafml okl
tw er o oo upoe.In191,230 ftes emiswr
oflei 88 ,0,adi 89 ,63 u vni h etes
permis andresidnt iessaecm ietettlwl tl ls
thnoehl h ubro eien iessise nMcia o
th smeyer

In inany Stte the licnse sste is stil in an
tr-ansitional stage, and its possibilitis as a source of ]
on indiscriminate, hunting, and incidentally as a me-
important statistics cocrnn hunting have not beE
It is, moreover, incomplete in som Stts, wher
extended to residents or does not cover all kinds of ga
qualities are inherent in an ne cee n a
disappear in due time. Certain other inherent diffi
give rise to problems which are not so readily soved.
grou01ped under three heads: Special privlege, cost c
Much of the adverse criticism provoked by the lic
been caused both by the privileges granted and by tt
law. Certain exemptions already referred to (pp. 3
tility to the system and undoubtedly interfere with it
the other band, failure to accord reasonable privileges,
granted without impairing the value of the law, has C
and intensified opposition. The exceptionalprivielq
dents of certain limited districts or memers of e
regarded, perhaps with justice, as class legislaton.
exempt taxpayers from the requiremients of the law,
times works injustice and arouses strong critcism.
extremes are at least of doubtful constitutionality, and
the best working of the system. Exemption of Ian
pavers is in many cases necessary, but to devise a cleai
means for accomplishing it without interfering with
of the law is one of the difficult problems still to be s
evil, which can be more easily remedied, is the polii
somie States of exacting a large fee for a hunting lice
the licensee the privilege of carrying home even aIi:
the game or trophies be has secured. This is a sot
that apparently serves no usef ul purpose, and migh ea
Althouild comparatively uniniportant, the expenseof
is an itemi that must be taken into account in cons

eint 8unting License..
SoDvi (if Statt. of the State of Iviscolosint.
........... Of
:% Stnt ...................
v edto -hunt all protee"
t open seamon therefore ,
A re I Ong rt-striciions provided. by
b td i be )wn' td aty' GaMOV
'e I L
Marriox OF LIC". 9XIL,
Wor of eyos'. .......
....................... .........
I Mitneef Mbetedt, I have hereunto got my
hand tind affixetl my offivial meal, at the Capitol.
ib the city of madimm. this..
D. 1902.
.................... .............. .
Slate PUlm &ad Ga Warden.
f ht bhie glazed paper, mid momited on Miezi. (The
cer license is similar but bright red.)

' iM10.,, ..... *0 C M T 4 i,, ," i ii i
"7 1
inl ifeet.We icese are isse r gam commissinr or
cos ofcle ica sric. h uua eto of issuin te through
cae freien lcnss in whc tin feso is ar lg ipopr
ndnese. licnse In North Daoatertei 0prcet sMc
reidn lcesad t e oneiden licese ors 33prnt oingn
miimm in ore toisrdqaefns fogmertin, andor
exii cniealvaato. Thu th peat iothDkt ig
th gnrlnneint lies cots$5. If, as in som of the c s
license fe tecuae ilton of th a. U nprnled huner
paahralamycus ioo s ssace to the law on consiu

were a

"I I U I 'ON.
One Killvil.
na 6 let-T.
Ihv Slmc of ()m- Kilit-il.
of N'I% vlolb-.I.
4?: 0 1
M 4,11111 vro 1 4 or (,()t, I
No 4501
Osic AntrInIm Killed.
Nei., 415 11
on.. Ail". sheep Killed.
No. 4 5-0 1.
the Peace. CtjUJION.
()rte Mtn. Go;it Killed.
ite paper, with an extnict from thv
IS atild printol on white paper.

Fro aiiimiilibeginningiiniaifew States nonresident l icne haveiiiiii
stea d ilyii in crea sed in n u m b e riiiiii d u rin g th eiiiiiii Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiii....siiiiiiitiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiisiiiiiiiiitiiiiliiiii tiiiiiiiiii
hpresent ime they re requirdiini31iSatesiandierritorie," iaidii
Grea vait exst iiin the... formii ofthicne in dii ofii1 isse andiii iii~
i n ..... th e ............. p r....... i, ................ ..........................ivi e e b t t e eisa t n e c o w r t..............................eii -
Adotio ofmrmnfr esado h ocle opnlcne
which. prvdstehlemo nywthapri ohn u lotg
toisr h sf hpeto i ane Thfesrnero$1t
W .....V1,bu nms ae tert s$0fo id n 2
frbggm n id.1n a few State th aimu rate has
iiie~ be n ed ceiti$5. Thimjoity o State iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiwiiiiii p iti theiiiiiiiiii
icese to carry withi hi ouifteSatiesnbl muto
_ p m e! o b a i e iiiiiiiii ===s l iciiiieiins e .iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiii
Reidn licenses arei reqire inmsifihitts ln
notenmodrfrmMciga wetwrd Or inari th|fei1
bt'nafwSae ti ny7 etain Hi~ i $ Thsiicen
weefrtrqurdol o hnigbggae u nmstSae hi
us snwbe xtne ocvrhutnil ae
I nii i iso m e iii ii iicasesi th eiiii receipiiiitiiisi, iii)HII piiiartiiicu larlyiii ifiro m resid en t i l ))iiiiiiiiiiiii))iiiiii)iiiiii)))))iiiii~iiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiii h av
fui s e ai m uchil larger111=====11==== inco m e fo ga m eii p r t ci oni tiiihaiii w as:::::::::: antiiii i=iii =ii i-i== ii === iii====ii===..
iiiiiiiptd an seea tte o een agl n hssuceo eeu
fo i n te n a n ce o f th eir w a rd e n se rv ice W ith ad eq u a te lice n se la ws::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
prpryefretewr fgm rtio ma emd@rc
ticall self-supporting.i iiiiiiiii iiiiiii!iiiili ii
Naurllism opoitonhs ee mnfete t teadptono
thi ce s sy t m Quesioi hiaii bee isiiei asi to ti consitu-................
tinaitiiiteiiwiafetigiine idet an some of.. tsequston
ar st ll unsettled.iii~i ~i i)==iiiiiiLiiiiii ii iiii iiiiiiiii~ii~ i
n adito to these StteGeriiiniieorq i nreients eaing
....................... se ur lie ss Ma k th n inglc a eis e orsd n s
onyiiii Jin
iiiii =o = 4

Several cases have been decided in State courts involvin dire
or indirectly the validity of nonresident hunting licenses, but the q
tion has not yet been directly decided by the Supreme Court of
United States. As there is no immediate prospect of such a decisi
it may be interesting at least to review briefly the precedents wl
have already been established and to refer to one or two decision
the Supreme Court in analagous cases, which indicate to some exi
what the attitude of that court would be if the question were dire
before it. But first it should be explained that the chief ground
attack on the constitutionality of nonresident licenses are the clat
in the Federal Constitution prohibiting taxes or duties on arti
exported from any State (Art. I, sec. 9), guaranteeing to citizen,
each State all the privileges and immunities of citizens of the sevr
States (Art. IV, sec. 2), and prohibiting legislation which s
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United Sta
* or deny to any person within its jurisdiction the e<
protection of the laws." (Amend. XIV.)
While nonresident license laws have been declared void in a
cases, they have been so declared by inferior courts or on techn
grounds and not by the highest courts or on the merits of the q,
tion. In 1886 the circuit court of Craighead County, Ark., decl
the Arkansas act of 1875 unconstitutional (Am. Field, XXVII, p.
Jan. 15, 1887). In April, 1887, the circuit court of Poinsett Coui
Ark., held the same act unconstitutional, and as a consequence ji
ment was rendered against the sheriff of the county for $10 and c
in each of 18 cases in which he had collected $10 license fees f
nonresidents. (Am. Field, XXVIII, pp. 3-4, July 2, 1887.)
1901 the superior court of Spokane County, Wash., declared
Washington law unconstitutional because it discriminated in not
qvuiring boys under 16 years of age to be licensed, and in 1903 declh
a subsequent nonresident license law void on account of a defect in
title. (Field and Stream, VIII, p. 501, Oct., 1903.) None of tl
a See also article on 'Nonresident Licenses,' hy William A. Talcott, jr., in F
and Stream, L, pp. 205-206, March 12, 1898.
In December, 1902, the 'American Field' started a fund for the purpose of de
ing the aosts of carrying a test case to the Supreme Court, but during the first
months collected only about $160. (Am. Field, LVIII, pp. 593,597, 1902; L
145, 103. )

, declared the Arkansas law pro-
in the State unconstitutional in
s from hunting on their own land.
03.) This case has been appealed
but the decision has not yet been
Cummings v. People) which may
1nt license question, was carried to
rit of error. One of the conten-
,he constitutionality of the Illinois
, is invalid because it discriminates
ave been rendered by higher courts
of such laws, one by the supreme
other by the United States circuit
linois in 1899. In the former case
',ep. 90; 2 Atl. 659) one Allen was
the act for the protection of game
178, which imposed greater restric-
anresidents of the State than upon
> the supreme court of New Jersey,
n was not in violation of the four-
)n of the United States, prohibiting
iich shall abridge the privileges of
ay to any person the equal protec-
that the statute was valid in its
game on the property of persons
ider the laws of the State for the
institutionality, after showing that
stitution, and so much of the foux-
[vileges and immunities of a citizen
the case in hand, as Allen was not
ourt said:
n, therefore, which, on the surface seems
a state to deny to any person within its
s. But even this appearance is dissipated,
the. supreme court of the United States
3. It was there argued that a state law
lish stock-yards and slaughter-houses in
other persons from slaughtering cattle or
area of about 1,1;4 square miles around
-teenth amendment; that the right to use
business for the acquisition of property

such purpose should operate equay upon all persons within. the- j
that the statute, securing such a right to some persons, and denying
substantially similar situation, was invalid. But the court decidE
this nature were not within the purview of this clause of the ame
had been framed to remedy the evils arising from the existence of la
where the newly-emancipated neroes resided, which discriminated
tice and hardship against them as a class; and that this design must
in determining the scope and effect of the provision; the learned ju
for the court saying: We doubt very much whether any action
directed by way of discrimination against the negroes as a class, o
their race, will even be held to come within the purview of this pro
clearly a provision for that race and that emergency, that a strong
necessary for its application to any other.' * *
Bearing in mind, then, this indication of the scope of the aendm
the ultimate arbiter of its construction, how can it be said that the st
review is interdicted by it? * The statute seems to stand i
gory as the Louisiana act, as an exercise of the police power for tl
one of the modes of acquiring property; and, as such, it might be e
the terms of the amendment, by giving them their widest significatio
as the supreme court declares their meaning to be, they do not touc
hand. No rights of the prosecutor under the federal constitution tb
be infringed.
In the Illinois case, In re Eberle (98 Fed. 295), the n
nonresident license was directly decided. Frank Eberh
Iowa and a member of the Crystal Lake Club, an Illini
authorized to acquire and own real estate in Illinois for i
and fish preserve, was arrested when hunting on the land
He was charged with hunting without a license in violation
law requiring a license of $10 from nonresidents, passed i
quent to the incorporation of the club. At the trial t
was adjudged guilty of violation of the statute and was
pay a fine of $25 and costs and stand committed until
paid. An unsuccessful application was made to the I
circuit court for a writ of habeas corpus.
In denying the writ the court held:
The sovereign ownership of wild game is in the state, in trust fo
its citizens; and a statute requiring the payment of a license by a no
privilege of hunting such game within the state is a police regula
poIwer of the state, and not in violation of article 4, sec. 2, of the
tution, or of section 1 of the fourteenth amendment, although such fet
of residents of the state; nor is the validity of such regulations as
individual, who is a nonresident of the state, affected by the fact th
holder in a corporation of the state which owns lands maintained as
Several important decisions are on record sustaining
hibiting nonresidents from taking oysters. As early
United States circuit court upheld the New Jersey oyste

oril .Crel ah .C T) hsi edn aeo
1M6~ (Hne v. Coptn 36 N.J .5T,.n)n10aanuhl
rneigtedo n nteHnycs h r said:
The Surm Cour of teUieSttshsueltepic
surm cour of Caiori (Et Maer to th effect othatn-
The wild gaewti tt eog otepol ntercletv overig
6paity Iti o h ujc fprvt wesi xeti s f aV pol
maY elc to maei o n hymy fte e iasltl rhbttetkn
bfio rfi n mrinit if iisde dncsarfothpoeton r

that particua locaity.
The planting of oysters in the solcovee by wtr owe incmonb h
Pepe of the State is not diffrn in principle fothtof platig con pn r
land held in the same wAay. Both are for the purpse of cultvto an poi;an
if the State, in the regulation of its public domain, cngat to it own ctznh
exclusive use of (Irv lands, we see no reaon why it my not do the saetigi
re4pect to such as are covered by water. And as all concede that a Stt a rn
to one of its citizens the exclusive use of a part of the common poet,tecolu
sion would seem to follow, that it might by appropriate legislaton ofnthue
qf the ichle to its own People aloiie.

said that hunting licenses
entries except those under
In Europe licenses to hunt
, and in some countries, as
de between residents and
ject in detail it will suffice
;e systems of Great Britain
ow Zealand for Australasia,
thwest Africa, Sudan, and
d that the issue of hunt-
countries of Europe where
onies in the heart of Africa
lopean control and where
le else in the world.
ven four licenses must be
es are required for killing
>f a dog, and in addition, a
Game and gun licenses are
this connection. Both. are
ulations regarding them is
id revenue. Under the act
I throughout Great Britain
,t a cost of 3 ($15), or for
fourteen days, at 1 ($5).
>ost-offices. They are not
and snipe, for capturing
ing deer on inclosed lands
f the Royal family and the
revisionss of the law, and a
stands of licensees.

=land the earlier te!

gun license is not required in case of members of the naval, milia
or volunteer service, of any person carrying a gun belonging to the
holder of a gun or game license, or where guns are used to kill vermin
or frighten bilis by occupants of lands, or are carried by gunsmiths or
common carriers in connection with their regular business.
Under the law of July 31, 1895,- several forms of licenses (Jagd-
scheine) are issued for hunting in Prussia. A resident may obtain an
annual license on payment of 15 marks ($3.75), or one good for three
days for 3 marks (75 cents). A foreigner or nonresident-that is, a
person who has no domicile or owns no property in Prussia-must pay
40 marks ($10) for an annual license and 6 marks ($1.50) for a three-day
license. Officers in the forest service are furnished free licenses good
for a year. In either case the holder must own land on which he can
hunt or must have an invitation from some one who owns a preserve.
Each license has its own distinctive color-yellow for the annual, red
for the daily, white for the gratuitous, and the same colors, but with
a black background, for the nonresident. Each has a diagram printed
on the back, showing the open and close seasons for each kind of game
and is good throughout Prussia, except in the island of Heligoland.
Under the animals protection act of 1880 hunting game is prohibited
except under license. These licenses are good only during the open
season and within the district for which issued. The license feesi
not to exceed 50 shillings ($12.50), are fixed by notification of the
Under the general game law of Japan two series of licenses are
issued: (A) For capture of live game with net or lime, and (B) for
killing game with a gun. Each of these licenses is issued in three
classes, distinguished by different colors, and these classes are based
upon the amount of taxes paid by the holder. First-class licenses
(buff) are issued to persons paying not less than 100 yen ($50) income
tax, 500 yen ($250) land tax, or 150 yen ($75) business tax. To such
persons or the members of their families tbo fee is 20 yen ($10).
Second-class licenses (green) are issued to persons paying not less than
3 yen ($1.50) income tax, 30 yen ($15) land tax, or 20 yen ($10) business

pota cads Ontefc ftelcneaes ownte numer a~n
po~~ead g fte odr ndtesa f t e ; dep rtmn of ar
culture an omre n h aki ridan asrc of theiame
law, ~ shoin the clos sesos th id rtcear, all timad theo
Under th riac fJl,10,h ntiglcn are eqbired in
the Gra EatArcnh tig disict. The fee is 10 res
triti are require tohaeadpsi f50rpes beorthe r icense
isised nadiin pca fee ar requ ire for huntig thol i
loig id o am:1rupe fo ac dwar anteoe 3 rue fo r
each gnhreeswtrorpennio eti te id
ofatlpkdoy, p Clbso aab;1 uesfrec
leoard 20 ruesfrec uflhpooauo in;0. upe
fori eahrioeo ad10rpe orec lpat

Special fees, varying from 250 milliemes ($1. 25) to 50 poun
($256)-in the case of rhinoceroses-are required for ki
animals, and extra taxes are collected for the shipment of
various species. License B costs but 5 ($25), and allow
to kill 10 specimens each of wild sheep, ibex, wart hog, cc
of antelope, and large bustards.
In the Transvaal, under the game ordinance of 1902,.
required to hunt in any part of the colony, except by owni
of land hunting on their own property. The fee for this
($15) for the whole season, or 1 ($5) for a period not es
weeks. Certain game, such as elephants, hippopotamus
several of the rarer antelopes, giraffes, rhinoceroses, qual
ostriches, and cranes can not be hunted without a special
the Colonial Secretary, and such permit must bear a 25 (

)logically to show the progress
s and Canada. An attempt is
f summary all the important
,sidents from hunting, which
s and Provinces since 1872,
ig-license law in the United
)osed on nonresidents much
,en made to collect these laws
ies, with their references, are
,he following list is about 160,
gland. Each entry is accom-
tant provisions of the law and
or page, so that the original
ind in the State or county.]
k boxes and $5 licenses for sneak
Susquehanna flats in Cecil and Har-
esidents. (Laws of 1872, chap. 54.)
d to hunt in Atlantic, Camden, Cape
counties. Fees, $5 first year and $2
,p. 470.) Repealed March 23, 1896.
required of nonresident trappers,
.s of 1875, p. -.) Fee increased in
drawn from nonresidents in 1903.
required for hunting game to carry
s hunting together included under
$5 each. (Acts of 1875, chap. 2055.)
residents only to use sink boxes in
ounty. (Laws of 1876, chap. 78.)
residents prohibited from hunting
ties without permission from land-
of gun. (Ibid., chap. 309.)
hunting game for sale or export.
ce counties prohibited* from killing
(Laws of 1877, chap. 145, sec. 1.)

.0e io 107811K-DOX 1108886 onl iusquenaliza viate in uects us
from $20 to $10. (Ibid., chap. 292.)
New Jersey.-Nonresidents prohibited* from hunting any game
fowl without complying with the by-laws of the gae pro
organized or to be organized under the laws of te State.
chap. 184, sec. 1.)
New Brunswick.-$20 nonresident license* required for hunting
birds in the Province. Licenses good until September 1 fo
issue. Fee for officers of army or navy, $5. (Laws of 188,
1879. Delaware.-Nonresidents required to secure certificates of imem
Delaware Game Protective Association before hunting in th
$5 the first year, $2 in subsequent years. (Laws of 1879, ea
Missouri.-Nonresidents prohibited from hunting within the Stal
1879, I, sec. 1618.)
Tennessee.-Hunting game for profit prohibited* in Cumber
Morgan, Scott, Campbell, Overton, Putnam, White, Roane,
Bledsoe, and Van Buren counties. (Laws of 1879, chap. 133,
Virginia-Nonresidents of the State prohibited* fro huntir
partridges in Accomac or Northampton counties without wri
owners or occupants of the lands. (Acts of 1879, chap. -.)
1880. Maryland.-
Cecil and Kent.-$10 license* required of residents of Cecil
ties for the use of sink boxes on Sassafras River. (Laws of 1
Patuxent River.-Nonresidents of Anne Arundel, Calvert, (
George, and St. Mary counties prohibited from shooting sni
wild fowl on the Patuxent River. (Ibid., chap. 176.)
Queen Anne.-$10 license* required of residents of Queen Al
use of sink boxes on waters of county. Licensee pohibited
use of sink box to nonresident under penalty of $20-100,
nonresident) confiscation of sink box and other paraphern
of resistance the penalty is $50-$100. (Ibid., chap. 370.)
1882. Maryland.-
Anne Arundel.-Licenses at $2 each (and clerk's fee of 50 (
for the use of 'booby' or 'bush' blinds on thile Severn, South,
rivers. (Laws of 1882, chap. 400.)
Caroline.--4.50 nonresident license* required for hunting
rats, quail or partridges, woodcock, sora or water rail, and dui
Quebec.-$20 nonresident licenses required for hunting in the.
Vic., chap. 15, se. 17-18.)
1883. North Carolina.-Nonresidents of the State prohibited from shoc
in Currituck and Dare counties from blind, box, battery,
1884. New York.-$10 nonresident license* required for hunting on
(Richmond County). (Laws of 1884, chap. 185.) Repealed
South Carolina. -$25 market-hunting license* required for eac
hand employed by nonresidents hunting ducks, fising, gat
or terrapins, or selling game in Beaufort, Berkeley, Charleston
Georigetown counties. (Laws of 1884, p. 734.)

164 m ote--3 oneiet iese*rqirdfr iln m oin other l gam , i iii
see 26 )
Vi. chap 25, see 20.)
pusun tine busiess
Anne Arne and rrnc fo ired. noneintlcs*fohut i rab
(Lw of 1886 chap 190.)
'atmr.$0nneietlcne orhnig ab tso wod ck
(Ibd. chp3.
on,, land of hos exmt (Ii.,hp 3.
Que ne-45 orsdn ies*frhnigaygm.Get
hutn nln fhs exmt (id. crhp w88lon)

have seue a $10 licns* frm the comssoe of Conln
not applicable to shareholders in an incoprae cmay hutn
of said company. (51 Vic., chap. 36, se. 16.)
1889. Tennesse.-Non reients of the Ste prhbite* frmhniggm i
in certain counties and from huntng at all in otes (Lw of 18
179, sec. 1; chap. 244, see. 2. )
Ngonresidents of certain counties prohibited from killig ae o
in these counties. (Ibid., chap. 244, see. 2.)
N-onresidents of the State prohibited from killing wild fowl on
Lake. (Ibid., chap. 156, see. 1.)
Newfoundland. -$100 nonresident license* required for killing crbu
of British war ships stationed on the coast for fisheriespoeto
from license. (Deer preservation act 1889, sec. 6; Con. Stt 19, c
see. 6.)
1890. Maryland.-
Dorchester. -Nonresidents of Parson Creek, Church Cree, an N
tricts prohibited* from hunting wild fowl in the Little Chopa
Penalty: $20 and costs, and forfeiture of boat, guns, and other fi.-
(Laws of 1890, chap. 140. )
Somerset. -$9.50 nonresident license* for hunting any game. (Nol
by one invited and accompanied by a resident. ) (Ibid., chap. 589.
Worcester.--S10 nonresident license* for hunting wild fowl. (Ibii
446. )
British Colambia.-$50 nonresident license* required for killingbi
Limit: 10 deer, 2 bull elk, 3 reindeer, 5 caribou, 8 mountain sheep,
rain goats. Members of army, navy, and Canadia militia in servi(
Province require no licenses. (Game-protection act 1890, secs. 9-10
Manitoba.- $25 nonresident license,* good for calendar year, reuire f
ing animals or birds in the Province. (Game act of 1890, se. 8.)
1892. Maryland.-
Anne Arundel and Prince George.-Law of 1880 (chap. 176) amend
to restrict hunting of snipe, ortolan, and wild fowl on the Patuxent
Anne Arundel and Prince George counties to residents of these
except such as have permission of a majority of the citizens adjae
river and employ a licensed boat. $2 pusher's license required for
paddling, or conveying nonresidents hunting on Patuxent River.
$104-30, or, in default, confiscation of boat and fixtures. (Laws
chap. 360. )
St. Mary.-$20 nonresident license* required for hunting rabbits, p
and wvoodcock. Penalty: $20 or ten days, and forfeiture of guns ar
paraphernalia. (Ibid., chap. 588 .)
South Carolina. -$2,5 nonresident license* required for hunting in
County,,; IHorry County, added to those in which market hunting is'
Virginia. --Non residents of the State prohibited f romn killing wild fom
marshes, islands, or beaches below the head of tide water, except in,
and Northampton counties. (Laws of 1891-2, 1). 10-70.)
0ntario.-$25 nonresident license* required for hunting big game
(Acts of 1892, chap. 58, sec. 8.)
1893. South Carolina. -S25 nonresident county liee* required for killing
any kindly. :dot require of persons hunting on their own lad.'
December 22, 1893, see. 3.) [Repealed by omission from Coeof I

Pr trm nuntn in tile county.
months,n fofitr ofgu and
ird for hunigga squires,
k1. Peaty: $10 freac bird or
of gun to owner of proerty on
alt of fine. Taxpayers and those
authorty on land of resident are
ranting or obtaining licens until
-ed for hunting squirrels, rabbits,
ialty: $10 for each animal or bird
un to owner of propet on which
fine. Taxpayers and those hunt-
4ldent are exempt. (Ibid., chap.
fe, and use of sink boat, sneak
nia rivers prohibited.* (Laws of
shooic wild fowl on waters of
1 forfeiture of guns, traps, boats,
v. Repeal of nonresident license
(Ibid., chap. 225. )
eA for shooting rabbits, partridges,
robins. Taxpaye'r and persons
.re exempt. (Ibid., chap. 139.)
. for shooting squirrels, rabbits,
,it of land in county, and reduced
opn on land of resident.) (Ibid.,
for shooting rabbits, pridges,
Smembers of the Eatrn Shore
from killing wild fowl in Accomac
1, chap. '740, see. 2.) [The effect
? e in the association virtually a
s of 1884 practically reenacted.
dent licenses requireol for hunt-
nsaolimited to 5 (ler and
[Zng shipment of I (leer to any
.(Laws of 1895, chap. 23.)

-11 anteo to Nase(1U eSv i tto.(asf
NothDaoa.$2 onesdntliene ad 0cet e
prohbitin i cs o onesdnt hnin bggae
food. Apprvd erur 2I 185 (as f185
Britis Columi.-5 nnesdntlces rqirdf
~embers of ary, avy,adCadinmltarqr
portion act 1895ses. 19-20.)
Quebec.- $6 residet licenseatorzn iligo 3crb
5) in excels of regula limits Nnrsiet icnss '
(1) For haunting all anials n id ecp n
(2) For hunatintg big gaine and fu-ern aias
ing Avoodcock, snipe, plover, crlew, sadppespa
ffte $0. (4) Fosr hunting the sme ir o te il
the Gutlf of St.Lawrence *fee10. esdudo-
of fish andgame clbs inoprtdin thePrvice
lieutenant-governor in counil, o rcomedaio
redue fes or issue fre perits. (59 Vie., cap. 20
1896. Hawaii.-' $5 hunting license* reuird o the islan-d of
at 64.))
Newfoudlnd. -$10 nonrsident licens reqird o
August 6, 1896, sec. 5.)
Nova Scotia.-Ifod i fica in i details of norsit lie
nonre,,.iden license require for hunig id, ae
jionresident. license for hunting othr gae l Iii
Fe for offcers of ariny or nvysttine at Hlifi
officrs longing to the Gae ad Inland Fisher I
Holons wlio have *lia domicie in Nova Scoia, ar in the
or of the government of Cnadat and are memers o
nonre~idents paying not les than $20 rea -etae tax
18961 clial) 4, sees 3-3; Rev. Stat., 190, 11, clap
Ontario.- Riden s required to obtan lceses a $2e.
Pro\-ince. (59 Vi., chitp.68, sc. 2.
1897. Michigan.- Nni i esiden licese or le, $25. Residen
vents. All1 licenses must bear coupon propery e,
issu. (Ats of 1897, 1). 40:3.)
Nort Carolina. -.Nonresidefs olf the tat prhibted
wild foNw] in Camlen Couty. (Law of 1897eip
orth Dakota. -Resident license fe Incease to C5 c
owers reuiredto secret resident licenses
Tlihis lawr did not becoe effefie until Decmbe, 195
XN', 1). 89, August 3, 1895

44M. Tww see.-Nonresidenta of Grandy and Van Buren counties prohibited from
killing doer, quail (partridge) or wild turkey in those counties. (Laws of
.19879 chap. 172.)
Wtsoonsin.-VW nonresident license* and $1 resident license* required for
hunting deer. Resident licenses required only in forty counties, dc signatefl
as 'counties frequented by deer.' Full details in regard to issue of coupon
licenses. (Laws of 1897, chap. 221.)
Mew Brunswick.-420 nonresident and $2 resident licenses* required for killing
moose or caribou. Nonresidents' required to furnish $100 bond* with 2
edWent sureties for observance of the game laws. (Acts of 1897, chap. 23,
Quebec.-Nonresident license fees graded* according to a tariff established
by the lieutenant-governor in council. Fee may be reduced in case of
members of a fisb-and-game club incorporated in the Province, provided
club leases a hunting reserve. (60 Vic., chap. 25, see. 5.)
1891L Northwest Territories.-415 nonresident license, good only from August I to
January 31, required for hunting any of the animals or i)irds mentioned by
the ordinan Guest license omitted. (Ordinance No. 40 of 1898, see. 4;
Con. Ord., 1898, chap. 85, see. 20.)
1899. Georgia.-$25 market hunting license* required of any person killing or Cap-
turing for sale, except on his own land, deer, quail, wild turkeys, or doves.
Not in effect until recommended by grand jury of the county. (AeLs of
1899, p. 96.
nlinois.-410 nonresident county license, good until June 1 following date
of issue, allows shipment of 25 birds. (Laws of 1899, p. 231, see. 26.)
'September law,'* permitting nonresident on payment of $6 and
residents on payment of $4 to kill one deer in September, for food pur-
p9ses only, in Aroostook, Franklin, Hancock, Oxford, Penobscot, Piscataquis,
Somerset, and Washington counties. (Pub. Laws of 1899, chap. 42, see. 21.)
Xinnesota.-425 nonresident license and 25-cent resident license required for
bunting deer, elk, caribou, or moose. All licenses good one year from (late
of issue and must contain description of licensee. (Laws of 1899, chap. 222,
sec. 53.)
North Carolina.-$25 nonresident license for clubhouses in Dare County. (Pub.
JAws, chap. 133, see. 2. )
Worth Dakota.-425 nonresident and -15-cent resident license reenacted. Exemp-
tions same as in 1897, except that resident children under 16 are exempted.
Jaws of 1899, chap. 93, sec. 4.)
South Dakota.-$10 nonresident hunter's license* required for'big game or
birds. (Laws of 1899, chap. 90, see. 14.)
West Virginia.-$25 dollars nonresident county license required for hunting
in the State. (Acts of 1899, chap. 22, sec. 17.)
Wisconsin. -Nonresident license fee for hunting deer reduced to $25. $10
licerxse* established for hunting all other game. Resident license extended
to cover-all game. Details of issue amended. (Laws of 18.99, chap. 312.)
Wyoming. -Nonresident license fee increased fro ni $20 to $40. $1gunlicense*
required of each resident hunting big game outside his own county. (Laws
of 1899, chap. 19, see. 14.)
Now Brunswick.-Law of 1897 modified so as to dispense with bonding feature.
(Acts of 1899, sees. 39-45.)
Newfoundland.-Nonresident license fees for killing caribou reduce(], and
licenses issued in three series: $40 license for 2 stags and I doe; $50 license
for 3 stags and 1 doe; $80 license for 5 stags and 2 does. (Deer presserva-
tion act of 1899, secs. 7-10.)

Quebec. -Reenactment of nonresident license provisions of 1897. (6
chap. 24, sec. 1416.)
Iowa.-$10 nonresident county license,* permitting export of 25 t
animals. (Laws of 1900, chap. 86.)
License fees to be credited to game protection fund. (Ibid., chap. 87.
Cecil.-Chapter 556, Laws of 1894, repealed, and $10 license requi
use of sink box by residents on Elk and Bohemia rivers. (Laws,
chaps. 372 and 444.)
Dorchester.-.Nonresidents (except taxpayers) prohibited from s
or killing ducks, geese, brant, or swans within 1 mile of shore
Middle or Lower Hooper Island without permission of landi
(Laws of 1900, chap. 378.)
Garrett.-$25 nonresident license required for hunting any game.
of 1900, chap. 189.)
Somerset.-$9.50 nonresident license required for hunting any game
needed by anyone invited and accompanied by a resident. (I
1900, chap. 203.)
New York. -Nonresidents prohibited from taking fish or game on frest
forming part of State boundary except under same conditions or fee
required of. citizens of New York in State of nonresident. (Laws
chap. 429.)
Virginia.-$10 nonresident license required for hunting deer, partridges
ants, and wild turkeys in Alleghany, Augusta, Bath, Botetourt, Hi
or Rockbridge counties. License good only in county of issue, but
sion of landowner obviates necessity for license. (Laws of 1900, cha
sec. 4.) $10 nonresident license required for hunting partridges (o
in Lee County. License carries privilege of shipping quail killed by 1
(Ibid., chap. 330.)
Manitoba.-$25 nonresident license* required for hunting in the Provi
issued at discretion of minister of agriculture and immigration. (62
Vic., chap. 14, sec. 18.)
New Brunswick.-$30 nonresident license required for hunting any ani
birds in Westmoreland County; fee for nonresident license for mo
caribou raised to $30. (63 Vic., chap. 39, sec. 3.)
Ontario.-$25 nonresident and $2 resident license provisions reenaci
resident license* established for killing moose, reindeer, or caribou.
protection act 1900, sec. 25. )
1901. Illinois.-$10 nonresident county license extended* to cover State.
must bear photograph of holder. (Laws of 1901, p. 212.)
Indiana.-$25 license* required of nonresidents. Permit required for
squirrels and wild fowl, October 1 to November 10. Issued withoul
to residents and to nonresidents holding license. (Laws of 1901, che
Maine.-Repeal of the September deer law. (Pub. Laws, 1901, chap.
Minnesota.-License provisions of 1899 amended to permit residents to
licenses upon written (formerly personal) application to county
received through office of any city, village, or town clerk before whoi
cant appears. (Laws of 1901, chap. 342.)
Montana.-$'25 big game license* and $15 game-bird license* required
residents. Taxpayers exempt. (Laws of 1901, p. 135, secs. 19-24.)

r hunting rabbits, par-
icks. (Not needed by
a resident.) (Laws ol


ting or
tyers, r'i
bv neri

(Laws of 1902, p. 379.)
Newfoundland. -Nonresident license fee incr
placed at 3 stag caribou. (Preservation of
Nova Scotia.-N president license changed to
and fee increased from $30 to $40. 'Li
(Laws of 1902, chap. 23, se. 2.)
1903. Arkansas.-Repeal of former license laws.
hunitin the State* except in Mississippi C
secs. 4, 11. )
Colorado.-$25 nonresident license* required
day ($2 first day) for birds. $1 State hu
listed. (Laws of 1903, chapter 112, Divisi
Florida.-$10 nonresident license extended t
cable to counties which have special ga
5251, sec. 6.)
Nonresidents prohibited from hunting
permission of owner of land (ibid., cha
except upon payment of $1 per day* to gai
Idaho.--$25 nonresident license required for
birds. $1 resident license* established. (
Illinois.-Nonresident license fee increased f
of photograph abolished. $1 resident licei
p. 214, sec. 25.)
Indiana.-'25 nonresident license required fc
export of 24 birds. Permit for hunting s,
abolished; $1 required from residents fo
October 1 to November 10. Both nonresi
bear photograph of licensee. (Acts of 19(
Maine.-$15 nonresident license* required foi
Laws of 1903, chap. 99.)
$5 nonresident license* required for hun
in Knox, Lincoln, Saadahoc, and Waldo c
Freeport, and Harpswell in Cumberland
chap. 236.)
Minnesota.-Reenactment of former license
nonresident license* for small gae,; resid
gae animals and fee increase to $1. (La'
repeal of license laws of 1895, 1899, and 1
New Hampshire.-$10 nonresident license* ri
of 1903, chap. 87.)
New York.-Nonresident license required for
that required of resident of New York in
amount to be fixed by commissioner of fore
of 1903, chap. 475.)
North Carolina.-$10 nonresident license* re
(Private Laws of 1903, chap. 337, sec. 10.)
$20 nonresident license* required for h
turkey in Cabarrus County. (Pub. Laws

Iaa.-4$10 nonresident licese *required of unnaturalized foreign-born
dets who hunt in the State. (Laws of 1903, chap. 136.)
ee.-Nonresident and $25 market.hunting l icenses required for hunt-
ing in the State. Fee for nonresident license same as resident of Tennessee
is required to pay in State of a pplicant. ( Acts. of 1903, chap. 189, secs. 9, 14.)
tsh.-410 nonresident gun license required for hunting any game animals or
F#birds in the State. (Lawes of 1908, chap. 116, see. 2.)
Virginia.-$10 nonresident license* required for hunting in the State. Chil-
dren and guests of resident -landowners exempt, but host must hunt with
his guest and must not, directly or indirectly, receive any compensation from
him. ( Acts 1903, chaps. 227, 286, sec. 2070e.)
'askington.-Uniform $L county license required of residents and nonresi-
dents hunting in the State. (Laws of 1903, chap. 94.)
Y'-est Virginia.-Non resident license extended* to cover the State and fee
# reduced from $25 to $15. -(Acts of 1903, chap. 46, see. 17.)
j1yoming.-Nonresident gun license fee increased front $40 to $50. (Laws of
1903, chap. 44, sec. 8.)
oew Brunswick.-Reenastment of license provisions with addition of 25 cent,
resident license to hunt any game in Westmoreland County. (Con. Stat.,
VoL I, chap. 33, secs. 44-46.)
Sewfoundland.-Nonreeldent license fee reduced from $100 to $50. (Acts of
1903, chap. 8, sec. 3.)
Northwest Territories.--$25 general nonresident license and $15 bird license*
required of nonresident for kniiting in the Territories. General license
permits export of trophies of big game. (Ordinances of 1903, 2d seas., chap.
29, sec. 18, passed Nov.,1, ~1908.)
Keatcky.-Nonresident license .fee reduced from $25 to amount required of
citizens of Kentucky in State of applicant.* (Acts of 1904, chap. 48.)
Eouisiana.-$10 non resident license stibstituted for absolute prohibition; same
license required of unusituralised foreign-born residents. $25 market hunt-
ing license established. (Laws of 1904, chap.-)
Allegany.-$10 nonresident license *required for hunting any game. (Laws
of 1904, chap. 439..)
Anne Arundel.-Previous laws modified so as to remove restrictions from
-nonresident ow ners of land in county and permit nonresident not owning
land to hunt if invited by a, resident and hunting with him on his own land
or to shoot wild fowl from a licensed blind on invitation of owner.
Baltimore.-$5 nonresident license required for hunting squirrels, rabbits,
partridges, pheasants, woodcock, and jackenipe. Photograph of holder
must be attached to license.. Nonresident taxpayers and persons hunting by
written permission on the land of a resident exempt. (Laws of 1904,
chap. 542.)
SPatuzent Eiver.-$10 license* for hunting birds required of nonresidents,
except members of certain incorporated hunting clubs, of not more than 3G
members, owning or leasing lan within one mile of the river and improved
by a club-house. License muet also secure written peimission of owner of
land adjacent to water on whih he hunts. $2.50 pusher's license required
of residents of Maryland pushing, paddling, or conveying anyone hunting
ortolan, rail, reedbirds, ducks, or geese. (Laws of 1904, chap. 509.)
Somerset.-$10 nonresident and $1 resident license* required (except in
case of resident landholders) for hunting squirrels, rabbit,,, muskrats, quail
or partridges, doves, woodcock, ducks, and geese. (Laws of 1904, chap. 198.)
6095-No. 19-4--5

I;/!!l///i;;;/ll/////iiilii 'iiii"""ili"iii!li~#liiii!li~u~i9li
'" iii.i ."II""'" ; Oi""ii~iP~iis 'iiiil"
Illnr~l ""~~ ii~l ~i ~~i~na
~~~ ilill0i:~iii;ir I ;iiiii;""l~,' ;i~iili;""ls .,,,,,, :,,
II,,: -~"' i .,,,,.,,,,
rrrr;rrrr, rr sr:nrrs iirrr:::::::
~ ;;" ;; "', 5 1;; 1;;;;;; ii isiisiii;
irs:iin iE;t""""'
1 ;s,,, ;
$;iil"i~i";""::,,,;liiiii; ii~l:l':Oi~l:,:
; ,;s~ ,i;iissis ~i; I:: i;;;;;;' '::,ii~";':"' il;,li 1""; ;;;;;;;iiiliil; .;~iliiil
.OO""'iE -""
"b~ ;sU
s, '"
ii Inin
i, s:, rr~
. i
~ ,
;li; """';i;;it l; ;i;;iiiiis;i;;i
.;; ;; ~o
~,.,, ;;;;~;;;,;,,,,
ssi 9iigliiiiii"i
.ii ;i ;sl;ii; I ;;;irEiliErlEii~i,, ;;,i~ii
ri;, ,,,
.. roii;~,ir;riiiii
;i: ,';;,I""" 1,1 ;i:
~ g
.i~ ;i~:~;iilllllii;II
.ii ;
; r, ; ; ; ';~i; ;i,,,,':;;li;;; ;;lus
~ '
;a~oa ~;
,,,,,:.;11;;1;;, ,;;ii
;i;i~iiii, ,;;,;iii
~i; R;~;;;;iii~si
lllxx li~"i ~
;I ii ,;i"

'Much discussion of the license system has appeared in sportsmen's
rnals in recent years, mostly in the form of brief articles and notes,
ddthe following list of titles, arranged chronologically, has been
pard .or the convenience of persons who may desire to examine
maateril. No attempt has been made to give a complete index of
literature of the subject, or to do more than to indicate some of
more important articles which have been consulted in the prepar-
n'**of this bulletin:
A MEMBER, Game Protection in New Jersey. [Defense of the charter of the
West Jersey Game Protective Association.] 188, Oct. 28, 1875.
EDITOIAL, Game Protection-The Florida Snap Law [Nonresident license act
,of 1875]. volume, pp. 377-378.
.C., -Shooting Dogs and Taxing Guns. [Advocates $10-$15 Nonresident Gun
License good throughout the State or in contiguous counties.] (Forest and
StreaXIII1, p. 1012, Jan. 22, 1880. -
1 T riAL. The Arkansas Law U~nconstitutional. [Decision of Craighead
County Circuit Court.] < Am. Field, XX VII, p. 49, Jan. 15, 1887.
Awowrxmoos, Non-Resident Shooting in Poinsett County, Arkansas. [Act of
1875 declared unconstitutional by Poinsett County Circuit Court.] Field, XX VIII, pp. 3-4, July 2, 1887.
$96. EDrrORI AL, Non-Residenit Diserininations. Jan. 26, 1895.,
-1890. EmITORIAL, A New Jere Sheme (for requiring nonresidents to obtain $10
licenses to hunt or fih]. . RoBBINS, C. E., North Dakota Non-Residents [fail to secure writ compelling
auditor to grant l icenses for same amount charged resid en ts]. Stream, XLVI, p. 277, April 4, 1890.
EDITORIAL NOTE, SnRa8p sht [-the Michigan License System]. St ream, XL VII, p. 1, July 4, 1896.
1887, Housni, E., The Wiscopain Deer Licenses. [Summary for 1897]. aud Stream, XLI X, p.* 487, Dec. 18, 1897.
1898. TALCOTT, WILLIAM A., Jr., [onstitutionality of] Non-Resident Licensea.
EDITORIAL NO0TE [FareM to pass a $2 NonResident License Law in New Jer-
sey]. Honesr, E., [Abuse of] Wisconsin Deer Licenses. p. 349, Oct. 29, 1898.
189. CUNNINGHAM, G. W., Michigan Deer [and the Operation of the License Law].
(Fost and Stream, LII, p. 10, Jan. 7, 1899.

p40, Mai2, 199
Stram 181 .....99
Stea, Ll p. 46, Nov1, 199
EIORI the Non-Rsdent Licns Law Uped Nov.~/ 18 199
1901 JONSO) F C. Som Hadshps f No-Reidet Lcene Las.] LV p 87 Mr 9191

M-K California, 49.s;
highlicese, 4. Crfied v.Coryll, 849
i *VOU~ay, 9. Crighea Couny, Ar., 46
excesslicenes, 1. Critende Couny, Ar., 47
licenM 15.Cummngs nPeopl, 47
*umbe andrwdpt, ExparteMaie, 49
. 14.Geer Con ectic t, 49
in Woado,18. aneyv. Cmpto, 49
w-m Rhode sland, 49

)1, 34.
,, 1873, 12.

. ;., ExEx. 7.1
' s M.40,Ontario, index, 8-82.
. gget18-1#,40. icenses issued 180-908, 40.
,21.' moms licenses, 40.
Index, 0-84. summary, 28.
i Z* Oregon, Index, 6i.
inSdex, 5R- market hunting, 15.
at probation, 11, 1U summary, 21.
* D* Oyster laws, 10, 485.
exemption, 80* Patuxent River restrictions, 11.
%*** Pennsylvania, exemption, 80.
. A nary, Ona1o.40 Index, 63-465.
ile ne, nt rio 40uammary, 21.
index 68*Permit to carry Alrearms, 18.
Photograph of licensee required, S4.
Branawick, index, 6456. Poinsett County court dectalon, 48.
22. Prohibition of camping and fire hunting by non-
4, exemption, 31. residents, 11.
Prohibition of hunting-'by non residents, 11-12,
0 14-15.
)Umphiz, eempton,30.Prohihition of oyster planting by nonresidents,
hsum, 21.-M
ewJesyeal ostrla,.0 Prohibition of oyster taking by nonresidents, 10,
esepti yos e lao10
Iexpn, So6. Piohibitions, county, 11-12.
'Iwnod17, 12. Quebee, index, 67-62.,
law'o IM, 2.asecial licenses, 17.
O. reind lenses, details resident licenses, 16-19, 86-87.
b~tr, 12-16. details of isue, 29-80.
sned in 1902 and 1903, 35.hstr,119
sned in 1902 and 1908, 87.
objects, cg8om-amW s objects, 86-37.
Sfdisehthainginste 1ae 12 Residents, unnaturalized foreign born, 84.
C; prohibited from camping and fir hunting, 11. SsarsRvr 7
r prohibited from hunting, 11-12, 1d-15. September law in Maine, 18.
4 prohibited from planting oyses 249-W. Seters' permits, 41.
prohibited from taking oysters, 10, 48-49, Severn River, 17.
North'Carolina, Ourrituck County law, 11. Siak boxes, 11, 16--17.
*early laws, 10, SS. ink-box licenses, 87.
Index, 56-64. 'Small game, 18.
law of 1768, 10, 33. Sneak-boat licenses, 37.
summary 21. .South Carolina, Beaufort County, 18.
wild fowl restrictions, 11, exemption, 80.
Worth Dakota, exemption, 30, Sk high license, 15.
index, 60-61. index, 66-68.
sfummary, 21. sQunmary, 21.
Northwest Territories, index, 59-65. Bouth Dakota, county license, 18.
summary, 22. index, 61-63.
Nova Scotia, exemption, 31. sumary, 21.
Index, 57-66. South River, 17.
Summary, 22. *iSpecial licenses in Quebee, 17.
-Number of big game licenses, S9M). Special privileges, 42.
Number of licensed hunters in certain.States in Spokane County court deoislon, 46.
190M 38-89. State v. Carson, 49.
Oahu license, 18. Staten Island, N. Y., 18.
Objects of licenses, 3-41.. Statistics, comparison, 87-41.
Illinois, 34. Statlstics of former yesrs, number, 40-41.
New Jersey, 33. Sudan, 58-54.
nonresident, 338.Summary of license legislation, 19-28.
North Carolina, S8. Susquebanna Plats, 16-17.
resident, "63. Tables:
Ohio, index, 64-6 Details of Issue of nonresident licenses, 26-29.
Bummary, 21L Details of issue of resident licenses, 29-30.

licese, 193,8 inex 6365
No eiet I iree fo bi gndm 10,3. su mr
,Nonr set licese issue in10 n 93 ahntnC u tM x m tos 1
M. Wes Jese Gam Prtctv Asoitin 2
Resde t lin es sue in ,90 and193,37
Wes Vigna onylcne 3
Te n se ,e e p i n,3 .e e p i n 0
index,~~~~ 556.ide,6-5
su m a y,21 2*. u m ar /
T r n v a ,l c ns s 4 i d f wl a l l c n e n I d a a 8
U n n t u r li ed o re g n b o r re id nts 34 l c e n e l w s i n a ry a n 1 -1 . i
Utahinde, 65
summary,~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 22 e;rci nNrhCrlnI
Virini, at or reetrae ithIndans 1. Vrgiia,11
eal iene 0 isosn idx 1

okyu r%

3 1262 084916641