. Breeder and sportsman. Horses. JUNE 30, 1900] tttje $veetoev m&> §voxtematt parently have relied on caBes not directly in pointâthat is, cases not involving the validity of game laws, but caseB which wonld, at most, have a bearing merely by analogy. Of all the cases cited by the learned judge, only two, it seems, are game law cases, these beiDg Ex parte Enapp, 69 Pac. K., 315, a California case, and Geer vs. Connecticut, already referred to. All the other cases are on entirely different questions not involving the exercise of the police power. The Enapp case is not good law, and is o
. Breeder and sportsman. Horses. JUNE 30, 1900] tttje $veetoev m&> §voxtematt parently have relied on caBes not directly in pointâthat is, cases not involving the validity of game laws, but caseB which wonld, at most, have a bearing merely by analogy. Of all the cases cited by the learned judge, only two, it seems, are game law cases, these beiDg Ex parte Enapp, 69 Pac. K., 315, a California case, and Geer vs. Connecticut, already referred to. All the other cases are on entirely different questions not involving the exercise of the police power. The Enapp case is not good law, and is opposed by decisions of other Slates on the same point; and is directly opposed by the doctrine laid down in the Geer case, which latter is of controlling authority on the question. Besides, the Enapp case was on a different ordinance and a different state of facts. Most sportsmen are pleased with the decision in the Geer case, because it was the deliberate expression of opinion by the highest courts of the land on questions whioh had been in dispute in regard to the power of a 8tate to pass a game law; and it was supposed that it forever disposed of most of the questions arising in regard thereto. It seems, therefore, somewhat remarkable that Judge Ross should have used that case to sustain his position, when, as already staled, its hold- ings are directly opposed to the conclusions reached by him. It is true that the Geer case was a case involving the power of a State to pass and enforce a law preventing the transpor- lion beyond the limits of a State of game killed in the State; but in reaching a conclusion sustaining the law, the court entered into a most learned and able discussion of the origin of such laws and the right and property in game generally, and held that the game belonged to all the people of a 8tate in common, and that the Government of the State ex- ercised a truBt for its people in protecting such game, and that it could make such regulations in regard th
Size: 2433px × 1027px
Photo credit: © Library Book Collection / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1880, booksubjecthorses, bookyear1882
