Penalties. —Every law should provide a penalty for its infringement; but the penalty should not be out of all proportion to the offense. It is just as unwise to impose a fine of one dollar for killing song-birds for food as it is to provide for a fine of three hundred dollars. A fine that is too small fails to impress the prisoner, and it begets contempt for the law and the courts! A fine that is altogether too high is apt to be set aside by the court as "excessive." In my opinion, the best fines for wild life slaughter would be as follows:
| Shooting, netting or trapping song-birds, and other non-game birds, each bird | $5 | to | $25 |
| Killing game birds out of season, each bird | 10 | to | 50 |
| Selling game contrary to law, each offense | 100 | to | 200 |
| Dynamiting fish | 100 | to | 200 |
| Seining or netting game fishes | 50 | to | 200 |
| Shooting birds with unfair weapons | 10 | to | 100 |
| Killing an egret, Carolina parakeet or whooping crane | 100 | to | 200 |
| Killing a mountain sheep or antelope anywhere in the U.S. | 500 | ||
| Killing an elk contrary to law | 50 | ||
| Killing a female deer, or fawn without horns, each offense | 50 | ||
| Trapping a grizzly bear for its skin | 100 |
For killing a man "by mistake," the fine should be $500, payable in five annual instalments, to the court, for the family of the victim.
Whenever fines are not paid, the convicted party should be sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor at the rate of one-half day for each dollar of the fine imposed; and a sentence at hard labor should be the first option of the court! Many a rich and reckless poacher snaps his fingers at fines; but a sentence to hard labor would strike terror to the heart of the most brazen of them. To all such men, "labor" is the twin terror to "death."
The Introduction Of A Bill. —Much wisdom is called for in the selection of legislative champions for wild-life bills. It is possible to state here only the leading principles involved.
Of course it is best to look for an introducer within the political party that is in the majority. A man who has many important bills on his hands is bound to give his best attention to his own pet measures; and it is best to choose a man who is not already overloaded. If a man has a host of enemies, pass him by. By all means choose a man whose high character and good name will be a tower of strength to your cause; and if necessary, wait for him to make up his mind. Mr. Lawrence W. Trowbridge waited three long and anxious weeks in the hope that Hon. George A. Blauvelt would finally consent to champion the Bayne bill in the New York Assembly. At last Mr. Blauvelt consented to take it up; and the time spent in waiting for his decision was a grand investment! He was the Man of all men to pilot that bill through the Assembly.
Very often the "quiet man" of a legislative body is a good man to champion a new and drastic measure. The quiet man who makes up his mind to take hold of "a hard bill to pass" often astonishes the natives by his ability to get results. Representative John F. Lacey, of Iowa, made his name a household word all over the United States by the quiet, steady, tireless and finally resistless energy with which for three long years in Congress he worked for "the Lacey bird bill." For years his colleagues laughed at him, and cheerfully voted down his bill. But he persisted. His cause steadily gained in strength; and his final triumph laid the axe at the root of a thousand crimes against wild life, throughout the length and breadth of this land. He rendered the people of America a service that entitles him to our everlasting gratitude and remembrance.
After The Introduction Of A Bill. —As soon as a bill is introduced it is referred to a committee, to be examined and reported upon. If there is opposition,—and to every bill that really does something worth while there always is opposition,—then there is a "hearing." The committee appoints a day, when the friends and foes of the bill assemble, and express their views.