mm'A 
 
 ..S../C 
 
 ;3.ik.L 
 
 A± 
 
 Author. 
 
 Title 
 
 Imprint. 
 
 36 — V1Z72-^ QPO 
 
"^1^ 'Tev-rL Tor vi . 
 
 Committee on the Territories, 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 Thursday, March 20, 1906. 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock n. m., Hon. Edward L. Hamil- 
 ton (cliairman) in the chair. 
 
 The Chairman. The meeting; of the committee was called this 
 morning for a hearing on House bill 11040, known as the automatic- 
 gun bill. Are any gentlemen here ready to address the committee in 
 favor of the bill?' 
 
 STATEMENT OF ME. G. 0. SHIELDS, PRESIDENT OF THE LEAGUE 
 OF AMERICAN SPORTSMEN AND SPECIAL AGENT OF THE NEW 
 YORK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
 
 Mr. Shields. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I come here to plead 
 the cause of the birds and the wild animals. I am not here to speak 
 for any business or persomil interest in this, but we are here to ask 
 you to enact a law for the protection of the birds and wild animals. 
 
 Mr. Leo YD. Before you proceed, give your name, residence, and 
 occupation, and why you are here. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I am president of the League of American Sports- 
 men, and I live in New York City. 
 
 Mr. Lloyd. You are here in the interests of that league? 
 
 Mr. Shields. In the interest of the League of American Sports- 
 men and of a number of other bodies, whose names will a]:»pear as we 
 progress, in documentary evidence. I want to make a personal ex- 
 planation in this connection. I want to tell you gentlemen that I 
 liave been devoting nearly all my life to the work of game preserva- 
 tion. I am on record in 1878 as having petitioned the Ohio legisla- 
 ture to enact a law to protect the wild pigeon, and I am on record as 
 far back as 1872 as trying to get Congress to enact a law to protect 
 the butfalo. I have been working in the interest of the:^ various 
 species of wild animals and birds from 1865, from the time Pcame out 
 of the Army in the civil war, up to to-day. Of course, in the mean- 
 time I have had to make my living as I went along, but I have been in 
 this work in the interests of wdlcl animals and birds for nothing; have 
 never got a cent of salary out of it; have paid my own expenses all 
 the time, and have put in the work of the League of American Sports- 
 men $15,000 of my OAvn money. That is my record in this matter, 
 l)riefly. 
 
 I am accused by certain gun people — I will not say whom — of doing 
 this work against the automatic shotgun from malicious motives. It 
 has been said ; and I have letters on file that have been written to cer- 
 tain people, trying to oppose this automatic-gun bill in various 
 places, to the effect that I am doing this because the gun makers and 
 
 O' -^ X a" 
 
690 
 
 ^^ O .V 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. -^V-"^ ^ aO^ o\ 
 
 aimnunition makers withdrew their advertising from Recreation 
 Mao;azine, which I published up to a year ago. If any of you are 
 interested in knowing the facts about that, 1 have a copy of that 
 magazine here containing the advertisements of the Union Metallic 
 Cartridge Company, the Winchester Arms Company, and the Rem- 
 ington Arms Company, the people who are opj^osing us to-day in our 
 effort to secure laws to prohibit the use of this automatic gun. They 
 are all directly or indirectly interested in the measure which is now 
 before you. 
 
 This magazine contains half-page advertisements of those three 
 corporations and of a number of others in the gun and ammunition 
 business. That issue also contains a severe criticism, a severe arraign- 
 ment, of the so-called '' pump gun,'' the repeating shotgun, Avhich 
 fires six shots in ten seconds, and perhaps in less than that. 
 
 I inaugurated in that issue a very strenuous crusade against that 
 weapon, and I have been fighting it from that day to this. I have 
 been making rapid progress, as will appear here from documents, in 
 creating public sentiment against the use of these murderous weapons,, 
 not only the automatic shotgun, but the repeating shotgun as well. I 
 have all this time been conducting a crusade against the reckless 
 slaughter of game with any weapon, whatever it may be, and have 
 been urging the enactment of laws to jirohibit the sale of game; to 
 prohibit the shipment of game from one State to another; to limit 
 the number of l)irds which a man may kill in a day; and I think you 
 all know that great progress has been made on all those lines. All 
 the States have enacted laws looking to -the preservation of their 
 game, and some of them more stringent and drastic laws than others. 
 The sentiment of the people of the United States, and of Canada as 
 well, is to-day raj^idly crystallizing in the direction of giving to the 
 wild animals and birds of this country every possible show for their 
 existence and of limiting the time of killing them and the number of 
 those that may be killed. These things must be done, or in a few 
 years there will l)e no game left in this country for anyl)ody to hunt. 
 
 We can easily see that the time is not far distant when the only 
 living wild animals and birds will be; those on preserves, either 
 public or private, and such game as may* overflow on to the surround- 
 ing territory. These are the conditions as you will find them, those 
 of you who live ten or twenty years from now. Every State in this 
 Union is spending money on its game. The gun and ammunition 
 people — I say this without any unfriendly feeling — are placing on 
 the mark^ all the time guns some of which are very cheap, others 
 very expensive and beautiful, which naturally create in the mind of 
 the' man who has one of them an anxiety to go out and kill things. 
 Ammunition is being made and sold at a rate that is simi)ly alarming. 
 
 In this connection I want to read you an extract from a letter 
 from William T. Hornaday, of the New York Zoological Society, 
 one of the most conscientious men in the world; a man who never 
 goes at anything carelessly; a man famous as a student of game 
 protection and of nature." He wrote this letter to Representative 
 Lacey a few days ago; it is dated March 24. Mr. Lacey handed it 
 to me this morning. It relates to the measure that is under consider- 
 ation by Congress to enact a law to protect migratory wild fowl. 
 An opinion has been requested of the Attorney-General as to whether 
 Congress has the right to do that. 
 
691 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 3 
 
 This letter reads as follows : 
 
 New York Zoological Park, 
 
 Xetc Yorh; March 2J,, 1906. 
 Hon. John F. Lacey, 
 
 Hoiixe of Rciifcsciitatircs. ]\'ashiii(it(jii. D. C. 
 
 'My Dear ^Mr. Lacey : I am delighted to know that the two game preserva- 
 tion measures in which we are interested are in such favorable condition, and I 
 beg you to accept thi'ough me the thanlcs of the zoological society for your 
 ap]tearance before the Conunittee on Agriculture in recommendation of the fence 
 appropriation for the buffalo herd. The item seems in a fair way now to go 
 through. If it does it will mean the consummation this year of a proposition 
 in which a great many Americans are interested. 
 
 In offering a buffalo herd to the National Government as a gift the zoological 
 society seeks to demonstrate the interest of private individuals in the fate of 
 our most conspicuous American (piadruped. We feel that it is the duty of 
 individuals to do something toward the establishment of the series of buffalo 
 herds that should be established very soon. 
 
 It is very gratifying to know that the game-refuge bill is in a fair way to 
 become a law. 
 
 We earnestly hope that the opinion of the Attorney-Cieneral in regard to the 
 constitutionality of a migratory wild-fowl act against spring shooting will be 
 as all wish it to be. In view of the enormous annual outlay for firearms to be 
 used against game birds it is im]»ossible to have too much legislation in behalf 
 of the birds. I have recently l)een assiired by a gun inventor and manufacturer, 
 who has every oppoi'tunity for obtaining information, that every year'thei'e are 
 sold in this country about 500.000 shotguns, of which about 850,000 cost $5 or 
 less. He also stated that in his opinion there are now in use in this country 
 about 10,000,000 shotguns, in which about 1 ,000,000,0<:)0 cartridges are used 
 every year. Of these 700.000.000 are manufactured in the factories and the 
 number is therefore well known. The other ."{OO.OOOjOOO are shells that are 
 reloaded. 
 
 In view of these figures, is it then possible for laws for the protection of bird 
 life to be too numerous or too stringent? The outlook for twenty years hence 
 really is appalling. 
 
 Yours, very truly, W. T. Hornauay'. Director. 
 
 Mr. Hornaday is the author of the best natural history that has 
 ever been written of American wild animals and birds. 
 
 The New York Zoological Society, at its annual meeting- last Jan- 
 uary, passed this resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the New York Zoological Society condemns the use of the 
 automatic shotgun as unsportsmaidike and highly destructive to bird life, and 
 that the society urges on the legislature of this State the passage of a law pro- 
 hibiting is use. 
 
 The Camp Fire Club, of New York City, at its last meeting pre- 
 ceding January 17, 1900, the date of this letter, adopted the following 
 resolution : 
 
 Rcsnlrcd. That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
 the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgiin in the hunting of 
 birds or other game, and we respectfully request the New York legislature to 
 enact a law prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purpose. 
 
 The New York Association for the Protection of Fish and Game 
 is one of the oldest game protective associations in the United States 
 and numbers amoug its members such men as Grover Cleveland, Hon. 
 Perry Belmont, Hon. Warner Miller, Hon. Robert B. Roosevelt, 
 William P. Clyde, J. Coleman Drayton, Charles R. Flint, Gen. J. 
 Fred Pierson, Gen. Warren M. Plealy, and F. Augustus Schermer- 
 
69 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 horn. At its meeting October 13, 1905, this resolution was unani- 
 mously adopted : 
 
 Resolved, That this association emphatically eoudemus and protests against 
 the introduction and xise of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
 birds or other game, and we respectfully request the New York legislature to 
 enact a law prohibiting the use of such weaixm for such purpose. 
 
 I have also a letter from the secretary of the Boone and Crockett 
 Club, of New York. I think all of you know of that club, and per- 
 haps some of you are members of it. Its membership is limited to 
 100 and is full, and it has a large waiting list. The Boone and 
 Crockett Club, at its annual meeting held in' New York City, Janu- 
 ary 13, 190G, passed the following resolution : 
 
 Resolved, That the Boone and Crockett Club hereby condemns the use of the 
 automatic shotgun in the hunting of birds and other game as contrary to the 
 ethics of good sportsniansliip. and requests its ofiicers and execiUive committee 
 to endeavor to have its use prohil)ited by law in the State of New York and 
 elsewhere. 
 
 I have here also a letter from Mr. J. Bissell Speer, secretary and 
 treasurer of the Lewis and Clark Club, of Pittsburg, Pa., a society 
 whose object is the protection of fish and game, whose membership 
 list is fiill, which has among its membership many men of national 
 and even international reputation. He writes me under date of 
 January 19, 1906, as follows: 
 
 It affords me pleasure to state that at its last meeting the Lewis and Clark 
 Club unanimously adopted the following resolution condeiiming the use of the 
 automatic gun : 
 
 ''Resolved, That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
 the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hiuiting of 
 birds or other game, and we respectfully reipiest our legislature to enact a law 
 prohibiting the use of such weapon for such jjurposes." 
 
 Of the 4.J men ]iresent, not one raised a dissenting voice. The Lewis and 
 Clark Club is a luiit in opposing the use of this gun, so far as I am able to learn. 
 
 The National Association of Andubon Societies includes 35 State 
 associations, with an ..aggregate membership of some 50,000 men and 
 women, all of wdioin are bird lovers and bird students. This associa- 
 tion passed a resolution in substantially the same language as those 
 which I have read. I will not take up 3'our time to read that. 
 
 Here is a communication from the Women's Pennsylvania Societ}' 
 for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, dated Philadelphia. Feb- 
 ruary 10, 1906, which reads: 
 
 To the officers of the New York Zoological Society. 
 
 Gentlemen : At a stated meeting of the board of managers of the Women's 
 Pennsylvania Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, held on the 9th 
 ultimo, a motion was made and carried : 
 
 "That this society send $25 to the New York Zoological Society, to be used 
 in the war which it is now waging against the automatic shotgun." 
 
 Furthermoi'e, the following resolution was unanimously passed : 
 
 " Resolved, That this association emphatically condemns and protests against 
 the introduction and use of the so-called automatic shotgun in the hunting of 
 birds or other game, and respectfully requests the Pennsylvania legislature to 
 enact a law prohibiting the use of such weapon for such purpose." 
 
 I have here also a letter signed by William Dutcher. president of the 
 National Association of Audubon Societies, which, as I say, has done 
 an immense amount of Avork in the direction of obtaining legislation 
 
693 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 5 
 
 for the jMirpose of protectino- animals and birds, addressed to Mr. 
 ^^'illianl T. Hornaday, in which he says: 
 
 My Dear Mr. Hornaday : It is with much surprise that I learn through your 
 communication of even date that certain persons are claiming that the National 
 Association of Audubon Societies for the Protection of Wild Animals and Birds 
 is in favor of the use of automatic or pump guns and consequently is not in 
 favor the passage of laws to prevent the use or sale of such firearms. 
 
 The statement >vas made publicly that the secretary of this asso- 
 ciation had declared himself opposed to any expression or legislation 
 against the automatic gun. |Keading:J 
 
 I beg officially to state that the National Association of Audubon Societies is 
 absolutely opposed to either the manufacture, sale, or use of such firearms, and 
 therefore hopes that the meritorious bill introduced by the New York Zoological 
 Society will become a law. 
 
 This bill jn'ohibiting the use of the automatic gun was introduced 
 into this Congress and into the legislatures of a dozen States at the 
 instance of the New York Zoological Society and the Audubon so- 
 eieties. Mr. Dutcher continues: 
 
 1 beg further to add that any statement contrary to th(^ above in effect 
 is unauthorized. 
 
 This society is working for the i»reservation of the wild birds and game of 
 North America, and it sincerely should not stultify itself by advocating the use 
 of one of the most potent means of destruction that hiis ever been devised. 
 You are at liberty to use this communication cither imltlicly oi' privately. 
 I am. \'ery siiicevcly, yours, 
 
 V/iLLiAM Dutcher, P rex id rut. 
 
 I have before me the report of the Ontario game commission for 
 the year 1905, in which, in regard to automatic guns, the commission 
 made this recommendation : 
 
 Both last year and the year before the board recommended that the use of 
 these guns be forbidden, and legislation was introduced last year for that pur- 
 pose. A most vigorous lobby was. however, conducted in tlie interest of the 
 manufacturers against the bill, which was ultimately killed. 
 
 ]Mr. PowER.s. Has any State as yet passed a bill prohibiting the use 
 of this gun ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. No, sir; and I will explain briefly that the bill was 
 introduced last year in about four or five States and got on the) 
 calendar in one State only. In the others it was killed in committee 
 by the manufacturers of the gun and others in interest. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. Has this bill ever been introduced into the Territorial 
 legislatures of New^ Mexico and Arizona, or has any similar bill been 
 introduced ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. I think it was in one of them, but I am not sure of 
 that. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. PTas it ever been considered by the Oklahoma Terri- 
 torial legislature? 
 
 Mr. Shields. I do not know about that. If it has somebody here 
 will probably know of it. Last year it was considered in Pennsyl- 
 vania, Xew Jersey, Arkansas, and Kentucky. Those are the only 
 States I know of. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. But it was not enacted into law in any of those 
 States? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Xo. sir; it was killed by the manufacturers of the gun 
 in committee. In fact, they say so; and there is no doul)t about it. 
 
694 
 
 6 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 The Chairman. How did they do that? 
 
 Mr. Shields. By going- there and telling the members of these com- 
 mittees that the use of this gnn should not be prohibited. T was un- 
 able to attend any of these meetings for good and sufficient reasons. 
 
 The Chairman. They had public hearings before these State com- 
 mittees, had they ? 
 
 Mr. vShields. Yes, sir; but the burden of organizing delegations to 
 go to the meetings would have fallen on me. I have said in the out- 
 set that I have been doing everything I could. 
 
 Mr. Moon. Your purpose is to protect the game ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Moon. Do you not think it is better to make a short season, 
 and designate in each season the kind of game that should be killed, 
 and how much each man may kill? 
 
 Mr. Shields. These things »re being done and have been done for 
 years past, and I have been largely instrumental in securing such 
 laws. . These things have all been done. They are merely stej)s in 
 the right direction. 
 
 Mr. Moon. What difterence does it make to the bird what kind of 
 gun he is killed with, if there are only so many of them to be killed ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. I will come to that directly. 
 
 The Chairman. Are you familiar w^ith the decision of Judge Hoss, 
 of the United States circuit court of northern Califoinia ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 The CHAiR:\rAN. Before you finish will you make some comment on 
 that decision? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; I will: but I should now like to read this 
 recommendation by the board of game commissioners of Ontario, con- 
 tinuing from where I left off: 
 
 A most visorons lobby was. however, comlucted in the hiterest of the manu- 
 facturers against the l>ill, which was ultimately killed. 
 
 The board reconnnends most emphatically that the use of these weapons be 
 prohibited. Special attention has been given to the investigation of state- 
 ments made by the opponents of the measure last sessicai, to the effect that 
 sportsmen generally approve of the gun. are opposed to its prohibition, and 
 nre of opinion that it is not an unduly destructive or unsportsmanlike weapon. 
 Almost every witness who has appeared before the board has been questioned 
 and many have been spoken to in iirivate, with the result that not a single voice 
 has been raised in snpixn't of it. 
 
 It is objectionable as being unduly destructive, because with little or no 
 practice it can be used as rapidly as a i'ei>eating gun in the hands of a highly 
 trained expert, and it is especially destructive where a bevy of partridge or 
 quail do not all take wing at the same instant. 
 
 The most conclusive objection, however, against this giui is that by its use 
 large numbers of birds are wounded which would otherwise escape untouched. 
 The difficulty of estimating the range of birds aimed at is well known, and 
 where the sjiortsman can slioot four or five times by merely pressing the trigger, 
 the temptation to continue shooting is irresistible, the result being that one, 
 two, or even three shots are discharged at a distance too great for killing, and 
 numbers of birds are hit which are able to escape for the time, only to die 
 within a day or two. 
 
 That is from the official report of the Ontario game commission, 
 and I can show you a report of the Pennsylvania State game com- 
 mission in almost the same words. They recommend the prohibi- 
 tion of the use of this automatic shotgun and for the same reasons 
 stated there. 
 
695 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 7 
 
 Mr. Caprox. Has there l)een any law enacted in the Province of 
 Ontario prohibiting the use of that gnn ^ 
 
 Mv. Shields. The bill was defeated there last winter in their com- 
 mittee, and it is up now again with, they say, a fair chance of passage, 
 in spite of the opposition ; but the Provinces of Manitoba and Alberta 
 have enacted laws against this gun, and they are on the statute books 
 there to-day, so that the gun can not be used there legally. 
 
 The Chairman. Assuming that this is a highly destructive gun, 
 the Chair would suggest that you discuss what may be the constitu- 
 tional, legal (questions relating to its use. 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; I will come to that shortly. 
 
 Mr. JNIcKiNNEY. And I wish Mr. Shields would take up the dis- 
 cussion in some way of the question why one particular arm should 
 be ])rohibited in its use, rather than that we should have a general 
 prohibition of the use of any arm. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I will say in answer to that question that, personally, 
 I would l)e glad to see a law enacted to proliil)it the use of any gun 
 on God's earth in hunting any wild animal or bird for at least hve 
 years to come. 
 
 Mr. IIkjoins. In other words, you would i)rohibit absolutely the 
 use of firearms for the hunting of any kind of game ^ 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; for at least five years. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. And make that general througlKwt the country? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir ; but such laws are impossible to-day. There 
 are 1(),000,()00 shotguns in use in this country, and it would be prac- 
 tically inq^ossible to secure the enactment of laws in any State pro- 
 hibiting the use of firearms for any such length of time. A number 
 of States have passed laws prohibiting the shooting of certain 
 species of game for three years at a time, and with very beneficial 
 results. When I say I would prohibit all shooting for five years I 
 am speaking for the Audubon people and for the nonsporting and 
 bird-loving people of this country. There are hundreds of thou- 
 sands of men and women who do not shoot and who do not approve 
 of the shooting of birds or animals. Personally I like to go out and 
 kill a bird occasionally; but I would deny myself that right for 
 five years or for the rest of my natural life if it would result in 
 restoring the birds of the country in such numbers as they were here 
 twenty years ago. 
 
 There are several decisions of the United States Supreme Court, 
 and I can furnish you copies of them any day that you may want 
 them, from the Dej^artment of Agriculture, in which the United 
 States Supreme Court has lu>ld that the game in each State belongs 
 to the peo|)le of the State in their sovereign capacity; that the taking 
 or killing of that game is a privilege which the State may extend to 
 the people; that that privilege may be limited and abridged in any 
 ^\ay that the State sees fit to abridge it. 
 
 Mr. Powers. That is as to the privilege of killing? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; and of selling. 
 
 Mr.«PowERS. We have that in my State. 
 
 Ml-. Capron. That is true always, acknowledging that the author- 
 ity of the State covers this entire subject. I should like to ask you 
 if you do not think that the Territorial leo'islatures of the several 
 Territories have absolute jurisdiction over this subject so far as the 
 Territories are concerned, barring Alaska ? 
 
696 
 
 8 ° AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I am glad you broiioht that question up. We are 
 here askiuc: you to prohibit the use of this gun in the Territories. 
 You are making States so fast that you will have probably only one 
 Territory left at the end of this session. 
 
 The Ciiair:man. Not so very fast. 
 
 ]Mr. Shields. The prospect is that only one will be left at the close 
 of this session. Alaska is one of the greatest bird-breeding grounds 
 for migratory wild fowl on this continent. A great deal of our 
 supply must come from Alaska. There are millions of other birds 
 that breed in Alaska that do not come south, and especially I am 
 speaking of the eider duck, which does not come south of Alaska, and 
 which is very abundant there. It is used by the people for food, and 
 its use as food is legitimate under certain circumstances. The Ter- 
 ritory of Alaska is destined to be settled up in the next few years, 
 and there will be an immense onslaught on the vvild game of that I'er- 
 ritory. If for no other reason, we should like to have you pass this 
 act to protect the wild life of Alaska. 
 
 Mr. Capron. This laAv will not reach Alaska at all, if it is passed. 
 
 Mr. Shields. Then I wish to ask for an amendment to make it 
 apply to Alaska. We want Alaska included in it. It is the most im- 
 portant part of this country for the preservation of bird life. 
 
 The Chairman. Assuming that evervbodv is quite in sympathy 
 with you in the preservation of birds and game, the question arises 
 now whether we might lawfully jirohibit the use of certain kinds of 
 arms. It strikes me it is a highly important element in this matter. 
 
 IMr. Shields. The Supreme Court has ruled that any necessary 
 regulation may be made to protect game. There is a case in the 
 Supreme Court 
 
 Mr. Reid. Let me ask you just on this point. It is within the 
 power of the State to ])rohibit the destruction of game, or to prescribe 
 the seasons during which it may be killed, and to make a discrimina- 
 tion between ditl'enMit kinds of guns which may be used at the time 
 wdien they may be killed ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Reid. Now, take the hunting season ; would it be constitutional 
 to sa}^ that you might hunt with one gun and I be j^rohibited from 
 hunting with another? 
 
 Mr. Shields. It would take two or three hours to read all the de- 
 cisions of the Supreme Court of the United States on that very point. 
 One of them is this: In 1852 the legislature of Maryland passed a 
 law that only one kind of rake should be allowed in taking oysters 
 from the waters of that State. It provides that this rake should 
 have only a certain number of teeth, and that the rake should be of 
 only a certain size. Some people undertook to use larger rakes in 
 taking oysters. The State arrested them and the offenders were con- 
 victed. If you can limit the number of teeth in a rake to be used in 
 taking oysters, you can limit the number of shots that a gun may fire 
 for killing game. 
 
 Here is another : 
 
 In the supreme court of Minnesota. State v. Rodman (58 Minn., .393, 400). 
 
 The preservation of such animals as are adapted to consumption as food or to 
 any other useful purpose is a matter of public interest, and it is within the 
 ]ioiiee power of tlu> State, as the rejiresentative of the people in their united sov- 
 ereignty, to make such laws as will best preserve such game. 
 
eg!? 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 9 
 
 • This decision was quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of 
 the United States in the case of Geer v. Connecticut (IGl U. S., 
 519, 533), and so was made a part of the decision of the Supreme 
 Court rendered in that case. 
 
 Mr. Reid. I woukl like to ask you if the same principle is not in- 
 volved in the legislation where the size of the meshes of nets is pre- 
 scribed ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Reid. xVlso in case of those laws prohibiting- the destruction of 
 fish with dynamite? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir; it is the same principle. And I am positive 
 that had the case in which Judge Ross rendered the decision spoken 
 of been carried to the Supreme Court of the United States he would 
 have been reversed, a dozen similar cases having been carried up there 
 with that result. 
 
 The Chair^ian. Will you specify those cases? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Doctor Palmer, of the Biological Society, is prepar- 
 ing a list of those cases. I will get advance j^roof sheets of that list 
 within a few days and will send copies to the committee. 
 
 The Chair^iax. Do any of these provisions aft'ect the constitutional 
 right of the people to keep and bear arms? 
 
 Mr. Shields. That does not relate to guns used in hunting game. 
 The States ha^'e the right to regidate 
 
 The Chairman. I see that your bill makes the having of the gun 
 prima facie evidence of a crime. 
 
 Mr. Shields. Ilere is a letter which I want to read to you, from 
 the Department of AgTiculture. 
 
 United States Department of Agriculture, 
 
 Bureau of Biological Survey, 
 Washiiigto)i, D. V., Nooembcr ,.'.?. IDO.j. 
 Mr. G. O. Shields, 
 
 Editor Shields Magazine, 1269 Broadivay, New Yorfc. 
 My Dear Mr. Shields : Ou returning to the city after an absence of several 
 weelvs I find your letter of November 11, reiiuesting a list of the States that 
 have laws regulating the gauge of guns that may be used in hunting birds. 
 
 Nearly all the States and the provinces of Canada have some legislation of 
 this kind, usually prohibiting the use of swivel giuis, or those which can not be 
 fired from the shoulder. The following lists will show how general this legis- 
 lation is : 
 
 (1) States which prohibit swivel guns (usually for hunting water fowl): 
 Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New 
 Hampshire. North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
 Washington, West Virginia. Wisconsin, British Columbia, Manitoba, New 
 Brunswick, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Ontario, unorganized Terri- 
 tories, Yukon territory. 
 
 (2) States which prohibit use of guns other than those fired from the 
 shoulder: Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Iowa, Loui- 
 siana, Maryland. Nebraska, New Hampshire. New Jersey, New York, North 
 Dakota. Ohio, Oregon. Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Wash- 
 ington, Wisconsin. Wyoming. 
 
 The CHAiR:\rAN. They limit the size of the guns. 
 
 Mr. Shields. They limit the use of guns to such as can be held 
 up and fired from the shoulder. Anything too heavy for that is 
 prohibited. 
 
 Mr. McKixNEY. As I understand, you do not object to any other 
 kind of a gun than this automatic shotgun. You do not object to 
 the repeating rifle or the double-barreled shotgun vv the single- 
 
698 
 
 10 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 barreled shotgun; l)iit it is the automatic shotgun to which you object? 
 Mr. Shields. The automatic is the only one mentioned in this bill ; 
 but I gave notice five years ago to all concerned that we must pro- 
 hibit the use of all repeating rifles and shotguns if we are to have 
 any birds or animals left in this country. I have told these gentle- 
 men in half a dozen hearings we have been in that within a few years 
 we shall have to ask Congress and the States to pass laws prohibiting 
 the use of all repeating shotguns and rifles. We might just as well 
 face this matter. jNIr. Hornaday has also stated for years past that 
 the time must come when all this must be done, or else we must sub- 
 mit to having our forests and our fields become as barren of wild 
 animal and bird life as these Capitol grounds to-day. You may 
 occasionally see a robin here, or a bluebird, but if the use of all kinds 
 of guns is not curtailed to the great-est possible extent the time will 
 come when you will never see a wild bird anywhere except on pre- 
 served ground. This letter from the Agricultural Department also 
 gives the following : 
 
 (3) states which prohibit guns larger than No. 10 gauge: Alaslca, Arizona, 
 Michigan. Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio. Utah. 
 
 Now, gentlemen, if you can limit the size of the hole in the barrel 
 of a gun which may be used in hunting birds you can certainly limit 
 the number of cartridges it may carry. [Reading:] 
 
 (4) States which prohibit guns larger than No. 8 gauge: Tennessee, Vir- 
 ginia. Ontario, Quebec. 
 
 (5) Provinces which prohibit the use of the automatic gun: Manitoba, 
 Northwest Territory. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. So far as you are concerned personally you are op- 
 posed to the use of any sort of a gun for the killing of game ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. I am willing to assent to that, and personally I am 
 in favor of it. 
 
 JNIr. HiGGiNS. That is what you would do if it was left to you? 
 That would prohibit what is known as the double-barreled shotgun? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. Will you not comment, please, on the difference be- 
 tween the quantity of game that can be killed by the ordinary double- 
 barreled shotgun and the quantity that can be killed by the gun this 
 bill discriminates against? 
 
 * Mr. Shields. I ^^'ill answer that by a letter from Mr. Arthur Rob- 
 inson, Avhich reads as follows : 
 
 DaNX & ROGINSON, 
 
 'Neiv York, March 21, 1D06. 
 Mr. G. O. Shields, 
 
 126!) Broodiriin. New York City. 
 Dear Sir : Regarding the use of the automatic shotgun, would say that I am 
 a member of two southern ducking clubs, wliere these guns are used very ex- 
 tensively. I have seen a flock of ducks come into a blind where one. two, or 
 even three of these guns were in use, and have seen as many as II shots poured 
 into a single tlock. 
 
 If there had been but three men ^^•itll double-barreled guns there 
 would have been only six shots. 
 
 Mr. HiGGiNS. They could have reloaded. 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes; but the birds would go 100 feet while the men 
 were getting the empty shells out, reaching after the new shells, put- 
 
699 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 11 
 
 ting them in. closing the gun, and getting it to their shoulder. 
 (Reading:) 
 
 We have considerable poaching on one of these clubs, the territory being so 
 extensive that it is impossible to prevent it. We own 00,000 acres, and these 
 poachers. I am told, nearly all use the automatic guns. They frequently kill 
 six or eight ducks out of one tiock, first taking a raking shot on the water, and 
 then getting in the remainder of the magazine before the flock is out of range. 
 In fact, some of them carry two guns, and are able to discharge a part of the 
 second magazine into the same flock. 
 
 Fire five shots out of the first gun : drop it ; pick up the other, and 
 get in part of that magazine before the birds get 75 yards aAvay, 
 which is about the limit of killing range. This letter continues: 
 
 As I told you the other evening, I am not so much against the gun when in 
 the hands of gentlemen and real sportsmen, but, on account of its terrible pos- 
 sibilities for market hunters, I believe that the only safe w;iy is to abolish 
 it entirely, and that the better class should be willing to give up this weapon 
 as being the only means of putting a stop to this willful game slaughter. 
 Very truly, yours, 
 
 Arthur liocixsox, 
 
 I have here a number of cojjies of this letter, and I will be glad to 
 give you gentlemen the addresses of these clubs and give you a chance 
 to communicate with the people on the gromid, so that you can get 
 at all the facts. 
 
 Now, Mr. Marshall will read you a letter from the President of the 
 United States bearing on this subject, and in self-defense 
 
 Mr. Cole. Have you any from Grover Cleveland ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. No, sir; I have never taken the matter up with him. 
 
 Mr. Cole. He is mighty good authority. 
 
 Mr. Shields. In January last I called on President Roosevelt in 
 order to get an expression from him as to whether he favored the use 
 of this automatic gun or not. The President received me and I 
 talked with him. I said, " Mr. President, I have come to talk with 
 you about the automatic shotgun and tell you I am fighting it.'' He 
 said, " I know it, and I am Avith you heart and soul.'' I said, " That 
 is good; and no^v may I quote you to that effect?'' He said, " Yes. 
 Sit down, I want to talk with you." We sat down and talked over the 
 matter for half an hour. Here is the interview as I wrote it out. I 
 sent him a typewritten copy of it and wrote him : 
 
 Mr. President, here is a copy of the interview that I bad with you. If I 
 have not quoted you (•ori-ectl,v, please say so. If you do not wish me to use the 
 inti-rview at all, say so. If there are any elianu'es you would like me to make in 
 it please make tlieni. 
 
 Mr. HiGGixs. I understand that the President has hunted mountain 
 lions ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HioGixs. Do you suppose that he woidd trust himself out in 
 the woods vrithout a repeating rifle, with lions all around him? 
 
 ]\Ir. Shields. I think he would. He is a thorough sportsman and 
 ii dead shot with a rifle. 
 
 I have never had any trouble in Ivilling any game on this continent 
 with a single shot. Sometimes I have not done it, but if a man is a 
 careful hunter and a careful shot, he can kill any animal in this coun- 
 try with a single shot. It may be necessary sometimes to give an 
 animal a second shot, or even more, to keep him from running too far. 
 
12 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 Ijiit there is no dangerous animal on this continent except the grizzly 
 bear, and in hunting these it is well to have a repeating rifle. But 
 that is the only aninuil on this continent that will ever attack you. I 
 vrill read yon what the President said. I sent him a typewritten copy 
 of this interview, as I said. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Mr. Chairman, may I make a suggestion? I do not 
 think that the name of the President should be introduced in this dis- 
 cussion, particularly in the way in which it has been introduced. I 
 think it is a question of propriety, of a gentleman placing himself 
 upon record as being in contradiction with the President of the 
 United States in respect to some proj^osed legislation, and I suggest 
 to the gentleman on the other side that nothing should l)e said, be- 
 cause it invites a statement in this controversy which I hoped might 
 be obviated. 
 
 The Chairman., There is a rule which prevails, I think, in commit- 
 tees as well as on the floor of both Houses, that criticism should not 
 be indulged in by either House of the other. But I knoAv of no rule 
 in relation to comments upon the Executive within reasonable bounds. 
 If any member of the committee knows of any such rule, I would like 
 to have him mention it. 
 
 Mr. Moon. No, sir; there is no such rule as to the President. He is 
 free property. Just'hit him as you want to. 
 
 The Chairman. A good deal must be trusted to the sense of pro- 
 priety which animates all gentlemen in this matter. Mr. Shields is 
 presenting his view in relation to this matter, and I suj^pose the gen- 
 tlemen on the other side will want to present their view. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. If we do so, we will do so with extreme reluctance, 
 having expressed our desire to avoid it, as it involves a question of 
 veracity between the President of the United States and the gentle- 
 man who is addressing the committee. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I am perfectly willing to withdraw Avhat I have 
 said and not to present the letter to you, if the gentlemen on the 
 other side will not say anything about it and will refrain from read- 
 ing their letter from the President. 
 
 The Chairman. If you gentlemen by mutual agreement desire to 
 strike out all reference to the matter, I suppose that might be done. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I simply started to read this in self-defense. 
 
 (Informal discussion and conversation between the members of 
 the connnittee followed.) 
 
 Mv. Shields. I believe the question has not been quite settled as 
 to whether I should read my letter from the President and the inter- 
 view with him. If the committee desires to have it left out, I am 
 quite willing to leave it out. 
 
 Mr. Lloyd. I think you have got to a point where you had better 
 read it. 
 
 The Cliatr^nfan. AVith that understanding, will the committee 
 agree to let the other side have as much time this morning as has 
 been consumed on behalf of the bill? You have talked fiftv minutes, 
 Mr. Shields. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I had started to say that I sent the President a type- 
 written copy of this interview, and I told you what I had written 
 him. 
 
 The interview referred to bv Mr. Shields, as presented by him, is 
 here printed in the record, as follows : 
 
701 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 13 
 
 PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT IS WITH US. 
 
 I called on President Koosevelt at the White House. January 17, and had a 
 long and interesting talk with him on the subject of game protection. In the 
 course of our convei-sation the I'resident expressed himself as heartily in sym- 
 pathy with our campaign against the automatic shotgun. 
 
 I asked him if I nnght quote him to that effect, and he replied that I might ; 
 that he regarded that weapon as a serious menace to the bird life of this 
 country, and that he is heartily in favor of the enactment of laws to prohibit 
 its use in the hunting of birds and wild animals. He said we had lived through 
 the time when the Iniffalo and the antelope were everywhere on the plains ; 
 when great herds of elk could be found in almost any range of mountains west 
 of the ^lississippi ; when mountain sheep traveled in great bands, even down 
 in the Bad I.ands of the upper Missouri Kiver. In those days we did not think 
 it would ever Ite necessary to restrict the killing of game. We did not realize 
 then that wild animals could be photographed alive in their native haunts. 
 
 We have lived to see all these conditions changed. The head hunters, the 
 skin hunters, and the thoughtless sportsmen have swept these herds of noble 
 wild animals off the earth, or have decreased their numbers to such an extent 
 that all we can do now is to preserve and perpetuate the reuniant. 
 
 We have seen the prairie chicken and the wild turkey extei'minated in certain 
 States where they were once abundant. We have seen the quail and the wood- 
 cock and the ruffed grouse decimated, until but pitiable remnants of these noble 
 species remain. Hereafter thouglitful sportsmen should bend their utmost ener- 
 gies to the preservation of what is left, and where shooting can be permitted at 
 all it should be with a view to the preservation of species rather than to the 
 making of big bags. 
 
 He said he wanted the sportsmen of this country to understand that they 
 have his hearty sympatliy in their efforts to save our wild animals from ex- 
 termination, and that he will do all in his povs-er to aid in this good work. 
 
 In his latest book, ** Pastimes of an American Hunter," the President says : 
 
 "True sportsmen, worthy of the name, men who shoot onlv in season and in 
 moderation, do no harm whatever to game. The most objectionable of all game 
 destroyers is. of course, the kind of game Imtcher who simjtly kills for the sake 
 of the record of slaughter, who leaves deer and ducks and prairie chickens to 
 rot after he has slain them. Such a man is wholly obnoxious; and, indeed, so 
 is any man who shoots for the inirjiose of establishing ;i record of the quantity 
 of game killed. To my mind this is one unfortunate feature of what is other- 
 wise the admirably sportsmanlike English spirit in these matters. The custom 
 of shooting great bags of deer, grouse, (piails, and pheasants, the keen rivalry in 
 making such bags, and their publication in sportsmen's journals, are symptoms 
 of a spii-it which is most unhealthy from every standpoint. It is to be earnestly 
 boped th;it every American hunting or fishing club will strive to inculcate among 
 its own members, and in the minds of the general public, that anything like an 
 excessive bag, any destruction for the sake of making a record, is to be severely 
 reprobated." 
 
 The President replied in this Avise: 
 
 (Mr. Shields here read a letter from President Roosevelt, as fol- 
 lows:) 
 
 [Personal.] 
 
 My Dear Shields : I am sorry to say that I must ask you. under no circum- 
 stances, to put me in quotation marks : for though you give the sense of what 
 I said, you in no case give the exact language used, so do not try to quote me in 
 the first person or to use quotation marks. You can state that my views are 
 substantially as you have quoted them, but don't actually quote them. 
 Sincerely, yours, 
 
 Theodore Roosevelt. 
 
 The CHAiR:\rAN. The President understood the purpose for which 
 Yon wrote him, and the purpose for which you proposed to use his 
 reply ? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Most emphatically. I asked him when I went in and 
 told him what I came for, Ydiat his feelino^ was in the matter, and he 
 
703 
 
 14 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUIf. 
 
 said, " I am with you in sentiment," and I said, "' May I quote 3'OU in 
 print? '' He said, '' Yes," and he sat doAvn and talked with me and 
 gave me this interview for publication. • 
 
 Mr. Capron. Would it not be an entirely different thing, giving 
 3'ou his views for discussion in a magazine and giving you something, 
 if he had knoAvn that it would be brought before a legislative com- 
 mittee of Congress for the purpose of influencing legislation ? Do you 
 think he would then have given you that expression of his opinion? 
 It is everything in the bearing which it has in this connection, in my 
 judgment. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I have no desire to place this matter 
 
 Mr. IvLEPrER. Under the rules of the committee could we not, after 
 we hear the reading of these letters, strike out that portion of the 
 hearing that refers to anything that the President may have said? 
 
 Mr. Cole. Did he give you any authority in that letter to use it in, 
 this connection? 
 
 Mr. Shields. Most emphatically. Here is his letter. Pass it 
 among you; you can all look at it [olfering letter to the committee]. 
 He says that I have reported the substance of what he said, and that 
 I might go ahead and use it. Here are several copies of the inter- 
 view as finally used, not in the first person, and not quoted. What 
 the President objects to is that when I sent this out to some of the 
 newspapers some of them edited it liberally, put it in quotation marks, 
 and put it in the first person, which I did not do. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. C. N. BOVEE. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the couimittee, I ap- 
 pejir here as a lawyer to speak for the Winchester Eepeating Arms 
 Company against the pending bill. The reputation and character of 
 my client, I think, calls for no explanation from me. It has done 
 more to advance the name of American gun inventors and American 
 manufacturers of firearms than any other concern in the world. It 
 is j^erhaps the most reputable manufacturer of firearms in the world. 
 
 I regret that JNIr. Shields has seen fit to bring in the name of the 
 President of the United States in this discussion. I think this com- 
 mittee could have disposed of this question without involving him 
 in a question of veracity between him and the gentleman who has 
 just spoken, but, in view of what has been stated, I will now read the 
 entire letter of the President of the United States to this gentleman, 
 addressed to him after the interview -which he has referred to, and 
 after the publications of the press, and I ask you gentlemen to give 
 attention particularly to what the President has said, in view of 
 what the gentleman has said as to the statement made by the Presi- 
 dent that he Avas not to quote him as having made the statements. 
 
 Th3 White House, 
 W(isJii)igtoii, Fehruanj 19, 1906. 
 Sir : It ai^pears that yon have purported to g\\e an extended interview with 
 me in quotation niarlis, puttins: my expressions in tlie first person so as to malve 
 me responsible for both the thought and the language. This is inexcusable on 
 your part. At the time you called upon me and I talked over informally with 
 you the question of the preservation of game and of wild life generally in its 
 various aspects, I told you explicitly that while you. could state that I was in 
 hearty general accord with your efforts, you were not to try to quote my lan- 
 guage, and subsequently I wrote you repeating this. As a matter of fact, in 
 
T'OS 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 15 
 
 what purports to be these quotations, you in no ease give the exaet hmguage 
 that I used. By pretending thus to give it, and by what you omit, as well as 
 what you insert whieh I had not said, you convey on certain ])oints an entirely 
 false impression, and you leave me no alternative but to explicitly repudiate 
 j-Qur statement, which I hereby do. Had you been content to c-ay that you gave 
 the general sense of what I said you would have done what you were authorized 
 to do. But when you attempted to give my exact words you not only did what 
 1 explicitly told you you should not do. but you used language which I explicitly 
 told you was in no case accurate. Not one single sentence you quote is as I 
 said it. Some of the sentences are sheer inventions. Others are inventions iu 
 part, and some of the things I said were omitted. It is unnecessai'y to char- 
 acterize such conduct on your part. 
 
 Yours, etc., Theodore Roosevelt. 
 
 Mr. (4. O. Shields, 
 
 1269 Broadway, Room 601, New York. 
 
 Now, gentlemen. I reiterate what I have stated before, that I would 
 not have iiitixxhiced that letter in this discussion if the o-entlenian did 
 not invite it, because I do not think that private citizens seeking to 
 advocate legislation in which they are interested have the right to 
 involve the President in a (luestion of veracity in a controversy of 
 this character. But the letter becomes pertinent and material upon 
 this inquiry as an illustration of the sources from which some of 
 these statements have emanated. The gentleman comes here and 
 frankly admits that he w'ould prohibit the use of any shotguns 
 and any rifles whatever, and that great industries like the Remington 
 Arms Company, great industries like the Winchester llepeating 
 Arms Company, employing, as that institution does, over 4,000 em- 
 ployees, and spreading the great reputation of the United States as 
 manufacturers of the best quality of products of this kind, promoters 
 of inventors, should be closed up for five years and their industry 
 destroyed. Why, gentlemen, it is monstrous ! The proposition is 
 preposterous ! 
 
 The gentleman knows of that decision of this judge of the United 
 States circuit court. Judge Ross. He knew of it before he came here, 
 and he knew that the constitutionality of an act of this character 
 would be presented in a decision rendered by a Federal judge in 
 this country in California upon precisely the point involved here, 
 and yet, knowing of this decision and knowdng that this inquiry 
 would be made of him as to whether this bill was constitutional, he 
 comes here and indidges in general remarks to the effect that the 
 Suj^reme Court of the United States would have reversed Judge 
 Ross if that case had been taken up; and yet he can not cite a case, 
 although the chairman of the committee asks him to particularize. 
 Of course he can not cite a case, because there is no such case. Of 
 course States have a right to limit the amount of game which can 
 be killed and also to place a limitation as to the time within which 
 game shall be killed, and within such limitations the Supreme Court 
 of the United States has held such laws constitutional. But here 
 is a bill determined by a competent authority to be unconstitutional 
 after a fidl and exhaustive hearing, and did the gentleman entertain 
 the views of this matter that he claims to entertain, it would have 
 been a very simple matter to bring here the decision of the Supreme 
 Coiu't of the United States to which he has referred, because the 
 decision of Judge Ross was rendered in 1000. He could have gotten 
 to the Supreme Court of the United States if he was so deeply inter- 
 ested in the principle which he advocates. 
 
16 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN". 
 
 The Chairman. Now, I assume, Mr. Bovee, that 3011 are also 
 speaking in the interest of the industries which you represent? 
 
 Mr. Bovee. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. And are you in favor of what we all regard as a 
 very laudable object, that of the preservation of game? 
 
 Mr. Bovee. Undoubtedly so, sir. And these industries are all 
 interested in the protection of the game. If the game is to be killed 
 off of the face of this continent, the business of the manufacturers of 
 the Winchester rilie and the AVinchester shotgun and all the other 
 arms that they manufacture — and it is the same with the Remington 
 Arms Company — is going to be swept away in that respect. They 
 believe in legitimate limitation as to the number of quail and par- 
 tridge and deer which may be killed, and that within the season. 
 They are in favor of all such limitations. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. Do we understand by your statements that Mr. 
 Shields has submitted to this committee what the President said in 
 quotation marks? 
 
 Mr. Bovee. I understand only what the record shows. I have 
 read the letter from the President to Mr. Shields protesting against 
 the publication of the article which has been submitted to the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. It is not claimed, as I read it, that it is in quotation 
 marks — what the President said. 
 
 Mr. Eeid. It does not purport to be quoted at all. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. No; it does not purport to be quoted. It says at 
 the end of the interview : 
 
 111 his latest book. Pastimes of an American Hunter, the President says — 
 
 and then proceeds to give a quotation from a book written by the 
 President. That is in quotation marks, of course. 
 
 Mr. Bovee. I will show you the publication that the President 
 referred to. Plere is a publication in the New York Sun of Friday, 
 February 10, lOOG. The letter of the President was written after 
 that publication. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. I did not want the committee to be misled in this 
 matter. 
 
 ]Mr. Bovee. I do not wish them to be misled, and I thank you for 
 calling it to my attention. 
 
 Mr. McKiNNEY. Is it not your understanding that he quoted the 
 President as being favorable to his view ? 
 
 Mr. Lloyd. The President says that in the letter which he read. 
 
 Mr. Bovee. He does not say that he is favorable, as I understand, 
 to this bill or to any proposition of this character. 
 
 Mr. McKiNNEY. He says that he is favorable to the preservation 
 of game. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Here is the publication that the President had refer- 
 ence to, reported in the New York Sun of February 10, 1900. The 
 letter of the President is dated February 19, 190G, and is as follows: 
 
 [From the Sun, Friday, February lO, 1906.] 
 
 President to sport.s)iie)i — Pleads for ■preservation of toikl animal life — Auto- 
 matic shotgun condemned as threatening extermination of birds — Case of the 
 elk and huffalo — Killing for sake of record unsportsmanlike. 
 
 President Roosevelt's views on the subject of game protection will be touched 
 upon in the next issue of Shields's Magazine. G. O. Shields, who is president 
 of the League of American Sportsmen, called on the President at the White 
 
AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 17 
 
 lluuse on January ]7. and the conversation turned upon the automatic shotgun. 
 When he saw what views the President held, Mr. Shields asked permission to 
 quote him. The President's reply, as given by the magazine, was as follows: 
 
 '■ V>y ;!ll means. You may say I regard that weapon as a serious menace to the 
 bird life of this country, and that I am heartily in favor of the enactment of 
 laws to prohibit its use in the hunting of birds and wild animals. Shields, you 
 tiud 1 have lived through the time when the buffalo and the antelope were 
 everywhere on the plains; v.hen great herds of elk could be found in almost 
 any range of mountains west of the Mississippi : when mounf.iin shee]) trav- 
 eled in great bands, even down in the Bad Lands of the upper Missouri River. 
 In those days we did not think it would ever be necessary to restrict the killing 
 of game. We did not realize then that wild animals cotild be photogra.phed 
 .•I live in their native haunts. 
 
 " We have lived to see all these conditions changed. The head hunters, the 
 skin hunters, and the thoughtless sportsmen have swept these herds of noble 
 wild animals off the earth or ha\e decreased their numbers to sitch an extent 
 that all we can do now is to preserve and perpetuate the remnant. 
 
 "We have seen the jirairie chicken and the wild turkey exterminated in cer- 
 tain States where they were once abundant. We have seen the quail and the 
 woodct)Ck and the ruffed grotise decimated until but pitiable remnants of these 
 noble species remain. Hereafter thoughtful sportsmen should bend their utmost 
 "uergies to the preservation of what is left, and where shooting can be per- 
 mitted at all it should be with a view to the preservation of species rather than 
 vo the making of big ])ags. 
 
 ■■ ^Ir. Shields, I want you and all the sportsmen of this cotintry who are work- 
 ing with you to understand that you and they have my hearty sympathy in 
 your efforts to save our wild aniiuals from extermination, and that 1 will do 
 all in my power to aid in your work." 
 
 In his latest book. Pastimes of an American Hunter, the President says : 
 
 " True sportsmen, worthy of the name, men who shoot only in season and in 
 moderation, do no harm whatever to game. The most objectionable of all game 
 destroyers is, of course, the kind of game butcher who simply kills for the sake 
 of the record of slaughter, who leaves deer and ducks and prairie chickens to 
 rot after he has slain them. Such a man is wholly obnoxious; and, indeed, so 
 is any man who shoots for the intrpose of establishing a record of the quantitj 
 of game killed. To my mind this is one unfortunate feature of what is other- 
 wise the admirably sportsmanlike English spirit in these matters. The custom 
 of shooting great bags of deer, grouse, quail, and pheasants, the keen rivalry in 
 making such bags and their publication in sportsmen's journals are symptoms 
 of a spirit which is most unhealthy from every standpoint. It is to be earnestly 
 hoped that every American hunting or fishing club will strive to in<'ulcate among 
 its own members and in the minds of the general public that anything like an 
 excessive bag. any destruction for the sake of making a record, is to be severely 
 reprobated." 
 
 Mr. Powers. Did I not understand Mr. Shields correctly to say that 
 while he did not in his magazine put what the President said in quo- 
 tation marks, as the language of the President, he sent the interview 
 as prepared by him out to newspapers, and the newspapers changed 
 it and published it in that way, putting that language in quotation 
 marks ? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. I understand that to be the fact ; but it is a significant 
 fact that in two newspapers in New York City the quotations from 
 the President are in the same form — in the Xew York Sun and the 
 New York World. 
 
 The Chairman. After all, while we all of us have a very high re- 
 gard for the President, and for his opinions on all questions, is this 
 question of the construction of what he said and wrote to Mr. Shields 
 at all vital in this controversy? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. I do not think so; I think it ought to have been left 
 out entirely. 
 
 The Chairman. And ought we not to get down now to the question 
 of the bill? 
 
 A s— 06 2 
 
18 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN". 
 
 Mr. BovEE. I think so. The interview with the President is sub- 
 stantiall}'^ as it appears in the New York Sun. There was but one 
 interview with the President of the United States, and the Presi- 
 dent repudiates it, and there is the report of that interview to which 
 he undoubedly has reference [referrino; to nowspaixn- article]. 
 
 The CiiAiR:\rAX. Do you doubt that he is in favor of the preserva- 
 tion of game? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. He is; certainly. 
 
 The Chairmax. And I have no doul)t that all the members of this 
 conunittee and the people of the country generally are in sympathy 
 with Mr. Shields's efforts in that direction. The question now is as 
 to the constitutionality of this measure, and if it may be construed 
 to be constitutional, whether it would be desirable to report such a 
 bill. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir. Now. let me say that this l^ill applies to four 
 Territories. The criticism of one of the members of the committee 
 clearly pointed to the fact that in each of these Territories they have 
 a legislative body competent to pass upon a bill of this character. If 
 a bill of this character is constitutional, and can be made a law. 
 there is a legislative body for that purpose in the Territory, and the 
 question naturally arises wdiy is not that the place to go with such a 
 bill, where representatives from the different parts of these terri- 
 tories, having full and particular knowledge of the conditions exist- 
 ing in the different parts of the Territory, coming as they do from all 
 the different parts and ramifications of that Territory, could deter- 
 mine whether such a bill is practical and necessary? 
 
 Mr. Powers. In all the acts relating to Alaska we find that Alaska 
 is designated not as a Territory, but as " the district of Alaska." It 
 is not in any of the laws or acts passed concerning it referred to as a 
 Territory. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir. I do not think this bill had in contemplation 
 Alaska. This bill was presented to the legislature in Oklahoma, and 
 it has been defeated. It is a fact that no State in the Union has 
 passed this bill. It has been attempted to be passed in the State of 
 Massachusetts, and has been defeated: in the State of Connecticut 
 twice, and defeated; in the State of New York once, and never en- 
 acted into law. It was submitted last year, and it was submitted on 
 the same arguments that have been made here to-day, and w^as never 
 reported out of the committee. It was defeated in the State of New 
 Jersey twice. In the State of Pennsylvania it Avas presented three 
 times, and never enacted; in the State of Michigan once, and de- 
 feated ; in the State of Wisconsin once, and defeated ; in the State of 
 Minnesota twice, and defeated ; in North and South Dakota, and de- 
 feated, and perhaps North and South Dakota, on the question of the 
 preservation of the sage hen or the partridge, might be said to be 
 deeply interested in an enactment of this character. In California it 
 was presented and defeated, in the State of Kansas it was defeated, in 
 Missouri it was defeated, in the State of Arkansas it was defeated, 
 and in the State of Kentucky it was defeated. 
 
 The Chairman. It was defeated in committee 
 
 ' Mr. BovEE. It was never enacted into a law, after several presenta- 
 tions in many of these States, on the same arguments that have been 
 made here to-day. And, gentlemen, we ought not to be misled by the 
 enthusiastic expressions on the general subject of the preservation of 
 
707 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 19 
 
 game emanating- from such societies as the Audubon Society, of Xew 
 York City, and as the Zoological Society or the Museum of Natural 
 History, of New York. Of course, you can go abroad and get peti- 
 tions that would reach from here to the Pacific Ocean on the general 
 subject of the preservation of game, and there are thousands and 
 thousands of people who would not have a bird killed or an animal 
 killed : they would not have a moose or a deer killed, or any form of 
 game killed, at any time, or any birds whatever. There are hundreds 
 and thousands of people who entertain views of that character, and 
 you could get all sorts of letters. 
 
 But here is the practical question: It concedes the right of a man 
 to use a repeating rifle which will shoot 13 times Avithor.t taking the 
 gun from the shoulder. It concedes the right to use a revolver which 
 will shoot any number of times without lowering tlie hand, just by 
 pressing the trigger. It concedes the right to use any self-loading 
 gun, or any gun of any sort, except this form of gun which has been 
 invented by this gentleman over there, Mr. Browning, and which is 
 in the course of manufacture by the Remington company. If you 
 are going to prohibit an advanced firearm like this, why not prohibit 
 the Remington rifle and the Winchester repeating rifle, which shoots 
 9 times, and why give a gentleman who is exterminating moose and 
 deer and caribou a preference over the man who is using a shotgun? 
 And in respect to the shotgun, the double-barreled gun is not pro- 
 hibited. They do not infringe on ^^our right to use a double-barreled 
 shotgun. Say that a bunch of quail starts up and a man shoots one 
 there and one there. That is two shots, ^^^lere are the quail by 
 that time? Are they sitting there on a branch waiting for him to 
 shoot again ? 
 
 Mr. Caprox. General! V, when some of us slioot. tliev are. [Laugh- 
 ter.] 
 
 j\Ir. BovEE. I can give you an illustration from an interesting let- 
 ter written by a local sportsman out in the West: Three of them 
 went out to shoot jack rabbits. Two of them had the noxious and 
 vicious automatic guns. One of them was on one side ajid one on 
 the other of this sportsman, and he had his old Parker gun, shooting 
 2 shots, and he describes in the most interesting way how these gen- 
 tlemen showed how they had nothing to do but throw up the gun and 
 pull the trigger. Well, he got the jack rabbits with his old Parker 
 gun, and these gentlemen had the pleasure of shooting into the air. 
 And it goes without saying that the sight can not be held on a bird, 
 and that sight nuist be taken at each bird separately, almost as 
 though the gun was renmved from the shoulder, because the recoil 
 will throw it off. 
 
 ]Mr. Reid. AAliat is the advantage of the gun? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. I do not know what the advantage is in the gun. It 
 is supposed that it is an advance in the line of the manufacture of 
 firearms. 
 
 Mr. -Reid. It ought to have some useful purpose if it is patented. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes. sir: and I presume that it has. It carries five 
 shots. 
 
 Mr. Powers. Have you ever examined into the laws of the State 
 of Maine in this regard? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. No, sir. 
 
70^ 
 
 20 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 Mr. Powers. We have found that the limitation upon tlie time 
 within which game may be killed and the limitation upon the amount 
 of game that can be killed, rather than any legislation as to the 
 weapon, has been able in our State to increase the amount of game, 
 and there is much more there than there was ten years ago. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Certainly : that is constitutional and is the practical 
 manner of reaching it. For instance, you can limit a man to 20 
 quail a clay. You can only kill two deer in the State of Maine, and 
 that within a very short space of time each year. And it is a signifi- 
 cant fact that in ]Maine, which has more deer than any other part of 
 the country, they never have attempted to pass this bill, !)eeause 
 they knew that that State was full of sportsmen, and it woidd be 
 killed the minute that it was presented. 
 
 Mr. Powers. Maine is the finest game preserve in the world. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir; it is the finest game preserve in the Avorld. 
 They kill hundreds of moose and caribou and deer every year; and 
 yet in that State of sportsmen, where shotguns and rifles are used, 
 these gentlemen have not seen fit to ask the legislature to pass this 
 bill. 
 
 Now, as to the constitutionalitv of this bill. Let us take the case 
 of Mather r. Marshall (reported in 102 Fed. Rep., 323) in the United 
 States circuit court for the northern district of California. Judge 
 Ross, one of the best judges on the circuit bench, decided that case. 
 
 The ])etitioner was convicted in the justice's court of Marin County, 
 Cal., of a violation of the provisions of an ordinance enacted by the 
 board of supervisors of that countv, declaring in its seventh section 
 that— 
 
 Every person wlio. in the county of Marin, shall nse any kind of a repeating 
 shotgun or any kind of a magazine shotgun for the piu'pose of Ivilling or de- 
 stroyitig any kind of wild duck, geese, quail, partridge, doves, or any other 
 birds shall be .guilty of a misdemeanor — 
 
 and by its eiglith section j^rescribing that — 
 
 Any i)erson violating any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a 
 niisdenieanor and. upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by imprisonment 
 in the county jail for not less than ten days or more than thirty days, or pay a 
 fine of not less than twenty dollars or more than two hundred dollars, or by 
 both such fine and imprisonment. A .iudgment that the defendant pay a fine 
 may also direct that he be imprisoned until the iine is satisfied, specifying the 
 extent of im])risonment. which must not e^cceed one day for every dollar of the 
 fine. U02 Fed. Rep.. 823.) 
 
 So that you will see that the precise question arose in that case in 
 respect to the ordinance. That was the only question before the 
 court on which the man was brought up on habeas corpus. What 
 did Judge Boss say ? I quote from his language : 
 
 But surely, in a case like the one at bar, where there is no question of the 
 public safet.v. public health, or public morals, and where the prohibited act is 
 in no respect malum in se, the absolute ])rohibition of the use of one's own 
 property on his own land can not be held to be a reasonable exercise of the 
 police power, when regulations will plainly attain the end desired by the legis- 
 lation in question. In the present instance, what was the end sought? Mani- 
 festly only the prevention of the taking or killing by one perscMi of more than 
 2.") quail. ]>artridge. or grouse in any one day : for section ,3 of the ordinance 
 provides : " Every person who, in the county of Marin, shall take, kill, or de- 
 stroy more than 2.3 quail, partridge, or grouse in one day, and every person 
 who, in the county of Marin, shall have in his possession in any one day more 
 
 I 
 
TO 9 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 21 
 
 than :-*•*> qu;!ii. pari ridiic m- grouse, shall be ,i,'iiilty oT a iiilsdcnicaiior." That 
 eud is .iust as effectively accomplished without the obnoxious section as with it. 
 It is wholly innnateriai to that object whether the s])ortsnian or hunter use a 
 repeating or iiia^'azine ^un or a double or single barreled gun. When the limit 
 is readied he has to stoi> shooting or incur the penalty prescrilied. And the 
 opportunity of detection is just as great in the one case as in the other. No 
 valid reason is therefore ix'rceived, and none has been suggested by counsel, 
 why the owner of a repeating or magazine shotgmi should be prohibited from 
 using it. and the owner of the e(iually if not more effective doulde-barreled 
 automatic-ejector shotgun be free to use it. 
 
 He means the Parker gnu, and guns of that character. 
 
 The Chairmax. In that case the defendant killed the game on his 
 own land ? I have not read the decision clear through. Does it make 
 any difference? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. I do not think there is an}^ distinction on that point. 
 It was in respect to the legislation itself. 
 
 The Chairman. The court makes no distinction ? 
 
 Mr. BoYEE. No, sir. You will see that it has been declared uncon- 
 stitutional. Further he says : 
 
 The equal iirotection of the laws to which every person is. by the provision 
 of the Constitution of tlie United States above quoted, declared entitled, woidd 
 ind<'cil he a vain thing if such discrinnnatory legislation was sustained by the 
 courts. If section 7 of the ordinance in question is valid, no reason is perceived 
 wiiy the process of eliuunation may not Ite extended l)y next prohil>iting the 
 nse of the double-barreled automatic-ejector shotgun, next all but nnizzle-load- 
 ing guns, and so on until the i)opgun ouly is permitted to be used upon wild duck, 
 geese, quail, iiartridge. grouse, doves, or other birds in JNIarin Country. Laws 
 enacted in the exercise of the jiolice power, whether by a nmnicipal corpora- 
 tion acting in itursnance of the laws of a State, or by a State itself, must be 
 reasonable and are always subject to the ]>rovisions of both the Federal and 
 ^tate constitutions, and they -'.re always siibject to judicial scrutiny. (Yick 
 Wo r. Hopkins, IIS T'. S., 372; Forster r. Scott. 13(i N. Y.. r)77. ."iS-i ; Toledo. 
 Wabash & W. R. I?.. Co. r. Citv of .T:icksoiiville, (m 111.. ::]7 ; Ex parte Whittwell. 
 OS Cal.. 73.) 
 
 Further on he says : 
 
 Enough has iieen said, T think, to show that the section of the ordinance 
 under which the petitioner was convicted and is imprisoned is miconstitutioual 
 and void. 
 
 Mr. Reti). If I note it clearly the ordinance prohibited the killing 
 of more thnn a certain number of birds? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. No, sir; the law prohibited the use of the automatic 
 shotgun. The petitioner was convicted in the justice's court of 
 Marin County, Cal., of the violation of the provisions of an ordinance 
 enacted by the board of supervisors of that county, declaring in its 
 seventh section that '' Every person, who, in the county of Marin, 
 shall use any kind of a repeating shotgun, or any kind of a magazine 
 shotgun," and so forth. 
 
 Mr. Reid. They put it on the broad ground? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes, sir; that legislation of that character was contrary 
 to the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. Will you allow me to ask you a question ? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Certainly, sir. 
 
 Mr. Klepper. Suppose there was no limitation there as to the num- 
 ber of birds that one could kill in a day, do you think tlie court would 
 then have decided as he did ? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Undoubtedly so. That was simply an illustration of 
 the practical way in which game birds could be preserved, just hj 
 
22 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 imposing a limitation as to the number of quail to be killed in a day, 
 and also that they must be Ivilled within a certain season. 
 
 Mr. IIiGGiNS. There is no question, is there, about the constitu- 
 tionality of the law that prevents the killing of more than a certain 
 number of quail in a day? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. No. sir; the Supreme Court of the ITnited States has 
 passed on that. There can not be any doubt about it. Now, in the 
 headnotes of this case, which is. of course, a concise digest, it says: 
 
 A county ordinance making it a misdemeanor to use any kind of a repeating 
 shotgun or any kind of a magazine shotgun for the purpose of Ivilling or destroy- 
 ing any kind of wild duc-k. geese, quail, partridge, doves, or any other birds, 
 is in conflict with the fourteenth amendment of the (Constitution of the United 
 States. 
 
 Where the manifest jiurpose of a county ordinance is to prevent the taking^ 
 or killing by one person of more than 2r» quail, partridge, or grouse in any one 
 day. it is not a reasonable exercise of its police power to pi'ohibit its killing, 
 within such limit, by the use of a repeating shotgun or magazine gun. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Bovee. Mr. Shields in the course of his re- 
 marks called attention to certain laws of certain States and to cer- 
 tain decisions regulating the bore and the weight of the gun. 
 Now, if you may regulate the bore and weight of a gun why ma}^ 
 you not regulate tlie number of shots that may be fired by a gun? 
 It struck me that that was an important point suggested by Mr. 
 Shields. 
 
 Mr. Bovee. I do not know that the legislation to which he has 
 called attention has ever passed the test of judicial scrutiny. 
 
 The Chairman. I understood Mr. Shields to cite some decision. 
 
 Mr. Shields. On various points, but not on that. But as a» 
 matter of fact those cases have come up. Tn those States regulating 
 the bore of the gun and regulating the use of swivel guns those 
 cases have gone into the courts. 
 
 The Chairman. Can either of you gentlemen cite a decision on 
 those things? 
 
 Mr. Bovee. I have stated the facts in the case of Marshall in the 
 United States circuit court, with respect to precisely this matter. 
 I know of no case where the constitutional question has been raised 
 in an act limiting the bore of a gun. I do not know that there is any 
 such legislation. It may be so, but I do not know of any case where 
 it has passed judicial scrutiny where the constitutional question has 
 been raised. 
 
 Mr. Powers. In your jn-actice before the United States circuit 
 courts — I have no doubt that it has been large — have you not found 
 that the different circuits in different States often decided exactly 
 the same questions entirely different? 
 
 Mr. Bovee. I can not recall the number of circuit judges that there 
 are. I can perhaps answer your question best by a personal remi- 
 niscence. Some years ago I had an important litigation against a 
 great Pittsburg steel concern. Park Brothers & Co. I removed the 
 case into the Federal court for defendant. Plaintiffs moved to re- 
 mand. They first went into the State court and moved to vacate the 
 order of renioval, and in the course of my investigation of that ques- 
 tion I found that many circuit courts of the United States were dia- 
 metrically opposed to each other, as has been suggested, and that the 
 weight of authority w^as in favor of removal by reason of the fact 
 that that great justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, 
 
^11 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 23 
 
 Judge ]\lillei'. of Iowa, had written a verv couviiiciuo- and strong 
 opinion in fa\()r of my contention. The question came up on a mo- 
 tiou in the State court to vacate tlu' order of removal. I succeeded 
 there in defeating the application and holding the case in the circuit 
 (oui-t. It was appealed to the general term of the Supreme Court. 
 One of the best judges that we have upon the bench wrote a 20-page 
 opinion, holding, with some of the cases in the United States circuit 
 court, that the case could not be removed. 
 
 The chief judge then presiding in the coui't wrote seven lines on the 
 bottom of that ()])inion. saying: 
 
 I do iKit cijiicur. I think that the weight of jiiUliority is in favor of the 
 reiHuval of tliis case to the United states convt. 
 
 His associates concurred with him on that subject. Undoubtedly 
 it is so. and if Mr. Shields in the we;iltli of his research has not been 
 al)le to hud an authority to the contrary of this which is here, the 
 matter of Marshall. ;ind of course with his great interest to sustain 
 a measure of this character he would have found it and brought it 
 here to you. if there had been any. the conclusion is that there is no 
 such authority. And I say that he can not put his finger on the title 
 of a case in the Supreme Court of the United States, although he 
 has had this Marshall case before him. 
 
 ^Ir. Powers. Is not this a case that would not be very likely 
 
 Mr. BovEE. He has not been able to get a legislature to pass his 
 bill. 
 
 Mr. Powers. I confess that I doubt the correctness of that de- 
 cision. I am with vou on other things, bttt I am not with vou on 
 that. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Gentlemen may differ in regard to their construction 
 of the Constitution of the United States, of course, but there we have 
 a judgment. 
 
 Mr. Caprox. I presume that is the law now ? 
 
 Mr. BovEE. Yes. sir: and you gentlemen are lawyers, and I pre- 
 sume lawyers should all bow humbly to the decision of the circuit 
 court. 
 
 Mr. Caprok. If it suits them. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. If it suits them ; yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. That is not the final judgment, you know. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. If you are going to pass this bill, then, to be perfectly 
 consistent, and if you are going to be thoroughly in harmony with 
 Mr. Shields on this matter, yoit ought to go further and stop the 
 pernicious double-barreled shotgun. You ought to legislate otit of 
 existence the repeating shotgun, and make us, when we go into 
 the woods, limit ourselves to a single-shot rifle. Perhaps some of us 
 are not as good sportsmen and shots as Mr. Shields, and perhaps 
 if we tackle a grizzly bear, if we have not a repeater we may 
 suffer the consequences; but we may console ourselves with the 
 thought that it is in the line of the protection of the game of the 
 country. And let me call your attention to the fact that the 
 game of the cotmtry is in the deplorable condition in which we 
 find it to-day, as depicted by Mr. Shields, not because these guns 
 have been in operation; it has not been because of this repeat- 
 ing self-loading shotgun that it is as we find it. That has not 
 done it. This is a new invention. It has been on the market only 
 
YX<5 
 
 24 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 a year. But it is the double-barreled shotgun that has done it 
 and the repeating rifle. This gun has not done it; and if you are 
 going to prohibit the use of this gun you want to go a step further 
 and go to the logical end. 
 
 Now, I want to repeat what I have stated before, that these nianu- 
 factiirers are in fa\"or of the protection of game; it is their very life. 
 It is to their interest, within constitutional and practical limitations. 
 Of course I do not deny your authority and your power, but I say 
 that your local legislative bodies in these Territories are better able 
 to judge of the existing conditions in their Territories as to whether 
 legislation of this character is demanded. If you are going to en- 
 croach upon their legislative prerogative and say that this thing •■h\\\\ 
 not be done in these Territories, regardless of whether they want this 
 legislation or not, why. gentlemen, how much further can you go? 
 How much further ought yon to go? If there were no legislative 
 body with power to enact laws of this character, then the situation 
 would be different. But they have such a body, constituted for that 
 precise purpose; and why should these people come here and trouble 
 Congress with such a matter, that almost every State in the Union has 
 repudiated. 
 
 I have only one further suggestion to make, and that is this : That 
 it is not fair to that gentleman who sits over there, who has devoted 
 his life as an inventor to the improvement of American mechanical 
 contrivances, and to whom the great Government of the United 
 States has issued a patent upon this gun. I want to say that the 
 Winchester Bepeating Arms Company does not manufacture this 
 gun which is aimed at here; it is manufactured by the Bemington 
 Company on the patents of that gentleman, and the Government has 
 issued a patent to him, and you are practically going to deny to him 
 the benefit of his life Avork and his study in improving American con- 
 trivances in advancing the cause of the American manufacturer; and 
 I say it is not fair. It is not fair when there is a better and more 
 practical means of protecting the game of the country by means of 
 limitation of bag and season within the limits of the Constitution. 
 In every State of the Union they have protection of that cliaracter. 
 and I think the matter should be left to those States. 
 
 I think that is substantially what I have lioen requested to ])resent. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. TOM MARSHALL. 
 
 Mr. Marshall. Mi: Chairman and gentlemen of the committee. I 
 am an employee of the Bemington Arms Company, the people that 
 manufacture this gun, and I am knoAvn as the expert shot that they 
 send out over the country to demonstrate the efficiency of the gun. 
 or the working qualities. As regards Mr. Shields, w^e are special 
 and particular friends, and we have traveled, I suppose, in a dozen 
 different States and Territories together this season, contesting this 
 bill, and I meet Mr. Shields here to-day exactly on the same grounds. 
 
 This is a business proposition. Mr. Shields is in this as a business 
 proposition, which I will explain to you in a moment. I am in this 
 as a business })roposition. as an emi)loyee of the Bemington Ai'uis 
 (Company, which manufactures this gun. 
 
 We oppose this bill for the reason that it is unjust and unnecessary 
 as a matter of game })r()tecti()n. because if they limit the bag, and 
 
AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 25 
 
 limit the number in the possession, shorten the sea-on (as ahiiost 
 every State in the Union has done), and control the sale, they have 
 the killing of game controlled to as great an extent as it can possibly 
 be done at this particular time. This, gentlemen, is along the line of 
 game protection. 
 
 My friend Shields comes here and tells you that lie has expended 
 $15,000 of his own money in the protection of game. Gentlemen, I 
 will tell you that that is absohiteh^ true; but at the same time he has 
 expended this $15,000 he has gathered in from the dear people of this 
 country by contributions $100,000. I do not know whether Mr. 
 Shields knows how much it has been himself. He tells you about the 
 organization of the Leagtte of American Sportsmen, of 20,000 mem- 
 bers. I am not a member of that association. That is the only gold 
 brick that I have not purchased. [Laughter.] But a memJber of 
 that association before the legislative committee in Albany. N. Y., 
 said : " Gentlemen, I am a member of the League of American Sports- 
 men, and it is organized just as you formerly organized the ' Buffa- 
 loes " of this country.-* He says — Mr. Shields is the great pro- 
 tective means of this organization — -" You are asked to join the 
 Leagiie of American Sportsmen, and the fee is a dollar. You write 
 on tt) Mr. Shields, send your dollar, and he says. " I am the presi- 
 dent of this association, and you are a member, and T have got your 
 dollar.' and that is all there is of it." 
 
 Mr. Shields says that it is from no financial interest th'ftt he comes 
 here and represents this bill. I cite you to the list of donators as 
 named in his ]March magazine, and that shows how in the last month 
 he has gathered together $400 from all quarters of the world, by rep- 
 resenting the automatic gun as the great destroyer of game birds and 
 animals. I am satisfied that he could get a subscription from each 
 and every one of you gentlemen if you could hear his pathetic word 
 picture, and he has amassed in the last month about $400 (carpenters'' 
 wages — better than the union scale) ; and why would he not come here 
 before you at a small expenditure to advocate this bill when it is to 
 his personal, private interest, and a matter of business remuneration 
 to him. every donation he secures? 
 
 He tells you about Mv. Hornaday, of the Zoological Gardens of 
 New York. Gentlemen, I am acquainted with this gentleman, who ap- 
 peared before a legislative committee in Xew Jersey the other day, 
 and when I said, '' Mr. Hornaday, did you ever see an automatic 
 gun? " he said "No; I never did." T said, "Did you ever see one 
 shot?" to which, of course, he said "No." But, nevertheless, Mr. 
 Hornaday went before that committee and strongly opposed it. when 
 he had never seen an automatic gun. And now Mr. Shields quotes to 
 you from Mr. Hornaday here. 
 
 I want to say to you that we use the word " automati(> " simply as a 
 trade-mark, sim])ly to designate it as different from the Winchester 
 pump gun, and the Remington guns, as a gun which we have just put 
 upon the market. I Avant to say to you that this gun is absolutely 
 under the control of the operator at all times. It is impossible to dis- 
 charge a shot from this gun without pulling the trigger. 
 
 Another thing that Mr. Shields cites to you is the punt and swivel gun, 
 which is a gun loaded with an excessive amount of powder and a very 
 heavy load of shot, and you have to rest it upon something, as you can 
 not liold it up : you tiu'n loose into a flock of birds with that : you can 
 
714 
 
 26 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 
 
 not tell what it is going to do; you may kill only one of them, and 
 you may kill all ofthem. But with the automatic gun we make but 
 the onesize of bore. He speaks of the 10-gauge gun and the 8-gauge 
 gun. We make nothing but the 12-gauge, one of the smallest size 
 used by sportsmen. It can not be loaded with anything but a certain 
 amount of ammunition. It can not be utilized in killing song and 
 insectiverous birds, for the reason that the load is such that it would 
 blow that little bird clear out of existence. 
 
 He cites you to the Boone and Crockett Club and other clubs of 
 Xew York, composed of men who are willing and able to oAvn their 
 own preserves and do own them. I was talking with a man not 
 long ago, walking down the street with him after a meeting, and I 
 said to him, ''Why do you oppose this automatic gun? '' He said, 
 *' Oh, you American manufacturers don't make anything that is fit 
 to be sold or used, anyway.'' He said, " Take my English gun, and 
 just look how fine that is; all rubbed down by hand." "But.'" I 
 said, '' our American citizens, most of them, can not stand it to pur- 
 chase that kind of a gun." He wanted an English gun, and that 
 was just the kind of ainan that I would appr<iach to unload a $700 
 giui on. and they are just the people that Mr. Shields cites to you 
 to-day. They were the j^eople that he landed for a gold brick, 
 perhaps. 
 
 Now, in regard to tlie communications from the sportsmen's asso- 
 ciations of 'this country, they have the National (xame Wardens" 
 convention, where each year the game wardens from each State in 
 the United States meet. ' They convened in St. Paul on the 24th and 
 ^oth of January this year. There were 21 States and Territories 
 represented by the game wardens and conmiissioners of those States 
 and Territories. Mr. Shields and I were present together. JMr. 
 vShields had with liim a resolution which would indorse a bill of the 
 character of this which is here to-day. That resolution never "got 
 any consideration whatever from that association. They said that 
 the way to protect game was to limit the bag and protect game 
 except in the prescribed seasons, and if you wanted to projiagate 
 game put a residence tax on sportsmen which will place a sufficient 
 amount of money in the treasury, which will enable them to go on 
 and reproduce in those States where the game has been depleted. 
 That was in this organization that I s]:)eak of. 
 
 I have a copy of a resolution introduced in the New Jersey State 
 Sportsmen's Association, the original copy, which they gave to me, 
 and I have it here, and that opposes this legislation and says that it is 
 wrong and in the wrong direction, and that it is not the way to pro- 
 tect game, and is an injustice to the sportsmen of this country, be- 
 cause if you limit the bag it makes no difference to that poor suffering 
 bird whether he is killed with an automatic gun or a muzzle-loader. 
 It makes no difference to the Territories and States. If we limit 
 the bag to 20 birds, it makes no difference whether a man goes out 
 and kills them with a bow and arrow or with an automatic gun. 
 
 This name " automatic gun " is simply a trade-mark. Mr. Brown- 
 ino; is here to-day. and if you desire to see the action of this gun we 
 will be very glad to demonstrate it to yott. Mr. Browning is also 
 the inventor of the Colt automatic riot gun, which fires 500 shots a 
 minute. That is an automatic gun, because all you have to do is, to 
 hold the trigger back, and that gun continues to shoot as long as 
 
7 
 
 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUISr. 
 
 27 
 
 Yoii hold the trigger. But this automatic shotgun is absolutely 
 under the control of the operator at all times. 
 
 I have here a short communication addressed to me from the game 
 warden of the State of Ohio, which T would like to read to show you 
 that this gun is not in tlie hands of the pot hunters or the so-called 
 game hogs. This reads: 
 
 State of Ohio Fish and Game Commission. 
 
 Columbus, Ohio, February 16, I'JiK]. 
 Mr. Tom A. ]\Iarshall. 
 
 ■US Broadwai/. Neic YorJ,-. 
 
 My Dear Mr. Marshall : I am in receipt of yours of the 14th instant, inquir- 
 ing as to our observation and experience with an automatic and repeating shot- 
 gun. Out of many linndreds of guns that our wardens liave siezed from poach- 
 ers in the State of Ohio, we ucAcr have so far secured an automati(^ sliotgun. 
 By careful reference to records, we find that the wardens have only secured from 
 lour to five repeating shotgiuis out of every hundred seized. This proves to me 
 conclusively that neither of these guns arc in the hands of the poacher and 
 game hog, as a rule. It is a fact that if all the hunters in this State were com- 
 pelled to use the repeating or automatic shotgun instead of the guns of their 
 choice, they would kill less game than is killed to-day by using such guns as they 
 are familiar with. 
 
 In regard to the protection of game, I have expressed myself in an article 
 addressed to the National Game Wardens' Association, at St. Paul, that no 
 amount of prohibitory or gun legislation will ever result in again restocking this 
 State with game birds; that the physical conditions of our country arc such 
 that it is impossible to expect such legislation to remedy it. If there is any legis- 
 lation that will remedy present conditions, limit the bag jier diem, number found 
 in possession, prohibit sale and c()ld storage, and provide a suitable home that 
 will afford protection from their natural enemies and inclemency of the weather. 
 Yours, very truly, 
 
 .J. < '. PORTERFIELl). Cllicf W'ttllfcil. 
 
 The Chairman;. What is ]Mr. Porterfiekrs position? 
 
 ]Mr. Marshall. He is the State game warden. Wlten a man goes 
 before the national game wardens of the United States, who discuss 
 and rehash and weigh these matters up, and they absolutely refuse 
 to take any action in regard to this matter, claiming and stating that 
 it is the wrong way to protect game, why should he come to you 
 people and ask you to drop into the Territories and enact this 
 legislation, when he was the father of 35 bills that were introduced 
 last year, some two or three in a State, and not one of those bills 
 became a law ? The States turned it down, and now he comes here and 
 asks you to " rake his chestnuts out of the fire " by slipping the 
 Territories in — this to make capital for him, to obtain contributions. 
 AVe say that this is wrong, and avc ask you simply to leave the matter 
 as it stands. 
 
 STATEMENT OE MR, MATHEW S. BROWNING. 
 
 The Ctiairmax. ^Ir. Browning, where is your residence? 
 
 Mr. Browning. Ogden. Utah. 
 
 The Chairman. And what is your occupation? 
 
 Mr. Broavning. I am in the ]:)atent business, the inventing of fire- 
 arms. This is the automatic shotgun. The gun is operated by the 
 recoil, and consequently I can not demonstrate it to you, as Mr. 
 ]\farshall has said, for it requires that a cartridge be fired in order to 
 throw the action back. I can show you how it does throw it back. 
 '^A^len the gun is firerl this is thrown back in this manner [indicating]. 
 
i X K-i 
 
 28 AUTOMATIC SHOTGUX. 
 
 which compresses a spring so that if it had a cartridge in the maga- 
 zine it would talce that cartridge from the magazine and put it in the 
 barrel [indicating]. 
 
 There are 4 cartridges in the magazine and 1 in the barrel, which 
 makes it a 5-sliot repeater. The gun can be fired as rapidly as a 
 person can ])ull and release the trigger. The action is the same 
 as it is in four other magazine shotguns that are now on the market. 
 You hold the trigger, with those guns, while with the left hand you 
 operate the slide; and it fires as quickly as it is closed. This slide 
 can be oi3erated on the repeater about as fast as the trigger of the 
 automatic gun can be pulled, so the repeater can be fired about as fast 
 as the automatic. But if you fire this gun as rapidly as you can, or if 
 you fire the repeating gun as rapidly as you can, or the double gun, 
 for that matter, it v.'ill be at the expense of accuracy, and you will 
 hit nothing if you shoot any of them as fast as you can. 
 
 Now, as to the killing of song and insectiverous birds with this 
 gun, there never was a gun made that T^'as less adapted for that pur- 
 pose. It requires a good ordinary load — a good game load — to 
 throw this action back [indicating]. If it is thrown back like that 
 [indicating] it does not operate. It must be thrown completely back 
 in order to operate. The cartridge that is used almost entirely in 
 shooting these small birds will not operate this mechanism at all. 
 The automatic principle — the automatic loading — limits the gun to 
 a narrow margin in cartridges. In automatic rifles and pistols a 
 difference of one grain will either make the arm fail to operate or 
 make the parts hit so hard that they are not long lived. The maxi- 
 mum load for this gun is 3^ drams and the minimum load is 3 drams. 
 There are many who say to me: "You can not kill ducks with 3^ 
 drams." On the other hand, none of them would say that 3 drams 
 was a bird load. This gun must be for the intelligent sportsman, the 
 progressive sjjortsman, who is willing to use an ordinary load, and 
 knows hoAv to take care of the arm. There is a friction piece here 
 that must be kept in about a certain condition in order to have the 
 arm work properly. 
 
 The CiiAiRMAx. What is the weight of that gun? 
 
 Mr. Browning. About 7^ pounds. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. ^^liat is the price of it? 
 
 Mr. Browning. Not less than $30. The cheapest gun is $30. This 
 gun is over $100. That reminds me that in discussing this matter 
 with Mr. Hornaday I did inform him that there were over 350,000 
 guns costing from $3 to $;") placed on this market yearly. There are 
 about 10,000 of these automatic guns placed on the market in a year. 
 Of all the guns that are placed on this market, four-fifths of them 
 are -old for less than $12. It is not the gun that the sportsman 
 buys that is destroying the game. It is the cheap gun that goes 
 into the hands of the boy, and of the negro, and of the foreign 
 laborer. The Latin races are especially destructive on the small 
 birds, as they are known as a delicacy with them in their own country. 
 
 The Chairman. Gentlemen of the committee, do you desire to hear 
 any further testimony in connection with this bill? Are there any 
 other gentlemen who desire to be heard in relation to this bill? 
 
 Mr. Kalanianaole. I Avould like to ask that Mr. McClellan be 
 heard briefly, as the Territory of Hawaii would be included in the 
 operation of this bill. 
 
AUTOMATIC SHOTGUN. 29 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. G. B. McCLELLAN, OF HAWAII. 
 
 Mr. McClkli.an. I simply want to say that a jn-otest luis been 
 received from citizens in the Territory of Hawaii against the passage 
 of this bill. Our people take the ground that Ave are entirely able to 
 legislate on these matters ourselves in our local legislature, and there 
 is no a])parent reason Avliy any such restriction should be placed upon 
 the Territory of Hawaii; aiid if it becomes apparent or necessary 
 that there should be such restriction, the legislature is amply able, 
 through the authority that you have already given it, to pass such 
 legislation as is necessary. I simply, on behalf of the citizens who 
 have spoken in this matter, desire to protest against the passage of 
 any such measure, taking away our right of local legislation, which 
 you have already given us. 
 
 Mr. BovEE. May I be permitted to enlighten the committee in re- 
 spect to one matter? I think that the committee ought to know that 
 Mr. Marshall is a shooter of some reputation and experience. He w as 
 captain of the American international shotgun team that went abroad 
 and cleaned out all the foreign teams. I do not remember the year, 
 but you will see the medal which hangs from his watch chain. He, 
 as a professional shooter, used a shotgun. I do not know wdiat kind, 
 but a double-barreled shotgun; and as a sportsman and captain of 
 the great American international team he comes before this commit- 
 tee and says Avhat he does. 
 
 ADDITIONAL STATEMENT OF MR. G. 0. SHIELDS. 
 
 Mr. Shields. I only want two or three minutes, Mr. Chairman, to 
 answer some new points that have been brought up. I want to say 
 that if the sale of the automatic and pump guns could be limited to 
 decent sportsmen we Avould make no objection to them. We want to 
 keep them out of the hands of market hunters. They are the men 
 who will have these guns as soon as they can get them. They are now 
 almost all using repeating "shotguns. We are doing aw\ay with the 
 jnarket hunters as fast as we can. and have been struggling Avith that 
 problem for the last ten years. 
 
 Mr. Broavising. If you did, this objection Avould not be pertinent. 
 
 Mr. Shields. On the other hand, there is no objection to the use of 
 these guns at the trap. We do not undertake to ask you to stop the 
 manufacture and sale of them at all. It is only the use of them in 
 hunting birds that Ave seek to prevent. If the makers of this and the 
 l^ump gTins shall decide by and b}', as they have alread}'' considered 
 the necessity of deciding, to cut down the magazine to hold only one 
 cartridge, so as to put the gun on a level Avith the double-barreled 
 shotgun, then all shooters Avill be on a fair footing. We claim that 
 two shots is enough for auA' man to haA^e in his gim at any one time. 
 
71: 
 

WMii