ENGINEERS’ CLUB 374 FIFTH AVENUE NEW YORK CITY, March 16th, 1906, Mr. W, T. Hornaday, Director New New Dear Mr, York York Zoological Society, City. Hornaday, It so happened that I did not get to see or hear of your article in the January number of “Shiclds’ Magazine" relating to my conversation with you until a few days ago. I know you intend to be perfectly fair; and as you have erred in some respects and possible about in others hardly give my ideas, I thought best to write I am not a doctor - but that is not that manufacturers you as briefly as it, In the first place, You correctly state the are most material. interested in tection; for on that depends the continuity of their business; and if the "automatic shotgun" would do what you say and do what you claim, it would interests of the present makers many times more than it would help them, game pro- so-called injure the I cannot see why you think we are trying to reach the unobtainable ideal in game protection, for our views are most practical. We want the game protected and will be glad to cooperate with you to that end; but it can never in this world be protected along the line you are striving, Let us look at this matter of game protection fairly, and see who are the idealists. The Zoological Society have been making strenuous efforts to have laws passed prohibiting the use of the automatic shotgun, and a couple of weeks ago they had five representatives before a Committee of the New Jersey Legislature urging the passage of an act with that one provision, Before I show that a law doing away with all automatic shotguns, all double shotguns, and all repeating shotguns would not give the desired protection, let us glance at the present statutes of that state relating to game prot ection$ They allow the shooting of ducks and water fowl eight months in the year ~ from September lst to April lst - day and night, no limit to bag, number in possession, marketing, or anything else. A more atrocious law for the destruction of game could scarcely be framed; and yet, these representatives argued that doing away with this gun was what was needed to protect it. In place of this unjust warfare, if the same amount of energy and money had been expended to get the season reduced more than half, night shooting prohibited, bag to be taken in a day, and the number of birds in possession limited - and, if extreme and license the gun - much good would measures were necessary, to prohibit marketing probably as so has the have been game been I wonder without accomplished. These are all practical provisions The season and bag limits may be demonstrated. may be given all protection that may be desired, why having a warden you made with eah the assertion man; for we as that do protect, restrictive as necessary, be that we knew the bag could not know it can enforced as easily be limited as any