Ex Parte Knapp

Good Law
127 Cal. 101·1899 Cal. LEXIS 605·59 P. 315
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 5, 1899Crim. No. 597.California555 words

Opinion

Concurring Opinion

Beatty, J.

I concur in the judgment on the first ground discussed by Justice Temple. The people of the state being the owner of its wild game, it may be conceded that the state legislature could annex any condition it chose to the privilege of taking it, hut a county ordinance forbidding all persons, under penalty, to transport game lawfully taken to the place where they desire to use or dispose of it is violative of the right of private property, as defined and regulated by general law, and necessarily invalid.

Lead Opinion

Temple, J.

This is an application for a discharge from custody made on behalf of James Knapp, who was arrested, tried, and convicted upon a charge of violating an ordinance of the county of Stanislaus. The ordinance declares, in effect, that it shall be a misdemeanor for anyone to hunt, kill, or destroy certain game with intent to transport, or to cause the same to be transported, without the county; or to offer the same to any person for the purpose of shipping or carrying the same without the county. It also declares that every railroad or transportation company, their agents and servants, who shall transport such game without the county shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

The prisoner was charged with willfully and unlawfully offering for transportation by Wells, Fargo & Co., from the town of Hewman, in Stanislaus county, to San Francisco, two wild ducks which were killed in Stanislaus county.

Serious question has been made as to the power of any county board of supervisors to add either restraints or regulations, to the right to take and kill wild game, to those made by the legislature. We do not find it necessary for the purposes of this case to decide that question. If such further…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.