Bird Notes and! Newti 



Id 



The Plumage Bill 



THE BILL IN COMMITTEE. 



Colonel Yate's Bill, which was relegated 

 to the bottom of the list on July 7th, on account 

 of the non-attendance of Standing Committee 

 C, whose business it was to meet and consider 

 it, came on again for consideration on August 

 4th, when Colonel Yate moved hie amendment 

 to allow of a licence for the importation of any 

 consignment of feathers, provided it was made 

 to appear to the Board of Trade, by the pro- 

 duction of a certificate from the country of 

 origin, that such plumage had been obtained 

 from birds regularly kept or bred in captivity 

 for their plumage. It was at once evident 

 that the trade would have none of such an 

 amendment unless the Venezuelan Egrets 

 were brought in ; and Commander Williams 

 was still talking when the members present, 

 not unnaturally, tired of his eloquence and the 

 quorum melted away. The proceedings were 

 then adjourned until October. 



During the interval the composition of the 

 Committee had been somewhat altered, 16 

 members being taken off and 15 new members 

 added. Mr. Bartley Denniss endeavoured to 

 constitute this a ground of objection ; but 

 the Chairman assured him that no Standing 

 Order prevented the Committee of Selection 

 from making such alterations. 



OSTRICH-FARMERS AND THE PLUMAGE 

 TRADE. 



"At a recent meeting of the ostrich-feather 

 trade held at Port Elizabeth the following 

 resolution was adopted : — 



That as the Ostrich is exempted from the Plumage 

 Bill, and it has been proved conclusively that there 

 is no cruelty attached to the handling of the birds and 

 taking the plumage, we thank the (Cape) Government 

 for the interest it has taken in the matter, and would 

 now respectfully request the Government to put a 

 definite stop to lectures on the subject at present. 



" It was stated that while Mr. Duerden was 

 accepted as a scientific authority on breeding 

 problems, he was not regarded as the best man 

 to lecture on matters afieoting the ostrich- 

 feather trade, and his opposition to the Anti- 

 Plumage Bill was calculated to do the industry 

 harm in England. Seeing that ostrich 

 feathers were exempted, South African farmers 



and traders had no right to interfere with the 

 Bill, and desired the Government to put a 

 stop to Dr. Duerden 's provocative lectures. 

 The views he had expressed in England were 

 not the views of South African farmers and 

 traders."*— South Africa (July 17th, 1920). 



It will be remembered that Dr. Duerden 

 led opposition to the Bill in the Times and 

 Nature, claiming that he had South African 

 opinion behind him ; he also took part in the 

 trade " demonstration " in London. His real 

 backing obviously lies with the fancy-feather 

 traders, who continue to assert in their leaflets 

 that " All the sections of the great South 

 African trade have united in opposing it." 



FRANCE AND THE PLUME TRADE. 



In an article in Le Chenil (June 24th, 1920), 

 M. Amadee Pichot deals with the Pheasant 

 " Farms " in China from which the feather- 

 traders were said to obtain supplies of Gold and 

 Silver Pheasants. The story was set going by 

 a U.S.A. Consul at Hong Kong, " and the 

 credulity displayed by this official would have 

 surprised us had we not long since become 

 familiar with the clever tactics of those to whose 

 interest it is to throw dust in the eyes of the 

 public." The " facts " he stated were found 

 to be all hearsay, and the existence of any such 

 farms was disproved by Mr. Beebe and Mr. 

 Roy Andrews. " Dr. Hornaday of New York 

 oSered to send a capable naturalist to take 

 photographic snapshots of the farms, but to 

 this proposal the plume-importers made no 

 reply." No doubt they would prefer to provide 

 their own photographs. M. Pichot adds : — 



Now that a law for the prohibition of the importa- 

 tion of feathers other than those of the Ostrich and 

 of domestic poultry is again being discussed in the 

 British Parliament, the plume-traders are up in arms, 

 and newspaper writers pretend that the Government 

 of the .French Republic has directed its representatives 

 in England to inform the English Government that 

 French industry will suffer if this law is passed, and 

 that large numbers of French workers, mostly women 

 and girls, will thereby be deprived of their means of 

 livelihood. This audacious assertion is as inexact as 

 the rest of the statements upon which the plume- 

 traders have sought to build their defence. 



* The italics are ouri.— -Ed. B.N. & N. 



