Bird Notes and News 



35 



The Plumage Trade 



THE PLUMAGE BILL. 



Three separate but identical Bills for pro- 

 hibiting the Importation of Plumage into this 

 country have been introduced into the House 

 of Commons. They are identical also with the 

 Bill introduced by Colonel Sir Charles Yate 

 last year, except that Bill No. 3 is entitled 

 simply " A Bill to Prohibit the Importation of 

 Plumage," dropping the words " and the sale 

 or possession of plumage illegally imported." 

 The object of the Bills is to add to the table of 

 prohibitions contained in the Customs Con- 

 solidation Act, 1876, the plumage of any bird 

 except (1) birds included in the schedule to the 

 Act, (2) birds imported alive, (3) birds ordin- 

 arily used in this coimtry as articles of diet. 

 The Board of Trade is empowered to grant 

 licences for purposes of museums, scientific 

 research, or other special purposes. The birds 

 named in the schedule are African Ostrich and 

 Eider Duck. The Bill is to come into opera- 

 tion six months after passing. 



The sponsors for the three Bills are Mr. 

 Galbraith (L., Spennymoor), who has obtained 

 second place on May 6th for Second Reading ; 

 Captain Brown (C.-U., Hexham), who has little 

 chance of success, having only fifth place on 

 April 22nd ; and Mr. W. Trevelyan Thompson 

 (C.-L., Middlesbrough) ; but it is understood 

 that any Bill successful will be taken charge of 

 by Mr. Thompson. Among the Members who 

 back the Bills are Sir Charles Yate, Viscountess 

 Astor, Lieut.-Colonel Page Croft, Sir BeviUe 

 Stanier, Sir John Butcher, Lieut.-Colonel 

 Arthur Murray, Captain Wedgwood Benn, Mr. 

 F. Green, Mr. Ormsby Gore, Mr. Cairns, Mr. T. 

 Davies, Mr. Bromfield, Sir Charles Oman, and 

 Mr, Aneurin Williams. 



THE BLOCKING OF BILLS. 



One of the spokesmen for the feather-traders, 

 Mr. H. G. Cubitt, has written letters to the 

 newspapers in all constituencies represented by 

 backers of this year's Bills, in which he under- 

 takes to answer the question why the measure, 

 which has been before Parliament in one form 

 or other nearly every year since 1903, has never 

 passed into law. This is the remarkable notion 

 which Mr. Cubitt sets forth : — 



" Because the arguments produced in support of 

 the idea nave been shown again and again to be the 

 well-meaning but uninformed diatribes of sentimental 

 people, which would not bear analysis." 



To the profiteer every argument which does 

 not appeal to the pocket is sentimental. But 

 what are the facts ? They are shown in the 

 leaflet, "Milestones," issued by the R.S.P.B. 

 Lord Avebury's Bill of 1908 was passed 

 unanimously by the House of Lords. Lord 

 Aberdeen's Bill of 1920 was carried unanimously 

 with the expressed approval of the Govern- 

 ment. Bills introduced by Sir William Anson, 

 Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, and Mr. Alden were 

 blocked in trade interests. Mr. Alden's Bill of 

 1911 had a majority of 326 to 48 on First 

 Reading and was then blocked ; the Govern- 

 ment BiU of 1914 passed its Second Reading by 

 297 to 48 ; Colonel Yate's Bill of 1920 was read 

 a Second time by 61 to 8, and every amendment 

 attempted by the trade in Committee was 

 rejected by an overwhelming majority. But 

 each Bill in the Commons has been obstructed 

 and hindered by every device rendered possible 

 in Parliamentary procedure to a small knot of 

 determined opponents. Why ? Because the 

 trade dare not face the verdict of the nation, 

 and plead and struggle and scheme and 

 manoeuvre and intrigue always for Delay, 

 knowing perfectly well the sentence which 

 awaits it. The "uninformed diatribes " would 

 seem to be the perquisite of Mr. Cubitt and 

 his friends. 



THE BISHOP OF DURHAM ON WOMEN 

 AND PLUMAGE. 



Speaking at South Shields on February 16th, 

 1921, the Bishop of Durham said that cruelty 

 to dumb animals was a very trustworthy index 

 of character. Most of it arose either from 

 sheer brutality or from mere thoughtlessness ; 

 but apart from these causes a vast amount of 

 suffering was occasioned by commercial greed. 



It was a grave scandal that the Plumage Bill, 

 presented again and again to Parliament and backed 

 by so great and emphatic an expression of the public 

 conscience, should fail to pass into law. It was sup- 

 ported by all humane and thoughtful people who had 

 been at the pains to inform themselves of the facts 

 concerning the plumage trade, and it was opposed by 

 the vested interest of a small but well organised trade 

 under the unreflecting and most discreditable acquies- 

 cence of a large section of the fashionable world. " I 

 say with deliberation," his Lordship went on, " every 

 self-respecting woman ought to be heartily ashamed 

 of appearing in public with her person garnished — like 

 the savage Indian v/ith the scalps of his victims — with 

 Egret plumes and Birds of Paradise. I can hardly 

 imagine a grosser paradox than that which will be 

 presented in the churches of the country this Easter of 

 Christian women kneeling at the altar rail to receive 



