Bird Notes and News 



^5 



in these days we did not want to capture birds, 

 put them under traps, and then liberate them 

 to be shot at merely as a test of human dex- 

 terity. On a final amendment to reduce the 

 penalties. Lord Onslow pointed out that these 

 were based on the Protection of Animals Act, 

 1911. This was the only amendment on which 

 a division was taken, and it was rejected by 

 69 votes to 5. The Bill was read a Third time 

 and passed on June 9th. 



The text of the Bill is as follows : — 



" Every person who shall promote, arrange, conduct, 

 assist m, receive money for, or take part in any meet- 

 ing, competition, exhibition, pastime, display, or in 

 any event whatever, at or in the course of which 

 captive birds are liberated by hand or by trap, con- 

 trivance, or other means for the purpose of being shot 

 at the time of their liberation, or who, being the owner 

 or occupier or person in charge of any premises, shall 

 permit his premises or property, or any part thereof, 

 to be used for any such purpose, shall be liable upon 

 summary conviction to a fine not exceeding twenty- 

 five pounds, or alternatively or in addition thereto to 

 be imprisoned with or without hard labour for a term 

 not exceeding three months." 



THE PLUMAGE BILL. 



The Importation of Plumage (Prohibition) 

 Bill, having been read a Second time in the 

 House of Commons on April 23rd, by 137 

 votes to 24, was referred to Standing Committee 

 D, with Sir Holford Mackinder, M.P., as 

 Chairman. The meetings on April 28th, May 

 3rd, and May 5th were practically a repetition 

 of last year's proceedings, except that the 

 Committee showed more weariness of and more 

 resolute opposition to the specious arguments 

 and pointless verbosity of the Bill's opponents. 

 Pages upon pages of " amendments " were on 

 the paper, obviously for the mere purpose of 

 talking against time and killing this Bill, as 

 last year's, by sheer obstruction. As Mr. 

 Bartley Denniss informs his constituents* with 

 apparent pride, " I pursued the same course as 

 on the two previous Bills by moving many 

 amendments to every clause and nearly every 

 line of the Bill so as to endanger its being passed 

 at all unless my clause was accepted." On 

 this occasion the promoters of the measure 

 proved more amenable than was the case with 

 the promoters of the Government Bill of 1914 

 or Sir Charles Yate's Bill of 1920. On May 

 10th Mr. Trevelyan Thomson announced that an 

 agreement had been arrived at and that Mr. 

 Bartley Denniss's amendment, with certain 

 modifications, was accepted. 



* Oldham Chronicle, May 12th, 1921. 



The new clause is as follows : — 



Within four months of the passing of this Act the 

 Board of Trade shall appoint an advisory committee 

 consisting of : 



(a) an independent chairman ; 



(b) two experts in ornithology ; 



(c) three experts in the feather trade, 



(d) four other members. 



All applications for addition to or removal from the 

 Schedule shall be made to the Board of Trade, which 

 shall refer such applications to the advisory committee, 

 which shall after due inquiry submit a recommendation 

 to the Board in regard thereto. 



The Bill, therefore, ceases to prohibit importa- 

 tion of all wild birds' skins and plumage, and 

 becomes a Bill appointing a committee to 

 advise as to the regulation of importation. On 

 this committee are to be permanently three 

 representatives of the feather-trade, while the 

 representation of Bird Protection remains, 

 also permanently, at the option of the Board of 

 Trade. 



An amendment was also accepted postponing 

 the coming into force of the Act from six to 

 nine months after its passing. 



The Bill was read a Third time on June 10th, 

 when Sir P. Lloyd-Greame (Secretary, Depart- 

 ment of Overseas Trade) carried an amendment 

 prohibiting the importation of plumage "in the 

 baggage " of passengers to this country, leaving 

 them free to bring in only that forming part of 

 their wearing apparel. Sir Charles Yate mad« 

 a strenuous effort to increase the number of 

 " other members " of the Advisory Committee, 

 pointing out that places should be definitely 

 allocated to representatives of the Societies 

 for the protection of animals and birds which 

 had stimulated the measure ; and he inquired 

 whether the agreement was made between the 

 Natural History Museum and the feather-trade 

 or the Natural History Museum and the Royal 

 Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 

 and the Royal Society for the Protection of 

 Birds. Mr. Thomson replied that the arrange- 

 ment was a Parliamentary one, between the 

 promoters and opponents of the Bill ; and Sir 

 P. Lloyd-Greame assured Sir Charles Yate 

 that the promoters were perfectly satisfied 

 with the discretion left in the hands of the 

 Board of Trade and that he had no intention 

 of putting any permanent officials of the Board 

 upon the Committee. 



The Bill was read a Second time in the House 

 of Lords on June 21st, after short speeches 

 by Lord Buckmaster and Lord Lambourne. 

 (It will be remembered that Lord Aberdeen's 

 Bill was also read without opposition last year, 

 and Lord Avebury's in 1908.) 



