Bird Notes and News 



91 



biennially, if not annually, in one country 

 or another, since International Co-opera- 

 tion is essential if the rarer and more 

 lovely species of birds are to be saved 

 from an untimely end. 

 INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR 

 THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS 

 This Committee, it will be remembered, 

 was inaugurated by Mr. T. Gilbert 

 Pearson, of the National Audubon Associa- 

 tion of America, on the occasion of his 

 visit to England last summer. The first 

 meeting of the British section was held on 

 May 28th, 1923, at 32, Smith Square, 

 Westminster, by invitation of Mrs. R. 

 McKenna. Those present representing 

 various societies interested in the subject 

 were : Earl Buxton (in the chair). Sir 

 Montagu Sharpe and Mr. F. E. Lemon 

 (Royal Society for the Protection of 

 Birds), Lord Rothschild, Dr. F. Dawtrey 

 Drewitt, Mr. H. S. Gladstone, Dr. Percy 



Lowe, Mrs. McKenna, Mr. J. H. Massing- 

 ham,Dr. Chalmers Mitchell, Mr. Richmond, 

 Dr. J. Ritchie, and Mr. W. L. Sclater. 

 Viscount Grey of FaUodon, Dr. Eagle 

 Clarke and Mr. E. G. B. Meade-Waldo 

 were unable to attend. The agenda in- 

 cluded the consideration of the scope and 

 general policy of the Committee with 

 regard to : — 



(1) Protection of birds on migration ; 



(2) Collection of information bearing upon the food 

 of special categories of birds, such aa sea-birds, insect- 

 eating birds, or fruit-eating birds ; 



(3) Consideration of the species of wild birds at 

 present permitted by law to be imported as food into 

 the United Kingdom ; 



(4) Special protection of birds in out-of-the-way parts 

 of the world ; 



(5) Prohibition and regulation of acclimatisation of 

 foreign species ; 



(6) Consideration of nature -reserves or sanctuaries 

 at home or abroad ; 



(7) Policy to be pursued in regard to the Plumage 

 traffic ; 



(8) Collection and fihng of statistics obtained by the 

 Committee. 



The Plumage Trade 



A MEMBER of the R.S.P.B. wrote in 

 May to a well-known firm of drapers 

 in London, to protest against being 

 shown in their millinery department 

 a hat made entirely of the heads and 

 wings of small birds. She received 

 the following eminently characteristic 

 reply :— 



" We find there is a demand for this kind of thing, 

 and we are therefore bound, in the interests of the 

 business, to stock same. We may mention that we are 

 ourselves not in favour of these hats, but we are com- 

 pelled always to study what is good for the business, 

 having the interests of the shareholders always to 

 consider. We may say that birds are now well pro- 

 tected by the Plumage Act, and we should have nothing 

 in stock contrary to that Act," 



Without examining into the ethics 

 of this epistle, or asking whether 

 women really go into a shop and ask 

 for hats made of birds' heads and 

 wings, or whether these particular 

 heads were imported, and if so, when, 

 it may be pointed out that the greater 

 number of these businesses are now 

 limited companies, and that the 

 responsibility rests with both the share- 

 holders and the customers. The 

 battledore and shuttlecock way of 



shifting responsibility is as old as 

 Adam and Eve, and the first dealer 

 in apples had the excellent excuse 

 that the lady clearly wanted the fruit 

 though she knew the prohibition even 

 better than the woman of to-day 

 knows that birds' plumage is contra- 

 band. But such tactics do not make for 

 the credit of the dealer or the customer. 



Many correspondents of the R.S.P.B. 

 evidently imagine that the Plumage 

 Act settled once and for all the buying 

 and selling of wild birds' plumage, 

 and they marvel at the flaunting 

 display of osprey and paradise feathers 

 in shops and catalogues, and at the 

 booming of them in women's columns 

 and other fribble of the Press. The 

 newspaper manager would no doubt 

 make the same reply as the drapery 

 director ; he has to concentrate on 

 £ s. d. The Act does not touch sale 

 and wear. It only prohibits importa- 

 tion. Firms and women alike are aware 

 that for good and sufficient reasons 

 urged by humanity and science, and 



