BIRD NOTES AND NEWS. 



Bird of Paradise is protected, and more- 

 over, New Guinea has " vast natural 

 reserves." " Mr. A. E. Pratt, the eminent 

 author and traveller," is quoted on this 

 point ; but no allusion is made to the irre- 

 futable facts furnished by Mr. Walter 

 Goodfellow. 



The characteristic note of the trade is 

 heard again in the treatment of legal 

 protection. Laws are cited to show that 

 in certain countries birds are protected : 

 not a word as to the fact that it was the 

 work of the plume-hunters which 7nade 

 such laws necessary. But if these laws 

 can be evaded in the interests of the trade, 

 the trade, it is contended, must not be 

 blamed. Plumage is illegally obtained hj 

 poaching and smuggling, but the trade 

 which profits by it must not, we are assured, 

 be held responsible ; yet if it were not for 

 the trade, smuggling would become unprofit- 

 able and would cease. " The duty of sup- 

 pressing it lies m the country where the 

 poachers work." M. Menegaux argues, for 

 instance, that " the value of Sea-Gulls and 

 Terns was never great " ; and that a certain 

 piratical raid on Hawaii, where poachers 

 killed " a number of Sea-Gulls . . . proves 

 no more than that the reserves were not 

 properly guarded." In the case in question, 

 which M. Menegaux alluded to so blandly, 

 the raiders comprised sixty-seven persons, 

 and had collected the skins and feathers 

 of 300,000 birds— Albatross, GulL Tern— 

 before the revenue-cutter captured them. 



The plain law-abiding man would suggest 

 a practical remedy for the slaughter, which 

 it is mere absurdity to deny. He would 

 say : Let there be the strongest possible 

 laws in countries where laws can be enforced 

 and let law-breakers, poachers, and receivers 

 alike be drastically dealt with ; since there 

 are leagues of continent where protection 



by law is impossible, and as the plume- 

 traders have shown that they kill and 

 poach and smuggle in defiance of law, let 

 us have a still more effective measure — 

 namely, the prohibition of the importation 

 of dead bodies and plumes into professedly 

 civilized countries. 



M. Menegaux, arguing backwards, would 

 find in the existence of a law, a proof that 

 there are no offences ; but would advise 

 that Avardens and police and Government 

 officials should be on constant guard in 

 every part of every tropical country where 

 the birds breed : in the forest, in the swamp, 

 in the scrub, in the jungle, in order, if possible, 

 to outwit the cunning of the hunter and 

 the greed of the trader. And if the plume 

 is still stolen, the police, not the thieves, 

 are to be held responsible ! Truly it is 

 a curious logic and a curious morality in 

 which this latest defender of the trade 

 involves himself. In one sentence, however, 

 he is frank. The plain man's methods 

 \vOuld be effective ; and effective repression 

 of the lucrative trade in birds' feathers is 

 the last thing desired, because " the feather- 

 trade and milliner interests employ great 

 capital, and . . . must therefore be 

 protected by the Government." To tliis 

 simple defence do we come at last, after 

 struggling with a jumble of arguments : 

 there is money in it ; it " must be protected 

 by the Government." 



Mrs. Fuller Maitland writes to tlie Times (August 

 18th, 1911) : — In the list of imported goods detained 

 on board ship and in the docks and warehouses of 

 London during the recent strike, 618 tons of bird- 

 skins and feathers are included. Yet persons with 

 pecuniary interest in the plumage-trade would have 

 it believed that the plumes used for millinery- 

 purposes are either dyed feathers from the poultry- 

 yard or artificial products of which horsehair is a 

 component part. 



