^'"1;,, •] Rnnetiis. 49 



lor they Ikinc hccn i)ulk'cl oil hy tlir l.inl itsrll hflorf layiiif,^ tlic 

 eggs." As such a statement is ridiculous, and contrary to natural 

 history facts, it has been suggested that M. Laglaize has been led 

 into witnessing the collecting of comparatively worthless moulted 

 plumes as a blind to the real object of a planned slaughter. Under 

 date i4/i/o(), His Britannic Majesty's Minister in Venezuela, in 

 a communication to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, 

 states : — " There is no doubt that by far the larger part of the 

 feathers collected and exported are taken from the birds shot for 

 the purpose. The estimates as to the exact pro})ortions vary 

 slightly, but 75 i)er cent, may be taken as a reliable figure for the 

 pro}X)rtion of feathers collected from birds killed and 25 per cent, 

 for tlie proportion of moulted feathers collected." 



In cha])ter ii. Mr. Downham expresses doubts about the 

 genuineness of Mr. Mattingley's photographs of the star\ing 

 young Egrets in Riverina, New South Wales, without attempting 

 to disprove the statements which appeared in Tin' Emu {\o\. vii., 

 pp. 71-73) with the pictures. Mr. Downham hazards the opinion 

 that the presence of the photographer was sufficient to cause the 

 state of collapse of the nestlings as depicted in the photographs, 

 which he terms " bogus," and even suggests that the i)arent 

 birds were not killed at all, but were merely frightened away by 

 the presence of Mr. Mattingley and his companion — downright 

 presumption on the ])art of the clever writer of " The Feather 

 Trade." The illustration of the nest of starvelings imploring 

 food from passing birds shows plainly that the young ones were 

 looking in different directions ; therefore, they could not be 

 looking at the photogra})her, as suggested. The R.A.O.U. would 

 not have reproduced Mr. Mattingley's startling (and now historic) 

 photographs had it not bona-fide evidence of the state of the 

 rookery as observed after it had been raided by the plume- 

 hunters. Furthermore, there is the statement by Colonel C. S. 

 Ryan, a past President of the Union, that personally he was 

 aware of another Egret rookery on a station in Riverina that was 

 raided by plume-hunters. The rookery was annihilated. Colonel 

 Ryan possesses the name of the principal raider, and can vouch 

 that over 400 backs of birds containing plumes were sold to the 

 trade. {]'idc evidence of Colonel Ryan, " Report from the Select 

 Committee of the House of Lords, Plumage Prohil:)ition Bill " 

 (1908), p. ^i.) 



Even if " the Government of Venezuela"* is now legislating to 

 })rotect its Heronries and to " farm " Egrets for the sake of 

 " moulted " (?) feathers, in Australia, at all events, and doubtless 

 elsewhere, the beautiful Egrets were cruelly slain during the 

 breeding season, when the plumes were prime, for " the feather 

 trade." 



* It is stated that the prohibition refers to the small sub-State of Apure 

 onlv, and not to Federal Venezuela. 



