252 Correspondence. [isfTan 



in his collection were hundreds of duplicate sets, obviously kept 

 for trade purposes. jMoreover, in the list given of eggs par- 

 ticularly desired was evidenced an uncanny knowledge of the 

 rarer Australian birds, not to speak of the Gymnorhina, of whose 

 interesting eggs " line series " were desired. In reply I did the 

 only thing decently possible : I suggested to the American 

 applicant for Australian favours that private collections of either 

 birds or their eggs should, at the very least, be restricted to the 

 collector's own country, and that indications pointed to the bulk 

 of both public and ornithological opinion in this country being 

 in favour of studying the sentient bird and restricting collecting 

 to men working for national or semi-national ends. 



I was not favoured with a reply, of course, and thought but 

 little more of the matter until quite recently, when letters came 

 to hand from three members of the Union residing in different 

 parts of Queensland. With each of these letters was enclosed 

 something not unfamiliar — to wit, a replica of the American 

 appeal of a few years before. Obviously, the membership list 

 of the R.A.O.U. was being worked. You have my assurance, 

 sirs, that the solicitation "drew a blank" in each case, and I 

 write this letter only in the hope that it may influence others 

 who, with a misguided idea of fraternity, may have been tempted 

 to maltreat their country's birds for the sake of someone whose 

 interest therein is merely sordid. Most of us have read John 

 Burroughs' s delightful sketches of (for instance) the Bluebird, but 

 we do not post over to America and say, " Send me a fine series 

 of the eggs of Sialia." 



There has to be a limit on the gathering of useful birds and 

 their eggs, and that limit should be somewhere about the words 

 " private collections." At present we are trying hard to get a 

 new and efficient Game Bill through the Queensland Legislature. 

 How much force would the R.A.O.U. carry in the matter if a 

 critic were able to say that some of its members not only despoiled 

 bird homes for their own unauthorized collections, but sent eggs 

 to other countries — not for any scientific end, but simpl}^ as 

 schoolboys exchange coloured marbles ? 



Very strongly, then, I protest against the Union being made, 

 however indirectly, a vehicle for such operations as those 

 indicated. And I would add that had this protest been left to 

 Mr. E. J. Banfield, R.A.O.U., of Dunk Island (who was a recipient 

 of one of the American letters), the opinions expressed would 

 probably have been a good deal more emphatic. — Yours, &c., 



A. H. CHISHOLM, 

 Brisbane, 15/11/19. Hon. Sec. for Queensland. 



To the Editors of " T/ic Jiniii." 

 Sirs,— The following list contains, so far as I can find out, the 

 names of the Union members who enlisted and went overseas in 

 defence of freedom in the Great War. There may be others for 



