ONE AUDUBON SOCIETY. 



s 



^ IVE HUNDRED invitations 

 were sent out for a novel re- 



ception by the Wiscorlsin 

 Audubon Society a while ago. 

 One of the directors lent a large, hand- 

 some house, and six milliners were 

 invited to send hats unadorned with 

 aigrettes or birds. Ostrich plumes, 

 quills and cock's-tails were not dis- 

 barred. Twenty-five other milliners 

 applied for space, "everybody " went, 

 and a great many tastefully trimmed 

 hats were sold. People who had never 

 before heard of the Audubon Society 

 became, through the newspaper reports 

 of the affair, greatly interested in its 

 object, and the society itself greatly 

 encouraged through the fact that by 

 their hats and bonnets many of the 

 "best" people of Milwaukee were 

 ready to proclaim it no longer good 

 form to wear the plumes or bodies of 

 wild birds. 



"Certificates of heartlessness," a 

 writer in Our Dumb Animals calls them 

 and we know of no better appellation 

 to apply. Women of fashion, says the 

 same writer, have been urged to use 

 the power which they possess — and it 

 is a power greater than that of law — 

 to brin^ this inhumanity to an instant 

 stop. The appeals for the most part 

 were in vain. Birds continue to be 

 slaughtered by millions upon millions, 

 simply for the gratification of a silly 

 vanity of which intelligent women 

 should be ashamed. Whole species of 

 the most beaiitiful denizens of field 

 and forest, woodland and shore, have 



been almost or quite exterminated 



The lady has surely a beautiful face, 

 She has surely a queenly air; 



The bonnet had flowers and rilabon and lace; 



But the bird has added the crowning grace — 

 It is really a charming affair. 



Is the love of a bonnet supreme over all, 

 In a lady so faultlessly fair? 



The Father takes heed when the Sparrows fall, 



He hears when the starving nestlings call — 

 Can a tender woman not care? 



— Susan E. Gammons, Our Dumb Animals. 



234 



Song birds have been driven further 

 and further from the dwellings of men; 

 our country is stripped of one of its 

 least costly and most charming delights 

 and all that women may deck them- 

 selves in conformity with a fad. 



A bill for the protection of birds 

 was passed on March 24, by the Sen- 

 ate of the United States, introduced 

 into the House of Representatives on 

 March 25, and referred to the Com- 

 mittee on Agriculture. It is entitled 

 "An Act for the Protection of Song 

 Birds." 



We confess, says the same writer, to 

 a feeling of humiliation when reading 

 this bill, because it seems a just indict- 

 ment of the women of America on a 

 charge of willful, wanton, reckless in- 

 humanity. That such legislation 

 should be made necessary, through 

 vanity alone, ought in our estimation, 

 to bring the blush of shame to every 

 good woman's cheek. 



" I didn't think," is the usual reply 

 of the fair sex, when approached on 

 the subject. " I didn't think." Aye 

 you didn't think, but that plea can no 

 longer avail when press and pulpit, in 

 the name of humanity, so earnestly 

 and eloquently plead with you to 

 spare the birds. 



If compassion for the little creature 

 whose life went out in agony, to sup- 

 ply that ornament above your brow 

 does not move you to abstain from 

 wearing such in the future, then the 

 knowledge that some of the "best" 

 people in the country consider it " bad 

 form," perhaps will. — E. K. M. 



