44



Correspondence.



“List,” at p. 213 of the Eighth Edition, it is recorded by the Society, not

by Mr. Phillipps, that two were “Hatched in the Gardens, May 23, 1873.

(First time of breeding).” I was told, rightly or wrongly, that one of these

two was reared. Of course it would have been my duty, as a Member of

the Executive Committee, to bring this under notice, or, if I did not,

somebod}' else did. But my chief objection to a Medal being awarded off

hand, as the then Secretary seemed about to do, was because it was doubt¬

ful, from Mr. Farrar's own account (Vol V., p. 145), whether he did rear the

young birds to be independent of their parents as required by the Rule.

The young (two) were killed by the cock on the floor. Judging by the

Shama, Mr. Farrar had by no means been fully successful, and therefore,

irrespective of the Zoo, had not qualified himself to be a recipient of a

Medal !


Mr. Farrar goes on : “I think it would be more satisfactory to

Members if somebody saw the birds ‘ alleged ’ to be raised. I always bring

witnesses; why should not others? It hardly seems right that a man

should award a Medal to himself.” The last clause seems to indicate that

this is intended especially for me,—doubtless because in the past, and

especially some weeks back, I resisted Mr. Farrar’s defiant evasions of the

Medal Rules and disregard for them. And what is more, let me tell him

that I will continue to do my duty and uphold the Medal Rules in spite of

his offensive suggestions. So far as my young birds are concerned, they

have been seen by several Members , the young Wren (in the house) by quite

a number, for during the past summer my birds have been visited by many

Members. Mr. Farrar says “I always bring witnesses.” Does he? He

has but a poor opinion of some of our memories. And there is one point

which Mr. Farrar regularly avoids—witnesses, or even a definite statement,

that his young birds have been fully reared as required by the Rules.


On what authority does Mr. Farrar accuse me of awarding a Medal

to myself? Will he oblige me by stating when I ever did such a thing ?

I11 every case I make preliminary enquiries of the Members of the Execu¬

tive before it is stated in the Magazine that a Medal is “ proposed.” After

the publication, I send a Circular Letter to the Members of the Executive,

asking the direct question whether it is their will that a Medal be awarded,

and each Member of the Executive gives a written reply. Of course, like

almost every thing else, I have to start the machinery and carry the

business through, but it is the Executive, not I, who award the Medals.

And yet Mr. Farrar accuses me of awarding a Medal to myself!


A day or two before I saw Mr. F'arrar’s second letter, I had started off

my usual Circular to my colleagues asking if it was their wish that a

Medal should be awarded in the four cases “proposed” last month; and

I especially referred to Mr. Farrar’s objection (first letter) in the case of the

Waxbill. Whether they will award a Medal for the Wren and for the



