1638 The Zoologist— April, 1869. 



destructive to fish, — that it is not sought after for the sal;e of its 

 plumes like the gulls, — and that from its wariness and great power in 

 diving, it is able to avoid the wholesale destruction to which other 

 birds were subject. 



Mr. H, E. Dresser thought that the words "sea-fowl" would be 

 more applicable than " sea-birds " in the Bill as it now stood, inas- 

 much as the latter terra was too comprehensive, it being intended only 

 to protect those birds vvhich are web-footed and swim. For this 

 reason he proposed that the words " sea-fowl " should be substituted, 

 and that the name " oyster catcher" should be struck out. 



Mr. J. E. Harling considered it expedient to protect the eggs 

 equally with the birds, since as much destruction of life might be 

 effected by wantonly robbing the nests as by killing the old birds. 

 He thought that a date might be fixed previously to which a sufficient 

 number of eggs might be taken, for food or otherwise, without a 

 penalty, and subsequently to which, under a penalty for taking them, 

 there would still be time for a second or third brood to be reared. 

 He objected to the proviso which had been introduced in the second 

 section of the Bill as it now stood, which was to the effect that no 

 penalty should attach for killing the birds bovdjide for the purpose of 

 food, because he considered that such a proviso would render the 

 section inoperative. Every person who killed a gull in the breeding 

 season would say that he intended to eat it, and the Act would be 

 evaded at every turn. He observed that none of the previous speakers 

 appeared to have considered the practical working of the Act, which 

 was of more importance than many supposed. 



Mr. Harland submitted that the speaker was out of order in referring 

 to a question which had not been mentioned by the Chairman, and 

 thought there was no necessity for bringing it before the meeting. 



Professor Newton could not agree with Mr. Harland. He con- 

 sidered that the practical working of the Act was most important, and 

 that it would be extremely vexatious to find, after passing the Act, 

 that there was any difficulty in carrying it into effect. 



Mr. Harting then proceeded to point out the legal effect of certain 

 words in several sections of the Bill as it now stood, and proposed 

 certain amendments. 



An animated discussion then followed, in which Mr. Francis Darwin, 

 Mr. Jackson Gillbanks and others took part. 



Mr. Blyth considered it unnecessary to extend the Act to such 

 species as breed inland, as for instance the black-headed gull. He 



