ON THE DESIRABILITY OF ESTABLISHING A "CLOSE TIME," 347 



persons : consequently the principle of privilege, usually urged 

 as one of the strongest objections to the Game Laws of this 

 country, would be introduced into the proposed Act, which would 

 thereby be subject to the attacks of all those who are opposed to 

 those laws. Further, that if there be any need to protect such 

 other wild birds, the need is greater, in most cases, to protect 

 them from the owners and occupiers of land than from other 

 persons. 



iii. That the power to be given to the Secretary of State would virtually 

 be that of repealing the Act, either entirely or in regard to any 

 particular kind or kinds of birds, at his sole will and pleasure, 

 without his acting on the opinion of any responsible adviser or 

 expert assessor; and that in consequence of such unlimited 

 power being intrusted to a high officer of State, who cannot be 

 expected to have any personal knowledge of the intricacies of the 

 questions involved, the results wovild in most cases be highly 

 unsatisfactory to all persons concerned, it being also taken into 

 consideration that the state of the law would vary very consider- 

 ably in different parts of the country, even perhaps in different 

 l^arts of the same county. Furthermore, the granting of such 

 power to any authority presumes that some kinds of birds would 

 be at once exempted from protection, which is tantamount to 

 inviting persecution on such kinds of birds as would be included 

 in what has been termed a " Black List." 



iv. With this recommendation your Committee have the pleasure of 

 entirely concurring. 



V. The anticipation of your Committee, that the penalties imposed by 

 the Act of 1872 would be found insufficient, having been proved 

 by experience to be true, your Committee consider that the pro- 

 posed increase of such penalties is quite inadequate to secure 

 efficiency to the new Act — -regard, however, beiag had to the 

 indefinite phrase, " except under aggravated circumstances," the 

 meaning of which your Committee cannot explain. 



Finally, your Committee wish to point out that, so far as they have the 

 means of knowing the nature of the evidence given before the Select Com- 

 mittee of the House of Commons, the four recommendations which they 

 condemn are directly opposed to that evidence. 



6. The increasing interest taken by the public generally in the question 

 which your Committee have been now for five years appointed to investigate, 

 is shown by signs too numerous to mention. Your Committee, however, 

 observe with regret that in the minds of some persons it has been mixed up, 

 if not confounded, with other questions which are entirely distinct. Two of 

 these maybe specified — (1) the Utility of Birds to Agriculturists, and (2) the 

 State of the Law as regards Cruelty to Animals. Tour Committee not having 

 been appointed to consider these questions, content themselves with remark- 

 ing that both are doubtless of great importance to the community, the one 

 from a moral and the other from a material point of view, but are likewise 

 entirely outside the duty of your Committee. 



7. In order to assist the clearer view which your Committee hope that the 

 public will in time take of the question of Bird-protection, your Committee 

 unanimously beg leave to submit for consideration the following remarks as 

 to any future legislation : — 



