40 HEPORT — 1892. 



had been bronglit forward at, the meeting of the Sectional Committee, 

 and a Committee liad been recommended for appointment. It had been 

 suggested to him by Professor Meldola that the action of the Committee 

 might be strengthened if the matter were again brought under the 

 notice of the local societies throughout the country through the Delegates 

 at the present Conference, and he therefore detailed the facts which had 

 led to the proposal for the formation of a Committee. In March 1890 

 the CardiS' Naturalists' Society had visited the island of Grassholme, 

 and while there observing the ha.bits of some of the wild birds a number 

 of young men from one of H.M. steamships had landed and shot puffins 

 and gulls, and wantonly destroyed a large number of the eggs. The 

 affair had been fully reported in the ' Daily Graphic ' at the time. As there 

 seemed to be a wholesale destruction of wild birds' eggs going on, the 

 matter had been brought forward last year in Parliament by Mr. Pease, 

 and at the time he (Dr. Vachell) had done what he could to bring it 

 under the notice of the local societies. He had also called the attention 

 of their Members of Parliament to the subject, but the latter had taken 

 the view that it was not very serious, and that when boys were home for 

 their holidays they could not be prevented from taking birds' eggs. 

 Mr. Pease's Bill proposed to render the destruction of wild birds' eggs 

 prohibitory under a penalty not exceeding 5s. each egg, and left action 

 to county councils in England and the magistrates and quarter sessions 

 in Ireland. They did not wish to pin themselves to the exact text of 

 Mr. Pease's Bill, but they wanted some legislation for the better pro- 

 tection of wild birds' eggs. He therefore moved : ' That a Committee be 

 appointed to take steps for furthering legislative enactment for the better 

 protection of wild birds' eggs.' ' 



Mr. Mills was opposed to the resolution, because in his opinion there 

 were a great many birds which did harm. He thought that it was neces- 

 sary for the v/elfare of the country and the preservation of game that 

 such birds should be destroyed. 



Professor Leipner said it was not proposed to include all birds in the 

 Bill ; it left liberty of action to the county councils, and he was in favour 

 of its becoming law. 



Mr. Chisholm Batten expressed his belief that there would be some 

 difficulty in getting the law efficiently carried out. 



Mr. Hembry approved of the resolution, and said that some good 

 would be done even if the law were only partially cai'ried out. 



The Chairman pointed out that there had, no doubt, been an abuse, 

 and it should, if possible, be checked. The proposal was as yet in its first 

 stage, and all action would }'est with the county councils and the justices, 

 to whom he thought the proper administi-ation of the law might very 

 well be left. As it stood, the proposal did not appear to him to do harm to 

 anybody's interests, and it did not follow that because such a law might be 

 in existence any person who took a bird's egg would necessarily be fined 5s, 



Mr. Slater remarked that gamekeepers were in the habit of destroy- 

 ing birds of prey because the latter destroyed the game. The balance of 

 nature was tiius upset, and the small birds allowed to increase and to 

 destroy the crops. 



' The following is the resolution passed by the General Committee : ' That 

 Mr. Thomas Henry Thomas (Chairman), Dr. C. T. Vachell (Secretary), Professors 

 AV. N. Parker, Newton, and Leipner, Mr. Ponlton, and Canon Tristram be a Com- 

 mittee to consider proposals for the Legislative Protection of Wild Birds' Eggs.' 



