ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY BULLETIN 



1009 



beauty? One would like to know; and if I found that 

 Satan had really returned to his place as an angel of light 

 and had, like Sir. Walter Rothschild, bought up islands 

 and territories for the saving of wonderful animals, or had 

 solved the problems of how to breed paradise birds in 

 semi-captivity (like Mr. Ingram), or had founded egret 

 farms, or had taken any other practical step towards the 

 preservation from extinction of any of the birds now per- 

 secuted for their skins, I should be the first to welcome 

 this as a sign of grace and to hope that in course of time 

 all birds that are worth saving, but yet are coveted for 

 their beauty might be similarly dealt with. But much 

 as I have looked into the question, I have never had re- 

 vealed to me the slightest attempt on the part of the firm 

 who trade in the skins of birds even to become properly 

 acquainted with the specific names of their victims, the 

 origin of the skins, how and by what means they are 

 procured, much less to move a finger or wag a tongue for 

 the restriction or regulation of this traffic. The fact really 

 is that those who promote this trade have hitherto sinned 

 in the deepest ignorance. They are only the receivers of 

 commodities obtained from the wild parts of the world, 

 and until their attention was called to the subject a few 

 years ago by the splendid insistence and remarkable personal 

 investigations of Mr. James Buckland, Mr. Frank Lemon, 

 and others, they never troubled their heads as to the effect 

 of their trade on bird numbers or on the economics and the 

 moral and material welfare of the world. 



But. iror.it of all. the feather trade has won over to its side 

 some who have indeed fallen from grace — men who in their 

 passion for collecting bird-skins and determining new types 

 and species would, during their own lifetime, put aside all 

 restrictions on the killing of birds and importation of skins 

 sooner than that one variation should escape their diagnosis. 

 It is to the shame of the Zoological Society of London, the 

 British Ornithologists' Union, the Natural History Section 

 of the British Museum, the Victoria University of Manchester 

 and Liverpool {Lancashire is vitally interested in bird pre- 

 servation because of the cotton crops) that these bodies have 

 taken no corporate part in the active crusade against the 

 devastating trade in bird-skins during the last few years, and 

 that on their silence — the silence of specialists — the Govern- 

 ment of the day has been able to rely in its iveary postponement 

 of legislation sine die to deal with a matter of world-wide 

 importance to the British Empire. 



I would support no measures for bird protection, national 

 or international, which fettered the researches of science; 

 for I believe the pursuit, the acquisition, and the applica- 

 tion of knowledge to be the best form of religion; but I 

 maintain that birds might be quite sufficiently protected 

 from the rapacious feather trade without unduly limiting 

 the research material for accredited museums all the world 

 over, or without checking the supply of living specimens 

 to zoological gardens. 



It is noteworthy that very few birds required for our 

 food supply are undomesticated or insufficiently protected 

 from extermination. Material-minded man sees to that. 

 It is the insert or fish-eating, non-edible birds of striking 

 or lovely plumage that are being done to death by the 

 feather trade. I have no desire whatever to protect the 

 sparrow (one of the few really mischievous birds) or any 

 type which unduly ravages man's grain or fruit crops. It 

 is the insect-eating or the guano-producing birds of the 

 world that require and merit special protection against a 

 trade which obtains their skins by the hundred thousand 

 for unnecessary portions of human attire or adornment. 

 The bodies of such birds are almost invariably unfit for 

 food, despite the ridiculous contention of Mr. Howell that 

 most of the bright-plumaged birds are killed "by men out of 

 all reach of authority" for food! Can Mr. Howell for one 

 moment suppose that humming-birds, trogons, rollers, bee- 



eaters, kingfishers, barbets, glossy starlings, paradise birds 

 lyre birds, orioles, and terns are killed for food? I can only say 

 that there is scarcely a savage that would care to taste the 

 bitter flesh of their poor little bodies. And egrets, white 

 herons? He must have a very low opinion of the intel- 

 ligence of newspaper readers if he thinks they would believe 

 such a suggestion. Suppress the market for the skins of 

 such birds — only needed for the costume of rich women or 

 the appliances of the obsolescent, time-wasting, and cruel 

 sport of rly-fishing — and the men "out of reach of all 

 authority" will not waste powder and shot on the killing 

 of inedible birds. These last, in their turn, by their in- 

 crease and multiplication will keep down the insect pests 

 of the world, or, if they are seabirds, l-eplenish the world's 

 stock of guano, increasingly necessary for the enrichment 

 of exhausted soils. — Yours, etc., 



H. H. Johnston. 



"LIFE"' AS A BIRD PROTECTOR 



A clause in the tariff bill now before Con- 

 gress reads as follows: 



Frovided, that the importation of aigrettes, egret plumes 

 or "osprey " plumes, and the feathers, quills, heads, wings, 

 tails, skins or parts of skins, of wild birds, either raw or 

 manufactured, and not for scientific or educational pur- 

 poses, is hereby prohibited; but this provision shall not 

 apply to the feathers or plumes of ostriches, or to the 

 feathers of domestic fowls of any kind. 



This provision is fathered and supported 

 by the New York Zoological Society, of which 

 Henry Fairfield Osborn, Madison Grant, and 

 William T. Hornaday are leading officers. It 

 is intended to check the "repulsive and hor- 

 rifying slaughter of valuable and beautiful 

 birds for the feather trade," and to prevent the 

 extermination, now rapidly proceeding, of 

 these birds. 



This immense commercialized wild-bird 

 slaughter that has been going on for years 

 with constantly increasing thoroughness serves 

 no defensible purpose. All the uses of orna- 

 ment and millinery can be served as well by 

 other means. It must stop pretty soon for 

 lack of birds to kill, but by checking it in time 

 what birds are left may be saved and continue 

 their species. 



We hope the clause may pass ! 



—From Life, Maxj 15, 1913 



THE SOCIETY'S PROSECTOR 



On May 7, 1913, the Executive Committee 

 appointed Dr. George S. Huntington as Pro- 

 sector of the Society for the utilization of the 

 soft parts of such of the dead animals at the 

 Zoological Park and Aquarium as may be 

 useful to the purposes of the College of 

 Phvsicians and Surgeons. 



