S/iLBOKNIANA 
43 
Spare the Owe. — Oiir correspondent, Mr. Joseph Collinson, 
has sent the following letter to The Standard : — 
“ M;iy I c.ill attention in the columns of The Standard to the fashion which 
has just decreed that the owl shall he the fiivourite bird for millinery purposes 
ilurini^ the next few months ? I would bei^ of you tr) lend your powerful aid to 
the movement which is endeavouring to shame so disgraceful a practice from 
the community. There is nothing more extraordinary in the century that 1 
know of than this terribly demoralising cra/e among women to decorate them- 
selves with the feathers and wings of birds ; sometimes the entire bodies and all. 
We are told on the very highest authority that the demand for sprays which are 
obtained from the birds of Paradise has been so great and so continuous that the 
trade now finds the supply failing. But the wholesale destruction of the harmless 
and necessary owl is even more deplorable — to an Knglishman ; and I think it 
is a great pity indeed that there is no law to interfere with the liberty of the 
subject in this respect. 
“ But women are not the only offenders. The game-keeper (the fact is well 
known, leastw'ays among the country people, if not by the general public) is a 
bitter enemy of the owl. The pole-trap, of which he is so fond, is an abominable 
device, and very little good will result from the efforts which are being made by 
the Board of Agriculture and the Bird Protection Societies to give the owl the 
protection that it is entitled to, while it is tolerated. It would be a waste of 
words to enlarge upon it as an instrument of torture. Plenty of evidence of this, 
some of a most revolting character, is to be found recorded in such humane 
journals as the Animals' Friend. Most of us know the description given of it by 
Richard Jefferies in ‘ Wood Magic.’ As a cause of indiscriminate destruction, 
I believe that Mr. W. II. Hudson, who has rendered herculean service in the 
cause of the persecuted birds, is ready to' furnish particulars to anyone who may 
introduce a Bdl for its abolition. 
“ The owner is not always to blame. Some take a fairly broad view of bird 
life ; others again are eager to protect certain kinds. It is the gamekeeper who 
is at the bottom of all the mischief. Alas, that, while much has been w ritten on 
the subject, little has been done. It is a matter which all who love the birds for 
their own sakes must have at heart.” 
As long as that genuine nature-lover, Mr. F. Carruthers Gould, 
is in authority, Selbornian principles are sure of a strong support 
from the Westminster Gazette, and we are glad to see an excellent 
illustration of an owl, with a poem by Mr. F. B. Doveton, 
bearing the same title as this paragraph, in a recent number of 
the Budget, issued from the same office. 
Was there no Altern.ative ? — Mr. J. H. Gartrell, of 
Penzance, writes to one of our contemporaries : — 
“ Last month a kingfisher — the first I had ever seen — became a frequent 
visitor to my garden, which is situated nearly in the middle of the town, and has 
an oval-shaped pond about i8ft. in length, in which there were about fifty goldfish. 
One morning at breakfast I was attracted by the brilliant colours of a strange 
bird perching in a tree, and intently watching the pond, and occasionally diving 
to the surface and picking up and gobbling something in gull-fashion, which 1 
saw' must be my goldfish. The bird was having his breakfast at the same time as 
myself. He came again for his dinner, and for three or four days in succession. 
1 became anxious for my goldfish, and desperate enough to shoot the bird. I, 
however, did not want to injure his beautiful plumage, and used very fine shot. 
One of these only struck him, but it was in the eye, and that was enough. The 
bird is now stuffed, and for the next hundred years will, no doubt, be on view 
to anyone who wishes to see a kingfisher. The query is how this bird should 
be so clever as to find out my pond and the goldfish therein.” 
