PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. 
147 
whether a name should be included or not. This Act proved 
of little use, so an Act for the Preservation of Wild Fowl was 
passed in 1876, the schedule of which, I.think, was framed 
from an edible point of view, as few species were included 
that were not of' some gastronomic value. This Act, as well 
as that of 1872, and the Sea Birds Act of 1869, were repealed in 
1880 by an Act entitled “ The Wild Birds Protection Act,” 
and I cannot do better than quote the brief summary from 
the “ Zoologist,” 1880, p. 487: “ A close time is provided 
for all birds between the 1st of March and the 1st of August. 
Those species which are mentioned in the schedule may not 
be killed during the close time, under a penalty not exceed¬ 
ing T1 ; those not mentioned in the schedule may not be 
killed under a penalty (for the second offence) of a sum not 
exceeding 5s. and costs. In the case of the latter class the 
Act does not apply to the owner or occupier of the laud on 
which any of these birds may be killed, or to any person 
authorized by owner or occupier. In other words, if any 
owner or occupier deems it desirable to keep down Sparrows, 
Hawks, Jays, Hooded Crows, Wood Pigeons, or any other 
bird which he may consider destructive he may destroy them 
on his own land, or authorize some one else to do so.” 
That this Act has done an infinite amount of good in afford¬ 
ing protection to many birds during the breeding season is 
no doubt the case, as the increased number of Blackbirds 
and Thrushes in the suburbs of the town will testify, for 
before the passing of the Act, any one might see numbers 
of nests containing young exposed for sale during the season 
in the Market Hall—a sale now stopped. It is a very 
debatable question whether it is desirable to allow such 
genera as Gulls, Gannets, Auks, Terns, &c., to increase and 
multiply to the extent permitted by nature, for while many 
fishermen affirm they are even now too numerous, and that 
the destruction of fish by such birds seriously affects their 
industry, others advocate the birds being protected, as they 
render good service in pointing out the shoals of fish, and 
also devour much fry of those species who would in their 
turn prey upon the herring; they also give notice by their 
cries when a boat approaches the rock, which at once tells 
the crew to sheer off. 
The amount of good done by insectivorous birds, which 
form the most numerous class, to vegetation in keeping 
within due bounds insect life is incalculable, and, as Brehm 
put it, “ to permit the insect world to make undue headway 
would amount to destroying Nature, for, in that case, the 
plant world on which her existence depends would cease to 
