2 
was the action taken by County Councils under the Wild Birds 
Protection Amendment Act of 1894. He considered that the varied 
lists of birds for which protection had been sought showed the 
wisdom of making the powers optional. He thought the Society 
might do good by bringing before County Councils the way in 
which lapwings were treated. Lapwings are entitled to considera¬ 
tion for two reasons—they are useful auxiliaries to the farmer, 
because their diet is mainly insects, molluscs, and worms, and 
they supply a large amount of excellent food in the shape of plovers’ 
eggs—although some people think we ought to prohibit the taking of 
these eggs. The great bulk of the eggs is laid upon ploughed land, 
which is afterwards harrowed, sown, and rolled, and they would in 
any case be destroyed did not they find their way into the market; but 
to shoot and eat these birds, in addition to taking their eggs, is the 
height of ingratitude, and is a practice which should be stopped. 
With regard to legislation, Sir H. Maxwell said he was far from 
attaching too great importance to it; he attached a great deal more 
importance to the efforts of this and kindred societies, in diffusing 
sound information, and arousing intelligent sympathy with the objects 
they have in view. At present, the fate which awaited every rare bird 
that makes its appearance in the land is that of being shot, so as to 
be placed in a collection; it may be that in a few years the gun will 
be replaced by the naturalist’s camera, which can take shots at such 
birds with far more beneficial results. Besides the many books 
referred to in the Report, there was one which he considered, deserved 
notice, and that was Herr Gatke’s “ Heligoland, as an Ornithological 
Observatory,” which might be described as an “ epoch-making book.” 
The Chairman then remarked that “ there was a tendency on the part 
of some of us to desire to enforce our individual views too rigidly on 
the public, I would invite you,” he said, “ to treat the questions 
which come before us with as great elasticity and true liberality as 
possible. There are those who would enforce the second rule of this 
society—‘ that members shall discourage the wanton destruction of 
birds, and interest themselves generally in their protection’—in a 
manner which would' affect some of us rather seriously. There are 
those who think that field sports—game shooting, for instance— 
may be interpreted as the wanton destruction of birds; I do 
not say it is the opinion of the majority of the Society, but I 
know it is the opinion of some of its members, and I would venture 
strongly to deprecate their carrying such ideas too far. I would 
recommend you to hesitate before you do anything to alienate the 
great body of sportsmen in this country. I have had a tolerably 
long experience of them, and I would say that there is no body of 
persons with whom I am acquainted who have such an intelligent 
sympathy with wild animals, as those who are classed as sportsmen. 
I have ventured to put in this caution—if you will allow me to call 
it so—lest you should be dissatisfied that some of us do not take 
identical views with those held by others. In conclusion, let me 
again congratulate you on the position to which the Society has been 
brought in the course of this year. Its prospects may not be dazzling, 
but I think they are promising. The work already done may not be 
