[ 7 ] 
found very suitably catered for. But sentimentalists wlio have mounted 
this hobby should avoid riding it—to use a colloquialism—to death, 
as, alas! so many are doing. The risk, possibly, is not so remote as 
people think—if, indeed, they have ever thought about it—of the 
scientific interest that is nowadays taken by so many in ornithology 
being endangered and checked through harsh and excessive legislation. 
Would not such be a great calamity if it came to pass? It is occasionally 
necessary to obtain specimens of birds and eggs with a view to studying 
and elucidating their history, though rare breeding species, I may in¬ 
cidentally observe, are very far from coming within the' scope of my 
mental reflections. Now laws must not be violated under any pretexts, 
so, personally I should entertain no objection to County Councils being 
empowered to issue certain “ permits ” to duly accredited naturalists, 
temporarily exempting them from the operation of the law, always pro¬ 
vided that the particular species whose acquisition or whose eggs were 
considered necessary in the cause of science was definitely stated in 
advance. Honest research should be encouraged ; it is wanton spoliation 
and destruction that need to be stamped out. 
Knowing the capacity of professional birdcatchers for clearing dis¬ 
tricts of any goldfinches that may come in their way, not to name other 
pretty and inoffensive wild birds, nothing would please me better than 
to see the practice legally condemned. It is, surely, taking away with 
one hand what is presented with the other to find eggs and young birds 
protected during the breeding season, and then, when it is over, to have 
a rabble of worthless fellows let loose upon the country to ply a trade 
that not only must be frequently associated with trespass, but is repug¬ 
nant to all who have once had an opportunity of noting its procedure, 
and who realise its baneful effects on the districts decimated. I am 
well aware that what is everyone’s business is no one’s, but bird lovers 
have wonderfully increased in numbers of late years, and detections and 
prosecutions should be simple enough once the trade was made illegal. 
But, in such an event, trivial fines; to be easily paid by the sale of birds 
caught subsequently would pretty well leave the question where it was. 
Can anyone suppose that game-poaching would be carried on to the 
extent it still is if breaches of the law on this head had been less 
temperately dealt with in the past? The infliction of a moderate fine 
scarcely acts as a deterrent. The money is virtually paid out of the 
proceeds of the next “ haul,” while it is certain that the detection of 
