HL Deb 21 July 1908 vol 192 cc1655-6

[SECOND READING.]

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

*LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH

My Lords, this is a very short and simple Bill, and one which I think will command the support of all Members of your Lordship's House. The only operative clause is the first clause, which provides that any person who takes or attempts to take any wild bird by means of a hook or other similar instrument shall be guilty of an offence, and shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding 40s. and for a second or subsequent offence to a penalty not exceeding £5.

The case for the Bill is this, that in severe winters a great many of our smaller birds—thrushes, blackbirds, starlings, and birds of that type—congregate near the sea in some of the milder districts of the West of England and Wales. It has been brought to the notice of those who are interested in the preservation of wild birds that a system of catching these birds by means of hooks has grown up in certain places on the coast. A well-known naturalist, who was an eye-witness of what was taking place, records that in the hard winter of 1906 birds were driven down to the coast; and not only did large numbers of them perish of cold and hunger in the fields—which, of course, it is impossible to prevent—but many were driven close to the haunts of population, and some of those who desired to catch them scraped small portions of land free from snow, and by means of baited hooks took a considerable number of birds. The account given is one which cannot possibly fail to awaken sympathy. The description supplied by eye witnesses is to the effect that so blind to danger were the birds made by hunger that they were not deterred by the frantic struggles of those already hooked.

It seems to me that there is nothing but undiluted cruelty in this method of taking small wild birds. I do not think it is widely taken advantage of, and I am certain it is contrary to the wishes and the feeling of the great majority of the population; but, under the present state of the law, they are powerless to prevent it. I um advised that this Bill will prohibit the practice altogether, and I hope your Lordships will give it a Second Reading.

Moved, "That the Bill be now read 2a."—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)

EARL BEAUCHAMP

My Lords, I have to say that His Majesty's Government are not only willing but anxious to do all they can to assist the noble Lord in passing this Bill; and I am quite sure the Scottish Office will also assist in expediting its progress.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.