HL Deb 19 May 1908 vol 189 cc3-11

[SECOND READING].

Order of the day for the Second Reading read.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, this Bill has been introduced on behalf of the Linnean Society, the Zoological Society, the Society for the Preservation of Birds, and last, though not least, the Selborne Society. I have also presented a petition from the members of the Royal Society. In fact, it has the general support of the naturalists of the country, and especially of all lovers of birds. It is no doubt of a somewhat peculiar character, but the circumstances are exceptional.

The most beautiful species of birds are being rapidly exterminated. At the plume auctions held in London during the last six months of 1907, I am informed by Mr. Buckland, who has done so much to promote this movement, that there were catalogued 19,742 skins of the birds of paradise, 1,411 packages of the nesting plumes of the white heron (representing the feathers of nearly 115,000 birds), besides immense numbers of the feathers and skins of almost every known species of ornamental plumaged bird. For the year the sales of egrets amounted to 190,000, and of birds of paradise over 28,000. At the June sale, held at the Commercial Sale-Rooms, 1,386 crowned pigeons' heads were sold, while among miscellaneous bird-skins one firm alone catalogued over 20,000 kingfishers. A deplorable feature of recent sales is the offer of large number of lyre birds' tails and of albatross quills.

The constant repetition of such figures as the above—and these plume sales take place at least every two months—shows that the Legislature must choose between the extermination or the protection of the birds in question. A precedent for legislation on this subject exists in the law that now obtains in the State of New York, where the entire feather trade of the United States has its centre; according to this law no wild birds, other than certain species named therein, and birds for which there is an open season, can be taken or possessed at any time, dead or alive, except under the authority of a certificate, and no part of the plumage, skin, or body of any protected bird can be sold or had in possession for sale. I understand from the Secretary of the Game Preservation Department of the Department of Agriculture in the United States that the example of the State of New York has been followed by several other States.

We commend this Bill to the favourable consideration of the House on three main grounds:—(1) scientific; (2) æesthetic; (3) humanitarian; and I think I might add a fourth, namely, economic. As regards the first, it is evident that unless the slaughter is stopped several species of birds will be within a few years absolutely exterminated. Once destroyed they could never be replaced, and from a scientific point of view this would be deplorable. Then I come to the aesthetic aspect of the question. It is not only the fact that some species will be utterly annihilated, but that the victims are just the most beautiful; in fact, their beauty is their ruin. Moreover, birds' feathers in hats are, I submit, not ornamental, but, under the circumstances, repulsive. This is so self-evident that I feel I need not, and ought not to, occupy your Lordships' time in elaborating a proof of what no one will, I think, attempt to deny.

Lastly, I come to the humanitarian reasons for the Bill. We all know that birds, while beautiful at all times, are pre-eminently so at the breeding season. Just when our best feelings would induce us to give them a close time, they are most ruthlessly destroyed. The history of the snowy heron, from which the so-called egrets, or "ospreys" are obtained, is especially pathetic. They used to be a numerous and widely distributed species—harmless and beneficial to man. Now they are greatly reduced in numbers, and indeed in some places exterminated. At most times the birds are wary and difficult to approach, but at the breeding season their habits alter. They will run any risks themselves rather than allow their young to starve. Of this the hunters take a mean advantage. They wait under the trees and shoot down the old birds as they are bringing food for their little ones.

Mr. Pearson, Secretary of the North Carolina Audubon Society, has given a graphic description of the scene. He said— In the tall bushes, growing in a secluded pond in a swamp, a colony of herons had their nesting home. I accompanied a squirrel hunter one day to the spot, and the scene which met our eyes was not a pleasant one; I had expected to see the beautiful herons about their nests, or standing on the trees near by, but not a living one could be found, while here and there in the mud lay the lifeless forms of some of the birds. They had been shot down and the skin bearing the plumes stripped from their backs. Flies were busily at work, and they swarmed up with hideous buzzings as we approached each spot where a victim lay. This was not the worst; in four of the nests young orphan birds could be seen who were clamouring piteously for food which their dead parent could never again bring to them. One little one was lying with its neck hanging out of the nest, happily now past suffering. At this time the destruction of the parents means an even more cruel death to the young also. Thus, the 190,000 egret plumes sold last year mean at least 500,000 deaths.

The same thing is happening not only over Florida and the whole Gulf Coast of the United States, but also in California and great districts of South America. Dealers often state that "aigrettes" are manufactured, but this is not so; man has never yet been able to imitate successfully these beautiful plumes. All that are offered for sale have been taken from the backs of the smaller white herons. Even the stiff plumes, or "stubs," are not manufactured but are the plumes of a larger species belonging to the same family. The so-called "ospreys" used to be worn in the Army, but they were given up on account of the cruelty they involve. No one would say that our fellow countrywomen are less humane than the authorities of the War Office, but the fact is that they do not realise the suffering to which they are parties.

I am glad to see that this Bill has been most cordially and sympathetically received by the Press, but one or two writers have expressed the opinion that it would have little chance if women had votes. On the contrary, I firmly believe they would welcome it. Her Majesty the Queen, we gratefully recognise, has done much to check the wearing of plumes. The Englishwomen are indeed few who would wear an "osprey" if they realised that it involved not only the slaughter during the nesting time of the parent bird, but the starvation of the whole brood of young. Again, it is sometimes said that the only effect of excluding feathers here would he that they would be sold abroad. If this were so, we should then at any rate have no responsibility; we should not be parties to this cruel trade. But if your Lordships and the other House pass this Bill, English ornithologists and lovers of birds will appeal to our brother naturalists abroad, and we believe they would initiate similar legislation on the Continent and thus put an end to this cruel, wanton, and barbarous slaughter.

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

THE DUKE OF BEDFORD

My Lords, I hope your Lordships will be able to give a Second Reading to this Bill. I can add but very little to that which the noble Lord has said. If there are any objections to this Bill they will probably come from the trade, that is from the dealers in feathers and plumes. The value of the plumes to the wearers does not consist in the fact that the feathers belong to rare birds, but that the manufactured plume is the fashion of the moment. At the present rate of destruction the extinction of many of the most beautiful creations of Nature is inevitable, and the prohibition of the use of the plumage now would be only anticipating what, as far as the trade is concerned, must be the result in a few years. This Bill seeks to bring about by the preservation of the birds now that condition as far as the supply of birds' feathers to the trade is concerned which must ensue on their destruction in a few years time.

EARL BEAUCHAMP

My Lords, I am sure the objects of this Bill will commend themselves to every Member of your Lordships' House. This is a matter in which a great many of your Lordships will have taken a sympathetic interest; and it is impossible for anybody either to hear or read the account which has been quoted by the noble Lord who moved the Second Reading, and which I think I have read in the public Press, of the condition in which the herons' nests were found after a visit from some of the agents of the dealers, without feeling that some action ought to be taken.

My duty this evening is rather to express the hesitation felt by the official mind as to whether the Bill, as drawn, will entirely accomplish the object of the noble Lord. My noble friend will be one of the first to realise the distinction between the prohibition of imports and exports, and I venture to suggest that it might be more efficacious to prohibit exports from our Colonies rather than to prohibit imports into this country. Steps have already been taken in the Bermudas, Barbados, Trinidad, Fiji, Natal, St. Vincent, and elsewhere, to prevent the exportation of these birds and their plumage. Then, a large quantity of plumage is brought into this country, made up, and exported to the Continent, and it is not impossible that such legislation would divert that trade to the Continent without the advantage sought for being attained.

I am not sure that the noble Lord would have the entire sympathy of the public, or, at any rate, of the ladies, in the passing of this Bill, but I can assure him that His Majesty's Government are very anxious to assist him in securing the objects he has in view. There is one other consideration, and that is that there are some species in danger of extermination which, though very beautiful, are often a great inconvenience and sometimes a considerable nuisance in the countries in which they are found. An Australian experience occurs to my mind at the moment with regard to the sweet -briar. This is a plant which we all rejoice to see in our hedgerows, but it is one of the most inconvenient and obnoxious plants to the sheep breeder in Australia. In the same way a bird which we may think ought to be preserved for its beauty may be a great nuisance in the country from which it comes, and the people there may think it desirable that there should be fewer of them.

Therefore, the question arises, what will be the best step to take in order to give effect to this Bill? I would venture to ask your Lordships to agree to the Second Reading this afternoon, and I would then suggest that it should be referred to a Select Committee. The noble Lord himself has admitted that the Bill is of an exceptional character, and I think, in the circumstances, its reference to a Select Committee would be of considerable advantage. If the noble Lord would agree to that course the Select Committee would be able to consider the suggestion that representations should be made to foreign countries as to how far they would be willing to assist by preventing export, which I am not at all sure is not really the most efficacious way of preventing the distinction of these birds.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

My Lords, I think the course proposed by the noble Earl who has just spoken is probably the most convenient, and I hope my noble friend will agree to it. My noble friend made, I think, a very strong case both upon humanitarian and upon scientific grounds, for some effort to prevent the extinction of a number of interesting species of birds. I feel very decided sympathy with him, and I hope that I may be pardoned for saying that I believe I am one of the few who have taken a practical step in the direction my noble friend recommends; because, if I am not mistaken, it was while I was at the War Office that my military advisers agreed to accept a substitute for what used to be known as "osprey plumes," but which, I need not say, had not a single osprey feather in them, but which, nevertheless, were, I think, obtained by the destruction of a very harmless and interesting bird, the white egret. I think the noble Earl is quite right in suggesting that we should make it our endeavour to obtain the cooperation of foreign countries, for without that I am afraid the success of the Bill will not be very great.

THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Lord TWEEDMOUTH)

My Lords, whilst desiring to support the object of the Bill I would point out that Clause 2 proposes to give certain powers to the Privy Council which my advisers tell me are not altogether what they should be, and I am going to ask your Lordships to accept an Amendment to this clause when the Bill reaches Committee. With regard to the general question, the only fault I find with the Bill is that I am afraid its provisions will not carry out what is desired. You cannot prevent birds being killed in their own habitat; people will go on killing them just in the same way, and I think that if the noble Lord will make inquiries in the millinery shops of London he will find that a very large number of feathered hats come from Paris, and perhaps still more are sent from Germany marked as from France.

LORD ASHBOURNE

My Lords, it is quite obvious that any measure purporting to interfere with fashion, and, to a certain extent, with trade, must be surrounded with difficulty. The noble Lord who has introduced this Bill has taken the only practical step that has yet been suggested to bring the matter to the notice of the public, and by that means to influence fashion. I think we are under a great obligation to my noble friend. I am sure that if he will preside over the Select Committee he will be able to guide it to a wise and sensible conclusion. I think this discussion will do a great deal of good. It puts the matter in a practical shape before the minds of men and women. We know that the highest lady in the land has done much to check the wearing of plumes, and I cannot help thinking that by degrees fashion will play a potent part in putting an end to the destruction of these birds.

THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTH-WARK

My Lords, I am glad that the noble and learned Lord who has just sat down has given a warmer expression of sympathy than was elicited from the noble Earl who represents the official mind in this matter. I do not think we can rely very much on the influence of opinion and fashion. This is undoubtedly not a new matter. It has been for a long time before leaders of fashion, and the great influence to which the noble and learned Lord referred has been exerted, but I am afraid the efforts that have been made have failed. I hope the treatment which it is proposed to give the Bill will not be a dilatory treatment, because we know not only that the thing wants doing but that it wants doing quickly.

LORD AVEBURY

My Lords, I am obliged to your Lordships for the sympathetic manner in which you have received the Bill. With regard to the point made by Lord Tweedmouth, if he will look at the words at the bottom of the first page of the Bill he will see that it will be impossible for milliners to bring over from Paris hats containing plumage; and as regards Lord Beauchamp's statement that it would be more efficacious to stop export, I would remind him that a great number of these birds come from South America, Russia, and China—countries from which it is impossible for us to stop export. It is only recently that these birds have been killed in these countries in such large numbers, and it has been largely owing to the fact that there has been such a profitable sale in this country. Therefore, if we stopped the sale in this country we should put an end to a very important reason for the destruction of these birds. We do not wish to prevent the agriculturists of the countries concerned from taking any steps that may be necessary to deal with birds that may be an annoyance, but I believe it is felt that on the whole birds do a very great deal of good to agriculture. As it is the opinion of the Leaders on both sides of the House that it would be desirable to refer the Bill to a Select Committee, I shall be very glad to adopt that course, if your Lordships are good enough to agree to the Second Reading.

On Question, agreed to.

Bill read 2a, and referred to a Select Committee.