1 MARCH 1930, Page 22


[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] do not intend to continue this correspondence, as I venture to think that I have made my arguments sufficiently clear and cogent ; Mr. Cather is, if he will forgive me saying so, one of those unreasoning people who do the cause of animals more harm than good. If mankind in the dim far- off ages had followed his arguments, does it occur to him that we should have been without that great host of creatures which minister to our use and our pleasure, and in whom millions of us find our chief delight? It cannot have been pleasant for the horse when he was first brought in from the boundless plains, and he, the freest and most splendid of God's creatures, felt the bit in his mouth for the first time. Cattle, sheep, dogs and the rest, should all have been left where they were in unlimited freedom ; Gallus Bankiva (not Banksia please, owing to a printer's error) should have been left to crow and fight in the Indian jungles. I commend to the notice of Mr. Cather and his friends, the fact that our Society will give many creatures of all kinds comparative freedom at Whipsnade, and we hope that this example will be followed by all other " zoos," wherever possible.. If your correspondent and others would join me in endeavour- ing to start an increased agitation for humane slaughter of all animals for food, or to start a campaign against unlimited catching of wild species, by those who have little or no love or knowledge of wild creatures, then I and many others will gladly co-operate with them.—I am, Sir, &c.,