THE PLUMAGE BILL.
[TO. THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—I am not able to appeal to your readers with the same virulence as that which flows from Mr. Massingham's ready pen, but with nearly forty years' knowledge of the feather trade and many years' close study of the attacks which have been made upon it by its enemies, I protest against the travesty of facts which Mr. Massingham endeavours to impose upon a credulous public.
In his letter appearing in your issue of January 29th he complains of repetition of statements by the trade, after allow- ing himself to repeat statements that have served for many years as propaganda for a Plumage Bill—statements that were dealt with and disposed of many years before-the birth of the Plumage Bill Group, and now repeated-swith further distort tion. He mentions several species of birds,- and asserts that they " and many, many others " are on the verge of eaters mination. Such assertions are 'nothing more than-repetition of propaganda of many years ago. Recent expeditions to tropical countries by naturalists have proved that .the:speoies he mentions exist in millions. He writes of the extermination of the- Bird of Paradise, probably ignorant of the fact that the special pleader- for the- Plumage Bill in 1908 'stated-that these birds would be totally exterminated within three years from. that -.date. I can definitely state that there has not been the slightest evidence of diminution during the - twelve years which have elapsed. Thanks,to efficient laws- which pro, vide for their protection and for the trade in their plumages, the Birds of Paradise are as numerous as ever. He quotes the declaration of the High Commissioner of New Zealand that the last colony of rare birds had been wiped out. I am in possession of correspondence which shows that the High Com- missioner of New. Zealand could not substantiate his assertion. He.. states that 200 millions of guano-producing birds were killed in one month in a Pacific island for the London.plumage trade. This is partly gross exaggeration and partly deliberate untruth, if it relates, as I presume it does, to a poaching raid carried out on the Island of Laysan by Japanese as far back as 1909. He quotes this, sheltering himself behind the Director of the Port Elizabeth Museum. His insinuation undoubtedly is that such incidents are regular monthly occurrences. The plumage of the birds in question never had any value for millinery purposes, and the figures he quotes are absolutely incorrect. His absurd statement that sea-birds only land at breeding times needs no comment.
I apologise for the length of my reply, and while repudiating the Drapers' Organizer as any authority on matters concern- ing the feather trade, invite its directorate and editor to spend a few hours in the City to inspect the warehouses, factories, stocks, and workers of the trade. The British Museum has already been informed that our doors are open to their repre- sentatives, and this invitation is cordially extended to your- self, Mr. Editor.—I am, -Sir, &c., C. F. DOWiniA14. 1, 9, and 3 Oxford Court and 97 Cannon Street; E.C. 4.
Previous page
