CO885-(21-23) — Page 618

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 885

23 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

2

were known to be opposed to the continued existence of the traffic in plumage. Accordingly, Lord Avebury, Mr. F. E. Lemon (Honorary Secretary to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds), Mr. James Buckland, and Mr. Walter Goodfellow, a member of the recent expedition sent by the British Ornithologists' Union to New Guinea, were asked to give us the benefit of their views. These gentlemen and the representatives of the Textile Trade Section of the London Chamber of Commerce attended at meetings held in February and March, 1911, and minutes of the evidence* which was then given are annexed. These meetings were followed by a long interval during which it was impossible for us to meet and we were not in a position to hold a fina! meeting to decide upon the terms of our report until the beginning of May, 1912.

5. As a result of our discussions we are unanimously of opinion

(a) that it is eminently desirable that all practicable measures should be taken for the suppression of the traffic in the feathers of those species of birds which are now destroyed merely for the sake of their plumage;

(6) that the only thoroughly satisfactory method of attaining this end is to secure an international agreement by which the importation of such feathers will be prohibited by all civilized countries, except when they are introduced for bona fide scientific purposes.

6. At an earlier stage in our deliberations we suggested to Lord Crewe that a letter should be written to the Foreign Office inviting Sir E. Grey to ascertain whether the leading Powers would be willing to send representatives to a Conference to be held in London for the purpose of discussing the prohibition of the importation of plumage. Lord Crewe communicated with the Foreign Office in this sense in September, 1910, but the reply received from that department was to the effect that a similar proposal made in 1909 had not been favourably received by many of the Foreign Governments to which it was submitted, and that, having regard to the opposition or indifference which had then been shown, Sir E. Grey was disposed to think that no useful purpose would be served by raising the question again.

A

In view of this reply, no further action was taken in the matter at the moment, but we understand that, since that time, the desirability of such a Conference has again engaged the attention of Sir E. Grey. The enclosed resolution adopted by the Inter- national Ornithological Congress which was held in 1910 (i.e., since the time when the Foreign Office received the unfavourable replies to their proposals), affords some evidence that public opinion on the Continent is becoming alive to the importance of this question, and it may, therefore, be hoped that if overtures were now renewed they would meet with a better reception. In any case, we would urge that the attempt should be made. suitable opportunity for re-opening the matter has been afforded by the fact that the delegates from the various countries which took part in the International Fur Seal Confer ence in 1911 have signed a protocol containing, among other recommendations, certain suggestions for international action in regard to the preservation of plumage birds. The Foreign Office have invited the observations of the Colonial Office on this protocol and we suggest that the Colonial Office should reply by urging the desirability of an international conference to consider the whole question and recommending that His Majesty's represent- atives abroad should be instructed to ascertain privately from the leading Powers whether a proposal for such a Conference would be favourably received, in order that, if there seems reason to suppose that the idea will obtain a fair amount of support, formal invitations to a Conference may be issued by His Majesty's Government.

7. If such a Conference is summoned, we consider that the delegates of His Majesty's Government should endeavour to secure an agreement on the following lines :-

(a) The importation of the skins and feathers of birds (other than ostrich feathers, eider-down and such other feathers as it may be considered desirable or unobjectionable to except) should be prohibited by every country taking part in the Conference.

(6) An exception should be made in the case of skins required for bona fide scientific purposes. The right to import for such purposes should, how- ever, be confined to institutions or persons to whom the Government of the country into which the skins are imported has granted a special permit, which should only be given on the recommendation of a Committee of ornithologists representing the national museums.

(e) Each Government taking part in the Conference should undertake to legislate for the prohibition of the export of skins and feathers from the countries and territories under its control, subject to the exceptions specified above.

Miscellaneous No. 263.

3

8. In the event of its being found impossible to summon an international Conference or of a Conference being summoned and proving abortive, we urge that His Majesty's Government should set an example to other nations by independently and at once introducing legislation on the lines indicated in sections (a) and (b) in the preceding paragraph. We consider that such legislation, while falling far short of that immunity from destruction of birds which might be achieved by international agreement, might diminish the incentives to destroy birds by diminishing the market for their plumage, and would leave Great Britain with clean hands.

9. It is, in our opinion, necessary that any law introduced in this country should follow the general lines of that introduced in 1908 by Lord Avebury rather than those of the bill introduced more recently by Mr. Alden. The difference between the two measures is that the first provides for the prohibition of the import of all species, with certain specified exceptions, while the second provides only for prohibition in the case of certain named species. We are advised that a law on the lines of Mr. Alden's bill would be unworkable, as it would necessitate the appointment of customs officers with sufficient ornithological knowledge to enable them to determine the species of bird from which a particular plume had been obtained. If it had not been for this difficulty, we would have recommended that, failing the adoption of the more stringent measures which we advocate, His Majesty's Government should at least take steps to assist other administrations to make their laws effective by prohibiting the import into the United Kingdom of any skins of which the export is prohibited by a British possession or dependency or by a foreign country.

10. In conclusion, we wish to emphasize our opinion that the duty of protecting bird-life rests primarily upon the Government of the country in which the birds are found, and that rigorous measures for preventing the export of plumage, except for scientific purposes, are as necessary as laws for prohibiting import.

11. In this connection we desire to observe that the prolonged intervals during which it was impossible for us to meet have not been entirely wasted. At our first meeting, Mr. Ogilvie-Grant undertook to draw up lists of the birds tound in the majority of the Crown Colonies, indicating those species which appeared to stand in need of more complete protection than was afforded to them by the existing laws. In the course of the last year these lists have been distributed by the Colonial Office to the Colonies concerned, with the suggestion that the local Governments should consider the desirability of adding any of the names which they contained to the list of species protected by their laws. These suggestions have been very favourably received and the laws of many Crown Colonies have been amended by increasing the number of protected species, while in many cases also the opportunity has been taken of improving the laws by the insertion of provisions which the experience of other Colonies has shown to be useful. We feel that, even if no more direct action for the suppression or restriction of the plumage trade is found possible, the Colonial Office may still do valuable work by assisting the Governments of the Colonies with information and advice and thus encouraging local efforts for the protection of birds.

The Right Honourable

Lewis Harcourt, M.P.

We are,

Sir,

Your obedient Servants,

EDWIN S. MONTAGU.

PERCY H. ILLINGWORTH.

S. F. HARMER.

C. E. FAGAN.

W. R. OGILVIE-GRANT. GEORGE W. JOHNSON.

H. J. READ.

R. E. STUBBS.

Note by MR. READ and MR. STUBBS.

Subject to the reserva- tions contained in the subjoined note.

We regret that we have not felt able to sign the foregoing report without reservation. Although as anxious as our colleagues to see an end put to the traffic in plumage,

we are unable to endorse the suggestion that separate action should be taken by this country in the event of an international agreement proving impossible.

29068

A 2