AIGRETTES
(A note in _Pearson’s Magazine_, 1913.)
Am I in favour of legislation prohibiting the importation of plumage
into Great Britain?
I cannot conceive of any one, man or woman, with imagination, and
knowledge of the facts, who would not be in favour of such legislation.
That English women—English _ladies_—after years of revelation
concerning this dismal matter, should continue to support by their
demands the killing of myriads of beautiful birds _at breeding season_
is the most discouraging instance I know of the blindness of the human
creature whose vanity is threatened.
American law has banned the aigrette; why does English law lag behind?
Not one of our legislators would torture a bird, yet because a few
thousand miles separate them from the scenes of this butchery, they seem
either unable to imagine what it means or to find time to put a stop to
it. I commend to one and all the Report of the House of Lords Committee
who examined the whole question some years ago, and said:
“The evidence has been such as to show conclusively, in the
opinion of the Committee, that not only are birds of many
species slaughtered recklessly, but also that the methods
employed for slaughter are such as in many cases, and especially
in that of egrets, to involve the destruction of the young birds
and eggs.
“Birds are, as a rule, in their finest plumage at the time of
nesting, and have been shown to be especially the prey of
hunters at that season.”
Such Committees should not be appointed if their conclusions are not to
be paid attention to.