PARAGRAPH 438-FEATHER MILLINERY. whole population, which in the last analysis depends on the farmer. The United States has also prohibited interstate commerce in plumage forwarded in violation of local laws. It would seem, therefore, that the Federal Government should not permit the importation of articles, the use of which is forbidden in certain of the States." Small herons, similar in general appearance to the North American species which have been almost exterminated, exist in many parts of the world. Such species are not to be distinguished from those of North America, except by the eye of the skilled ornithologist. If such species are permitted by Federal law to be imported, this will give encouragement to the further destruction of our own most useful herons, and will be an encouragement to persons trading in bird plumage to deal in native species, the buying and selling of which is in many places prohibited by local laws. For these reasons I urge that the section above referred to be so amended as to prohibit the importation of the plumage of American birds or of birds whose plumage is indistinguishable from that of American birds. Yours, respectfully, GEO. BIRD GRINNELL. AIGRETTES AND FEATHERS OF WILD BIRDS. Hon. OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, HUNTINGTON, N. Y., February 13, 1913. Chairman Ways and Means Committee. DEAR SIR: I herewith inclose petition which if brought before your committee will be appreciated. Yours, truly, Hon. OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, DOUGLASS CONKLIN. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. We, the undersigned, desire to appeal to your committee that you recommend to Congress the removal of aigrettes and the feathers of other wild birds from the list of materials the importation of which is at the present time legalized. As we understand it, aigrettes are now contraband in the States of New York, New Jersey, Louisiana, Missouri, Oregon, and California. We beleieve that the Government should prohibit the importation of those birds' feathers which are contraband, as it now prohibits the importation of opium. We hope that the committee of which you are the chairman will use your influence in this direction. CORNELIA PRIME, Life Member Audubon Society (And 13 others). PONTIAC, MICH., January 22, 1913. Hon. OSCAR UNDERWOOD, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives. DEAR SIR: We, the undersigned, earnestly urge and request that you and the members of your committee will favor the "McLean bill for Federal protection of migratory birds," and also the appeal of the National Audubon Association of Societies, as advocated in "Schedule N of the tariff law." Hon. SERENO E. PAYNE, HERBERT H. H. Fox UTICA, N. Y., January 21, 1913. House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: We understand that the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives will very soon give a hearing on Schedule N of the tariff law, which deals with the importation of plumage of wild birds, including airgrettes. Wild birds are of the greatest value in every country because of the vast number of insects and seeds of weeds destroyed by them. As you probably know, the aigrettes are obtained from the white heron during the nesting season, and are torn from the parent bird while the young are left to starve in the nest. PARAGRAPH 438-FEATHER MILLINERY. As long as the importation of airgrettes and feathers of wild birds is legalized, just so long the birds of our own land will be killed and their plumage sold as "foreign." We therefore urge you as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, to recommend to Congress that the plumage of wild birds, including airgrettes, be removed from the list of materials which at the present time may legally be imported. Yours, respectfully, ELIZABETH CHRISTIAN (And 70 others). BRIEF OF HENRY OLDYS, SILVER SPRING, MD., ON THE IMPORTATION OF BIRD PLUMAGE, ETC. Hon. O. W. UNDERWOOD, SILVER SPRING, MD., January 28, 1913. Chairman of Committee on Ways and Means, United States House of Representatives. DEAR SIR: Kindly permit me the privilege of filing the accompanying brief on the desirability of amending Schedule N, paragraph 438, of the present tariff law, so as to prohibit importation of bird plumage for millinery purposes, excepting ostrich plumes and the feathers of domesticated fowls. Lack of time and facilities must be my excuse for not presenting this brief in more suitable shape. Very truly, yours, HENRY OLDYS. REASONS WHY SCHEDULE N SHOULD BE AMENDED SO AS TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF WILD BIRDS' PLUMAGE. [NOTE. See similar prohibition in the case of eggs of game birds in the present tariff act.] (1) In 10 years, at the present rate of slaughter, a dozen of the world's most beautiful species of birds will be extinct. Many more will be rapidly approaching extinction. (2) This slaughter can be stopped only by closing the markets. (3) London, Paris, Berlin, and New York are the world's great markets for bird plumage. (4) England and Germany are trying to close their ports to bird plumage. (5) Equally attractive hat trimming will be substituted and will satisfy women and milliners. (This will have to be done soon, in any event; the bill anticipates the change and saves the birds.) Manufacture of artificial feathers in the United States will be stimulated. Every nation is interested in preserving beautiful and interesting things to the world. (See amplification appended hereto.) HENRY OLDYS, (1) In 10 years, if slaughter be unchecked, a dozen of the world's most beautiful birds will be extinct. Many more will be approaching extinction. Remarks. Naturally, the most beautiful birds are the ones sought for millinery purposes. Egret: The bird which furnishes the fashionable aigrette has been practically exterminated in the United States and China, in both of which countries it was once very abundant. In Venezuela the export has been reduced from 1,500,000 in 1898 to 250,000 in 1908-a reduction of more than 83 per cent in 10 years. Birds of Paradise: A number of different species of these beautiful birds are nearly extinct. The long-plumaged birds of paradise, found only on the island of Jobi, were once numerous; but in 1906, despite active search by natives, only 70 skins were shipped from the island. The red bird of paradise of the island of Waigion has become rare and will probably soon be extinct. Each year every full-plumaged male of the great bird of paradise, found only in the Ayru Islands, is killed and the species is rapidly nearing extinction. PARAGRAPH 438-FEATHER MILLINERY. The blue bird of paradise has become so scarce that 20 hunters were able to find only three specimens in a three weeks' search over a large part of its limited home. Some years previous to 1907 two Chinese traders in Humboldt Bay were exporting, every three months, about 12,000 bird skins, chiefly those of the lesser bird of paradise. Mr. Walter Goodfellows, an English ornithologist, who has recently returned from New Guinea, the natural home of several species of birds of paradise, reports that on that island one can now walk miles and miles through the former haunts of these species (and where on an earlier trip he found them very numerous) without seeing or hearing any of even the commonest kinds. Impeyan pheasant. The handsomely feathered impeyan pheasant has been exterminated in the lower part of its range in the Himalayas and is being vigorously pursued in its last stronghold. Humming bird. A former governor of the island of Trinidad recently stated that during the nine years of his incumbency 12 species of humming birds inhabiting the island were exterminated. Albatrosses: On the islands of Laysan and Lisiansky (of the Hawaiian group) the Japanese, during nine months' operations, killed 259,000 birds, mainly albatrosses, reducing the colony on Laysan to one-sixth of its original size. Had they not been arrested they would have exterminated the entire colony. Terns: The tern, or sea swallow, formerly the most abundant bird of the Atlantic coast, was in a few years swept from the seashore, one carefully guarded colony being all that was left. Ptarmigans: One shipment from the port of Archangel, Russia, included 10 tons of ptarmigan wings. Skylarks: There have been 400,000 skylarks shipped from Finland to one Paris shop. (2) This slaughter can be stopped only by closing the markets. Remarks.-The birds sought for millinery purposes are scattered over the world, and are usually found in remote wildernesses. It is a common custom for millinery agents to obtain them through natives, much as the fur traders obtained furs from Indians. (In New Guinea they trade opium for birds of paradise). It is impracticable to enforce laws prohibiting this trade. This condition is recognized by the Dominion Governments of the British Empire, which recently petitioned the British secretary of state for the colonies to close the London market, urging that while it remains open it is almost impossible for them to enforce their own laws protecting rare species threatened with extinction. (3) London, Paris, Berlin, and New York are the world's great markets for bird plumage. Remarks.-London and Paris are the principal distributing points for plumage of wild birds, Berlin for manufactured feathers. New York is the distributing point for the United States. Paris is the greatest egret market. Some idea of the magnitude of the transactions may be obtained from the following: London sales: At the millinery sale in the London market held in February, 1912, one firm offered plumage representing 30,000 egrets, 4,000 birds of paradise, 14,000 humming birds. At the August, 1912, sale there were catalogued 44,000 pairs of ducks' wings (by one firm), 12,800 terns, 6,800 kingfishers, 1,000 emus (nearly). London strike: During the recent strike in London 618 tons of bird skins and feathers were among the imported goods detained at the London docks and warehouses. (4) England and Germany are trying to close their ports to bird plumage. Remarks.-Four successive attempts have been made to pass laws prohibiting importation of bird plumage into England. 1. In 1908, bill introduced into House of Lords by Lord Avebury (Sir John Lubbock). Passed House of Lords. Not reached by House of Commons. 2. In 1909, bill introduced into House of Commons by (Mr. Percy Alden?). Passed House of Commons. Not reached by House of Lords. 3. In 1910, bill introduced into House of Commons. Not passed. 4. In 1911 bill introduced into House of Commons. Not passed. Mr. James Buckland, of England, states that Germany will be first to pass such a bill, though no bill has yet been introduced into either German parliamentary body. (5) Equally attractive hat trimming will be substituted for prohibited plumage and will satisfy women and milliners. Remarks. The strong opposition met by bird protectionists has been due to the claims of fashion. What fashion decrees must be worn, though the heavens fall. If fashion perforce must use other materials, this opposition will be withdrawn. Hats will still be trimmed, but with other materials; and since all will use the same kind there will be no difficulty on the score of fashion. PARAGRAPH 438-FEATHER MILLINERY. The proposed amendment, if adopted, will strengthen the movement in England and Germany, leaving France soon the sole market; and France will be obliged to yield before long to so strong a movement. If no action be taken it will be but a short while before the milliners will be obliged to use other material, owing to the failure of supply; but in that event the birds will be gone beyond restoration. (6) Manufacture of feathers in the United States will be stimulated. Remarks.-The manufacture of feathers of domesticated fowls into hat decorations is a growing industry in the United States, as is shown by the following figures, taken from the census reports: Manufacture of artificial plumes and flowers in the United States. Profits in 1904, $1,604,000, on capital of $2,568,000 (62) per cent); profits in 1909, $5,220,000, on capital of $9,693,000 (533 per cent). It will be readily understood that an industry paying more than 50 per cent profit on the capital invested will attract capital, and it is equally plain that if the full burden of hat decoration be thrown on artificial feathers and flowers the business of supplying the greatly augmented demand must itself be greatly augmented. Thus the passage of the amendment, besides saving to posterity many species of birds (for our action will be followed by other nations) and winning credit to the United States for preeminence in far-sighted statesmanship and broad-minded generosity, will at the same time give employment to much of our capital and many of our laborers. (7) Every nation is interested in preserving beautiful and interesting things to the world. Remarks.-Think what the negative of this proposition implies. If vandals run amuck among the old statuary and paintings, no one is to lift a hand to prevent the destruction! The Laocoon, Apollo Belvedere, Venus di Medici, the works of Titian, Rembrandt, Da Vinci, Murillo, Rubens destroyed never to be replaced, because of lack of a protector among the great nations! The Sphinx broken up and carted away for building stone without a protest! But posterity will hold the present age responsible and will brand it as Omar has been branded for destroying the Alexandrian library, and the Goths and vandals for the destruction that has become a byword and given us the terms vandal and vandalism. This will be marked as the age when ignorance, cupidity, and supineness combined to exterminate the whale, the seal, the manatee, the alligator, the American antelope, the moose, the caribou, the elk, and hosts of fur-bearing animals, besides many valuable, beautiful, and interesting birds and swarms of valuable food fishes. History will not listen to the plea, "It was not my business." I will answer: "You were there and could have prevented it; therefore, it was your business. You failed to do your duty. The only explanation is that you were corrupt, ignorant, or weak. The world was committed to your charge. How have you executed your trust? You have robbed posterity. You found the world full of varied and valuable forms of life and have left it a desert. What a man can prevent, that is he responsible for. You shall wear the badge of shame throughout succeeding ages. You shall be known as destroyers more vicious than the Huns." PARAGRAPH 438-BED FEATHERS. BED FEATHERS. TESTIMONY OF W. H. ROBINSON, REPRESENTING THE ROBINSON-RODERS CO., NEWARK, N. J. The witness was duly sworn by the chairman. Mr. ROBINSON. I want to get changed if possible paragraph 438, Schedule N. The present duty on the manufactured article is 60 per We ask to have downs for bedding purposes, crude, dressed, or manufactured, reduced to 35 per cent. cent. Mr. FORDNEY. What paragraph are you speaking of? Mr. ROBINSON. Paragraph 438, Schedule N. We ask to have feathers for bedding purposes, manufactured or dressed, reduced from 60 per cent to 25 per cent. We ask to have feathers for bedding purposes, raw or crude, reduced to 10 per cent. We ask to have feathers for bedding purposes that have been used for humans-in other words, second-hand feathers-put at a duty of 100 per cent. The CHAIRMAN. What is that? Mr. ROBINSON. A duty of 100 per cent, making it prohibitory. The CHAIRMAN. Can not feathers be cleaned? Mr. ROBINSON. Yes; they can. The CHAIRMAN. If they are cleaned, is there any reason why thev should not come in? Mr. ROBINSON. The boards of health usually order them destroyed, so they must think they can not be cleaned satisfactorily. For your information, about 50 per cent of the feathers used in first-class pillows in this country are second-hand. I know that because I have sold a lot of them. Mr. KITCHIN. How much do you ask us to reduce the finished product? Mr. ROBINSON. About on an average of 50 per cent. Our understanding is it is your intention to reduce the tariff, and we want to operate right along. The CHAIRMAN. On this article you are talking about the duty is largely prohibitory. We are not proposing to reduce the tariff just blindly. If a reasonable amount of importations come in, and there is reasonable and full competition, that does not necessarily mean we are going to reduce the rates. Where we run against prohibitive rates, and not fair competition, I think it is the purpose of the committee to reduce the duties. There seems to be very little competition from abroad in this item about which you speak. Mr. ROBINSON. It is not a large business, anyway. The items which come under paragraph 438, feathers for millinery purposes and feathers for bedding purposes, are not separated. Feathers for millinery purposes is a very much larger item of importation than bed feathers. The CHAIRMAN. There is practically no importation of bed feathers in this country, is there, under this 60 per cent duty? Mr. ROBINSON. Under the 60 per cent duty? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. ROBINSON. Yes; there is quite a large importation, but it does not pay 60 per cent. |