Editorials 31 the nature-study courses in our schools, special attention will be paid to the pedagogics of ornithology, while the later numbers will be more largely devoted to the recountal of experiences afield. Senator Hoar has again introduced into the United States Senate a bill designed to control the traffic in feathers for millinery purposes. It differs from the bill introduced by him last year only in excepting from its provisions birds which are used for food. 'The Millinery Trade Review,' in commenting on this bill, says: "The task of crushing such a measure will be made more difficult than at the last session, but crushed it must be, and every man or woman connected with the mil- linery trade must lend his or her aid in connection with that of the Millinery Merchants' Protective Association, whether capital is invested in the business or one is a wage-earner. His or her living in the seasons to come depends upon the rise or fall of this most iniquitous and childish measure." It is this final statement on which the specious pleas of the milliners are usu- aly based, whereas, as a matter of fact, no one thing would more greatly benefit the milliners' trade, as a whole, than the total abolition of feathers — many of which are worn exactly as taken from the bird — and their consequent replace- ment by various artificial ornaments, the manufacture of which would give employment to a much larger number of persons than are at present engaged in the millinery trade. In 'Harpers' Bazaar' for November 18, 1899, there appeared an editorial para- graph to the effect that as Herons are no longer killed for their plumes, which are now gathered from the ground and plucked from captive birds there was no longer any reason why these feath- ers should not be worn by the most humane-minded woman. Inquiry developed the fact that this paragraph was written by Mrs. Isabel Strong and was based on information furnished her by Mrs. Robert Louis Stevenson, who in turn had received it from a missionary to India. Requests for a correction of this er- roneous and misleading article resulted in an admission from the editor of the magazine in question that " unquestion- ably ... a comparatively small propor- tion of those egrets used are found upon the ground." Nevertheless, he has made no further reference in his pages to Mrs. Strong's paragraph, which led the reader to believe that all the plumes used were either picked up from the ground or plucked from birds captive in so-called ' Egret farms. ' Concerning these ' farms ' the editor of the ' Bazaar' is silent, and in every case where inves- tigation has been possible the 'farm' has proved to be a myth. One was described in great detail by a newspa- per correspondent, who made the mis- take of locating it in Yuma, Arizona, the home of Mr. Herbert Brown, a well-known ornithologist and member of Bird-Lore's Advisory Council. Inquiry of Mr. Brown develops the amusing fact that the ' farm ' consists of one lit- tle white Egret kept as a pet at the Southern Pacific Hotel. Admitting the possibility of picking plumes from the ground, it is absurd to suppose that the plume hunters would adopt this method to the exclusion of shooting, when one well-directed shot would yield more and better plumes than they might find in a week's search. Assemblyman Hallock has introduced a bird-protection bill in the New York leg- islature, which differs from the existing law in making the possesion of a bird's plumage as actionable an offense as pos- session of the bird itself. Under the pres- ent law it has been found impossible to convict millinery taxidermists having in stock the freshly made skins of native birds, but the amendment proposed, by making the old law active, will permit of the conviction of these, the worst offend- ers against it. We, therefore, urge our readers to use all possible influence in securing the passage of Mr. Hallock's bill.
