Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-03-23

run the same gamut So Is sort OF
fugitive law set up by the spoilers under
which the victim Is left no chance OF es-
cape.
The various commonwealth In the
United States have passed more or less
efficient laws for the protection of game
within their borders. The federal gov
eminent likewise has a law which pro-
hibits the interstate Shipment of game
protected by given states. These laws are
somewhat difficult of enforcement, but
are comparatively effective.
With relation to the birds that arc
slaughtered in foreign lands this govern
ment has taken no action other than to
place a duty of 20 per cent on imported
raw feathers and 60 per cent on imported
dressed feathers. Some of the states have
stipulated that the feathers of no species
of bird found in that state shall be offer
ed for sale, even though imported. The
general sale of feathers, however. makes
it easy for the dealers to evade the law.
Now appear the representatives of the
great associations that are friends TO
bird life and that want to prevent the ex-
termination of attractive birds whether
they are native of the United States or
of some other community. Prominent
among these advocates are such men as
DIR. William T. Hornaday, president of
the New York Geological Society; T. Gill
bert Pearson. secretary National Associa-
ton Of Audubon Societies, and Henry
Oldys, bird expert of the Department of
Agriculture. These men see a way out.
The special session of Congress is to
revise the tariff. When, in that revision
the schedule is reached which has to do
with the duty that is imposed upon i'm
ported feathers, the friends Of bird life
will ask that very simple little clause
be inserted. This clause will read some
thing as follows:
provided, That the Importation of
the plumage Of any wild bird is hereby
prohibited"
SO, at single stroke, would it be more
impossible for the women of America to
wear the plumage of wild birds upon
their hats. II any woman We're to ap-
pear wearing aigrettes after the passing
of this law she could be called upon to
explain the source from which she Sc
cured them. The merchant selling them
would likewise be faced with the neces-
sity Of satisfactory explanation, and
SO might, aigrettes be traced to the source
from which they came. AS it is unlawful
to kill the egret in the United States and
unlawful to import its plumage, there
Would be no escape.
1t has been suggested that under such
a law the aigrettes that are now in this
country would be very highly priced, and
would continue to appear on hats Tor
years to come. The bird lovers state that
they have no fear OF the feathers ap-
pearing on fashionable hats even on Eas-
ter Sunday a year from today. They
base this assertion upon an alleged I'M
Outstanding of a certain phase OF the
feminine mind. Wearing an aigrette in
the first place would be confession OF
the use of plumage that was a year old.
Such plumage would be quite generally
discarded at the end of the season and
would come to be worn only by ladies
maids and such members of the servant
class as fall heir to the discarded raiment
of their mistresses. So would the popu-
larity of the feather as a hat adornment
cease to exist at the end of the season.
OF course. the closing of the American
markets to bird plumage would not Of