Page:Bird-lore Vol 01.djvu/356

" Voii cannot with a scalpel find the poet's soul, Nor yet the wild bird's sons'." Edited by Mrs. Mabel Osgood Wright (President of the Audubon Society of the State of Connecticut), Fairfield, Conn., to whom all communications relating to the work of the Audubon and other Bird Protective Societies should be addressed. Reports, etc., designed for this depart- ment should be sent at least one month prior to the date of publication. DIRECTORY OF STATE AUDUBON SOCIETIES ■With names and addresses of their Secretaries -, rr „^v,;r^ Mrs. F. W. Batchelder, Manchester. New Hampshire Massachusetts Miss Harriet E. Richards, care Boston Society of Natural History, Boston. Rhode Island Mrs. H. T. Grant, Jr.. 187 Bowen street. Providence. C nnecticut Mrs. William Brown Glover, Fairfield. New York Miss Emma H. Lockwood, 243 West Seventy-fifth street, New York City. New Jersey..... Miss Anna Haviland, 53 Sandford Ave., Plainfield, N.J. Pennsylvania Mrs. Edward Robins, 114 South Twenty-first street, Philadelphia. District of Coiumbia ' . .^ ! Mrs. John Dewhurst Patten, 3033 P street, Washington. Delaware Mrs. Wm. S. Hilles, Delainore place, Wilmington. Maryland Miss Anne Weston Whitney, 715 St. Paul Street, Baltimore. South Carolina.'.'.'.'.'....'........ l^'SS S. A. Smyth, Legare street, Charleston. Florida Mrs. C. F. Dommerich, Maitland. Qjjjij Mrs. D. Z. McClelland, 5265 Eastern Ave., Cincinnati. Indiana Amos W. Butler, State House, Indianapolis. Tii!„„,v Miss Mary Drummond, Wheaton. Illinois ,, ^ „ „ ^, , , tq^^ Mrs. L. E. Felt, Keokuk. ■Wisconsin.... Mrs. George W. Peckham, 646 Marshall street, Milwaukee. Minnesota Mrs. J. P. Elmer, 314 West Third street, St. Paul. Kentucky Ingram Crockett, Henderson. Tennessee M rs. C. C. Conner, Ripley. fexas Miss Cecile Sei.xas, 2008 Thirty-ninth street, Galveston. California Mrs. George S. Gay, Redlands. Bird Protection and the Merchant Milliners This year is full of significance in matters relating to bird protection, and a nev/ impulse seems sweeping over the country regarding the entire matter. Moreover, the increased interest is trace- able to perfectly sound and reasonable thinking, brought about by the increase of nature-study and the systematic circu- lation of the accepted and indisputable facts concerning the relations between birds and agriculture, as well as the attention attracted by protective legis- lation. To bear out this latter statement, I would ask every officer of an Audubon Society to read Bulletin No. 12 of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Divi- sion of Biological Survey, entitled 'Legis- lation for the Protection of Birds Other than Game Birds.' This pamphlet of nearly one hundred pages, written by T. S Palmer under the direction of Dr. Merriam, gives all existing laws, so that it may be seen at a glance in what States, or counties of a given State, bird laws are either absent, defective, or efficient. A thorough reading of this summary is sure to bring about much State legislation as well as lead to national cohesion, for, as the introduction says, 'The pro- tection of birds is a national, not a local, question.' The history of legislative protection is briefly given, beginning in 1791, when New York enacted a law protecting Heath Hens, and ending with the text of the Lacey Bill, which became a law in May last. This bill gives wide discretionary powers to the Department of Agriculture, and is of the greatest importance. Another matter, formulated, doubtless, 12S"