I beg to move that this Bill be read a second time. When I got leave to introduce the Bill I explained shortly what its objects were. It is to prevent certain kinds of cruelty in the capture of birds and certain kinds of cruelty in keeping birds in too small a cage. I also stated that the Bill was the result of a deputation which went to the Minister for Justice; that he is in sympathy with it and would have introduced it as a Government Bill in the Dáil but he was afraid that it could not possibly reach the Seanad in time if that course were adopted. It was therefore suggested that the Bill should be introduced here.
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - WILD BIRDS PROTECTION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1927—SECOND STAGE.
I beg to second.
I think this Bill will entail very considerable hardship on a certain class of persons who make a living by the capture of small songbirds. A penalty of £25 is provided in the Bill——
That is the maximum.
—together with three months' hard labour for any person who uses bird lime for the capture of any wild birds. Some persons make a livelihood by the capture and sale of these birds, and I see no provision in the Bill for compensation for such persons, who will lose their livelihood. It occurs to me that this Bill is more or less of a one-sided character, bordering on class legislation. There are certain persons who take out guns to shoot down birds. It is not alone the birds they kill that matter, but the birds that they wound, which have to linger along until death releases them from their sufferings. The Bill makes no mention of that—that is sport.
CATHAOIRLEACH
You do not suggest that Senator Brown is feathering his own nest?
I know that Senator Brown is a kind-hearted man and that he did not look at the matter from the point of view that I am now putting—that he really did not think it was depriving certain persons of their living, and perhaps families of their bread and butter. I certainly could not vote for the Bill, as there is no provision made for the loss of employment which it will cause.
On most occasions I am in agreement with Senator Brown and I have no objection to supporting this Bill, but I want to take the opportunity of protesting against the unnecessary annoyance which farmers and cattle traders are subjected to by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, who, I am sure, are behind the Bill. I want to give some instances of the annoyance which they suffer. A farmer may send out a horse with a load of farm produce and when the horse gets to the market, owing to the heat and perspiration due to pulling the load his back or breast may be scalded by the harness. The inspector of the Society comes along and finds a sore and prosecutes the farmer for an act for which he is in no way responsible and could not foresee, because the horse would be in a perfectly sound condition when leaving home. The next instance I wish to give is that a farmer may send a number of animals to the market. Going along the road one of them may strike a stone with his foot or in some way get his foot injured, and it may be walking lame. If an inspector of the Society sees the animal the farmer is prosecuted for an act for which he is not responsible. Another instance is that of the Society's inspectors, or some of the members of the Society, poking around farmers' places. I admit this is to prevent the dishorning of cattle. In this case it is a deliberate act on the part of the farmer, but I cannot understand why any people should try to prevent the dishorning of cattle. It means the loss of markets in Great Britain, because a good many farmers over there will not have cattle unless they are polled, and if we do not supply polled cattle the Canadians will. Dishorning cattle, to my mind, when performed by a competent person, is no greater cruelty than the castrating of male animals. What I suggest is that Senator Brown should give me some assurance that he will make representations to the Society to cease these petty prosecutions.
CATHAOIRLEACH
This Bill does not deal with cattle or horses—it is confined to wild birds.
And it does not emanate from this Society. It is merely to bring the law here into the same position as it is in Great Britain and will be in Northern Ireland within the next few weeks.
I understood it was put forward by this Society.
Not at all.
They do not think of birds.
I thought Senator Brown would be able to do something with this Society to get them to be a little bit more moderate in their prosecutions.
CATHAOIRLEACH
The Senator might pay them a visit himself.
I never heard of the Society having anything to do with this Bill. It is brought forward at the suggestion of people who like to hear the song-birds and do not like them persecuted.
I agree with the Bill for one reason, if for no other, that it will restrict the activities of plover-catchers. They go about with these tremendous engines of war. In the case of golden plover, they come with great spring nets and they have these decoy birds held on by a thread. When they spring, the poor little bird hops, and he is kept hopping and hopping. He is kept for days, perhaps, in a bag, hungry, and is still kept hopping until he gets expert. These poor little birds are caught in that cruel way. To my mind, apart altogether from the question of cruelty to the birds, the destruction of green plover is a source of great loss to the country. The green plover is the most prolific devourer of noxious insects that we have. I am informed that they devour those grubs which cause the terrible rot we have amongst stock and which has been responsible for such heavy losses amongst farmers. I have heard that the green plover is one of the most tremendous devourers of these insects. If that is the case, this Bill is desirable apart altogether from the aspect of cruelty to the birds. I strongly support the Bill. I know that the poor little goldfinches, which should be a delight in the country, have practically altogether disappeared. They are caught in traps and by birdlime and sent wholesale to England.
Question—"That the Bill be read a Second Time"—put, and declared carried.