HL Deb 09 February 1866 vol 181 cc292-305
LORD BATEMAN

rose to put the Question to the noble Earl at the head of the Government of which he had given notice, but said that he desired to preface it by a few observations on the subject to which it referred. A very large and influential meeting, composed of eminent agriculturists from every part of the kingdom, with a deputation from forty-four or forty-five counties in England and Scotland, had been held on the previous day in St. James' Hall, in order to confer together on the subject of the cattle plague, and to determine what representations they should make in regard to it to the Government. Certain resolutions of the strongest nature were passed at that conference. Although all parties and shades of opinion, as well as all classes interested in the cattle trade, were represented at that meeting, and although there might have been some slight difference of view manifested on certain minor points of detail, yet. he thought he was justified in saying that there could not possibly have been greater unanimity displayed than was exhibited at that conference. It was arranged that a deputation should wait upon the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary on that morning; and the object of his present Question was to ascertain from the noble Earl the nature of the reply given by Sir George Grey to the members of that deputation. He wished to impress on the noble Earl that that deputation was not the first by a great number which had already attended at the Home Office. The county with which he was connected—one of the largest cattle-breeding counties in the country (Herefordshire)—had made representations of the same kind to the Home Secretary without the slightest result. He therefore now desired, if possible, to extract from the Government some indication of what their policy with reference to that fearful scourge was likely to be. There had already been far too much delay, and the great interests involved could not continue to wait while the Government were hearing this person and that person, and making a party question of that subject. It was not a party but a national question. Those with whom he acted did not wish to make it a party question, but to press their views with respect to it upon the attention of the Government, and to elicit some answer to the representations daily being made to them from all parts of the kingdom. If he was not misinformed, the Royal Agricultural Society of England applied a few days ago to be received as a deputation, and the Government told them that they must put it off till Monday next. Now, they had had too much putting off; and that was the very thing they complained of. There was, certainly, the promise that a Bill should be introduced into the other House. It might not be in strict accordance with the usages of Parliament that some idea of the nature of a measure about to be brought into the other House should now be given to their Lordships; but on a vital question of such extreme urgency as that, he really thought the Government might, without impropriety, afford some intimation of their probable policy. The noble Lord concluded by asking the noble Earl the First Lord of the Treasury for the Answer of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the Deputation from the Cattle Plague Conference held at St. James' Hall?

EARL RUSSELL

In reply to the Question of the noble Lord, I have to say that my right hon. Friend (Sir George Grey) has not given any formal answer to the deputation this morning. He received them, but he did not state what was the intention of the Government. The better and certainly the more regular and convenient course to pursue when a measure is about to be proposed to Parliament is to allow the Minister who is charged with the introduction of that measure to explain its provisions, and state the views of the Government on the subject to which it refers. It is, no doubt, important that there should be no unnecessary delay; but it was only last Tuesday that Her Majesty delivered Her Speech from the Throne, and the interval between that day and Monday is, I think, not unreasonable. The noble Lord says, and I agree with him, that the measure of the Government ought to be discussed with an absence of party spirit, and I trust it will be discussed in such a way that the Legislature may come to a right decision. In France and Belgium measures have been adopted by the Governments of those countries which have been in a great degree successful. I hope that the proposals made by Her Majesty's Government will be equally wise, and in the meantime I trust that the delay from this day to Monday will not be productive of inconvenience to the interests concerned.

THE EARL OF DERBY

There is one very good reason, as it seems to me, why this question should not be considered a party question, and that is, because the feeling seems to be unanimous—even the general supporters of the Government concur—in deprecating the course which the Government have pursued. I cannot help adverting to what seems to be an inconsistency in the course taken by the noble Earl at the head of the Government. During the whole of the autumn and winter the various Orders in Council have been justified by saying that it was necessary to ascertain the views of the country, and that the Government had to feel their way in order to know how far they might go—so that if they found the feelings to be strong and general they might adopt more stringent measures. Now, if there is anybody able to speak with authority on this question and represent the opinion of the country, it is the Royal Agricultural Society of England. If, however, I understand aright, they requested the honour of an interview with the noble Earl at the head of the Government in order to lay before him the unanimous opinion of the Society. I should have thought that the noble Earl would have been glad to receive such a body; but the noble Earl, I am informed, has told them that although he will be very glad to hear what they have to say, he cannot receive them until two o'clock on Monday—that is, two or three hours before the measure of the Government, which will then be cut and dried, is submitted to the House of Commons. If the noble Earl was really desirous to obtain the opinion of the Royal Agricultural Society, it appears to me he ought to obtain it before Monday, so that if desirable the Government might act upon their representations. Seeing them on the very day the Government measure is to be brought in does not, I confess, seem to me a very advantageous mode of profiting by the advice of the Royal Agricultural Society.

EARL RUSSELL

With regard to the first observation of the noble Earl, I am informed that a very distinguished member of the Royal Agricultural Society, the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, has expressed an opinion that Her Majesty's Government have done all that they ought to have done. No doubt others are of opinion, on the contrary, that the Government ought to have taken more vigorous measures. I have this very day presented a petition from an association in that county—Aberdeen—which has shown so much vigour and energy in taking measures against the cattle plague, suggesting that the measures adopted in that county are worthy of consideration. If the Royal Agricultural Society had come to me a fortnight ago I might have appointed an earlier day to receive them, but when they applied to me I was unable to see them before Monday next.

EARL SPENCER

said, he would endeavour not to weary their Lordships, but he hoped to be allowed to make a few observations upon the subject introduced by the noble Lord (Lord Bateman). He was of opinion that we had come to a great crisis in the matter of the cattle plague. In a very short time the grass would begin to grow, and it was necessary to act with great vigour during the short interval that remained, unless their Lordships made up their minds to see this terrible plague ravage the country during the whole of the summer. During the discussion in the other House of Parliament, frequent remarks had been made upon the Report of the Royal Commission. He thought it his duty to make a few observations upon those remarks, and he only regretted that their Lordships had not the advantage of hearing some member of the Commission better able to explain their views. It had been asserted that the Government were justified in not taking more stringent measures by the very great division of opinion that existed among the members of the Commission. It was true that as many as four reports were appended to the Report of the Commission; but if these reports were examined it would be found that there were not such great and important differences as were alleged to exist. It was true that Mr. M'Clean, an eminent engineer and a member of the Commission, differed from his colleagues in not attaching so much importance to the cattle plague as they did. With regard to the other eleven Commissioners, they agreed as to the identity of the disease with the rinderpest, which was so well known in Germany, Prussia, and Russia, and known not only to history, but by sad and constant experience every year. All the medical men and veterinary surgeons abroad had studied the disease, and the only thing they were agreed in recommending was the adoption of the most repressive and stringent measures. As to the cure of the disease, when it once broke out they gave it up. The Commissioners were, therefore, of opinion that strong and stringent measures must at once be adopted in this country to stop the disease. They did not wish to leave the adoption of these measures in the hands of the local authorities, believing that the Government were better able to carry them out and to instruct the country in regard to what was necessary to be done. On this point they were all agreed; and they were also unanimous in thinking that the only measure likely to be really efficacious was in putting a total stoppage to the movement of all the stock in Great Britain. Then came the difference between the Commissioners to which he had adverted. The minority of the Commission—and he was one of that minority—shrank from advising the Government to adopt a measure so novel and so gigantic in its proportions as the majority thought the Commissioners ought to recommend. The minority were of opinion that they were called upon to recommend some practical measure which the Government could put into execution. The arguments that weighed with them were that to stop the trade in cattle was impossible, that there were many parts of the country in which the disease had not appeared, and that the country at that time was not aware of the importance of the subject. The minority considered that the course and custom of so important a trade could not be revolutionized by a stroke of the pen under such circumstances. They, therefore, recommended measures which he admitted were not so efficacious, but which they thought were more useful because they would be carried out. It was thus only as to the degree of stringency that the Commissioners differed. This was in the month of October. He must say he still entertained the opinion that the minority of the Commissioners were right in the view they took and the recommendations they made at that time. But matters had now changed. On the 4th of November the total number of cattle that had died of the plague was not more than 10,000, while the number of deaths was now 11,000 a week, and the deaths altogether amounted to 120,000. The country was now thoroughly alarmed. Another circumstance favourable to the re-consideration of the subject was, that a change was taking place in the meat trade. There had been of late an enormous increase in the dead meat of the country, and the result was that, if it were indispensable to stop the movement of stock in the country, the trade would be able to accommodate itself to the change, while in October they would have been unable to do so. Another point was deserving of consideration. In two months' time the grass would be growing, and the farmers would be obliged to purchase their stock and replenish their herds. After that had been done the adoption of restrictive measures would be almost impossible. Was it, therefore, too much to ask the large towns to put themselves to some slight inconvenience for only six weeks? He conceived that a vast difference existed between that proposition and what was contemplated in October last, when the large towns would have had to submit to stringent measures for six months without having any very clear idea as to what the result would be upon the supply and price of meat. Still, he was bound to confess that a measure restricting the locomotion of cattle could not now be recommended with the same confidence as a cure for the cattle plague as it could have been six months ago. He especially doubted very much whether the total stoppage of cattle traffic would put an end to the disease in Cheshire, because he believed the air of the district was so thoroughly impregnated with it as to be past cure, until the infection actually died out of itself; he felt, therefore, that this measure alone would not be sufficient. He would, therefore, ask the Government seriously to consider the proposals of so large and influential a meeting as that held yesterday. He thought it would be necessary to go as far as to cleanse all the places where any diseased animals had been. He agreed with Dr. Lyon Playfair who had stated that if the recommendations of the Commission were to be carried out with the intention of doing good, it would be absolutely necessary for Government to give the strictest instructions to disinfect every shed where diseased cattle had been. In referring to Dr. Lyon Playfair, he must allude to what had fallen from the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll) on a previous occasion, with reference to a letter which Dr. Playfair had written to Lord Grenville on this subject; and which the noble Duke stated had influenced the Government in not acting on the Report of the Commissioners. He felt certain that Dr. Playfair had written that letter not to deter the Government from adopting the Report, but, on the contrary, to incite them to greater exertion. But time was wanted to do this, and the proposed suspension of all cattle traffic would give time for the cleansing not only of the market places and sheds, but also of the railway trucks, so that in the spring there would be no fear of animals catching the infection by being placed in infected places. He had had considerable difficulty in bringing himself to see the necessity of such stringent measures; but when he saw an influential meeting such as that of yesterday, representing all the counties in England, agreeing upon the question, he was willing to waive his own opinion, and consent with the rest to the course proposed. And even if the stoppage of cattle traffic and other measures for the period suggested failed to accomplish the one great object all had in view, still the advantages which would result from the arrangement would be very great. The disease would certainly be very much decreased for one thing, and much future distress prevented. He had sanguine hopes that if the Government would take the question in hand with vigour and determination, the disease would be eradicated as it had been from France and Belgium by the respective Governments of those countries. He would, in conclusion, press upon the attention of the Government the resolutions come to at the meeting yesterday, and say that although he did not desire to see them all embodied in the Government measure exactly as they stood, yet they were all worthy of the consideration of the Secretary of State, and he would be glad to see the spirit of them imported into his Bill.

LORD WALSINGHAM

said, he was very anxious, as a member of the Royal Agricultural Society, to remind their Lordships that a deputation from the Society had waited upon a Member of the Government two months ago, and that the proposed deputation was not the first. He said this because he feared that some of their Lordships might be led to believe that the Society had been backward in pressing their views upon the Government. As he would have an opportunity of expressing his opinion upon the subject when the deputation waited on the noble Earl, he would not now say more than that he agreed with the noble Lord who had last addressed the House.

EARL GRANVILLE

My Lords, I regret very much to find that some remarks which I thought it necessary to make in reference to the recommendations of the Commission have been construed into an attack upon it. But the idea of attacking the Commission never entered into my head. On the contrary, I think Her Majesty's Government owe a deep debt of obligation to the Commissioners. At a time most inconvenient to themselves they devoted their energies to a most difficult task, and although they put the Government to some inconvenience in recommending a course which the Government, from other reasons, did not think it right to adopt, yet I do think the country has been most deeply benefited by their able Report, especially in respect to the immense mass of information which they have analyzed and condensed, and which they have presented to Parliament in so clear a form, and he thought he should have been wanting in respect to the Commissioners and the country if he had not stated why their recommendations had not been followed. A very able and intimate friend of his, one of the Members of the Commission (Mr. Lowe), thought that this explanation was an attack upon the Commissioners; but he was sure that his right hon. Friend would be glad to learn that he had been misinformed in the observations which he had made with reference to the Privy Council. My right hon. Friend has complained of the Privy Council for not having summoned Dr. Simonds, while the fact is Dr. Simonds was the first person we saw upon the subject, and he with good reason declined to act in behalf of the Government. And with reference to another charge, I have to say that the Order in Council issued on the authority of Lord Palmerston and the noble and learned Lord upon the Woolsack was simply an extension to Scotland of the first Orders issued. Then we were charged with not having found out speedily enough whether the disease was the actual rinderpest or not. That is not the case. Sufficient doubt existed among professional men as to the nature of the disease to render it inadvisable to mention the name "rinderpest." Accordingly, the word "rinderpest" did not occur in the first Order; but it was inserted in the second Order issued on the 11th August. Some complaint, too, has been made that the appointment of the Commission was delayed unnecessarily; but the fact is that there is a great difficulty in appointing a Commission in the dead season of the year, so many gentlemen are away from home. The addresses of some were not known; others were in Switzerland; and, of course, endless delays from such causes were experienced. I think that your Lordships will agree with me that my noble Friend the Prime Minister is right in asking your Lordships not to anticipate the measure which is to be introduced on Monday. The noble Earl opposite alluded to the unanimous opinion of the House.

THE EARL OF DERBY

I said there was a very general expression of opinion on the part of the House.

EARL GRANVILLE

Yes, and the speeches in the House bore out that impression; but I found, in the course of conversation, that even leading Members on the Opposition side of the House entertained the opinion that there would have been a very strong opposition to a uniform Order, and some noble Lords considered it absolutely impracticable. I cannot acknowledge that in our conduct we waited to be guided by a little rise or fall in public opinion. We found that we really had not the power of enforcing arbitrarily upon the whole country measures which could only be carried out by the acquiescence of local opinion, and this feeling dictated our conduct as far as possible. The great advantage which an Act of Parliament possesses over an Order in Council is that the proposals before being accepted are well discussed, and different opinions upon the matter find expression and are read in every part of the country. But I earnestly hope the Bill will not be treated as a party measure.

EARL FORTESCUE

said, that from personal experience, he felt bound to express his conviction that any attempt to enforce stringent uniform orders throughout the country would not only have been generally unpopular, but perfectly unworkable. There was in this country no gensdarmerie to enforce measures even when sanctioned by Orders in Council framed under the provisions of an Act of Parliament, and such measures could not be carried out unless the people generally concurred in their advisability. He knew that in his own neighbourhood, Devonshire, he had heard gravely-entertained propositions of evading even the very limited and certainly not too stringent operation of the notices given by a majority of the magistrates in the petty divisions. There had also been the grossest carelessness in many districts, even on the part of the farmers themselves, owing to the general indisposition to inform and enforce the penalties against the neighbouring farmers who had evaded the prohibitions. The state of public opinion would certainly in October and November not have sanctioned the introduction of too stringent measures; and he even now doubted whether some latitude ought not to be allowed in any Act of Parliament about to be framed respecting the movement of cattle in districts quite remote from infection. Orders could not enforce themselves, and unless they were generally acceptable to the people, there was no machinery in this country which could secure the enforcement of any orders. The enforcement of penalties would not, he felt convinced, secure obedience to orders unless partial compensation were made to those whose cattle were to be slaughtered, as he believed they ought to be slaughtered. His experience of voluntary and mutual insurance associations had shown them to be failures, and he felt convinced that terror alone would be quite insufficient to induce men ren- dered desperate by losses to obey the law in such a manner as to save their neighbours' property from destruction.

THE EARL OF AIRLIE

said, he quite agreed that no measures could have been effectually enforced if they had not met with the concurrence of the local authorities. In his opinion, instead of stamping out the disease they were only spreading the infection by sending the butcher to the ox, as the effluvium arising from the slaughter of an ox apparently sound, but really diseased, must be very dangerous in a homestead. The case of Aberdeenshire had been held up as a very bright example of what should be done to stamp out the disease. Still, even in that county the cattle traffic, although under restrictions, had never been entirely stopped, Bound cattle being permitted to travel on the sanction of the committee being obtained. That sanction, however, was only given on the express understanding that the cattle so removed, were not to return, but were to be slaughtered at the market. He did not know whether their Lordships were aware of the very singular manner in which the cattle plague had again broken out in Aberdeenshire. From a statement in The Times newspaper of that morning it appeared that Mr. Hay, the inspector for the county, had discovered that the disease had been communicated by mean3 of a pack-sheet used for wrapping up the carcases of beasts slaughtered for the London markets. If the statement was correct, that was a strong case to prove the danger of slaughtering at home, and in favour of allowing cattle to be removed under certain restrictions. The disease had arrived at such a stage that they could only hope to free the country from it by slaughtering all diseased cattle, and isolating all suspected animals until they could get a clean bill of health. He was glad to learn that the Government were going to introduce a Bill on the subject on Monday night, and he trusted that they would press it forward as rapidly as possible.

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL

said, the question was whether the Government were to put a stop to all cattle traffic, or were to permit it to take place under certain restrictions. His noble Friend (Earl Spencer) himself, at the time that the Report of the Commission was made, was distinctly opposed to an entire stoppage of the traffic; and he was supported in that opinion by three distinguished Members of the Commission. His noble Friend was also decidedly against prohibiting the carriage of cattle on railways for the supply of large towns; and although he might have changed his opinion since, the judgment he came to in the first instance was supported by a very important minority of the Members of the Commission. He saw from a report in The Times of that day that at a meeting which was held on Thursday, over which a noble Lord present (the Earl of Lichfield) presided, the representatives of the Agricultural Societies of Edinburgh and Glasgow protested against a resolution being carried prohibiting the bringing of live cattle into large cities, and that was a circumstance worthy of consideration when Government had to determine whether the large populations of the kingdom were to be deprived of their supply of live meat by railway. That was a matter which could not be determined by any resolutions passed at a public meeting, but was a question for. Parliament.

THE EARL OF LICHFIELD

said, that at the meeting referred to an amendment in favour of excepting large cities from the operation of the prohibition was rejected by a large majority. He was much pleased to hear that the views of his noble Friend who had acted on the Royal Commission (Earl Spencer) with regard to the necessity for the suspension of the cattle traffic had changed since the publication of the Report of the Commission, and he thought that the reasons given by the noble Lord for the change in his opinion were perfectly satisfactory. He thought that the noble Duke (the Duke of Argyll), in remarking upon the important difference of opinion between the majority and the minority of the members of the Commission, had somewhat exaggerated that difference of opinion. As far as he understood the two Reports, the opinion expressed in both was in favour of applying uniform regulations to the whole kingdom, whether those measures were to be of the stringent character recommended by the majority, or of the milder character recommended by the minority; and he thought when he read the Reports that nothing could be stronger than the advice they contained, that whatever regulations were adopted should be applied uniformly throughout the country. It was clear that it was utterly impossible that any regulations could have been applied throughout the country generally without an Order from Government to that effect; and, although he was not in the least inclined to blame the Government for not having acted with more decision up to a certain point, he did think that at a later period, when there had been a very strong and a very universal expression of opinion throughout the country with regard to the necessity for uniformity of action, it was unfortunate that more stringent regulations were not adopted by the Government. Had Government desired to have a general expression of the feeling of the country upon the subject, nothing would have been easier than to have sent circular letters to the chairmen of quarter sessions in October last, requesting information upon the matter. It was true that no suggestions had been offered by those bodies; but it must be recollected that when they assembled in the early part of October the Royal Commission had just been appointed, and that it was looked up to with great confidence by the people, who believed that any Report issued by that Commission would be acted upon by the Government. It must also be recollected that at that time the public generally throughout the country were not sufficiently well-informed upon the subject either to have given any recommendations to the Government or to have acted for themselves in the matter; and he must say that nothing had astonished him more than the difficulty there was at one time in persuading the farmers of the imminent danger of the disease. He was, therefore, disposed to think that up to a certain time it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for the Government to have acted otherwise than they had done. But when the Orders in Council were issued, leaving it open to the local authorities in the different counties to act as they thought best for their local interests, it was to be expected that they would, to a certain extent, be guided by the action taken by the Government in the particular case which came under its immediate control—namely, the movement of cattle from the ports into the interior of the country. Now certainly the action of the Government in that case was not in the direction of putting a stop to the traffic, for since the issuing of the Orders in Council the movement of cattle from the ports to the interior had been unrestricted, and, as far as the public were aware, no precautions whatever had been adopted to prevent the evils likely to arise from such traffic. It was his earnest hope that the strongly-expressed opinion of so many practical agriculturists who were present at the meeting referred to, coming as they did from all parts of the kingdom, and representing so many agricultural societies and the most important agricultural interests, would have great weight with the Government when framing the Bill to be laid on the table on Monday next.

House adjourned at a quarter before Eight o'clock, till Monday next, Eleven o'clock.