HC Deb 12 June 1809 vol 14 cc989-90
Sir Charles Bunbury

moved the second reading of the bill to prevent wanton and malicious Cruelty to Animals. He said he was happy in the opportunity of shewing himself friendly to the cause of humanity, and was pleased with the thought that this bill was likely to experience no opposition. Cruelty to dumb animals was go prevalent, that it was impossible even to walk down to this house without witnessing barbarities shocking to their feelings; the practice was too common among youths, to the disgrace of their parents; and men in general disgraced themselves by their treatment of animals which contributed to their ease and to their comforts; this was exhibited in the practice of cutting off the tails of horses, and thus depriving them of the defence which nature had given them, from the annoying attacks of flies and other insects. The injury these animals also received from the carelessness and wantonness of drivers of mail-coaches, diligences, post-chaises, and slap-bangs, also called for legislative interference: he therefore hoped this bill would meet with the approbation of parliament.

Mr. Windham

said, that however his sentiments might be represented, he should not vote for a bill of this sort, which went upon a false and spurious kind of humanity, calculated to do more mischief than the very abuses it meant to prevent. There was one scandalous defect belonging to the bill, and that was the gross partiality and inequality of its enactments. It fell foul of one class of offences only, while it left untouched an infinitely larger class, and in which the very members of the legislature themselves were implicated, such at hunting, fowling, horse-racing, &c. It would open, besides, scenes of infinite vexation and injustice, by means of informers and litigation, much greater, indeed, than those it was framed to prevent. Besides, the obligations which the bill enforced were all moral duties, of that imperfect obligation which did not admit of legislative interference. He should take another opportunity of opposing the bill more at length.

The Bill was then read a second time, and committed for to-morrow.