§ MR. HOWARD VINCENT (Sheffield, Central)asked the hon. Member for the Knutsford Division of Cheshire, as representing the Metropolitan Board of Works, If the attention of the Board has been directed to the evidence reported to have been given at Wandsworth Police Court, on the 25th ultimo, by Mr. Humphreys, described as one of the Inspectors under the Metropolitan Board, in a case in which the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals prosecuted, that it was not cruelty to work a horse with chronic navicular disease in a four-wheeled cab, and to his statement, when the learned magistrate took a contrary view and convicted the prisoner, that half the cab 1022 horses in London were in that condition, what duties Mr. Humphreys is employed by the Board to discharge; and, on what authority he made the allegation in question?
§ MR. TATTON EGERTON (Cheshire, Knutsford), in reply, said, that Mr. Humphreys was one of the Veterinary Inspectors appointed by the Metropolitan Board under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, his duties being to report on all cases of diseased animals which were brought under his notice. All the Inspectors appointed under the Act were properly qualified veterinary surgeons, who also carried on business on their own account. Mr. Humphreys appeared at the Wandsworth Police Court as a witness on behalf of a cab-owner, whose horses were under his professional care, and gave evidence, not as representing the Board, but in his individual capacity as a veterinary surgeon. In justice to Mr. Humphreys, it must be stated that he denied having made the direct statement as reported.