§ MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will explain why the Privy Council have decided to withhold removal licences for Dublin cattle, which will have the effect of detaining within the city the whole of 685 the many thousands of milch cows now ' in the dairy yards of Dublin, contrary to the wish of the cowkeepers, who wish to put out the animals to grass for the annual summer pasture, and complain that these beasts, valued at least at £200,000, will be seriously deteriorated by imprisonment during the hot weather, while their owners will be put to much expense for their indoor maintenance; is he aware that many of the Dublin cowkeepers before the decision of the Privy Council had entered into binding contracts for the season's grazing, which will now be useless to them; and in view of the fact that this order extends to every dairy yard, even where there has been no pleuro-pneumonia for years, will he state whether there is any English, Irish, or Scotch precedent for the decision the Privy Council have arrived at?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURThe Privy Council have not decided to withhold removal licences for Dublin cattle. In consequence, however, of continued outbreaks of pleuro-pneumonia among Dublin dairy cattle, an Order was passed in February by the Privy Council restricting the movement of cattle out of certain districts scheduled to the Order without the consent of the Lord Lieutenant. Permission will be granted for the movement of cattle in the scheduled districts to pasture lands outside those districts within the North and South Dublin Unions in all cases in which his Excellency shall be advised that the movement can be effected with safety, having regard to the efforts now being made to stamp out pleuro-pnetimonia in Ireland. The circumstances of each application for permission to move cattle will receive careful consideration, and a communication to this effect was sent to the Dublin Cowkeepers' Association yesterday. The Order of the Privy Council referred to, restricting the movement of cattle, was made in accordance with the course adopted by the Board of Agriculture in Great Britain.
§ MR. T. M. HEALYI am obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for his answer, which I think will give great satisfaction and remove much misapprehension; but will he inform me, as a matter of fact, why a gentleman named Mr. Thomas Cass, who has not had pleuro-pneumonia upon his premises for 10 years, when 686 he applied for a removal order was refused?
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI am afraid I cannot answer that; but if the hon. and learned Member will put down his question for a later day, I will endeavour to obtain the information.