HC Deb 16 December 1908 vol 198 cc1950-72

As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. BIRRELL,) Bristol, N.

in moving a new clause (extent and adoption of Part I of Act), was understood to say that he had, with some reluctance, consented to amend the clause as it originally stood on the Paper by the introduction of the words at line 4, "subject to the approval of the council of the county in which it is situated," but a fair proposal was made to him, and he had accepted it. The effect would be that the county council would have a veto in regard to the adoption of the Act by the sanitary authority of any urban or rural sanitary district.

New clause— (1) This Part of this Act shall extend to any urban or rural sanitary district in Ireland after the adoption thereof. (2) The sanitary authority of any such urban or rural sanitary district may adopt this Part of this Act by a Resolution passed at a meeting of the authority. (3) fourteen clear days at least before the meeting a summons to attend the meeting, specifying the business to be transacted, and signed by the clerk of the sanitary authority, shall be sent by post to, or delivered at the usual place of abode of, every member of the sanitary authority. (4) A Resolution adopting this Part of this Act shall be published by advertisement in a local newspaper and by hand-bills, and otherwise, in such manner as the sanitary authority think sufficient for giving notice thereof to all persons interested, and shall come into operation at such time (not less than one month) after the first publication of the advertisement of the Resolution as the sanitary authority may fix, and, upon its coming into operation, this part of this Act shall extend to the district.

Brought up and read the first time.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the clause be read a second time."

MR. MOONEY (Newry)

congratulated the right hon. Gentleman on having met the wishes of the representatives of Ireland and put down a clause of this kind. The position they were in with regard to the Bill upstairs was that if it was passed in the form in which it then was, it would have been a coercive measure and no power was left to the elected body to decide whether the condition of the county did or did not require the adoption of the Act, but the right hon. Gentleman had met them in a conciliatory spirit, and he thought that the result of the clause that the right hon. Gentleman had proposed would be to make the Bill a much better Bill than it would have been if it had been passed in its original form. If the directly-elected representatives of the people were trusted it would give the Act a much better chance of success than it would have had if it had been passed in the coercive form in which it was presented upstairs, under which the local body were not to be consulted in any shape or form, and had to pay for the Act. He could only thank the Government for allowing the Bill to take this form.

MR. BARRIE (Londonderry, N.)

expressed the fear that the Amendment would have a different effect from what the right hon. Gentleman contemplated. They had to admit, however, reluctantly, that there were county councils in Ireland who were not so anxious to incur additional taxation with a view to preventing this terrible scourge, and his objection to the clause just moved by the Chief Secretary was that in such counties, the county councils largely composed of local people would not see there way to adopt the Act, whereas important urban county councils would be anxious to do so. Had the Chief Secretary seen his way to move the new clause in the form in which it stood on the Paper, it might have happened that a number of important county councils in the outward districts might have seen their way to provide sanatoria for the people of the poor rural areas.

MR. MOONEY

pointed out that the provision of sanatoria did not come in here. They came on in Clause 2. This Amendment only dealt with Clause 1.

* SIR W. J. COLLINS

expressed his satisfaction at the action of the Chief Secretary in placing this Amendment on the Paper. Its chief effect would be to bring the notification of tuberculosis into line with the notification of infectious diseases. If this clause had not been put on the Paper it would have led to the anomalous state of things that in one part of Ireland the medical man might have to notify a case of tuberculosis where he would not have to notify a disease like smallpox and typhus. He cordially welcomed the clause and hoped the Bill as amended would pass into law.

Question put, and agreed to.

Amendment proposed— In line 4, to insert the words 'subject to the approval of the council of the county in which it is situated.'"—(Mr. Birrell.)

Agreed to.

Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.

New clause— Any urban authority being a sanitary authority shall have power to provide that all meat killed outside the town and brought into the town for sale shall on the same day, before being exposed for sale, be brought into the abattoir or other place to be appointed by the council for inspection between the hours of eight o'clock a.m. and eleven forenoon, and shall not be sold or exposed for sale until after same has been inspected and passed as fit for human food, but no person shall be appointed or act as an inspector under this section who does not possess a certificate as a meat inspector."—(Mr. Mooney.)

Brought up and read the first and second time, and added to the Bill.

MR. BARRIE moved to leave out Clause 1 for the purpose of expressing the view that the Bill, in the shape it now came to the House, would be cordially welcomed in all parts of Ireland. He also desired to remove any misapprehension that might have arisen owing to the hostility with which the Bill was met, in its original shape, in Committee. He desired to give expression to their appreciation of the propaganda for the prevention of this scourge initiated by the Countess of Aberdeen, and of the work carried on by her and her co-workers, to which the Bill now before the House was due. It was a matter of regret that Ireland had suffered so much from this scourge in the past, as it had been proved that the climate had not been the cause of the high death-rate from the disease. He only moved this Motion in order to give hon. Members an opportunity of making their opinion on the subject plain, and to express the hope that the Bill now about to be passed would be cordially welcomed in all parts of Ireland.

LORD BALCARRES

seconded the Motion in order that he might express his satisfaction that the Bill had been made quasi-permissive. Though it might not be of great and immediate benefit to the country, the Bill would strengthen and assist chit propaganda which in a very few years would bring public opinion to such a pitch that the measure would be made compulsory. When the Bill was in Committee the objections brought forward by hon. Members representing constituencies from every part of Ireland were so serious, and were pressed with such obvious sincerity and candour that the Government were obliged to give way on certain important points upon which they would not have given way if they had recognised at the outset that the Bill was to be made permissive. He thought, therefore, that when the Government made the Bill permissive they ought to have taken off the Paper some of the Amendments they put on at an earlier stage to placate the opposition. One particular portion of Clause 1 was objected to by the hon. Member for the City of London on the ground that it coerced the poor people. The representative of the Board of Agriculture saw the danger and said the Bill was only to be applied in serious cases. An Amendment was accordingly put in that cases should only be described as notifiable when infective discharges were liable to communicate the disease to other persons. Clause 1, therefore, was only going to apply where the patient was in an advanced stage of consumption. He agreed that they must do their utmost for these tuberculous people, but the problem in Ireland more than in any other country wanted to be dealt with at the beginning. They wanted to prevent the inception of these germs far more than to relieve the last months of men or Women who were suffering; and he could not help thinking it was a mistake so to limit the Bill as to prevent the initial stages of the disease being dealt with under the powers of Clause 1. It was apparent from the circular hey had issued, that it was the official view of the Local Government Board that the effort should be made at the beginning, and, that being so, how could it be contended that notifiable power should only be given in cases where infective discharges were liable to communicate the disease to other people? He wished to press upon the right hon. Gentleman that the Amendment which he had put in the Bill in order to placate opposition had no scientific basis; and he hoped he would co-operate with all good agencies in Ireland so that at the earliest possible moment, and when public opinion justified it, the power of notification would be extended to include cases of tuberculosis in their earlier stages. The present limitation was unwise and almost dangerous.

Amendment proposed to the Bill— In page 1, line 7, to leave out Clause 1."—(Mr. Hugh Barrie.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word 'person,' in page 1, line 7, stand part of the Bill."

MR. BIRRELL

said that the object of the Bill, of course, was to prevent the spread of the disease, but it was desirable, at all events in the first instance, that they should not go beyond public opinion. He quite agreed, however, with the noble Lord, and he hoped as time went on that people would recognise how important it was to deal with the disease at the earliest possible stage and would co-operate for that purpose.

MR. KETTLE

had no desire to be ungracious, but speaking with the sincerity and seriousness of a person two members of whose own immediate family had died from tuberculosis he was bound to say that the Bill was going to scare everybody and cure nobody in Ireland. He believed the medical men supporting the Bill had made pretensions to knowledge they did not possess; and, as the noble Lord had said, the disease, if it was to be compulsorily notifiable, ought to be notified in its early stages. He had, in his own experience, had the perfectly definite statement of a leading medical specialist to the effect that there might be no symptoms of tuberculosis in a person and yet he might be dead and buried four months afterwards. If they were going to make the notification compulsory, if they were going to make a physiological black list in Ireland, if they were going to make an attack upon family life, and if they were going to make those who were afflicted with the disease to be looked upon as lepers, then the State ought to have done something to help them; but it had done nothing to help by contributing funds for the estabishment of sanatoria or the making of provision for the treatment of tuberculous patients. Whatever satisfaction the Bill might give the Viceregal Lodge in Dublin, he did not believe it was going to cure a single person afflicted with tuberculosis. The problem was rather one of bad houses, under-feeding, and general depression than anything else. Certain Members were exalting the Bill as one of first-class importance, and he felt bound to make these remarks.

* SIR W. J. COLLINS

could not help feeling that the noble Lord was in error in saying that the words would necessarily apply merely to advanced forms of disease, and that they had no scientific, basis for putting them into the Bill. The distinction was not between the earlier and later stages, but between those forms of tuberculosis which were communicable, and those forms which were not communicable to other persons. The object of the Bill was to deal with those forms of tuberculosis which were communicable to other persons. There were many tuberculous diseases of the brain, of the glands, of the joints, and of other parts of the body which were in no sense communicable, and to notify such cases would be unnecessary expense and an unnecessary precaution. The distinction was between those forms of tubercle which were communicable and those which were not; and those which gave rise to infective discharges were communicable. The Bill would practically apply to all forms of communicable tuberculosis. He maintained there was ample scientific justification for the insertion of the words, and that it was not correct to say they would apply only to the later stages of the disease.

* SIR CHARLES DILKE (Gloucestershire, Forest of Dean)

said the Bill must be looked upon as purely experimental, and he confessed that some of them who had read, as laymen interested in public health, recent scientific writings on the subject from foreign countries were inclined to say that we were two or throe years behind the age, and that the whole of the science on which this Bill rested was now extinct in the countries where the matter had been more carefully considered. He would not pursue that, because he spoke only as an amateur, and had no authority to put that view before the House, but no one could read recent literature without being aware of the fact, and they had it officially before them, because recent Reports on the health of the Army and Navy agreed in that view. In the final Report on the health of the Army the Director-General took a view entirely different from that on which this Bill was based, and he said at the conclusion that it was quite evident that in the present state of our scientific knowledge we must be most careful in laying down any principles, and he explained why the whole of these principles had been given up temporarily until further experiments had taken place. In the Navy the whole mode of treatment which was based on this scientific theory which came from Italy three years ago had been the cause of repeated deaths, and was a complete failure, and it had been abandoned at Netley Hospital.

MR. MOONEY

said he would not have risen but for the remarks of the noble Lord on the front Opposition bench, who was against the insertion of the words which left it to the Local Government Board to prescribe the form, and who talked about the conciliatory methods with which they were met upstairs. He did not think he would accuse the Vice-President of conciliatory methods at all. He shared the views of the hon. Baronet and the Member for St. Pancras. He was never in favour of the Bill. Like the hon. Member for Tyrone, from personal knowledge he knew a good deal more about consumption than he wished he knew. In his opinion, the Bill would not do everything its promoters hoped. The housing of the working classes would do far more. He did not believe they could cure tuberculosis by notification. They had to stop it by giving more sanitary houses, and teaching people that pure air and fresh water were not going to do them any harm. If they were to take away what was inserted upstairs this would be a much more sweeping Bill than any Member had any idea of. People talked about tuberculosis when they meant something which was entirely different. Everyone was in favour of having some notification of consumption, but if they were to have notification of tubercular disease of the finger or the toe, they would be making the thing more of a farce than it was at present. He was very sorry to hear the right hon. Gentleman express his opinion that he had gone a little too far in putting the obligation on the Local Government Board. If he moved to leave that out in another place the Bill would become far more objectionable than in its original form.

Amendment negatived.

MR. BIRRELL

said there were one or two Amendments on Clause 1. They had some little discussion upstairs on the language of the clause as originally drafted, which was rather vague. He thought it was perfectly intelligible with the Amendments he proposed.

Amendments proposed— In page 1, line 7, after the word 'person,' to insert the words 'within any district to which this part of this Act extends.' In page 1, line 8, after the word 'suffering,' to insert the words 'in any prescribed circumstances.' In page 1, line 9, to leave out from the first word 'any,' to the first word 'medical,' in line 11, and to insert the words 'prescribed form, or at any prescribed stage, the.' In page 1, line 11, after the word 'days,' to insert the words 'after he becomes aware of the fact.'"—(Mr. Birrell.)

Agreed to.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 12, to leave out from the word 'health,' to the word 'a' in line 13."—(Mr. Birrell.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the clause."

MR. MOONEY

said he did not quite understand the Amendment. The effect would be to send the medical officer of health a certificate in the prescribed form. They had had a long discussion upstairs as to who was the medical officer who should get the notification. A doctor might not be satisfied that a patient was suffering from tuberculosis, and might send him to Dublin to consult a physician, and if he came to the conclusion that he was suffering from tuberculosis the Committee decided that the person who ought to have knowledge of it was the medical officer of the district in which the person resided, because there was no earthly good, as far as he could see, in notifying the medical officer in Dublin that a person who lived in Galway had been imported and was found to be suffering from tuberculosis. He should like some explanation why the right hon. Gentleman now put aside the considered judgment of the Committee upstairs.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. CHERRY,) Liverpool, Exchange

said the explanation was simply this. Now that the Act had been made, not compulsory, but adoptive, if they left the words as they were in the Bill it might be necessary to send the notification to the medical officer of a district where the Act had not been adopted.

MR. MOONEY

Do I understand that suppose Galway puts the Act into force and Dublin does not, and a man comes up from Galway and consults a doctor in Dublin that doctor is not bound to notify anyone?

MR. CHERRY

said it was the medical practitioner attending on the person, and not the specialist who was obliged to notify. The meaning was the same. The medical officer of health could only be the medical officer of the district in which the patient resided. If the district adopted the Act it was binding on all persons resident in the district, and the medical practitioner attending on the patient was bound to give notice to the medical officer of the district.

MR. COOPER (Southwark, Bermondsey)

said that if a man came up from Galway, which had not adopted the Act; to Dublin, which had, for advice, and then went back to Galway, it seemed hard that the people of Dublin should be compelled to pay half-a-crown for a notification to the medical officer in Dublin, where the man did not reside. Some words ought to be inserted to clear up that point.

LORD BALCARRES

said these words were inserted to meet the objection of the hon. Member for Limerick, and to ensure that the notification should be charged to the district in which the man was ordinarily resident and not that in which the doctor lived, where the man might happen to go. The difficulty seemed to be entirely removed owing to the voluntary notification.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment proposed— In page 1, line 15, to leave out from the word 'with' to the word 'shall,' in line 17, and insert the words 'the President of the Royal College of Physicians in Ireland and the President of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.'"—(Mr. Birrell.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

LORD BALCARRES

asked if this would prevent these two learned bodies nominating a member to serve. The President was changed frequently, and it often occurred, naturally enough, that one President was especially versed in a particular branch of science, and it might be most to the convenience of the two colleges and to the assistance of the Local Government Board particularly, if some latitude were given to the learned societies to select the most qualified member.

MR. BIRRELL

replied that he did not think it would prevent such nomination. The President in the exercise of his discretion could take the judgment of some learned colleague.

MR. COOPER

said he was assured that the Irish Branch of the British Medical Council were quite willing to undertake the duty, but they were of opinion that it would be inequitable that the expenses incurred in the discharge of the duty should fall upon them. They hoped, therefore, the Government would introduce a clause providing the necessary financial aid.

MR. MOONEY

said that Irish Members were quite willing to leave the matter to such competent persons as the Presidents of these two learned societies.

Amendment agreed to.

MR. COOPER moved to leave out subsection (4). It was hard on medical men, he contended, that they should be fined if they did not notify cases of tuberculosis within seven days. It was not always easy to form a diagnosis. In some cases a diagnosis could be very easily made, while in other cases the opposite was the fact. Where the provision had been tried it had lamentably failed, and it only put the medical profession to a good deal of difficulty and annoyance.

Amendments not seconded.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, line 4, to leave out the words 'seven days,' and to insert the words 'the period specified in this section.' In page 2, line 12, to leave out the word 'local,' and to insert the word 'sanitary.'

Agreed to.

MR. COOPER moved to insert after the word 'supply,' the words' all materials for the collection of the suspected discharges and send.'" He moved the Amendment, he explained, in order to raise the question upon whom was to fall the cost of sending the material to the bacteriologist to be examined. The sputum must be sent in a proper vessel, and if it was transmitted by post the half-crown fee for examination would be considerably depleted. He wished to know what means the Government had taken to secure that the sender should be able to send free of cost. He believed that the suggestion—

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

Order, order. I find that this Amendment affects the question of rates, and so it is not in order.

Amendment proposed— In page 2, line 37, to leave out the words 'of the district.'"—(Mr. Birrell.)

Agreed to.

Clause, as amended, agreed to.

MR. MOONEY moved an Amendment designed to provide that where a local authority put people out of a house for purposes of disinfecting it, they should provide temporary shelter instead of sending the people to the poorhouse.

Amendment proposed— In page 3, line 5, after the word 'bedding,' to insert the words 'Section fifteen (which relates to temporary shelter).'"—(Mr. Mooney.)

Agreed to.

MR. COOPER moved to leave out the words in Clause 2, "and Section seventeen (which relates to power of entry)." He said that this was a very powerful clause, and he did not think the House could really recognise what it meant. It meant that a medical officer of health on an order made by a Justice of the Peace might enter the house of anybody suffering from tuberculosis, between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m., and compulsorily remove him to a sanatorium or a workhouse. As it was improbable that there would be a sanatorium available, the clause practically meant that a man could be forcibly moved into the ward of a workhouse. This was not like the case of a man suffering from small-pox or typhus, as tuberculosis was nothing like so dangerous as these. He maintained that this forcible removal to a workhouse was a strong order and further than the Government had a right to go.

SIR W. J. COLLINS

in seconding, said that as the work proposed was of an educative character he thought the Government would be well advised to leave out Section 17.

Amendment proposed— In page 3, line 6, to leave out the words 'and Section seventeen (which relates to power of entry).'"—(Mr. Cooper.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHERRY

expressed sorrow that the seconder held that view. He spoke with great deference in the presence of so great a medical authority, but he was afraid the hon. Member did not quite realise the conditions. In large tenement houses one patient might do an infinite amount of harm to the people who lived in the same room with him or in an adjoining room. If there were no power to enter for the purpose of removing a patient, the Bill, in his opinion, would be useless.

MR. MOONEY

quite agreed. He did not think that the Bill was much good as it was, but if they left out this provision it would not be worth the paper it was written on. Without the subsection it would be impossible to carry out a single provision of the Bill in insanitary dwellings. They might as well withdraw the whole Bill, unless they gave this right of entry.

Amendment negatived.

Amendments proposed— In page 3, line 12, to leave out from the word 'apply,' to end of clause. In page 8, line 15, to leave out from the word 'hospital,' to end of clause, and to insert the words, 'provided under this part of this Act, or being treated in any dispensary so provided.

Agreed to.

MR. COOPER moved: "In page 9, line 5, to leave out from the word 'council,' to the word 'for' in line 8, and to insert the words 'shall appoint for their county a superintendent medical officer of health to carry out the provisions of this Act, the Housing Acts, the Public Health Acts, the Infectious Diseases Prevention Acts, and.'"

MR. MOONEY

, rising to a point of order, asked whether the Amendment was in order, as it provided for the appointment of a superintendent medical officer, and would presumably impose a charge upon the rate.

MR. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

Nothing is said about paying. I do not think it is out of order.

MR. COOPER

said he moved the Amendment in order to support the action of a conference of medical men in Ireland which asserted that it was absolutely useless to appoint a bacteriologist, and that it would be very much better to appoint for each county a superintendent medical officer of health. If the Act was to be a valuable and living one it was necessary that certain things should be done; he therefore urged that a superintendent medical officer should be appointed to carry out the provisions of the Act, exactly as medical officers were appointed in the counties of England. Anybody who knew the insanitary condition of a very large number of houses in Ireland would recognise that this was a very reasonable request and would, if carried out, do much to make the Act effective.

Amendment not seconded,

Amendments proposed— In page 10, line 5, to leave out the words 'superintendent medical,' and to insert the words 'medical superintendent.' In page 10, line 6, to leave out the words 'superintendent medical,' and to insert the words 'medical superintendent.'"—(Mr. Cherry.)

Agreed to.

MR. CHERRY moved the insertion of Words in Clase 17 to provide procedure for the settlement of disputes with respect to the compensation to be paid for animals. He said the procedure for ascertaining the amount of compensation to be paid for a tuberculous cow which had been slaughtered was set forth in Section 274 of the Public Health Act. That section stated the compensation was to be ascertained by arbitration, provided that it was over £20, and by Court of Summary Jurisdiction if under that amount. It was suggested in Committee that arbitration should be made to apply to all cases irrespective of the value. He understood that objection was taken to that on behalf of the farmers, because in a case where a cow was valued at £15 there might be spent on the arbitration proceedings five or six times the value of the cow.

Amendment proposed— In page 10, line 25, after the word 'dispute,' to insert the words 'by arbitration.'"—(Mr. Cherry.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. MOONEY

said he was astonished at the position taken up by the Attorney-General. He maintained that it the clause was left in its present form they would never get an arbitration at all. Section 274 of the Public Health Act proposed to be incorporated in this Bill provided that there was any doubt that full compensation should be paid, any dispute as to actual damage should be settled by arbitration in the manner provided by that Act, or if the compensation did not exceed £20 it should be ascertained by Court of Summary Jurisdiction, and then it went on to say that in no case could a larger amount than £10 be recovered. If those whose animals were slaughtered were to get their disputes settled by arbitration, some further Words must be put in. The Amendment proposed by the Attorney-General would make the clause worse. As the clause stood it did not carry out the intention of the promoters of the Bill, of the Committee upstairs, or, apparently, of the Attorney-General.

MR. CHERRY

said that in a case where the amount was so small as £10 procedure by arbitration with counsel employed would be enormously expensive. The section as it stood would allow of the whole matter being dealt with by an arbitrator in half a day and at less trouble.

MR. MOONEY

said it was the opinion of the Committee upstairs that a Court of Summary Jurisdiction was not the proper tribunal to deal with cases of this kind. He did not mean that in dealing with disputes the parties should bring in the complicated and expensive methods of arbitration. He meant that some provision should be made for the two parties agreeing between themselves as to the appointment of an arbitrator. If the hon. and learned Gentleman could undertake to introduce words which would achieve that object, he would be satisfied. The clause at present was vague and ambiguous. He did not think a divisional police magistrate in Dublin should be asked to decide whether a cow was Worth £10 or more.

MR. CHERRY

said if they had arbitration they must have a form of arbitration whose decisions could be enforced. If the hon. Gentleman wanted him to consider the matter further he would do so.

MR. MOONEY

said if the hon. and learned Gentleman left the clause in its present form he might add to the gaiety of the Press of Dublin when cases came before the magistrates, but he would not expedite justice.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed— In page 10, line 28, at end, to insert the words '(3) Where a milch cow has been slaughtered under this section, the carcase shall belong to the sanitary authority, and shall be buried or returned to the owner or otherwise disposed of by the sanitary authority according as the condition of the animal or carcase or other circumstances require or admit.'")—Mr. Cherry.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

LORD BALCARRES

said that according to his recollection of what took place upstairs there had been some misapprehension. What was put before the Committee was that where a tubercular beast was slaughtered and properly buried it would be a hardship if the owner were not allowed to take away his hide and horns which were not considered dangerous and might be sold. Now it was to be provided that where a milch cow had been slaughtered the carcase might be returned to the owner. That was the very thing the owner ought not to possess, because he was going to be compensated for it. The only question was as to whether the compensation was adequate. Upstairs it was claimed by hon. Members below the gangway that the carcase should be returned to the owner.

MR. MOONEY

No.

LORD BALCARRES

said, of course, if the hon. Member corrected him he begged pardon. He thought it was only a case for the hide and horns being returned.

MR. CHERRY

was understood to say that he thought the noble Lord had been misinformed.

MR. MOONEY

said the case they put forward was that in the majority of cases they were all agreed that the carcase should not be returned to the owner, but it was pointed out that there were a great many cases in which it would create great hardship because there was a certain form of tuberculosis which affected only portions of the carcase. Therefore, as the value of the whole animal would be a good deal more than £10 they thought it was only fair that if it could be proved that by the removal of a part of the carcase the rest was fit for human food the owner should get it, and that he should not lose the difference between the value of the animal and £10. They had already passed a clause giving the authority power to appoint a competent meat inspector, and he ought to be able to decide whether any harm would be done to the public health by returning any portion of the carcase to the owner.

MR. BARRIE

felt very strongly that under no circumstances should the reputation of Irish meat suffer from the possibility of the meat of any animal slaughtered under this Act finding its way into the market. He therefore, thought there was grave objection to the clause as proposed by the Government. It was certainly not carrying out the undertaking given to the Committee.

* MR. COOPER

said he understood that the carcase was to be left in the possession of the sanitary authority to be destroyed. It was so in London at the present day. He could hardly understand why the owner of an animal was compensated if after a cow was killed it came into his possession. If a cow was so seriously diseased as to have anything like tuberculosis of the udder, other portions of the body must be affected, and there were no means by which the carcase of an animal could be made immune. In Berlin they had a method and that was the only country where this meat was sold, of steaming the flesh in a very high temperature, and destroying the tuberculosis bacilli, but in England no such thing had been adopted, and it was doubtful whether it was wise that they should allow meat from a tuberculous animal to be sold to the public at all. In London they always destroyed the whole of the animal, and compensation was given while the horns and hoofs and those portions of the body which could be used for manufactures were handed over to the owner for sale. He certainly objected to leaving these words in. To return the flesh to the owner was very dangerous to the community, and was in direct contradiction of all the Acts which had been passed up to the present time.

MR. JOYCE (Limerick)

reminded the House; that all these animals would be perfectly in the control of the medical superintendent of health of the district and the sanitary authorities in those districts would be advised what to do by their medical superintendent and would carry out the advice given by him. They had perfect confidence in their medical superintendents.

Amendment agreed to.

MR. CULLINAN (Tipperary, S.)

in moving to omit Clause 19, was understood to inquire whether under his clause half of the expenses of the medical officers' salaries and the cost of medicines would be contributed as heretofore under the Public Health (Ireland) Acts to the local authorities by the Treasury. They were performing a public duty, and this should be done. He drew the attention of the President of the Board of Agriculture to this subject, and he had hoped he would be able to meet the case.

Amendment proposed— In page 11, line 9, to leave out Clause 19."—(Mr. Cullinan.)

Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

MR. CHERRY

was very sorry that he was not informed on the subject. He certainly never heard of any such provision.

MR. MOONEY

said they had not a representative of the Treasury present in Committee when his hon. friend raised his point, which was a very serious one for Ireland. As had been pointed out, prior to the Act of 1907, half of these charges were borne by the Treasury or the Local Government Board, but the expenditure incurred under this Bill would be borne wholly by the ratepayers, who would get no contribution whatever. It was rather a bigger question than the right hon. Gentleman seemed to think.

MR. CHERRY

said he knew it was a very big question, but he did not wish to commit himself. He knew that it was a very large question.

MR. MOONEY

wanted the right hon. Gentleman to give an undertaking that before the Bill passed through its stages in another place he would carefully consider the matter. The right hon. Gentleman shook his head, but it was a very important matter. If they passed the Bill they did not want it to be a dead letter, because no county council was going to appoint any officer if they were to be told that they lost the contribution. He thought the right hon. Gentleman might consider whether he could not make it clear that the sanitary authority and the county council were not going to be in a worse position if they adopted this Act while a neighbouring county might say they would let things go on and would not pay any expenses. At least the right hon. Gentleman should give an undertaking that before the Bill came from another place he would inquire and see if something could not be done, because otherwise he could assure him with the greatest possible desire to see this Bill Working if it was passed, in its present form, no local authority or urban sanitary authority would appoint a single officer.

MR. CHERRY

said his right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was present, and if he liked to give him authority to pledge the Treasury he should be glad to do so.

MR. BARRIE

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman would not give an undertaking that he would make a reprsentation in the proper quarter that the proper sum should be provided. He agreed with the views put before this House by the hon. Member below the gangway that unless local authorities were encouraged to put this Act into operation by some grant providing halt of these salaries, the Act would be a dead letter in many counties in Ireland.

MR. CULLTNAN

said that was the reason why he brought the matter forward and urged it upon the Vice-President of the Board of Agriculture, so as to have the matter loked into. As the hon. Member for Newry said, the county councils of Ireland would not employ anyone to stamp out the disease and carry out the intentions of the Bill if they had to bear the entire burden. It was really such an important matter that, he asked for some undertaking that it would be considered, and the county councils told what their position was to.

Amendment negatived.

Amendment proposed— In page 11, line 24, after the word 'Acts,' to insert the words 'the expressions" veterinary surgeon" and "duly qualified veterinary surgeon," respectively, mean a person registered under the Veterinary Surgeons Act, 1881."'—(Mr. Birrell.)

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

MR. MOONEY

said the veterinary surgeons registered under the Act of 1881 had passed certain examinations in Edinburgh and London, but under an Act passed about six years ago they now had a college in Dublin. He did not know whether a person who had received the certificate of this Dublin college would be a person registered under the Veterinary Suregons Act, because the Veterinary College of Dublin was not in existence in 1881.

Amendment agreed to.

Bill read the third time, and passed.