§ 1. Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTasked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether the Committee, consisting of Sir John MacFadyean, Professor Mettam, and Mr. Stewart Stockman, the Board's chief veterinary officer, appointed nearly a year ago to carry on research in India as to the characteristics of foot-and-mouth disease and the manner in which it is contracted and spread, has yet proceeded to that country; and whether the above-named gentlemen will remain there for several months for the purpose of conducting or supervising the conduct of such research, or how otherwise can such research work be efficiently and exhaustively carried out?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Runciman)Mr. Wragg, the secretary of the Committee, and Mr. Cabot, one of the Board's veternary officers, sailed for India on the 6th ultimo in order to commence investigations on lines which have been settled by the Committee. Major Holmes, of the Indian Veterinary Department, will cooperate with them in the work. Sir John MacFadyean will leave this country for India about the end of November in order to supervise the work in person.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTHow long will the latter gentleman be carrying out his inves- 16 tigations in India I Will he still be able to carry on his work at the Royal Veterinary College?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI have no doubt Sir John would not have accepted my invitation unless he had obtained leave to be away from the Royal Veterinary College for the purpose. I cannot say how long the investigation will take.
§ 3. Mr. C. BATHURSTasked how many outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred since the reappearance of the disease in this country last summer; what is the present condition of the country with regard to the disease; and whether the cause of any of the above outbreaks, other than those of known Irish orgin, has been traced?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANEighty-one outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease have occurred since its reappearance in the summer. An outbreak was confirmed in the county of Durham on the 24th September, and another in Northumberland on the 28th September, but no case has occurred elsewhere in Great Britain for more than three weeks past. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTCan the right hon. Gentleman tell us why he has decided to relax the embargo upon Irish stores contrary to the opinion of the leading agriculturists of Great Britain?
§ Mr. WILLIAM O'BRIENIs it not the fact that of the eighty outbreaks only one has been traced to Ireland, and that the two provinces of Connaught and Munster, which are now boycotted, have been free from the disease for the last thirty years?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANIt is not for me to answer the last part of the question. But as to the earlier part, I can say it is not the case there has been only one outbreak traceable to Irish sources, but there have been many.
§ Mr. CHAPLINMay I ask the President of the Board of Agriculture, in regard to the deputation he has been good enough to say he will receive respecting the importation of Irish cattle, if, in the event of the results of that deputation not being considered satisfactory, he will take care that in any arrangements that will be made for business, we shall have the opportunity afforded to us, if it is desired on this side of the House, of discussing the question?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI can make no statement as to the order of business, but I will consult with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and will communicate with the right hon. Gentleman on the subject.
§ Mr. GINNELLI beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture (1) whether he has got any estimate of the loss inflicted on raisers of live stock in the twenty-seven counties of Ireland untouched by foot-and-mouth disease by each day's continuance of his restrictions against the importation of cattle, sheep and swine from those counties; (2) whether events have not proved that precautionary measures were more successful in Ireland than in England; (3) if similar restrictions were not imposed upon uninfected areas in England, will he state the reason for preventing importation from the uninfected parts of Ireland; and (4) the panic upon which the restrictions were based having proved unfounded, whether the restrictions have been or will be immediately withdrawn, and the trade in all classes of live stock from the uninfected parts of Ireland restored to its normal conditions.
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI am not in a position to make any estimate of the loss occasioned to stockowners, both in Ireland and in Great Britain, by reason of the restrictions imposed to prevent the introduction and spreading of foot-and-mouth disease, but there is no doubt as to their magnitude, and I greatly regret their occurrence. As the hon. Member is probably aware, I have recently made certain modifications in those restrictions which will, I hope, afford some relief to exporters and grasiers on both sides, but under existing conditions I feel it my duty to continue in force the precautionary measures which have been prescribed. "With regard to the other inquiries of the hon. Member, I would say (1) that I do not think that it has been proved that the precautionary measures taken in Ireland have been more successful than in England, and (2) that the circumstances attending the shipment of animals from Ireland seem to me amply to justify the difference in the character of the restrictions to which the hon. Member refers.
§ Mr. GINNELLThe right hon. Gentleman has not answered the question, which is as to the reason for a different rule applying to the uninfected parts of Ireland from that applied to the uninfected parts of England?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANThe hon. Member must be well aware that the traffic between Ireland and England is conducted on board ship and that necessitates the gathering in Irish ports of animals from large areas, carrying them by ship over to England and their distribution from the ports of England. The mere circumstances of that traffic necessitate the difference.
§ Mr. W. O'BRIENDoes not exactly the same danger arise in the transport of animals in England as well as in Ireland? Must they not necessarily be herded together in large numbers on the way to and from fairs and markets?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANNo, the conditions of the trade are quite different in England and Ireland. If they were identically the same in Ireland as in England there would, of course, be good reason for the view which is held by the hon. Gentleman, but as the conditions, are not the same the treatment must of necessity be different.
§ Mr. GINNELLMay I ask a question which I have asked already, but which the right hon. Gentleman has not answered—when he expects, in the event of no further outbreak in Ireland, to restore the normal conditions of the trade?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI cannot make any definite promise in regard to that. I can only say generally I hope the normal conditions will be restored as soon as it is safe to do so.
§ Mr. W. O'BRIENCan the right hon. Gentleman give the House anything like a definite reason why the fifteen-mile isolation system which prevails in England should not prevail in Ireland as well if Ireland is not to be treated as a foreign country, and why a country, two whole provinces of which have been free from this disease for thirty years, is to be deliberately boycotted and its trade destroyed?
§ Mr. RUNCIMANI thought I had just answered that very point. I should like to make one comment on a phrase used by the hon. Member. I have not treated Ireland as if she were a foreign country. If I had, we should rigidly have excluded all animals which came from Ireland for a period of certainly not less than six months.
§ Mr. GINNELLI beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the extent 19 to which rent of land, interest in lieu of rent, and purchase instalments in Ireland, now falling due, and paid normally with the proceeds of sale of cattle, sheep and swine, are rendered unpayable this season by Departmental restrictions which the event shows to have been unfounded in respect of twenty-seven of the thirty-two counties of Ireland; and whether the Government will make reparation to victims of those restrictions by remitting the current gale of purchase money and of interest, and withholding police assistance from any landlords attempting to recover rents which the restrictions have prevented the tenants making?
§ The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell)I am, of course, well aware that the interruption in the sale of store cattle is an enormous injury to the small farmers in all parts of Ireland, but I cannot, in answer to a question, deal with Departmental restrictions enforced for the prevention of the spread of disease. The Government have no power to remit the payment of purchase annuities.
§ Mr. GINNELLWill the right hon. Gentleman say what the Government propose to do in the complete absence of money to pay these instalments?
§ Mr. BIRRELLThat is a very terrible contingency.