§ 48 Mr. PATRICK WHITEasked the Prime Minister (1) whether he has now considered the extracts submitted to him from speeches of Ministers when the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Acts, 1878 and 1884, were before the Houses of Parliament; and, if so, have they, together with the wording of those Acts, which are now consolidated in the Act of 1894, con- 1244 vinced him that the intention of Parliament was that, upon Ireland complying with certain regulations, which she has since done, she was to be treated as a part of the United Kingdom, as one county in England to another; if so, will he state why Ireland was treated differently last year, and in the manner prescribed for a foreign country by the Act of 1878; whether, having regard to the Parliamentary understanding arrived at between the representatives of Great Britain and of Ireland when the Acts referred to were under discussion in Parliament, and that Great Britain has apparently not acted up to the promises made on her behalf, he will appoint a satisfactorily constituted Committee to inquire into the original elements and working of the Act of 1894, in order that one country may not misapprehend the action of the other on a matter concerning both so vitally; (2) whether, having regard to alleged illegal embargo which was placed on Irish cattle landing in this country last year, to the dissatisfaction which it caused to Irish stock owners, to the refusal which met all their appeals for redress or mitigation of their grievances, to the magnitude of the interests involved, and to the loss and inconvenience imposed upon Irish owners, this year by the detention of animals, which can now only be enforced for humane reasons, he will appoint a Committee of Inquiry into the existing system of detaining cattle on arrival and enable the Irish stock owners to place their grievances before an impartial tribunal; (3) whether Sub-section (23) of Section 22 of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act of 1894, for prohibiting the conveyance of animals by any specified vessel to or from any port in the United Kingdom for such time as the Board may consider expedient, the Sub-section upon which the English Board of Agriculture relied for its authority last year to place an embargo on Irish cattle, is taken word for word from Section 4 of the Act of 1884 and should be read in conjunction with that Act, which applied to foreign countries only, except in so far as it related to the fitness of vessels engaged in the domestic trade to carry animals; whether his attention has been called to the statement of the Minister in charge of it in the House of Commons that it applied to foreign countries only; and (4) whether he is aware that the prohibition Orders issued by the Board of Agriculture last year against cattle from Ireland amounted in 1245 effect while they lasted to a form of Protection in favour of British stock owners as against Irish, losing to the latter several million pounds; whether, if such a thing is possible by the action of a single Minister of a Government opposed to Protection in any shape or form, will he consider what losses might befall the farmers of Ireland if, following the precedent of last year, a Protectionist Minister of, a Protectionist Government catering for the support of agriculturists in this country, proceeded on the same lines for an indefinite period; and whether, having regard to the importance of the matter and in order to make clear the intentions of Parliament in past legislation, and that its will shall prevail in the future, he will appoint a Committee that will command the confidence of both countries to inquire into and report upon the working of the various Diseases of Animals Acts as between Great Britain and Ireland?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThere is no foundation for the statement that Ireland has been treated in the manner prescribed for a foreign country by the Act of 1878. As I explained in my previous answer on the 27th March last, the action of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries in respect to the landing of Irish animals in Great Britain was taken under Section 22 of the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894, and the restrictions imposed were such as might in effect be imposed at any time, if necessity should arise, upon the movement of animals from any one part of the United Kingdom to any other part. I am informed that none of the Board's Orders was based upon Sub-section (23) of that Section. The Orders issued last year preventing the admission of animals from Ireland to Great Britain were based on Sub-sections (17) and (37). Section 22 of the Act of 1894 re-enacts in all material respects Section 34 of the Act of 1878 and does not refer to foreign animals at all. I am advised that there has not been any illegality or any breach of Parliamentary understanding, and I do not consider that, in the circumstances, there is sufficient reason for the appointment of a Committee as suggested by the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. PATRICK WHITEIs the right hon. Gentleman not aware that when these Acts were passed through the House there was an understanding that Ireland would be located as part of the United Kingdom; that last year 155 animals which were a source of infection 1246 were prevented from landing in this country, and that no similar treatment was meted out to any part of Great Britain? Is that equal treatment?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have told the hon. Member that I am advised the Section referred to applied to movements of animals from one part of the United Kingdom to any other part.
§ Mr. PATRICK WHITEWas not the understanding that animals in any part of the United Kingdom were to be treated alike? Was that agreement broken?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI believe the Irish Department of Agriculture has excluded animals from Great Britain.