PROTECTION OF ANIMALS (No. 2). (Hansard, 5 March 1930)

§ Mr. LOVAT-FRASER

I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the hunting of deer. The first Clause of the Bill runs as follows: A person shall not chase, hunt or pursue, or cause to be chased, hunted or pursued, any deer with hounds. The second Clause makes a person guilty of an offence liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £25. The third Clause states that the Bill shall not apply to Scotland or Northern Ireland. May I say right away that I propose this Bill at the request of, and on behalf of, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and, if I may touch a personal note, I do it also as one who loves the deer. [Interruption.] May I repeat that I do it as one who loves the stag, and, as a lover of the stag, I ask this House to pass a Measure which proposes to put an end to a practice that subjects the stag to the grossest and most terrible cruelty. Deer-hunting goes on all over the country, but the black spot is the area which is hunted by the Devon and Somerset hounds, and I ask the House to listen to me while I read one description at least, and, if time permit, two descriptions of a stag hunt by the Devon and Somerset hounds. This description is given by one for whose accuracy and truth I can vouch. I am not prepared to mention his name publicly, but I am prepared to give it to any hon. Member who asks me for it after the matter is dealt with. This man attended a large number of hunts, and on 19th September he attended one at Cloutsham, a district hunted by the Devon and Somerset hounds. I will read to the House his description of that hunt, and it is the kind of thing to which I ask the House, in its humanity, to put a stop. He describes how a stag, a very large animal, was put up, and great difficulty was experienced in getting him to break cover: For about two hours it was just merely chasing backwards and forwards, with no vision at all, guided only by the cry of the hounds. About three o'clock it broke clear and ran across the moor to Horner Valley. Here for about 20 minutes there was a check, and as I was sitting on my horse, by the side of the stream, with several others, this stag came walking up the stream to- 444 wards us, not more than four yards away, and I had the most excellent view of it, and was able to note these facts. It was greatly distressed, absolutely steaming; its sides and flanks were heaving like a blacksmith's bellows. Its mouth was open, tongue lolling out of its mouth. Every now and then he would pause and kneel in the stream, partly immersing his fore-hand, then would rise and walk slowly on up the stream. The most appealing look from its eyes, which seemed to protrude almost from their sockets, brought from those who witnessed this scene (followers like myself) the expression of 'Poor devil, I hope he gets away.' However, the hounds were soon on him. When tackled by the hounds he jumped into a wire fence, rebounded back into the stream, backwards in the midst of the pack, who mauled him, but he got up with the hounds hanging on to him out of the stream up the hillside where he charged head first into a holly bush. Here the hounds again dragged him down. Three huntsmen dismounted and endeavoured to climb up the steep to get them off, but before reaching them stag and hounds came bundling down all in a heap. On reaching the bottom, the stag again got on his legs, blood streaming down its near fore-leg and lame. Its hindquarters just above the hocks were smeared with blood. He ran across the stream into a field, through a gateway into another field, surrounded by a brick wall, which stooped the field, huntsman and all. … There the stag was brought to bay. A huntsman came out and stuck him, and my informant says: I took the time from sticking, and it was four and a half minutes before the eye nerve was insensitive. Curiously enough a man made the test as to this, drawing the knife blade across the eye, which immediately closed, denoting life. I examined the carcase, and it was mauled everywhere. The fore muscle of the fore-leg was torn from the bone. The hindquarters were covered with blood and wounds. The torture of the stag lasted over a period of 25 minutes from the time it was first tackled in the stream. I am afraid I have not time to read another description to the House, but it must not be imagined that this is a solitary incident. I hope that no one will rise on the other side of the House and say that I have given one instance of cruelty only. I would like to read a dozen. I have here a large number of descriptions corresponding to the one I have read. That is what I ask the House to bring to an end. Domestic animals are preserved from cruelty, while wild animals are not, and in this Bill I am asking the House to put an end to a particular form of cruelty which is inflicted upon one type of wild animal. Not only do I ask the House to refuse to allow this to go on in the interest of the animals who are subjected to cruelty, 445 but I ask it in the interest of the hunters themselves. It is an astonishing fact that one sometimes hears people who indulge in the practices I have described say that they love animals. That is a very common statement amongst those who indulge in these brutal pursuits. It reminds me of a picture I saw in "Punch" some time ago by Bernard Partridge. An old woman is seen in a country road with her grandson, and the village doctor comes along and, pointing to the child, says, "Well, what are you going to do with this little fellow?" "Oh," said the woman, "he is going to be a butcher. He is so fond of animals that we cannot keep him out of the slaughter-house." That is the sort of person who professes to love animals.

It is pretty certain to be said, "Look at the unemployment you will bring about. Look at the thousands of people who depend for a living, at all events for some part of their lives, and, in some cases, all their lives, upon this practice." No reform of this kind has been brought about without throwing people out of employment. One of the favourite pursuits of this House at one time was cock-fighting, and 100 years ago the House was frequently depleted of attendance for that pursuit. Bull baiting was also a common pursuit. Those two things, which were brought to an end in 1849 by an Act of Parliament, had become highly industrialised, and their abolition caused a large number of people to be thrown out of employment. Yet the Parliament of that day did not hesitate to put an end to brutal pursuits because it threw a certain number of people out of employment. I say again, that an amusement which means cruelty and blood-sport such as I am asking the House to condemn, is a thing that might well come to an end. These unhappy animals are placed under the dominion of man by the Creator of the world. Let us treat them as the Creator would wish them to be treated; let us save them from unnecessary suffering. I, therefore, ask the House to pass this Bill.

§ Lieut.-Colonel GAULT

As the Bill which the hon. Member for Lichfield (Mr. Lovat-Fraser) asks leave to introduce is one which, if passed into law, will adversely affect the material welfare of a great number of my constituents, I beg 446 leave to oppose it. As everyone who has spent a summer vacation, or has even paid a casual visit to Exmoor, knows, stag-hunting is the natural sport of the countryside, and has been for generations past. It is inborn, and part and parcel of the lives of those who live upon the moor, and who, to a large extent, rely upon stag-hunting to implement the scanty revenue which they derive from a none too generous soil. In addition to those are a number of small ostlers, smiths, small tradesmen and job-masters, who depend upon stag-hunting entirely for their well-being and sustenance. If this Bill becomes law they will be wiped out of existence.

I do not object to this Bill merely on the grounds that I have mentioned. I would join issue with the hon. Member upon the vital principle which is covered by this Bill, namely, the prolonged fear and terror in the hunted animal. Anyone who has any experience of the conservation of game realises that a given area can only support a given number of animals, and that a system of conservation and limitation is essential if the fauna of our country, or of any other country, is to be preserved. Stag-hunting has ever been a time-honoured custom of the moor, but of late years a well-intentioned and sentimental point of view, which has little or no knowledge of wild life behind it, has come to regard hunting with hounds as an entirely cruel method of killing game. I am not a regular follower of the Devon and Somerset staghounds, but I have seen on more than one occasion a hunted stag, with the hounds not far behind him, coming, not hurriedly, but quietly out of cover, before making his point. Surely, this indicates, at least, that there is no undue terror in the mind of the hunted stag.

Sometimes he is killed. Sometimes, through the instinctive law of the hunter, in ways too numerous to mention in a 10 minutes' speech, he is killed, but when he is killed he is killed with certainty and surety, and not left to die, as sometimes happens in the case of shooting. I have heard of an instance of a stag, wounded by shooting, which got away into the woods and lived a miserable life for some days before it was finally found and put out. A hill farmer, not long ago, told me of a fox, 447 that lived in a covert near his farm, that had been regularly hunted by hounds for some past seasons—it was then alive—and when that fox got tired of being chased it crossed a clay belt, where scent did not hold, and got safely into an old tree, from which vantage point it used to watch, unconcernedly, the hounds, which were unable to find it there. I have watched a hunted fox, with the hounds in the field behind him, take up a chicken within 100 yards of my house, throw it over his shoulder and go to cover behind the house, where no doubt he enjoyed a succulent repast. These instances disprove the theory that prolonged fear exists in the mind of the hunted animal.

If the House accept this kind of legislation, how long is it going to be, after the death-knell of stag-hunting has been sounded, before the death-knell of hunting in general will be sounded, hunting which has played so valuable a part in the well-being and happiness of our race? I know of no happier meeting place for rich or poor than the hunting field. If we pass this sort of legislation, it will not be long before similar legislation is introduced to put an end to coursing, in which the supporters of hon. Members opposite are vitally concerned. After that, there will probably come the prohibition of shooting. If all these sports and pastimes are to end, there will be a great repercussion of financial hardship upon the countryside. If the House accept this principle, how long will it be before we are asked to accept a Bill which will prevent sweet old ladies from keeping vicious eats to destroy the household mouse?