NEW CLAUSE.—(Prohibition of certain public contests, performances, and exhibitions with animals.)

HC Deb 20 April 1934 vol 288 cc1309-10

"(1) No person shall promote or cause or permit to take place any public performance which includes any episode consisting of or involving—

1. (a) throwing or casting, with ropes or other appliances, any unbroken horse or untrained bull; or
2. (b) wrestling, fighting, or struggling with any untrained bull; or
3. (c) riding, or attempting to ride, any horse or bull which by the use of any appliance or treatment involving cruelty, is, or has been, stimulated with the intention of making it buck during the performance;

and no person shall in any public performance take part in any such episode as aforesaid.

(2) For the purposes of proceedings under paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of the preceding sub-section, if an animal appears or is represented to spectators to be unbroken or untrained it shall lie on the defendant to prove that the animal is in fact broken or trained.

(3) In this section—

• the expression 'horse,' and 'bull' have, respectively, the same meanings as in the Protection of Animals Act, 1911;
• the expression 'public performance' does not include a performance presented to the public by means of the cinematograph.

(4) In the application of this section to Scotland—

• the expression 'horse' has the same meaning as in the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act, 1912; and
• the expression 'bull' means ox as defined in that Act."—[Sir R. Gower.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

1.5 p.m.

Sir R. GOWER

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee will remember that when I moved the Second Reading of this Bill, I stated that its sole intention was to prohibit a repetition of the three features of a rodeo exhibition to which general exception was taken when there was a rodeo in this country 10 years ago, namely, the lassoing, the wrestling, and the riding of beasts exhibited as unmanageable, and I gave an undertaking to the House that if it were found that the words then and originally included in the Bill did not carry out that intention, I would put in amended words to carry it out. The matter has been very carefully considered, with the result that I gave notice of an Amendment to Clause 1, and I now move the Second Reading of a new Clause consisting of Clause I as originally drawn, but as it would have been amended had the Amendment of which I gave notice been passed, with the addition of the words "involving cruelty," in line 8, after "treatment," and with the omission of the words "a view to," and the insertion instead of the words "the intention of." It is only necessary to say that if the new Clause is accepted by the Committee, it will then read as if it had been amended as proposed on the Order Paper, with the exception that paragraph (c) will read; (c) riding, or attempting to ride any horse or bull which by the use of any appliance or treatment involving cruelty is, or has been, stimulated with the intention of making it buck during the performance. I understand that this new Clause meets with the general approval of the Committee.

Question, "That the Clause be read a Second time," put, and agreed to.

Clause added to the Bill.