Lords Sitting of 20 February 1873

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament—The Duke of Leeds, after the death of his father.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Epping Forest* (19); Poor Allotments Management* (20).

HORSES—0UR SUPPLY OF HORSES.

  ADDRESS FOR A ROYAL COMMISSION.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY,in moving that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the condition of this country with regard to horses, and its capabilities of supplying any present or future demand for them, said, that during the short time he had been a Member of their Lordships' House it had been his. fortune to address them on more than one occasion, but he had never done so with a more complete sense of his own unworthiness and unfitness for the task he had undertaken than that which he entertained on this occasion. It was not alone that the subject itself was difficult—because that he had known beforehand—but since he bad given his Notice such a flood of communications had been coming in upon him, expressing with one unanimous voice the same

  703
  opinion, and containing such a mass of detail, and in many cases such a mass of wandering evidence, that he felt himself wholly incapable of doing justice to the subject. His difficulty was much increased by the absence through illness of a noble Lord who was much more competent to address their Lordships, not merely because he would have spoken with great weight on all subjects, but because he had given much of his attention to this particular topic. He need hardly say he alluded to Lord Ossington. That noble Lord, unfortunately, was not able to be in his place; but he had taken the trouble to write his views, and he should have the honour of quoting later in the evening opinions which, coming from that noble Lord, their Lordships would esteem worthy of respect. In approaching the subject he wished to guard himself against being supposed to touch, except in the most general manner, on thoroughbreds or racehorses. Whatever their merits might be, it was not his duty to speak of them, because they did not seem to him to be within the scope of his Motion. Neither did he intend to propose particular remedies for the evil which he was about to bring under their Lordships' notice. Those would be for the Commission, which he had little doubt their Lordships would address Her Majesty to grant. There were, however, two remedies which he could not help touching upon owing to the character of the persons by whom they were suggested, and to the extraordinary nature of the remedies themselves. Within the last few days the newspapers and himself had been honoured with a communication from a gallant gentleman whose opinions would carry just weight with them., not only on account of his great ability, and because he had added lustre to the Navy and the Turf, but also because he gave up to the horse "what was meant for mankind." Nothing that Admiral Rous might write could lessen his respect for him, but perhaps he ought to mention that the gallant Admiral had not sent him this letter. He saw it for the first time in The Times. The gallant Admiral in that letter said—
  "My dear Rosebery,—The facts from practical knowledge bearing upon the state and condition of our national stud convince me that in 1873 there is a greater number of horses of
  704
  every description in England than ever was known, and that in their respective classes and vocations they are superior to their predecessors. A strange accession of national wealth has increased the demand for superior articles, especially for hunters, high-stepping carriage horses, and clever hacks; consequently, the extra demand exceeds the normal supply.
  "All luxuries and domestic stock have risen in value owing to a higher remuneration for labour, and it stands to reason that with the present price of beef and mutton, no farmer occupying grass lands can speculate with advantage in rearing horses when he can get 45 s. for his lambs."
  He believed in that most sincerely; but he did not see what consolation was afforded to the farmer and to other persons who wanted horses for their industries by the facts stated in the letter of the gallant Admiral. There was another passage which he was anxious to quote—
  "Our prizes are open to all the world; even the paltry national donation of Royal Plates voted each Session by the House of Commons to improve the breed of horses on British territory is partially lost to us by Her Majesty's Masters of the Horse allowing foreign horses to compete. They have been liberal with trust money which they were bound by duty to see properly appropriated. It is the old British reciprocity system, to give away everything and receive nothing."
  Now, for curiosity's sake, he had looked up the names of the horses who won the Queen's Plates in England last year, and he found that of 18, the total number, three were what were known as foreign-bred horses; but they were horses the sires of which were English, which had been trained by English trainers and ridden by English jockeys on behalf of an English resident, and which were only called "foreign" because they had been bred in a foreign land. He could not think, therefore, that it was quite logical of the gallant Admiral to argue that they were foreign horses. He did not, however, wish to dwell on that point, and he would come to the kernel of the letter—the remedy proposed. He could scarcely exaggerate the respect and attention with which Parliament and the country must have prepared to hear what the Oracle had to say on that point. Well, what was it he said?—"The practical remedy—put the same tax on racehorses as on other horses of luxury, and then pray leave us alone." What was the result of 60 years' experience of racehorses? Of 15 years of absolute rule at Newmarket? Of a powerful mind devoted to a subject

  705
  with which it is thoroughly conversant? Reduce racehorse duty from £3 17 s. to 10 s. 6d. "It is your wealth that has caused a scarcity of horses; therefore, reduce the tax, and behold you shall abound." Well, the only other remedy he should consider was that of a more distinguished authority still—he alluded to Her Majesty's Government. What was the remedy proposed by Her Majesty's Government? It was so well described in a letter from a noble Lord that he begged to be allowed to quote the passage—
  "Recent legislation in this direction amounts to nothing short of the commencement of a system of taxing agricultural labour and produce. It is not generally known, perhaps, that the employer of a labourer at daily wages to look after mares—or horses not bred for agricultural purposes—is now chargeable with a tax on that account, and that when a tenant farmer thinks proper to make high-bred horses a part of his live stock, the profits arising there from, if any, must be returned and taxed additionally, under a separate form, as something apart from ordinary agricultural gains. When, too, he requires the assistance of a neighbour's team to help out the tillage of his farm, a licence must be taken out for each horse so borrowed. It is difficult to understand the wisdom of this course.…. Why should a man attending mares, or a stud groom at a breeding establishment, be made an object of taxation a bit more than a herdsman? Why should the profits arising from a superior stallion be taxed a bit more than those of a shorthorn bull? Why is a particular horse or broodmare assumed to be an article of luxury before it is used as such, or, on the other hand, after it has ceased to be sound?"
  Then he had received a letter from the noble Lord (Lord Calthorpe), the senior steward of the Jockey Club, informing him that Government had taxed the services of his stallion Knight of the Garter. Knight of the Garter was, on Admiral Rous's authority, one of the finest horses in the world. Now, at a time when foreign prices were tempting every owner of horses and mares to send their stock abroad, was it a wise thing to discourage in this way their retention at home? Yet, although the Government in buying horses for the Army was daily more pinched by their scarcity, this was apparently the sole remedy it had to propose. When alluding to thoroughbred horses and racing, he knew he was treading on very delicate ground. It was the fashion of the present day to denounce racing as selfish and demoralizing, as a mere inducement to gambling, and to deliver in Parliament flaming Philippics against what were somewhat affectedly termed "our Isth-
  706
  mian Games." If in the month of September an apprentice emptied the till of his master, the circumstance was described as a lamentable case arising from the St. Leger; and if an old woman was run over at a crossing during the last week in May the accident was attributed to the Derby. All the evils to which flesh is heir, all the weaknesses to which humanity is liable, every failing and every misdeed—all were unsparingly attributed to the Turf. That was not the time, nor was their Lordships' House the place, for an advocacy of the Turf, but he did not think racing was open to all the denunciations levelled at it; at the same time he must express his regret that, at some of the great meetings, short distance races were encouraged—in fact, at the July Meeting last year only two races were run during the whole week over distances exceeding a mile, while during the Second October Meeting not a single match was made or run. Again, handicaps seemed to be superseding all other kinds of racing; but the greatest curse of all was the curse of permitting horses to run in assumed names, which had entrapped many minors, and had been the ruin of many fortunes. But, in defence of the Turf, he might quote what was said of it last year by one who was not mixed up with it in any way—"It is a noble, manly, distinguished, and historically national amusement." That was the testimony of the present Prime Minister; but if one wanted to see racing in its best form, he must see a match such as he witnessed last year, at Doncaster races, between Lord Falmouth and Lord Fitzwilliam, who ran two horses which they themselves had bred, without a bet, merely anxious to test the merits of their respective breeds of horses, amid the cheers of myriads of their delighted fellow-countrymen, who watched with delight not merely the contest between noble horses, but the honourable rivalry between names they knew and revered. He regarded racing, when carried on in that way, as one of the most legitimate sports in which men of means could indulge. Hunting and shooting were pursuits of the rich, but horse-racing afforded amusement to hundreds of thousands of the poorer classes of the community. But it was said the Turf gave rise to gambling. No doubt it did; but he ventured to

  707
  assert that gambling by the owners of horses was decreasing. In many cases those gentlemen' had no more on their horses than they would have on a rubber of whist. To revive an old French saying, to abolish gambling by putting down races would be like attempting to abolish rain by suppressing the gutters. Then, again, it was said that racing destroyed the present breed of horses. Everyone who had a difficulty with them —the squire who found hunters doubled in price, the stockbroker whose steppers cost a fortune, the ecclesiastic whose cob had come down with him—all with one voice cried "It is the fault of the Turf; down with it." Some, he believed, had gone further, and intended indicting Admiral Rous under the old law against "he who poisons the King's land with weeds." But he confessed he had never understood why it was the duty of gentlemen who raced to see that every Briton was well and cheaply horsed. It was a private amusement, involving, so far as he knew, no public duty, but much private anxiety and. expense; but yet we were told by the gentlemen who wrote the fine articles and made the fine speeches that it was the duty of the Jockey Club to reduce the price of horses, to revive extinct breeds, to produce animals equal to Pegasus, and to mount the Army. All he demanded was that what was sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander, and that if the Jockey Club were to mount the Army, the Royal Yacht Squadron should provide ships for the Navy. As to our thorough-breds, they were said to have deteriorated in quality; but last year he had seen three of them sold in three minutes for nearly £27,000, and the worst of the three had been bought for 6,000 guineas by the Prussians, who at any rate had the credit of knowing what they were about. Then as to numbers, thorough-breds were almost the only class of horses that had increased. He found that the total number of thoroughbred foals foaled in the United Kingdom in 1870 was 1,815; in 1871 the number was 1,751; and in 1872 it was 1,741; while the export had been, in the three years he had named, 57, 102, and 217. He would now proceed to deal with the more general subject, and ask what was the cause of the scarcity of horses. He believed that the greater and surer profits derived from sheep and cattle, and the custom
  708
  of warranties, which made the farmer liable to have horses returned on his hands, had much to do with it. Then there was the difficulty of obtaining proper sires and the expense of service. The expense and annoyance of dealers' licences were also an element which had its effect. A man who only sold a horse or two did not like to be put down as a dealer and taxed accordingly. Ignorance of breeding, which made persons give it up in disgust after one or two attempts, had also to do with the scarcity. The recent enormous exportation of horseflesh—especially mares—was another great cause, as was also the great demand for all sorts of horses simultaneously with the decline of breeding. Lastly, the abolition of posting had its share in bringing about the scarcity. Forty years ago, when we had no railways, the English system of posting was unequalled, and our post-horses, the majority of which were mares, were matchless. Every town was at that time an equine centre; and the farmer seeing the team pass by his house kept a look out for these mares when they were broken down, knowing that they would be easily obtainable for breeding purposes. When posting was done away with and railways were opened, the farmers, not calculating on the expansion of our commerce, concluded that there would be little or no demand for such horses in future. Next, the Irish famine of 1846 caused a marked decrease in horse breeding in Ireland. Then came the Crimean War, which occasioned a very large exportation of horses, and turned the attention of foreign buyers to what might be done by purchasing in this country. The war of 1866 excited that attention still further; and he found that so rapidly and largely had the exportation of horses increased, that within the last six years no fewer than 14,000 mares had been exported from Harwich and Hull. Returns on the subject of the export of horses had been kindly furnished to him by the Board of Trade, but, after having bestowed great labour over them, he feared they were worth little more than the paper on which they were written. It appeared from those Returns that during the last 15 years 60,000 horses had been exported from this country; but, referring to the Returns for the year 1870, he found that only eight horses were set down as having been exported from

  709
  Ireland, when it was known that during that year the agents of the French Government were buying every horse they could find in that country. He knew, therefore, that this must be wrong; and having gone to a high authority on the subject, he was treated with scorn for supposing that these Returns were of any value. He was asked what on earth had induced him to suppose that the dealers passed their horses through the Custom House? Besides the enormous export of mares to Germany, the French and Italians had been buying largely in this country, and more especially our roadster stallions, which had thus become very scarce. It would be difficult to compute how many of those animals had gone out of the country within the last few years; but he had high authority for saying that numbers of them had been bought for France and Italy. Then, what had become of the 14,000 mares exported to Germany? They had been put to thorough-bred horses, which had also been exported from the United Kingdom, and the result had been the horses of the Uhlans. It was difficult to lay hold of accurate Returns. What was a difficulty to the Board of Trade was a tenfold greater difficulty to a private individual; but it was not going too far to say that three-fourths of the carriage horses in London had come from Germany, and a great number of the London omnibus horses had been imported from Belgium and France. The Cleveland mare, the Clydesdale, and the roadster had all become scarce. The farmers had lost the habit and practice of breeding, having parted with their mares to the foreign buyer; and what was the result of this? In the letter with which he had favoured him, Lord Ossington wrote—
  "The scarcity of horses in England is becoming a matter of general anxiety, not only to individuals who require the use of horses, but to the Government, who have to make provision for the service of the cavalry and artillery."
  Lord Portsmouth, writing to him, said—
  "I have been a master of hounds for 23 years, and I can testify strongly to the extraordinary scarcity of horses."
  Mr. Chaplin, in a letter too long to quote, deplored the same evils. A considerable proprietor in Cheshire wrote that horses were both scarcer and lighter, and that the old-fashioned hackney had disappeared. A gentleman in the neighbourhood of Darlington stated that there for-
  710
  merly great numbers of horses of the hunter class were bred; now nothing were bred but thorough-bred stock and cattle, and the Cleveland mare had died out. A gentleman from Northallerton wrote much to the same effect; and added that he had had a conversation with a person on the subject of drawing horses' teeth, who said he had altered many a score, and began to feel some compunction. He had altered three year-olds into five-year-olds, and had drawn as many as eight from one mouth at one time. The Secretary of the Lanarkshire Farmers' Association wrote to say that in the district of Clydesdale hardly any horses were bred now in comparison to what used to be; that it was moderate to say prices had doubled, while there was great difficulty in producing the best stamp of Clydesdales. Dealers from all parts of the country said, in the words of one of them—"There were more horses left unsold after a fair some years ago than are offered for sale at the beginning now." The French Government agent last year, after his tour through this country to purchase horses, told Mr. Weather by there were five horses nine years ago for one now. The Secretary of the Yorkshire Agricultural Society wrote in these terms—
  "Our breeders have been tempted to sell all their best horses for exportation. There is a lamentable want of sound strong thorough-bred stallions in the country. The Cleveland mares, from which have usually descended our best coach horses, and from whose daughters by thorough-bred horses and again crossed by blood have sprung all our best hunters, are nearly extinct; in fact, the foreigners have got them all."
  From Ireland he had received communications stating similar facts with regard to the scarcity. Coming to not the less useful but less romantic cart horse, he had received testimony from a company—the Great Northern—than which none had better experience in the matter. They had 1,300 of those animals, and they found that in the 10 years from 1863 to the present year the increase in the price they had to give for their cart horses was over 70 per cent. They also mentioned that the proportion of increase within the last five years had been far greater than in the five years preceding. From facts he would come to figures, and he thought his figures would bring conviction home to everyone who might still be doubting. He would begin with the less and come to the

  711
  greater. In Wales the number of brood mares and agricultural horses in 1871 was 117,176 as compared with 116,131 in 1870. Considering the enormous development of such towns as Cardiff, Dowlais, and Merthyr Tydvil, and all the district over which an unhappy blight prevailed at that moment, that increase showed no abundance. In Scotland the number in 1870 was 172,871, and in 1871 the number was 174,434, showing an increase for the latter year of 1,563. That was an increase which, when he considered the great annual increase of wealth and commerce in Scotland, did not make him very proud of the state of things as regarded horses existing at this moment in his native country. In Ireland there were complete Returns for 1872. This was one of the things they did better in Ireland. Well, there the number in 1871 was 538,095; and in 1872 the number was 540,745, showing an increase for the latter year of 2,650. But his suspicion became excited by this Return, and he took the trouble of comparing the number for 1862, or a period of 10 years from the last Return. And what did he find? Why, that in 1862 the number was 602,894, as against 540,745 for 1872—showing a decrease in the 10 years of 62,149. When their Lordships remembered the progress which the commerce of Ireland had made since 1862, and the benefits which had been showered on her agricultural population by the Land Act, they would see that the decrease was all the more surprising. In England the last Return of brood mares, unbroken, and agricultural horses was for 1871, when the number was 962,840, as against 977,707 for 1870, showing a decrease in 1871 as compared with 1870 of 14,867. If one who knew nothing about England saw that Return he would be tempted to exclaim—"What unhappy country is this? —its population must be dwindling down, and its commerce and agriculture must be languishing. Is it the Spain of Charles II or the France of Louis XV.?" Would their Lordships allow him to detain them a little longer by referring to the episode of the last Autumn Manœuvres—when it was determined to take some thousands of the troops of the British Army to Salisbury Plain, and put them through a series of operations in the neighbourhood of Stonehenge? To carry out that determination 2,000 transport horses were required; fair notice
  712
  and a fair price were given; but the resources of Great Britain were found unequal to meet that overwhelming demand. He spoke on competent authority when he said that at least 1,250 of them were brought over from France alone. So that this kingdom, which had been so long held pre-eminent in horses, was unable to furnish Her Majesty's Control Department with 2,000 horses for three weeks. But how did these foreign horses do their work? After three weeks they were so changed, so emaciated, so utterly unfit to undergo another week's work on the completion of the Manœuvres, that their best friends—if horses bad friends, which he was beginning to doubt—would not have known them; and he was told that when sold by the Government the sale was effected at a loss of little less than £20 a horse on the average. He had shown the inconvenience to this country of the scarcity, for which he hoped a Commission would find a remedy. He had now to point out that the scarcity was a positive danger to us. He based this statement on the experience of the last two great wars—which might be called the two breech-loading wars. The wars of 1866 and 1870 taught us— if they had taught us anything—that in future great wars would be declared on the shortest notice; that they would be as sudden as the eruption of a volcano. On the 12th of June, 1866, diplomatic negotiations were broken off between Prussia and Austria. On the 15th of the same month the Prussian troops crossed the frontier; on the 18th they occupied Dresden, and in six weeks after, the campaign was decided, and the monarchy of Austria was lowered to the dust. On the 15th of July, 1870, negotiations between France and Prussia were brought to a close. On the 30th of the same month the Armies of the two nations were massed opposite to each other on the banks of the Rhine. In a week after the blow had been struck which decided the fate of two Empires. What should we do if we were called upon to fight so suddenly? Speaking roughly, we had 6,600 cavalry horses and 6,000 artillery horses. In case of war we should want 2,500 cavalry horses and 4,000 artillery horses, and not fewer than 25,000 light and 50,000 heavy transport horses. A man who had more to do with supplying horses to Her Majesty's troops than probably any other person in Great Britain had told him that

  713
  he could not provide 3,000 horses at even double the present regulation price in three months. Well, our position would be this—we should want between 6,000 and 7,000 horses for our cavalry and artillery—he would not allude to the transport, because that was a hopeless subject—within, at the longest, about a fortnight, and we should not be able to obtain the half of them in six times that period. This was no very pleasant reflection. But there was another consideration. A poet had been defined as something which was born and not made. On the other hand, a charger was something that was born a horse but had been made a charger; and to make a charger took about five months. So that we could not get the 6,000 or 7,000 cavalry and artillery horses we wanted in less than six times the period within which we should require them, and that even when we did get them they would not be chargers. He did say that this was a grave state of things. He did not know what was the intention of Her Majesty's Government with regard to the Motion which he was about to make; but he could not doubt that it was favourable. This was not a question of party. It was pre-eminently a national question. He had not dwelt for one moment on the fact that our carriage horses—the horses we used in luxury—were derived from foreign sources; nor had he dwelt on the fact that our preeminent position as a horse-breeding country was passing away. He was pleading for the horse not as a means of pleasure, nor even as an animal that had had a great and beneficial influence on the national character, but as an adjunct of commerce, an implement of agriculture, and an engine of war. It tilled the earth, drew their waggons, conveyed their merchandise, and afforded the means of transfer in their great cities; and yet—and this was a serious portion of the question—they were dependent for their supply upon the foreign market. It might be part of the pedantry of politics to disregard this aspect of the question; but they could not disregard that side of it which affected the Army, and thereby the security for those liberties and privileges which they enjoyed. They could not ignore the fact that they required last year for a short space of time 2,000 horses, and that those 2,000 horses could not be found in England. If he were not misinformed—and he
  714
  made the statement on high authority—there would be no possibility, owing to the scarcity of horses, of holding the Autumn Manœuvres this year—a fact which foreshadowed the lamentable condition the country would be in in time of war. He thought their Lordships would agree with him that the subject he had brought under their notice was one of an extremely grave character. He had been informed that at this moment our Navy was deriving its supply of coals from America, and that the old joke as to sending coals to Newcastle was literally fulfilled. He bracketted those two subjects together. They well deserved the consideration of their Lordships, not as a body of politicians, but as a body of Englishmen and statesmen. Feebly as he had laid his case before them, no one was more aware than he was of its great importance. The naked facts he had stated, and figures he had quoted, not merely justified, but imperatively demanded as full and comprehensive, and as searching an inquiry as it was in the power of Parliament to ordain.
  Moved that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying Her Majesty to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into the condition of this country with regard to horses, and its capabilities of supplying any present or future demand for them.—(The Lord Rosebery.)
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I am quite sure your Lordships have heard. as I have with the greatest pleasure the speech just delivered by the noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery)—a speech evidencing much ability—and the great pains he has taken to inform himself upon the subject on which he spoke, and delivered in that agreeable manner in which the noble Earl enlivens everything he says, however dry the subject-matter may be. I am sure the noble Earl will not think that I at all undervalue the importance of the subject or the ability with which he treated it—but far the contrary—if I make but a few observations in reply, agreeing in some of the points which he has urged and differing in respect of others from hum. He began by attacking our common friend, Admiral Rous; but as I never knew a man who was more capable of defending himself, whether in the Jockey Club or against the elements on the Atlantic, or on the hustings, than the gallant Admiral, I shall only say that when the noble Earl said that Admiral

  715
  Rous was in a minority of one in his opinion as to the deterioration of horses in this country, I beg, with great humility after his assertion, to state I am afraid I know at all events one other person—that is myself—who agrees with the Admiral in opinion. The noble Earl alluded to the greatly increased price of horses; and there I agree with him entirely, as I imagine your Lordships will also, whether as regards race horses or common horses—horses for riding, carriage, or any other description of horses. The reasons for that state of things are obvious. The competition for horses has of late years augmented immensely. You have London, Glasgow, Manchester, Liverpool, and the manufacturing towns of Yorkshire, competing with the landed proprietors of the country, and you have the formidable competition of foreigners, and the consequence is an enormous increase in prices. And I must say that if a Commission is to be appointed, and the object of the Commission be to lower the price of horses from national considerations, I can conceive no more fatal blow than would thus be given both to the breeding and to the breeders of horses. The noble Earl then went on to his second point—namely, the degeneracy of horses. Well, that is clearly a matter of opinion; but I confess I have very great doubts as to whether horses in this country have in fact degenerated. I must say I do not take the view which the noble Earl has expressed. I know it is entertained by some who say that the breeding of race horses has had an injurious effect upon the horses of the country generally, and that the best thing we can do is to get rid of racing altogether. I think nothing of the sort. On the contrary, I think that immense improvement has resulted from the additional encouragement which has been given to the breeding of race-horses. I do not quite agree with my noble Friend in what he said as to thorough-bred horses, for it is quite extraordinary to what uses two or three year-old thorough-bred horses can be turned. Five years ago I was stopping in a country house in France, to which was attached a farm of 2,000 acres, and the whole work of that farm—not only on the farm itself, but all the road-work and going to market—was entirely and exclusively done by thorough-bred horses of from two and a-half to five years old; and I think this system prevails much more in Ireland than here in England.
  716
  The owner of the farm to which I have referred had had in Paris, and the neighbouring post stations, no fewer than 600 horses, and he is moreover the only foreigner who ever won the Derby, and therefore it cannot be alleged that he does not very well know what he is about. But with regard to degeneracy—I do not know where my noble Friend has found it. He says we have lost the old British carriage horse, and for my part I am heartily glad of it. The reason why we have lost the old British carriage horse is, I believe, to be this:—that we have given up the enormous, heavy, carriages which were drawn by those ponderous animals at the rate of about five miles an hour, and that we have now a different class of horse for the lighter vehicles of the present day. I infinitely prefer the well-bred, sinewy horses which my noble Friend (the Duke of Richmond) drives, to the handsome chestnut cart horses which drew his grandfather through the streets of London. Well, again, if my noble Friend goes into the Park he will find the number of horses in Rotten Row quadruple what it used to be—although I confess a percentage of those horses, particularly those which so many affectionate husbands and anxious fathers provide for their wives and daughters, I do not admire. I think if my noble Friend goes into the Park any afternoon he will find—or I am very much mistaken—no lack of hacks which would carry him as fast, as safely, and as well as the old hackney to which he alluded. Again, it is said that everything is sacrificed now to speed. Well, I remember hunting with a noble Marquess, whom I now see present, in Northamptonshire 40 years ago. The fields were not then one-fourth or one-fifth of what they are now; and I venture to say that if my noble Friend goes to any meet there, out of about 500 horses which he will probably see there, he will find 200 or 300 capable of carrying 13, 14, or 15 stone at a tremendous pace and over a difficult country with great success. I am told that the old English hunter is extinct. Well, I have never been able to fix the precise date when that animal flourished; but I confess I very much prefer the well-bred weight-carrier of the present day to the steady "old-fashioned hunter." He is confessedly unable to live with the hunters of the present day as to pace, and I believe them to be fully as en-

  717
  during as he was, if they are not asked to go faster. In fact I do not believe in the degeneracy of the horse. I think we have quite as good horses now as we ever had, if not better; and and that so far from people being more easily satisfied, they are becoming infinitely more fastidious in the matter of horses than they used to be. And then as to what one hears as to the impossibility of obtaining horses—when you bring it to the test you find it to be all nonsense. I have bought horses pretty well all my life, and I well remember the constant story of the dealers as to the impossibility of procuring good horses. "It is impossible," they say, "to get them. Formerly you could run down into Shropshire and bring home 10 or 12 first-class horses; but now that cannot be clone for love or money. But by an exceptional piece of luck, I lighted yesterday upon the valuable animal I am about to show you." The question of the merits or demerits of the horses of the the present day is one, as I have said before, entirely of opinion, and I do not concur in that entertained by my noble Friend. But now as to what was said as to the diminution of horses. My noble Friend objected to the figures of the Board of Trade, and I, of course, cannot vouch for their strict accuracy; but they are the figures returned by the Customs to the Board of Trade, and with your Lordships' permission I will give a summary of the exports for the last three years. I believe it is not the habit of the Customs House officials to take account of horses that are exported singly; but after making allowance for that, the numbers are widely different from those given by the noble Earl. I find that the number of horses exported in 1870 from the United Kingdom to Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, the United States, and other countries, was 7,202; in 1871 the number was 7,172; while in 1872 the number fell to 3,383. The total number of horses in the United Kingdom in 1872 may be stated at 2,700,000. Of that number Great Britain had 2,145,000, Ireland 540,000, and the Army at home 15,000. The number in Great Britain included 1,258,000 horses employed solely in agriculture, mares for breeding, and unbroken horses; 852,000 horses for which licence duty was paid after deducting 5,000 for more than one license or change of ownership, and 35,000 horses
  718
  exempt from licence duty, including horses kept for sale by dealers, officers' horses, and horses in mines. In the United Kingdom about 1,323,000 horses are employed solely for agricultural purposes. It is true that France has more horses than we have, yet while we have seven horses to every 100 acres of cultivated land, Belgium has five, and France only three. Whether the Board of Trade figures are correct or not it is impossible for me to say, but I have here a statement from the Inland Revenue, and of its correctness there can be no doubt, because it is compiled from a return of the taxes paid. This statement shows that while in 1831 we had 961 racehorses, that number had increased to 1,390 in 1851, and to 2,473 in 1871. Of horses other than racehorses we had, in 1831, 338,343. That number, in 1851, owing probably to the causes alluded to by the noble Earl, had diminished to 311,113; but in 1871 it had increased to 859,321, or nearly treble what it was in 1831. It does not, therefore, seem very clear to me that there has been so great a diminution of horses in this country. I see, however, that the number of horse-dealers has increased from 1,037 in 1831, to 1,464 in 1871, and the increasing competition, therefore, may account for some of the gloomy statements which these gentlemen make to those who deal with them. The noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery), with considerable eloquence, then went into the military question—one with which I am not very competent to deal. I understood the noble Earl to say that the country would require 78,000 draught horses in case of an invasion. But we have something like 1,000,000 of agricultural horses in this kingdom, and is it possible to imagine that, in the case of invasion, any Government would hesitate to double the price now paid, or that the country would hesitate to supply the horses wanted, or, if need were, that a law would be passed enabling the Government to seize what they required for the defence of the kingdom? The noble Earl's argument that in case of war we should require a certain number of horses in a fortnight, if it means anything, means not that there ought to be more horses in the country, but that we should have a number of cavalry horses perfectly broken and ready for purposes of war. As to our not being able out of our

  719
  million of horses to find enough unbroken horses for the use of our cavalry, I believe that idea to be a delusion. Admitting, however, all the statements and figures used by my noble Friend to be correct, my noble Friend has, with becoming modesty, entirely avoided the question of what the Commission, when it is appointed, is to do. Is it to establish breeding clubs all over the country? In 1831 the French regiments were half of them mounted on foreign horses. That was thought to be a great national calamity, and studs were established all over the country. Twenty years afterwards, however, General Fleury reported the plan to be a failure, and that it had the effect of extinguishing private enterprise, and the result was that the system was abandoned. In Algeria the experience has been the same, and in India we have had 80 years of Government studs; and what has been the result? A distinguished officer recently stated that the system had proved a gigantic failure, and another friend of mine has informed me that we had extinguished private enterprise, and had now succeeded in mounting every private at a cost of £205 per horse. The noble Earl, though not making any definite recommendation, appears to have some bias towards placing an export duty upon our brood mares. To do so, however, would be, I believe, to take away exactly that stimulus which keeps up the supply of the country, and would be fatal to the breeding of horses in this country. I must say that unless Her Majesty's Government—unless it is pointed out to them, or unless they see themselves that some good will probably result, ought to be very chary of granting a Royal Commission. It used formerly to be a great reproach to Liberal Governments that they were too much accustomed to do things by Commissions, which are at once expensive and likely to last a long time. What I would therefore suggest to the noble Earl is, that he should withdraw this Motion, and substitute for it one for the appointment of a Select Committee. It would be easy to form a Committee most competent to deal with the matter, not only from a knowledge of horses, but also of administration and of political economy.
  In reply to Lord HOWARD DE WALDEN,
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, that the statement he had made with respect to the price of our Indian cavalry horses
  720
  had been made upon the authority of a distinguished member of the Indian Council, who, for the last 14 years, had taken an active part on the Committee which attended to this subject.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY,in reply, stated that he had heard with regret the speech of the noble Earl the Foreign Secretary. But he must be allowed to point out that in no degree could the figures quoted by the noble Earl be accurate, for it was not till 1870 that even an approximate Return was made of all the horses in the country, and that was put forward as only "partly accurate." Now, he submitted that "partial accuracy" for all purposes of comparison was as worthless as total inaccuracy. In the absence then of such figures, the question became one of testimony. He was exceedingly sorry that the testimony of the noble Earl differed so completely from that which he himself had collected. However, the House was too empty, and the information somewhat too vague, for him to press his Motion to a division, and he would, therefore, willingly accept the Committee offered by the noble Earl in lieu of the Commission proposed by himself; and he hoped that it would be fixed for a time when it might be assisted by the advice of those noble Lords who were at present engaged in pursuing the fox.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND: I am glad the noble Earl has consented to accept the Committee which my noble Friend has agreed to grant. I think it very inconvenient to appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into this subject, and I should have been prepared to vote with the Government against such a Motion. I do not know, indeed, what a Royal Commission would have to do if it were issued. I cannot imagine that so ardent a free-trader as the noble Earl would propose to put an export duty on horses; but unless it was to prevent horses going out of the country it was hard to see what a Royal Commission could have done. I disagree entirely from the noble Earl as to the degeneracy of the horses of the present day. It is not for me to defend the views expressed by Admiral Rous. I have known Admiral Rous a longer number of years that even my noble Friend opposite, and there is no more competent judge on this subject than my friend Admiral Rous. He speaks his mind frankly, and goes straight to the point, and speaks

  721
  with great authority, no doubt, as one who understands the subject. A. visitor at Tattersall's, however, during the months of May, June, and July would see horses from some of the finest studs in the world. With regard to weight carrying horses, perhaps the finest stud in the world was brought to the hammer when the Pytchley Hunt changed hands—a stud, too, which had been formed in no long period of time. I do not see anything, therefore, in the present state of the supply of horses which would justify the Government in issuing a Royal Commission. I agree in much that has been said with regard to racehorses, but I believe the best thing for them is to be left alone. As the noble Earl has accepted the proposal of the Government that a Committee should be appointed, I will not trouble your Lordships with any further remarks. My noble Friend has, I think, exercised a wise discretion. A Committee may bring together some information that may be valuable and lead to useful legislation, but a Royal Commission would not do either.
  Motion (by Leave of the House) withdrawn.

  POOR ALLOTMENTS MANAGEMENT BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill for making better provision for the management in certain cases of lands allotted under Local Acts of In closure for the benefit of the poor— Was presented by The Duke of RICHMOND; read 1a. (No. 20.)
  House adjourned at Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.