Lords Sitting of 14 February 1884

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILL—First Reading—Contagious Diseases (Animals) (14).
ROLL OF THE LORDS.
THE LORD CHANCELLORacquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had prepared and laid it on the Table: The same was ordered to be printed. (No. 13.)

EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)—VOTE OF CENSURE—PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS.-OBSERVATIONS.
VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: My Lords, as I see a Member of Her Majesty's

825
Government (Lord Carlingford) on the front Ministerial Bench, I wish to make one or two remarks concerning last Tuesday's debate. We were placed on that occasion in a most peculiar position. The noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs quoted a number of documents which he said would be produced, and I thought, of course, that we should receive copies either yesterday or this morning. However, we have not received them, and we are still wholly ignorant of what has passed between the Government and Admiral Hewett and General Gordon. Now, this is a most unfair proceeding both to your Lordships' House and the House of Commons. Of course, I do not know what the explanation may be of the delay in the printing of the documents in question; but we know what facilities there are for printing documents at the Foreign Office and in other Public Departments. Owing to the absence of the noble Earl (Earl Granville), I cannot ask the Question now; but I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the noble Earl to read to us all the documents which have not been printed, and to give us the particulars of every one of the telegrams to which he referred in his speech.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS)—FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE.

  MOTION FOR A RETURN.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, that as a Bill would be presented that evening, giving larger powers to the Privy Council to deal with the foot-and-mouth disease, he begged to move for the Return which stood in his name on the Paper.
  Moved, That there be laid before the House—
  "Return of all the cases in which foot and mouth disease has been imported from foreign countries into England, Wales, and Scotland, and also into Ireland, since the outbreak in 1880; giving the name of each such foreign country and the date and port of landing of each diseased cargo;
  "2. Return of the number of outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in England, Wales, and Scotland since 1880, tabulated according to months;
  "3. Return of the foreign countries now forbidden under the Act of 1878 to land live animals in the United Kingdom; giving date of each prohibition, and stating whether the prohibition extends to all animals or to cattle only;
  826
  "4 Return of foreign countries from which foot and mouth disease has been imported since 1880, and which are now permitted to land cattle or sheep or pigs in the United Kingdom; distinguishing countries which have been temporarily prohibited, and giving date of removal of prohibition."—(The Earl of Camperdown.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsuggested that the Returns should be made to cover the whole period since 1880.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNsaid, he would accede to that suggestion; but he thought that his form would include all particulars of the outbreak, especially those of the last six months.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL), said, he considered that the information would be very useful, and he should be happy to give Returns for the whole period, as suggested by the noble Marquess.
  Motion agreed to.

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION—REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD EGERTONsaid, he rose to ask the Lord President of the Council, When the Report of the Royal Commission on Technical Instruction will be presented; and whether the Report on Agricultural Education in Germany, France, Denmark, Holland, and the United Kingdom, by Mr. H. M. Jenkins, could be at once issued separately, before the publication of the general Report? He wished to ask this Question because it was well known that Mr. Jenkins had some time past laid his Report before the Royal Commission; and since the passing of the Agricultural Holdings Act of last Session people were looking forward with great interest to that Report. Unless, therefore, the noble Lord could assure the House that the Royal Commission would report immediately, and would include Mr. Jenkins's Report in its own, he would ask whether it was not practicable that that Report could be laid on the Table as early as possible?
  LORD BALFOURsaid, he hoped that the whole Report of the Commissioners on Technical Instruction would be presented as soon as it could conveniently be done, for it was a subject which was regarded with the greatest possible interest at the present time. He should like to say a word in reference to the point which most concerned him. Speaking as a Member of the Royal Commis-

  827
  sion which was inquiring into endowed schools in Scotland, he must say that they would like to have the benefit of the advice of the Royal Commission on Technical Instruction, and also of the information which they had collected. There were large endowments in Scotland, notably in Glasgow, and a larger one in Edinburgh, which, with the consent of everybody concerned, would be devoted to technical instruction; and it would be quite absurd for their Commission to proceed with any schemes saying how these endowments should be spent until they had got the advice and information of the Commission on Technical Instruction. He would be very glad if anything could be done to hasten the publication of the Report.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, he knew the interest with which the Report of the Commissioners on Technical Instruction was expected, and also the importance attached to the Report of Mr. Jenkins on agricultural education abroad. The Royal Commissioners had just had a meeting, and had before them the proposal of the noble Lord; and they came to the conclusion that it would be better not to present the Report of Mr. Jenkins separately, but that it should be presented with the rest of the proceedings. They expected that there would be no long delay, and that the Report and the documents would be published before Easter.

METROPOLITAN RAILWAY (PARK RAILWAY AND PARLIAMENT STREET IMPROVEMENT) BILL.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  LORD LAMINGTONsaid, he rose to ask Her Majesty's Government, Whether the First Commissioner of Works has signified his approval of the Bill which proposes to make an underground railway from Paddington to Westminster; and if the improvement of the approaches to the Houses of Parliament by Parliament Street is dependent on the carrying of this Bill; and to move for Papers. When he first brought the subject of the improvement of Parliament Street forward, the noble Lord gave a promise that nothing would be done without the approbation of Parliament. He had, however, been horrified to find that an underground railway was to be carried
  828
  from Paddington to Westminster under Hyde Park and St. James's Park, and that the promoters proposed to clear away the whole of Parliament Street, over which they were to have almost entire power. It was stated that the Government were to receive a considerable sum from the Company for the privilege granted; but such a privilege had never been conceded to a private body before. It was well known that we wanted public buildings ourselves—a National Portrait Gallery, for instance—and it was understood that when the Houses in Parliament Street were pulled down, the plans for the new buildings would be submitted to Parliament. The interesting collection of portraits which we had, all of which had been donations to the country, were now very badly housed and in great danger from fire, and something ought to be done to make provision for their safety. An opportunity for doing so might be found on the Parliament Street site; yet the Government were going to allow a public Company to have that site. He thought that the works proposed would be most injurious to the Parks, and they would take five years in carrying out. He wished to know whether the Government really meant to break the direct pledge given last year, and whether they had signified their approval of the Bill? He should move for all the Correspondence which had taken place between the First Commissioner of Works and the Directors of the Railway Company.
  LORD SUDELEYsaid, in reply to the noble Lord, he had to state that during the autumn a plan was brought before the First Commissioner of Works for making a railway under the Parks from Paddington to Westminster. Nothing could be done, as their Lordships were aware, in respect to the Parks without the consent of the Crown, and the Government had an absolute veto upon all schemes, even independent of an Act of Parliament. It was, therefore, found by the First Commissioner possible to compel the Company to make their proposal in such a manner as, while giving great facilities for the increased traffic, would, at the same time, enable important public improvements to be made at the Westminster end of the proposed line. In the proposed Bill the route would be as follows:—Starting from the Edgware Road Station of the Metropo-

  829
  litan Railway, which would be considerably enlarged for the purpose, the new line would go south-eastwards under the Edgware Road to its junction with Oxford Street near the Marble Arch. At an intermediate point it would be joined by a branch from Paddington, which would connect it with the Great Western. At the corner of the Edgware Road and Connaught Place would be a station occupying the site of Arklow House, the residence of Mr. Beresford Hope. Then the line, always underground, would burrow across Hyde Park to a point between the Albert Gate and Hyde Park Corner, where would be another station, and it thence would pass under Constitution Hill, the Mall, and the ornamental piece of water in St. James's Park to a terminal station at Westminster to the south of Charles Street. In making this station the Bill would deal with very considerable improvements proposed in Parliament Street, King Street, and Charles Street. The Government had given the matter careful consideration, and had finally come to the conclusion that, subject to certain conditions and safeguards being agreed to, it was a scheme which they ought not to veto, but, on the contrary, it was one that ought to be encouraged, that it would be of very great public benefit, that few railways could be constructed with less inconvenience and less destruction to property, and that no damage and very little interference need take place in regard to the surface of the Park or to the trees. There had for some time been a great demand for direct north and south communication, and for access between the railways in the north of London to Belgravia and Westminster. It was also of the highest importance that every means should be afforded to artizans and the labouring classes for travelling from the suburbs to their work, as every day rendered it clearer that in the congested state of London facilities of this sort were the only true remedy for the increased number of houses wanted. On the Metropolitan Railway their total traffic showed that no less than 80 per cent were third-class passengers, and, therefore, it was clear that a line considerably shortening the journey to the northern suburbs would be an enormous gain. It was also certain that the roads and streets between the north and south of "Inner London"
  830
  were gradually getting more and more blocked, and, looking broadly at the matter, it was evident that steps must be taken to relieve the traffic by underground lines. The Government, therefore, decided to allow the Bill to be placed before Parliament in the usual way, subject to preliminary conditions made by the First Commissioner on their behalf, and accepted by the Railway Company, which were the following:—(1) That no ventilators or air-holes of any kind be made in the Park or in the public thoroughfares; (2) that the tunnel should be made at a depth below the surface of the Parks to be approved by the Commissioners of Works; (3) that the Government should have the option of taking out the value of its land and houses, proposed to be taken for carrying out the improvement scheme, in new frontages to Parliament Street, King Street, and Charles Street, subject to arbitration as to the price in the event of difference; (4) that the works in the Parks be executed between September 1 and March 1, and that there should be no disturbance of the surface of the Parks without the consent of the Commissioners of Works; (5) that the buildings to be erected between the proposed station and the public offices in Charles Street should be completed to the satisfaction of the Government before the station was opened; (6) that the buildings to be erected in Parliament Street, King Street, and Charles Street should be of a material and design to be approved by the Commissioners of Works; (7) that the stations to be erected by the Company should also be of an elevation to be approved by the Commissioners of Works; (8) that the improvement scheme, including the rebuilding of houses on the site, should be carried out within a period to be agreed upon. From this their Lordships would see that every precaution had been taken to prevent any inconvenience arising from the making of this railway. It had been argued that damage might be done to trees in the Park, but he might state that the line had been most carefully laid out with reference to trees, and very few indeed would be hurt. The experience gained in the Phœnix Park, Ireland, where there was a tunnel 700 yards long, showed that fine trees 150 years old could flourish over a tunnel. Some portions of the line would have to

  831
  be constructed on the "cut and cover plan "—i.e., cutting out a trench, and when the brickwork was completed filling it in with earth; but the Company had agreed to cover the surface with timber and turf during the construction, so that the progress of the work would be scarcely visible to the visitors to the Park. As their Lordships would have noticed, the conditions provide that no ventilator or air-hole whatever was on any account to be made in the Park. The railway would be ventilated by fixed engines and fans at the stations, and Sir John Hawkshaw, the eminent engineer to the Company, had informed the First Commissioner of Works that there would not be the slightest difficulty in carrying this out. Objections had been raised to the scheme by the Press and individuals, mainly with regard to the possibility of ventilators being at some time permitted, and it had been argued that although they might not be made at first, they would, as on the Thames Embankment, be erected later on. On this point there was not the slightest reason for alarm, as it would be the duty of the Office of Works to see that no infringement was made in the matter, and it was a totally different case from the Thames Embankment, where the Metropolitan Board of Works had no power, except through Parliament, to prevent the opening of the ventilators. The improvements proposed to the approaches of the Houses of Parliament were very great. Parliament Street would be set back in a line with the Foreign Office; there would be a new street formed some 50 feet in the rear parallel with it. Upper Charles Street would be widened, so that there would be a large space between the public offices and the houses, and a new street would be constructed in the rear of Great George Street. The Railway Company would have to undertake the responsibility of clearing this site, and, if not required by the Government, reselling or reletting the large blocks of land which would at once become available for building purposes. There could be no doubt that if the great obstructive pile of buildings at the bottom of Great George Street could be removed and the street set back, they would have one of the finest thoroughfares in Europe leading from Trafalgar Square to Westminster Palace. As he had already shown, the
  832
  Government had the option of taking the purchase-money for their land and houses in the new frontages in Parliament Street, King Street, and Charles Street, and it was likely that many of the new public offices which were still required, and which the noble Lord had referred to, would be erected on these sites; but, of course, that matter had not yet been decided by the Government. The noble Lord had referred to the National Portrait Gallery, and he could assure him that every precaution had been taken to secure the safety of that building. No fires were allowed, and watchmen were continually going round to see that there was no risk of fire. Then the noble Lord objected to the Government joining with a private Company in carrying out what he considered to be a great Government undertaking. There was no doubt that the widening of Parliament Street was a matter that the Government would be bound to give every facility for carrying out—but at the same time it was purely a Metropolitan improvement. Last autumn the First Commissioner endeavoured to persuade the Metropolitan Board of Works to undertake this duty, and on behalf of the Government offered them every facility for the sale of laud on the Great George Street site, so that by setting back the street and obtaining new frontages they would recoup themselves. The Metropolitan Board of Works had not seen their way so far to carry out this proposal. If the Government were to act themselves in the matter, it would be necessary to purchase the additional land and carry out the work themselves, but it would be too much of a land speculation, and, in view of the large sums now being expended on public buildings, they felt they would not be justified in undertaking this. The only other feasible way was the one he had already indicated of uniting this with the railway extension. Their Lordships would remember that this plan of connecting the formation of new streets in the Metropolis with the construction of railways was strongly recommended by the Joint Committee of both Houses, which sat in reference to the Metropolitan Railways in 1864, and also the Committee which sat in their Lordships' House in 1863. This policy had been carried out in the City, and new streets had been formed in connection with the

  833
  Underground Railway, and also in connection with the Thames Embankment, and had been found to work well. He hoped that in the present instance it would also recommend itself to their Lordships. The Bill and scheme would have to go upon its merits through a searching investigation of a Committee of both Houses; but in the event of its becoming law there appeared to be every prospect that the Railway Company, while obtaining a very economical route, would carry out at Westminster a great Metropolitan improvement, and would save to the country the interest on the large sum of money, over £250,000, which had been spent on land purchased on the Great George Street block, now lying idle.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he was not at all satisfied with the statement of the noble Lord that this would be a great Metropolitan improvement. The scheme would involve the re-casting of the streets between their Lordships' House and the Treasury, and he could not help thinking that a great change of that kind ought not to be effected without the public having an opportunity of judging of the plans and the character of the buildings that were to be erected. No doubt the buildings about to be removed were of a shabby character. He would suggest that the plans of the new buildings should be deposited for inspection in some public place.

IRELAND—MARINE BOARD (CORK).

  MOTION FOR A PAPER.
  VISCOUNT MIDLETON, in rising to move for Copies of the correspondence which had taken place between Mr. P. U. P. FitzGerald and the Board of Trade, and to ask the Government why Mr. FitzGerald's name had been removed from the Marine Board at Cork, said, the Local Marine Board consisted partly of the elected members, and partly of gentlemen nominated by the Government, and the meetings of the Board in question took place in the City of Cork. In 1880, Mr. FitzGerald was nominated to fill one of the Government places. He was a gentleman occupying an influential position in the county, of which he was a magistrate and a deputy lieutenant. He resided on Cork Harbour, 23 miles from the City, and had special qualifications for a seat on the Marine
  834
  Board, inasmuch as he took great interest in nautical matters, had passed all the examinations, and held two certificates of the Board of Trade. His appointment reflected great credit on the Government that nominated him. At that time Mr. FitzGerald could not pledge himself to attend regularly to ordinary meetings, and he was told that his duties would be mainly of a consultative character, and that he would be referred to as occasion required. Upon those conditions Mr. FitzGerald accepted the offer. The newspapers reported that he had received a handsome acknowledgment from the Secretary of the Marine Board, who paid a high tribute to Mr. FitzGerald's usefulness to the Board for the information which the Secretary had on various occasions received from him, and had stated that Mr. FitzGerald had constantly attended at the office when he had been in Cork, in order to assist in any matters that were under deliberation. The small amount of remuneration attached to the office Mr. FitzGerald had regularly handed over to the Cork Sailors' Home. One would have thought that a gentleman willing to devote himself to this work would have been one whom a prudent Government would have desired to retain. But early in the present year Mr. FitzGerald received an intimation from the Board of Trade that as he had not attended the meetings of the Board it was not contemplated to include his name among the Government nominees. That was the first intimation he had received of any dissatisfaction or any desire to remove him from a position which he had filled with advantage to the public. The noble Lord (Lord Sudeley) would have to be very explicit in his disclaimer and very careful in his utterances if he would divest the mind of the public of the belief that Mr. FitzGerald's dismissal was directly traceable to political persecution. The Marine Board was appointed by the Board of Trade. The President of the Board, of whose office he (Viscount Midletonj would speak with the utmost respect, was known to hold peculiar views. He had lately spoken of a Member of that House who had given the whole of his life to the Public Service as one "who toiled not, neither did he spin." He also lately indulged in an inflated eulogium of another Member of that House

  835
  who had only lately entered the House, because he took the chair at a dinner in glorification of the President of the Board of Trade. When it was known that Mr. FitzGerald was the accepted Conservative candidate for the Borough of Cambridge, people were very ready to put the interpretation on this proceeding which it was natural it should bear, and he was very anxious to give the Government an opportunity of disclaiming having been guided by any such motive. It had also transpired that on a chance vacancy occurring on the Marine Board a few months ago the President of the Board of Trade consulted Mr. Parnell as to who should be appointed. It certainly startled those who held loyally to the Crown in connection with the Government of Ireland to find that Mr. Parnell was the person consulted under these circumstances. Of course, Mr. Parnell recommended a person strongly affected to his own interests, while one who had been conspicuous for his service to the public, and who was known as a Loyalist and a Conservative, was summarily dismissed from his office without any notice that his conduct had given dissatisfaction, or one word of explanation as to the reason why he was thus sent away. He (Viscount Midleton) would be glad to know that the Government were prepared to lay on the Table the Papers bearing on this subject.
  Moved, " That there be laid before this House, Copy of the correspondence which has taken place between Mr. R. U. P. FitzGerald, whose name has lately been removed from the Marine Board at Cork, and the Board of Trade."—(The Viscount Midleton.)
  LORD SUDELEY, in reply, said: I think I can give the noble Viscount opposite (Viscount Midleton) a somewhat different complexion of the case he has raised. Throughout the United Kingdom there are 17 Local Marine Boards, and to each Board there are 10 members. Six of these members are appointed by the shipowners, and four by the Board of Trade. These gentlemen are appointed for two years; and if vacancies occur, either by death or by resignation, those vacancies are filled up, the Board being re-elected every three years. In this month the triennial elections will take place. Mr. P. FitzGerald was nominated by the Board of Trade to the Local Marine Board at Cork in 1878, and
  836
  was re-nominated in 1881. The Board of Trade, however, finding recently that a number of the gentlemen who had been appointed to the Marine Board at different places were not attending as frequently as they could have wished, considered the matter; and they thought it was quite evident that a number of those gentlemen were either unable to attend from illness, or from various other circumstances, and thought it would be wise for them to determine that unless gentlemen had attended at one-third of the meetings during the year, that they should not be nominated, unless special reasons for their absence were forthcoming. Accordingly a Circular was sent out to that effect, and was sent to 20 out of 68. Mr. FitzGerald, who, as the noble Viscount says, has done such eminent work during last year, did not attend the meetings of the Board on one single occasion, and therefore the Board of Trade naturally sent the Circular to him. It is a very simple document, in very few lines. It merely states that the Board of Trade having ascertained that——not being able to attend the meetings often during the past year, they do not propose to re-appoint him as one of their nominees to the Marine Board, as they conclude his engagements do not permit of his attendance. If, after this, any gentleman said that it was from ill-health, or other cause, he had been unable to attend, he would have been re-nominated, and that has been the course taken in the case of other gentlemen to whom Circulars were sent. But Mr. FitzGerald, on receiving the Circular, wrote to the Board of Trade, pointing out that he understood, when he received the appointment, that the office did not expect his regular attendance, provided he kept himself informed of what was being done; the fact really being that he did not attend on a single occasion. But what did he do, besides writing to the Board of Trade? He at once, within a clay or two, wrote to all the newspapers, and appealed to the Press. The noble Viscount makes out that he has been politically persecuted, and tries to show that the President of the Board of Trade, (Mr. Chamberlain) has behaved shabbily towards Mr. FitzGerald. My Lords, there is not the slightest foundation for this charge. The noble Viscount has alluded to another matter, in which he says Mr. Chamberlain asked Mr. Par-

  837
  nell to nominate a certain gentleman to fill a certain vacancy. Whether that is so or not is very immaterial, as it has nothing to do with this case. The decision of the Board of Trade upon the general question was come to after careful consideration; but in the particular case under discussion, the Board of Trade believed Mr. FitzGerald to be thoroughly competent to perform the duties attached to the appointment. The Circular states merely that the Board of Trade do not propose to re-nominate, as it is concluded that the nominee to whom it is addressed is too much occupied to attend the meetings of the Local Marine Board. If, however, any nominee replies that he has been prevented by illness, or other cause, from attending, and is able and willing to perform the duties attached to the appointment, the Board of Trade is quite prepared to reconsider his case.
  VISCOUNT MIDLETON: May I ask if the noble Lord has any objection to lay on the Table of this House the actual Correspondence that has taken place?
  LORD SUDELEY: There is only one letter and the Circular which I have referred to.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) BILL.

  BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL), in rising to introduce a Bill to amend the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878, said: My Lords, although this Bill is not a long or a complicated one, I think it may be convenient, in the circumstances of the case, that I should give some statement of its purpose upon bringing it in. With a very slight exception this is a foot-and-mouth Bill. To put it shortly, the Bill is intended to increase the responsibilities of the Agricultural Department of the Privy Council for the purpose of protecting the country against the importation of foot-and-mouth disease from abroad. To any one not familiar with the history of this subject, it might seem somewhat strange that this particular disease, among those which are enumerated in the Act of 1878, should be chosen for legislative treatment now, because, as is well known, it
  838
  is one of the mildest, in its immediate effects, of all those diseases. But the reasons for this course are not difficult to explain. The stock-owner, speaking of the inroads of foot-and-mouth disease, might use the words of the old line—"My wound is great because it is so small," because the fact is, that foot-and-mouth disease not being of the formidable nature of cattle plague or pleuro-pneumonia, it has been found impossible to treat it by the capital and extreme measures which have been applied to those fatal diseases. It has been found to be impossible hitherto to treat it either by way of absolute exclusion of animals from foreign countries or by way of slaughter at home. I may say, in passing, that I am not at all satisfied that the system of slaughter at home might not, in certain circumstances, be applied even to foot-and-mouth disease, supposing that the happy day had arrived when this country was again quite free, or nearly free, from the disease, and when it was necessary to prevent its revival. But it is curious to look back for a few years and to see the change which has occurred in the public mind, especially in the agricultural mind, with respect to this disease. It is only 20 years, I think, since foot-and-mouth disease was struck out of a Cattle Diseases Bill, as not a thing worth dealing with, upon the Motion of Sir William Miles, representing the agricultural interest in the House of Commons. It was not until the year 1869 that foot-and-mouth disease was admitted into the list of diseases for the purpose of legislative treatment, upon the proposal of Mr. Forster. Well, my Lords, after 1869, and before 1878, before the Committee of the other House in 1877 was appointed, and before the Act of the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) passed in 1878, was introduced, foot-and-mouth disease had raged over and over again throughout the country, and spread to an even larger extent than it has lately—although the recent extent of the disease is undoubtedly large—and had had the same ups and downs which it has recently, in 1882–3, experienced. But, in spite of that experience, I find that neither those who framed and proposed nor those who discussed and debated at immense length the Bill of 1878 in both Houses—which is the Act now administered by the Privy Council

  839
  —ever thought for a moment that the system of exclusion, the rule of prohibition as against foreign countries, was to be applied to this disease. I cannot find the slightest trace of such an idea ever entering into their minds. It was described at the time by a high authority, Mr. Henry Chaplin, as a Bill for the purpose of stamping out foot-and-mouth disease by the two methods of restriction at home and the slaughter of animals at the port of landing. And the prohibitory discretion which the Bill contained, and which was only repeating what the former Acts had contained, was mainly directed, not against foot-and-mouth disease, but against cattle plague. Well, my Lords, since the passing of the Act of 1878, I venture to say that the Privy Council has endeavoured by its able permanent staff to administer the Act faithfully and in its spirit. I believe they have done so, and I believe also that great care has been taken by some of the local authorities in the country, I cannot say by all, because their administration of the Act has varied very much, and in many cases, I am bound to say, there has been great want of carefulness and energy. Nevertheless, there have been restrictions enough imposed both by local authorities and the Privy Council; the system of slaughter at the ports has been carefully administered; and yet, in spite of all this, the disease has not been got rid of. Not that the precautions taken both at home and in regard to foreign cattle have been without effect. I am convinced that by the system that has been pursued—however annoying and harassing it has undoubtedly been—very good effects have been produced, and the mischief of the disease has been reduced both in point of time and extent compared with what would otherwise have been the case. Still, my Lords, we all know that foot-and-mouth disease continues to retain its hold on the country. It still returns from time to time, and breaks out from year to year. For reasons which it is not easy to trace, it is more severe one year than another. It dies out for a year or two, and then revives. This is the state of circumstances with which we have now to deal. In the face of this recurrence of a most annoying and mischievous disease, I fully recognize the fact that all parties concerned in the matter have grown more and more weary of it,
  840
  and agree that more effective means should be taken to restrict it. That feeling, indeed, is shared by the Privy Council itself. The evil must be met, in order to put an end to this state of things. Before I go further I must say this—that the impatience—the natural impatience—of the farmers, the local authorities, and all concerned, especially during the last year, and, above all, during the last six months, has been immensely aggravated by the notion that the increased outbreak of 1883 has been caused and fomented by the introduction of fresh infection from abroad into this country. To those who have looked carefully into the facts, the amount of misapprehension and of exaggeration which has taken place upon this subject is something extraordinary. I could give 50 instances of it, for they are only too familiar to us at the Privy Council. The other day, for example, when I received an important deputation, I greatly surprised one of the speakers by telling him that foreign animals admitted for immediate slaughter did not arrive at, and were not kept in, the same wharves and lairs with the animals from free countries that were about to be distributed throughout the interior. Then, the Privy Council has been deluged with memorials and resolutions from all parts of the country, especially, I think, from Lincolnshire, demanding the immediate exclusion of foreign animals, in the apparent belief that not a week nor a day passed without the disease being kept up by these constant arrivals. My Lords, I confess I am not surprised that these ideas should take hold of the minds of men loss informed when I read some of the utterances of those to whom they may naturally look up as their guides. For instance, I saw it asserted the other day in "another place" by a right hon. Gentleman, that Her Majesty's Government had, by not keeping out foot-and-mouth disease, been allowing it to rage throughout the length and breadth of the land. Now, what are the facts in regard to 1883? I am not referring to the origin of the disease, or even to its last introduction, but to the circumstances of 1883; and I undertake to say that the increase of foot-and-mouth disease during the last half of the year 1883 had no connection whatever with the

  841
  arrival of any fresh foreign infection. There is no trace of any such connection to be found. The facts are these. In the first three months of last year 68 cargoes, containing more or less foot-and-mouth disease among them, arrived in the ports of this country. In former years, and with our former notions upon the subject of foot-and-mouth disease, this would have been treated as an ordinary case. It is a number which has often been largely exceeded; but the cargoes came one after another, especially from French ports. Accordingly, the Privy Council prohibited the importation from France in March, and has maintained that prohibition since. This is the first time that the power of prohibition has been thus used under the Act of 1878 in the case of foot-and-mouth disease. Germany and Holland had been infected also, and we communicated, through the Foreign Office, with the Governments of those countries, and cautioned them that if they continued to send foot-and-mouth disease among their animals it would be necessary for us to prohibit their imports also. The figures as to the rest of the year are very different, indeed, from those of the first three months. Since the 1st of June, 1883, only five foreign cargoes have contained any animals affected with foot-and-mouth disease. Since the 8th of July there have been only two such cargoes; and for more than three months past there has been no sign of foot-and-mouth disease in any foreign cargo. No connection can be traced between the facts I have stated and the facts relating to the unfortunate outbreak of the disease at home. For instance, the number of outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease in the first week of July was 60, and no aggravation took place until the month of August. In one week in September the maximum reached 1,505 outbreaks, and since that week they have steadily declined. In the week before Christmas the number was 387. An Order was then issued stopping markets and fairs in all counties except those which were perfectly free from foot-and-mouth disease. Since that Order came into force the outbreaks have been reduced from 387 to 53 in the last week; and I have great hopes that that process of reduction will continue. Well, my Lords, I say that there is no connection to
  842
  be traced between the disease at home and the facts I have before stated as to the cargoes which came with foot-and-mouth disease in the earlier part of the year into our ports. It is known to those who have studied this subject that that is also the general conclusion to be drawn from former experience. Mr. Forster, in the debate on the second reading of the Bill of 1878 in the other House, challenged anyone to show that, under the former Act of 1869, there was any relation between the arrival of foot-and-mouth disease in foreign cargoes and its prevalence in the country; and then the system was far more imperfect than that which was established by the noble Duke's Act, inasmuch as there was no positive and general rule for slaughter at the port. I am convinced that it has been a very great misfortune to the agricultural interest that they have, during the past year, persuaded themselves, or allowed themselves to be persuaded, that their great and immediate danger was from abroad, instead of being, as it was, in fact, at home. Instead of fixing their attention on the vital matter of stamping out the disease at any cost in their own districts, they have been haunted by this fiction of a constant influx of fresh foreign infection, which, if it had been true, would have made all their efforts futile. For instance, let me ask you to consider the importance of the arrival at Grimsby last autumn of a single vessel with some pigs on board which were infected with foot-and-mouth disease. At that moment there were about 5,000 infected places in Great Britain, and this was simply an additional infected place. And let me point out that of all the infected places in the country this was the one which was beyond all comparison the safest, and the one where there was the least danger of any infection escaping. It was subject to the same rule as that which applies to rinderpest, and all the animals were slaughtered at once. There is not a pretence for supposing that any infection from that cargo escaped from the foreign animals' wharf at Grimsby, and added anything to the foot-and-mouth disease in Lincolnshire. I should like for one moment to point out the vital importance of stamping out disease at first in the particular place, upon the particular farm, where it shows itself. That is an idea which seems not to

  843
  have taken possession of the minds of all who are interested in getting rid of this disease, and yet it certainly filled the minds of the authors of the Act of 1878. The essential principle of that Act was to give power to local authorities to stamp out the disease wherever it appeared in the country. If that object could be attained, of course all local restrictions with their attendant inconveniences would become unnecessary. That this can be done, I think, is amply proved by the experience of the last few years. The disease has often been effectually isolated and stamped out in Wales, Gloucestershire, Somersetshire, and in several other counties in England, and in Somersetshire especially, where, although it has broken out several times, it has been stamped out through the energy and excellent arrangements of the local authorities, and in. no instance has it been allowed to spread beyond the infected place. When it broke out in any place in that county, therefore, it may be safely asserted that it was imported from beyond its boundaries. The same thing may be said with regard to Scotland, where I am bound to say the provisions of the Act have been admirably administered. In the three or four Northern counties of England the measures adopted by the local authorities have been attended with the greatest success. Thus the Chief Veterinary Inspector of Durham states in his Report—
  "Foot-and-mouth disease in this county has invariably died out on the spot where it appeared, showing how well the local Inspectors attend to their duties, and also how willingly the owners of stock assist in carrying out the regulations. In the Infected Circles Order, if properly carried out, you have a sufficient safeguard without placing the whole country under restrictions."
  Mr. Dunne, the Chief Constable of Cumberland and Westmoreland, one of the highest authorities on this subject, also reports that in 1877 the disease broke out on 9,000 farms in those two counties, attacking 240,000 animals, and that since the Act of 1878 there have been only five or six fresh outbreaks, which have never been allowed to extend beyond the place originally infected. Such an energetic and enlightened administration of the law relating to this subject is evidently of vital importance at the present moment, and it will become of yet greater im-
  844
  portance when we succeed in reducing the disease within a very narrow compass. Then the mode of dealing with every fresh outbreak will become a very serious matter indeed, because the question whether the infected place shall be isolated and the disease stamped out, or whether it shall be neglected and permitted to spread, will be a matter not only of local or county interest, but of national interest. Whatever steps we may take, however, we may be assured that we can never expect that the country can be hermetically sealed against foot-and-mouth disease. We must do all we can to exclude it, and to limit the area of the outbreaks of it when they do occur. But we know that it made its way into this country in 1840, when the importation of all foreign cattle was absolutely prohibited. Then, only the other day, it made its way into Ireland, into which there is, practically, no importation of cattle; and it seems to have been carried there, not by any animal imported, but by Irish drovers who had come over to this country, and been in contact with diseased animals here. I believe, therefore, that no restrictive system that we can devise will afford us complete security against the introduction of this disease into this country. My own belief, indeed, is that infection has very rarely escaped from the foreign animals' wharf. There is, however, the case of the French cattle in 1880, which has evidently made a deep impression upon the mind of the country. There is, undoubtedly, a great probability, though no proof, that the disease was re-imported into this country after it had become almost extinct, and that it came from a French source. This fact has naturally alarmed the country, and if it has happened once I cannot deny that it may happen again, and the feeling that it might happen again naturally affects the public mind, and especially that of the agricultural classes. In these circumstances, we cannot expect to obtain the hearty co-operation of the farmers and of the local authorities, which is so essential to success in carrying out measures for stamping out the disease, unless we are able to give them satisfactory assurance that they will be protected from fresh infection from abroad. This assurance we desire to give them by the Bill which I am about to introduce. We are fully prepared,

  845
  in case of danger, to use our present powers to the utmost; but we recognize the great advantage of giving to the minds of those interested in the matter—of those whose co-operation is absolutely essential to success—the assurance that can be given by more stringent legislation upon the subject. We are willing to assume a much heavier responsibility than we have at present in this matter, although our responsibility with reference to it is weighty already. For that purpose, and with the view of protecting the country against the introduction of foot-and-mouth infection from abroad, the Bill, while defining in the most ample manner all the discretionary powers of the Privy Council, and applying them to foot-and-mouth disease expressly, will also impose upon them an obligation to exclude foreign cattle from the country under circumstances which are thus described—
  "They shall prohibit such landing whenever they are satisfied with respect to any foreign country that, having regard to the sanitary condition of the animals therein or imported therefrom, to the laws made by such country for the regulation of the importation and exportation of animals and for the prevention of the introduction or spreading of disease, and to other circumstances, a reasonable security does not exist against the importation from such country of animals affected with foot-and-mouth disease."
  It will, of course, become the duty of the Privy Council to inform themselves as to the state of things in foreign countries in this respect. I am unwilling to say much about the Bill of the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon), because he has not yet had an opportunity of stating its provisions; but I must say that Her Majesty's Government find themselves unable to accept that Bill, and for this, among other reasons, that it would require the Privy Council to act like a machine on information reaching them that a single case of foot-and-mouth disease had occurred in any foreign country. That, we think, would be going beyond the necessities of the case. We cannot adopt a measure which would lay down so hard-and-fast a line. We cannot make this country depend for its supply on such a fact, apart from all other circumstances. It is evident that the noble Duke intends by his Bill to abolish absolutely the
  846
  system of slaughter at the ports in the case of foot-and-mouth disease; and he is so thoroughly aware of the revolution which he proposes, that he very considerately postpones the date when his Bill is to come into operation until October 1. We do not think that it would be wise to abolish the alternative system of slaughter at the ports. Between the cases in which in future there must be prohibition, and the cases in which there must be free admission, as from Canada and Scandinavia, it will be advantageous that we should retain the middle course of slaughter at the ports. The safety may not be enough to do without it; the danger may not be enough to justify absolute prohibition; therefore, we think it most desirable to retain the alternative. There are two minor clauses of the Bill of which I have charge to which it may be convenient that I should refer—the one gives power to make special exceptions of animals intended for exhibition, or in other exceptional cases, the same as is now possessed in regard to countries whose animals are admitted for slaughter; the other will enable the Privy Council to exercise the power of admission without slaughter in relation to any part of a foreign country which they can at present exercise with reference to the whole of a foreign country. That will enable us, for example, on sufficient ground shown, to admit store cattle from certain States of the American Union, when we might not be justified in admitting them from the country as a whole. That is, if it can be done with safety. I am not prepared to say that it can be done at present, although I know it is very much desired by many important interests. At present the Privy Council have no power to do it; and by this clause we take the power. Then it is thought advisable that the compulsory part of the Bill should be open to review by Parliament at no distant time; and, therefore, it is proposed that this part of the Bill should be temporary, and only last for two years. If your Lordships accept this Bill, as I hope you will—and we are anxious to lose no time, and shall take the second reading as soon as possible—the Government will do all in their power to carry it without delay through the other House, and the Privy Council will do all in their power to carry it into effect.
  Bill to amend the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, 1878—Presented (The LORD President).
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he had listened with very considerable attention to the statement of the noble Lord who had just sat down. The noble Lord devoted the greater part of his remaks to the progress of foot-and-mouth disease for many years back, characterizing it as one of the mildest diseases known amongst animals, and proceeded to show that all the provisions which had been put into operation by the Privy Council, and all the arrangements which had been made under it, had reduced this disease down to such a small and infinitesimal extent, that it was beginning to die out. If the argument of the noble Lord were carried to its logical conclusion, it would show that there was no need for this measure, which the Government had, nevertheless, thought right to introduce. In some criticisms on the Bill which he (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) intended to ask their Lordships to approve next week, the noble Lord had raised an objection to the date fixed in that Bill as the date when it should come into operation. The noble Lord's reference to that Bill seemed to him most irregular, seeing that it was not immediately be-fore their Lordships; but he begged to assure their Lordships that he had mentioned October 1 as the date, because he had no hope of the Bill passing through the House of Commons until a very late period in the Session. He would very gladly alter the date, and say that the measure should come into operation from the date when it should become law. He would not, however, go into a criticism of the Bill on that occasion, but would prefer to give his opinions upon it on the second reading, after he had seen it in print. The noble Lord said that farmers in this country were mistaken in thinking that foot-and-mouth disease was of foreign origin.
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL): I beg pardon. What I said was, that farmers were mistaken in thinking during last year that the disease was constantly fomented by fresh arrivals from abroad.
  THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONsaid, he had evidently mistaken the noble Lord's meaning. That
  848
  they were suffering now from disease which had been imported from abroad, he thought there was no ground for disputing; but he would go into that question fully when he had an opportunity of moving the second reading of his own Bill. Whether the Bill just introduced by the Government was a good Bill or a bad Bill, it seemed to owe its birth to the suggestion of the late President of the Council, and to the action of Mr. Chaplin in "another place." In the Speech from the Throne it was noteworthy that no reference was made to the suffering agricultural interests of the United Kingdom, and he thought they might fairly assume, without any exaggeration, that as late as 6 o'clock on the opening day of the Session the Government had not the smallest intention of introducing a measure dealing with foot-and-mouth disease. His own Bill might not have had the effect of drawing this Bill from the Government; but he suspected that what led to its introduction was the Notice of Amendment to the Address by the hon. Member for Mid Lincolnshire, in which he proposed practically to censure the Government for not having carried out the Resolution carried in the House of Commons in July last. Probably those Gentlemen who had the management of the Business of the House of Commons informed the Government on the Wednesday following, that unless something was done Mr. Chaplin would probably carry his Amendment, and then, on Wednesday afternoon, the House was informed by the Prime Minister of the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill. If, however, the Government measure passed into law, and if it was found to be a good measure, the farmers would have to thank the Opposition, and not the Government, for its introduction. His noble Friends on that side would give full consideration to the Bill of the Government, with that spirit of fairness which characterized them.
  THE EARL OF JERSEYsaid, that what the country wanted was a clear measure. That under discussion depended upon the responsibility of the Government; but if the carrying out of the measure was to be governed by certain Members of the Ministry, like Mr. Mundella and Mr. Chamberlain, he feared the Bill would be of no use whatever. He, for one, refused to

  849
  place much reliance upon the responsibility of such Ministers. He hoped the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) would insist upon his measure, because it seemed likely that the responsibility which the Government might assume would be only of a temporary kind.
  Bill read 1a. (No. 14.)
  LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRESIDENT of the COUNCIL)said, that at present he would name Tuesday for the second reading.

PARLIAMENT—THE HOUSE OF LORDS—THE CROSS BENCHES.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF WEMYSSsaid, he had often observed that on occasions when any subject of great interest was to be debated in that House it was very difficult to find seats on the Cross Benches. He apprehended that the demand for places on those Benches was not likely to be diminished, but to be annually increased. The accommodation was so limited on fighting nights that there was scarcely any possibility of getting a seat on those Benches. It was a very simple matter. The Cross Benches were so far apart that it would be perfectly easy to provide a remedy. Could not the noble Earl direct that additional Benches should be provided?
  EARL GRANVILLE: I am afraid the noble Earl has not addressed himself to the right person. Officially, I have no power to order changes in the distribution of the furniture of your Lordships' House. Individually, I rather sympathize with the late Lord Derby than with the noble Earl, as to the view which should be taken of the "Cross Bench mind." I am so old-fashioned a Party man that, while I am certain I prefer a good Liberal, I am afraid I also prefer even a good Tory to one who sits on the Cross Benches, and who is neither fish, flesh, nor good red-herring. The Cross Benches are usefully available for some Peers. The illustrious Members of the Royal Family, to whatever side their individual opinions may incline, most properly wish to avoid any appearance of being mixed up in Party dissensions. I admit that the noble Earl himself has a good right to a Cross Bench, because, although he invariably votes on one side,
  850
  yet I believe that, in his own Cross Bench mind, he equally and impartially condemns both Parties in the State, thinking himself alone to be in the right. No doubt some of our noble Friends have gone to the Cross Benches, and appear to have deserted the Party to which I have the honour to belong; but, notwithstanding their peculiar views on some points, we shall be most ready to welcome them back to the roomy Benches on this side of the House. There are others whose Conservatism is of so much more fossil character, than that even of the Opposition Front Bench, that I am sure they might be squeezed into some corner of the crowded space opposite. I am afraid I cannot help the noble Lord, who had better try some process of elimination than crowd the space with unnecessary Benches.
  House adjourned at half past Six o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock.