SECOND READING. (Hansard, 23 July 1888)

§ LORD LAMINGTON
, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, remarked that when foreign meat was first introduced in this country people were wont to buy it at the rate of 3d. or 4d. per lb., but that was now entirely changed. This meat was bought by the different meat dealers, but he had never seen that it was announced in any shop—"Foreign meat sold here." The effect was that British meat was reduced in price, and that foreign meat was raised to the level of price of home-grown meat, both kinds being sold at a uniform rate of 8d. or 9d. per lb. Now, the Bill he submitted to the House was of the very simplest character, and it proposed that any person who should sell or expose for sale, either wholesale or retail, any foreign meat should exhibit a notice to that effect in a con- 174 spicuous part of the establishment, subject to certain penalties. Simple as the Bill was in its terms, he believed it would be an estimable been to all classes—on the poorer classes as well as on the agriculturist—by doing justice to British produce. Like the Oleomargarine Bill and the Food Adulteration Act, the Bill simply required dealers to say what they sold, and he begged to move the second reading.

§ LORD TRURO
said, he thought the public would be very much indebted to the noble Earl for introducing the Bill. He was not quite satisfied that it would have as much effect as possibly the noble Lord anticipated; but it was satisfactory to know that it was about the first step that had been taken in the direction of repressing those innumerable small frauds both in regard to sale and adulteration, of which the poorer classes were constantly being made the victims. The time had certainly arrived when such a step should be taken.

LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY
said, he hoped their Lordships would pass the Bill; but he would suggest that it should be made to apply also to foreign cheese, since American cheese was said to be much adulterated with oil, which allowed of its being made at less cost than cheese made from milk.

THE SECRETARY TO THE BOARD OF TRADE (The Earl of ONSLOW)
said, the Government were not wanting in sympathy with the object which the noble Lord had in view, and that, if the existing law was insufficient to prevent people from selling an article under a false name different from that which they professed to sell, he agreed with him that a legislative remedy should be found. He had not yet heard, however, that the noble Lord had accepted the advice he tendered to him the other day—namely, that he should institute a prosecution, and ascertain for himself whether or not the law was defective in that respect. He was afraid the Bill would not attain the objects the noble Lord had in view; no penalties were mentioned for an infringement of its provisions, and the Licensing Authority was not stated. It was assumed that butchers would be divided into two classes—those who put 175 up a notice that they were dealers in British and foreign meat, and those who did not; and that customers would be driven away entirely from those who put up such notice. It seemed more likely, however, that every butcher would take out a licence, and that when a customer came and asked about foreign meat the butcher would say that he sometimes sold it, and so was obliged to exhibit the notice, but that at the particular moment he had nothing but the best British meat. Again, this notice would appear outside the shop only; there would be nothing on the carts to indicate whether the tradesman was a dealer in foreign meat or not. What the noble Lord had to do was to show how he could tell the difference between a British steak and a foreign steak. For his own part, he thought it would be extremely difficult to do so; but until that could be done he was afraid that it would be impossible to put an end to the frauds. Perhaps it might be found possible to extend the system of marking joints of meat adopted by the Jews; however, until they could in some way earmark the particular joint, he did not see how they could put an end to the fraud complained of. With reference to the Bill itself, the noble Lord in the Preamble asserted that the present statutory law was insufficient to prevent fraud in this direction; but he had done nothing to prove that that was really the case. It might be so or it might not; but, for his own part, he was advised that the present law was sufficient. Then the noble Lord's Bill went on to define foreign meat as that of animals produced elsewhere than in Great Britain and Ireland and the Channel Islands. That was, in his opinion, a poor compliment to their Colonial Possessions, and he hoped that our Colonies would not hear that the noble Lord called meat "foreign" which came from them. With regard to the words "produced elsewhere," he did not know who the friends and clients of the noble Lord were; but if they were the large farmers and graziers of the country, he did not think that they would thank the noble Lord for endeavouring to put restrictions upon animals produced abroad and imported alive into this country. With regard to licences, the Bill did not say how they were to be obtained, or at what 176 cost. He thought that while the proposed restriction would be to a very great extent ineffectual, so far, at least, as the interest of the poor consumer was concerned, it would have the result of enabling the butcher, who already made no small profit, to say that in consequence of the action of the noble Lord and of Parliament he was obliged to put up the price of home-grown meat, and that increase of price would probably be extended to foreign meat as well. In his opinion, the result would be much the same as had happened in France, where a Bill had been passed only allowing meat to be imported in whole carcases or in three or four portions which could be shown to fit together. The result there had been largely to raise the price of beef. There was very likely some truth in the assertion that American beef was sometimes palmed off upon the consumer as British, but he was afraid that that was not confined to the matter of beef alone. A large amount of cheese made in America had been sold as British, and he was informed also that until recently a quantity of bacon and ham had been brought into this country and sold as Cumberland and Wiltshire bacon; but since the Merchandize Marks Act the Custom House Authorities had been able, to some extent, to grapple with that difficulty. He understood also that lard imported from America and sold as British was, to a large extent, made of oil and the fat of pigs which had died a natural death. All this was a great evil, and one which required to be looked into. Again, he believed that much horse flesh was used in the Bologna sausages and polonies sold to the poorer classes. While he would not ask their Lordships to reject the Bill, having regard to the advanced period of the Session, he would put it to his noble Friend whether it was desirable to proceed any further with it if the House affirmed the principle of the Bill by reading it a second time that afternoon? He would undertake in the beginning of next Session to move for a Select Committee of their Lordships' House to inquire into the whole subject of selling foreign food articles under the name of British, and he hoped that with the information which that Committee would obtain the Government would be enabled to bring forward a Bill drafted in a manner more 177 likely to attain the object than that of the noble Lord.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
said, that he was somewhat surprised at the conclusion at which the noble Earl had arrived with regard to this Bill, considering the objections which he had urged against it. For his own part, while he was in favour of the principle that all things should be sold for what they actually were, he would suggest that it would be far better for the noble Earl to consent to the withdrawal of the Motion for the second reading after the statement made on behalf of the Government, than that their Lordships should be asked to affirm the principle of a Bill which was so imperfect as the one which had been introduced.

§ LORD LAMINGTON
thought that the noble Earl who had spoken for the Government had been rather severe on his Bill; but after what the noble Earl had said he would withdraw his Motion.