§ LORD LAMINGTON, in rising to ask Her Majesty's Government when the Committee on Foreign Meat Importations, which was proposed last Session, would be appointed, said: My Lords, I wish to state very shortly the circumstances under which I put this question. Last year I introduced a Bill, of only one clause, which compelled butchers who sold foreign meat to put up a placard announcing that they did so, in order to enable persons buying at that shop to consider whether they would have home-bred meat or foreign meat. I never could understand in fact why that Bill was objected to, or how it could be called protection in disguise. It was simply based upon the principle of the Margarine Acts and Acts of that kind—namely, that persons selling a good original article, and another which might be mistaken for it, should give the purchasers fair warning. However, I was induced to withdraw that Bill on the promise of Her Majesty's Government that they would appoint a Committee to examine into the whole question. I have been waiting for the appointment of that Committee. The noble Lord apparently does not remember that promise at all, but the promise was made by the noble Lord who then represented the Government in this House.
* LORD BALFOURWith reference to the statement made by my noble Friend that a promise was made by the Government to appoint a Committee, I would like to recall what took place last year. The noble Lord introduced a Bill, not as he says of one clause, but of seven clauses, and upon that measure a discussion took place. The noble Lord who then represented the Board of Trade stated very fully the reasons why the Government could not agree to the Bill, and showed that it would not effect the purposes which the noble Lord had in view; and he suggested that the Bill should not be further proceeded with, and that if the noble Lord moved for a Committee next year (that is, this year), the Government would consider whether it could be appointed 856 to inquire into the question of whether the sale of foreign meat, under the name of British meat, and also the other question of the sale of horseflesh as beef. The noble Lord stated that he thought the Government themselves had promised to move for the appointment of the Committee. The noble Lord called my attention to that not long before the House rose for the Whitsuntide Recess. I then told him I would look into the matter, and as the result of that examination, I communicated to the noble Lord that I thought there had been a slight misapprehension of the circumstances. The words as reported in Hansard, which were used by the noble Lord who preceded me in this office, undoubtedly seem to bear the construction that the Government would itself move for the appointment of the Committee; but that does not correspond with the notes which are in the office of the Board of Trade, from which he presumably spoke, and it does not correspond with the answer which the President of the Board of Trade gave to a deputation about a week later. If the noble Lord were here himself he might be prepared to state from recollection what it was that he did say to the House. I do not wish in any way to cast discredit on what he said; but I have gone into the matter somewhat carefully, and I notice that the speech, as reported in Hansard, does not bear the usual mark which denotes that it was corrected by the noble Lord. Therefore, I think, on the balance of evidence, I am entitled to say that in all probability the reply given to the noble Lord was that if he moved for a Committee the Government would endeavour to meet him, and to arrange a reference with him. At any rate, I assure your Lordships that that is the sense in which the matter was understood at the Board of Trade, both by the President and by the other officials. Then I come to the other point as to whether it is desirable that the Committee should be appointed. I say quite frankly that if the attention of the Government had been called to the matter earlier in the Session, we should have felt bound to carry out the promise then given, and to endeavour to agree with the noble Lord the terms of reference to a Committee upon this important subject. But I would ask my 857 noble Friend whether at this period it is expedient to appoint such a Committee. We have now reached the very last days of June; and if appointed now, the Committee would probably not hold more than eight or ten sittings during this Session; at all events, I do not think it would be possible for the Committee to examine fully into the subject in the time that would be at its disposal. Upon the whole, therefore, I suggest to the noble Lord whether it is not undesirable to press for the appointment of a Committee at this stage, and I put that consideration before the House. At the same time, I am exceedingly anxious that there should be no accusation either upon the Government or upon the Board of Trade, or any breach of faith with the noble Lord; and I have, therefore, gone fully into the circumstances and have endeavoured to explain to the House where I think the misapprehension has arisen. Your Lordships are aware that a kindred subject, and one which was in the mind of those who agitated this question last year—namely, the fraudulent sale of horseflesh—has been the subject of a Bill which has got the Royal Assent this year. I am perfectly aware that that does not meet the exact point to which the noble Lord refers in his question, but this matter of the substitution of foreign meat for British meat seems to open up a very much larger question—in fact, last year it was so dealt with, as part of the larger question of the fraudulent substitution of one article for another. That is in itself a very large and important question, and, upon the whole, I think, and I hope the House will agree with me, that it would be unadvisable to enter on an extended inquiry of that kind at this period of the Session.
§ LORD LAMINGTONMay I be permitted to state that I brought forward this matter about two or three months ago, and it is not my fault that it was too late in the Session for the appointment of this Committee. With respect to the Bill that I introduced, I do not think that the noble Lord has ever seen the Bill. He says there are seven clauses, but there is only one clause about which there could have been any discussion, namely, one which provided that placards should be put up wherever foreign meat was sold. The 858 other clauses were simply with reference to penalties and other details for the carrying out of the main clause. I rather agree with the noble Lord that it is late in the Session to appoint a Committee, but I must say that I complain very much that the promise given last Session was not carried out very much earlier in this.