HL Deb 16 February 1904 vol 129 cc1463-9
* THE EARL OF LICHFIELD

My Lords, I rise to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether any arrangements have been made by the Board with the railway companies with regard to the conditions affecting the carriage of milk and other agricultural produce. With regard to the latter part of my question— that which refers to other agricultural produce—I do not intend to trouble your Lordships at any length. It is a very complicated and difficult matter, and is chiefly, I imagine, a question of rates; but, at the same time, it is one of vital importance to the whole agricultural interest in the United Kingdom, and I cannot help hoping that the negotiations which I believe have been going on between the Board of Agriculture and the railway companies may be successful from our point of view, and that the President of the Board of Agriculture will be able to announce that he has made satisfactory arrangements with those companies. But on the question affecting the carriage of milk, I should like to trouble your Lordships with a few words, because the conditions are so extremely unsatisfactory to the agricultural community, Your Lordships may be aware that the only way in which milk can be carried on the railways is either at the parcels rate, which is practically a prohibitive rate, or at the owner's risk rate. As a matter of fact, nearly the whole of the milk trade is carried on at the owner's risk rate, and the unfortunate farmer is allowed no compensation for loss or damage to his milk. The railway companies only undertake to compensate when it has been proved that their servants have been wilfully neglectful.

Those conditions are extremely unsatisfactory for the farmers, and I should like to read to your Lordships one or two typical cases. Here is the first. Milk duly consigned, carriage paid, takes eleven days to reach its destination — a distance of about 100 miles. The railway company, although repeatedly pressed, absolutely decline to make any compensation. Here is another case. Milk duly consigned, carriage paid, is spilt on the railway. The company admit this, but refuse to entertain a claim for compensation. The third case that I will quote is that of milk duly consigned, carriage paid, but never heard of again. The railway company said that they could find no trace whatever of the milk in question, and declined to give any compensation. I can assure your Lordships that those cases are typical of many hundreds throughout the kingdom, and what we hope the Board of Agriculture will be able to arrange is that the railway companies should admit responsibility and pay the farmer in cases of loss or damage.

I should like also to call attention to the exceedingly insanitary state of the milk vans in hot weather. I have heard of cases in which fish has been sent in the same van as milk, and also a live boar. Milk has also been sent in the same van as offal from slaughter-houses, the stink from which was said to be abominable. The result is that in the hot weather the milk so sent is very liable to arrive at its destination sour and tainted, and is refused on that account by the consignee. What we desire is that there should be some special regulations under which milk should be carried in vans by itself, and that the vans should be properly cleaned and washed out. In many cases they are not swilled out half frequently enough. An individual farmer by himself is practically powerless to get any redress from the railway companies, and, as a consequence, many societies have, of late years, been started throughout the country to help the farmers in these and other matters, and representations have been made to the Board of Agriculture through these societies, giving cases of complaint, and urging the Board to take up this question on behalf of the farmers and endeavour to make more satisfactory arrangements with the railway companies.

I cannot help thinking that the railway companies will accede to a request put before them by such a powerful institution as the Board of Agriculture. Our railways are managed by able and sensible men, and I feel convinced that they will find it to their own interests to accede to those demands. The present conditions do not favour an increase in the milk trade, for farmers get discouraged. I am confident that if there were better regulations and more chance of farmers getting compensation when they suffer loss on the railway, the trade would be increased, and in the end the railway companies would benefit. There is one thing certain, that under present conditions the servants of railway companies know that their masters will not have to pay if they are careless, and the result is that they are extremely careless. If the railway companies undertook to pay for damage, they would very soon make their servants much more particular and careful in handling the milk, and, therefore, I do not think that in the end the companies would have to pay very much by way of compensation.

There is only one point further that I should like to submit to the President of the Board of Agriculture, and it is this. Is the noble Earl correctly reported as having said the other day that his Board intended at an early date to introduce a measure dealing with adulterated butter? I hope that may be so. We were all very much disappointed that no mention was made of the subject in His Majesty's most gracious Speech. It was alluded to last year, and a Bill dealing with the subject passed through several stages in the House of Commons; but, I suppose, mainly owing to the lamented death of Mr. Hanbury, and the dislocation that ensued at the Board of Agriculture, the Bill did not pass. I can assure the noble Earl that this is a very important matter, and one in respect of which we look to him for help. I hope that not only will a Bill be introduced, but that every effort will be made by the Government to get it passed into law this session.

LORD MONTEAGLE OF BRANDON

My Lords, this is a matter of vital concern to Ireland, as well as to England. The Irish farmers' grievance is even greater than that of the English farmer, and I have no doubt that if anything is done the benefits of that measure will be extended to Ireland. I should like to point out one or two special points where this matter touches us in Ireland. The question roughly divides itself into one of rates and one of facilities. The question of rates is not so much for the Board of Agriculture as for the Board of Trade; but with regard to the question of facilities, the difficulties of the position are very much aggravated for the Irish farmer by the breaking of bulk in crossing the channel. It is practically impossible for the Irish farmer to get any redress. In these cases where a grievance exists of goods being injured in transit by what must be gross negligence, there is a difficulty of bringing it home to any of the different companies concerned, because there are more than one of them. I believe that the law is that the receiving company alone is responsible, and once they have handed over the consignment to a steamship company their responsibility ceases. The person sending the goods has to proceed against the company that receives them from him, and he cannot get any redress, for all that the company has to do is to prove that it passed the goods on to another company. That is one of our grievances. As regards other agricultural produce, I believe there are also great difficulties in the matter of proper sanitary precautions and so forth for the cross channel traffic, both as regards milk, butter, and other perishable traffic, and the cattle trade. But perhaps this is also rather within the purview of the Board of Trade, and therefore I will not detain the House upon it. I only rose for the purpose of emphasising the importance of this matter to Ireland, and of making an appeal to His Majesty's Government that any benefits extended to English farmers should be extended also to Irish farmers.

* THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, perhaps I may be allowed to reply first to the Question which the noble Earl has put to me, but of which he did not give me notice—the question as to the introduction of a Bill for the regulation of the sale of butter. The Speech of His Gracious Majesty was, I think, of an unusual length, and perhaps butter was one of those subjects which might with best advantage be left out in the competition for mention in the King's Speech. As it had been generally announced in the country that the Government intended to reintroduce the Bill, I do not think any disappointment can have occurred in the minds of agriculturists. As a matter of fact, Mr. Fellowes, who represents the Board of Agriculture in the other House, has already given a promise to that effect, and he will introduce the Bill probably on Monday or Tuesday next, and it will then be printed and circulated. The noble Lord who has just sat down appealed that whatever was meted out to England should be meted out equally to Ireland. I am afraid I must say that in my opinion the Irish farmer is in a much better position, so far as regards funds, than the English farmer. We in England are always trying to get a little money out of the Treasury, whereas the Irish farmer has a very large sum of money at the disposal of the Agricultural Department in Ireland; and, more than that, he has one of the ablest representatives to deal with the matter in Mr. Horace Plunkett, and I am sure that in his hands the interests of Irish farmers have no chance of being neglected.

So far as the general question is concerned, I have been in correspondence with all the railway companies in England for some time past on the subject of facilities for agricultural traffic, and I shall hope, in the course of a few days, to lay upon the Table of both Houses of Parliament the correspondence which has taken place between us. Naturally, attention has been given to that very important trade, the milk trade. As the noble Lord has informed your Lordships, there are two rates —the owner's risk rate and the company's risk rate—and there is a material difference in the amount of the two. Not unnaturally the farmer prefers the lower rate, and the companies, when asked to compensate for loss, reply that if the owner chooses to send the goods at his own risk ho must take the loss. However, I am glad to say that in this matter, at any rate, the companies have been disposed to meet the agriculturists as fairly as could reasonably be expected. They tell me that whilst they must maintain their legal position in regard to traffic conveyed at owner's risk, it is their practice, in a friendly way, to consider on its merits every case of total loss, wilful pilfering, or misdelivery. I should have thought that the can of milk that went astray for eleven days did so owing to misdelivery, and I am surprised that the company refused to entertain the application for compensation. But it must be remembered that this is ex gratia and not a legal position that can be enforced.

There is, I am afraid, a disposition to think that the Board of Agriculture can do a great deal more than they can. The only effective weapon is in the hands of every individual Member of Parliament, that is, to invite Parliament to refuse to consider any Bill which a particular company may put on the Table of the House unless they do so and so. That would be a strong step, and one which would not be supported in the country unless it was shown that the company treated those who sent produce by that railway in a manner which was manifestly inequitable and unfair. I have been lately considering whether it would not be to the greater advantage of farmers to send their goods at owner's risk, but to insure them. I believe that the difference between owner's risk, plus insurance, would be considerably less than if transmitted at company's risk, and I think that is worthy of their consideration. Farmers are, of course, entitled to ask that such a very delicate product as milk shall not be mixed up with anything which might easily taint it, such as fish. I can assure your Lordships that the Board of Agriculture have not lost sight of this very important question, but are in negotiation with the companies; and I hope to be able to show you exactly what the nature of those negotiations has been in the course of a very few weeks.