HL Deb 30 July 1906 vol 162 cc395-401

House in Committee (according to Order).

Clause 1: —

Amendment moved—

In page 2, lines 1 and 2, to leave out Sub-section 4."—(Earl Carrington.)

*LORD CLIFFORD OF CHUDLEIGH

said the Amendment he desired to move was one desiredby several county councils, particularly those in which there were large dairies, and where the chasing of cows might produce injury at some distant date. The second section of the Dogs Act of 1871 provided that a Court of Summary Jurisdiction might take cognizance of a complaint that a dog was dangerous and was not kept under proper control. If it appeared to such Court of Summary Jurisdiction that such dog was dangerous the Court might make an order directing that it should be kept under control or destroyed, and, if a person failed to comply with that order, he should be liable to a penalty not exceeding 20s. for every day he so failed. It was admitted in the case of sheep that it was very necessary that the clause should be passed, and they asked that a dog which was seen chasing cattle might be considered to be a dangerous dog and might come under Section 2 of the Act of 1871.

Amendment moved—

In page 2, line 3, to leave out the word 'sheep ' and insert the word ' cattle.' "—(Lord Clifford of Chudleigh.)

LORD BARNARD

suggested that, instead of saying cattle included horses, mules, asses, sheep, goats, and swine, they should adopt the words used in the title and speak of live stock.

*LORD CLIFFORD

observed that he believed the definition given of "cattle" was almost word for word the definition given in "Webster's dictionary.

EARL CARRINGTON

said he must ask the House to leave the word "cattle" and not to substitute the words "live stock." He could not accept the Amendment, but perhaps the noble Lord would allow the clause to read "whore a dog is proved to have injured cattle or chased sheep." If that would satisfy the noble Lord, he would be pleased to have the words put in.

LORD CLIFFORD

It is not quite what I wish, but I shall be pleased, under the circumstances, to accept it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment moved—

In page 2, line 3, to leave out the words ' chased or' and to insert the words ' injure cattle or chased."—(Earl Carrington.)

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2, agreed to.

Clause 3:—

A NOBLE LORD

asked whether foxhounds were included in the regulations. He foresaw some difficulty unless they were excluded. He was in full sympathy with the object of Sub-section (b), and he understood there were Departmental reasons for pressing it forward, but he should like the House to have a little more time to consider it. He also asked how they were going to prevent dogs from straying. Dogs were not infrequently let loose for the purposes of protection, and he should be glad to know how it was proposed to prevent that.

EARL CARRINGTON

said that foxhounds and all sporting dogs would naturally be exempted from wearing collars. If a dog was a stray dog, the police took it up, and, if nobody claimed it within seven days, they put it into a lethal chamber, where it received merciful and perhaps deserved death. Dogs let out at night without chains upon them came under the category of stray dogs.

Amendment moved—

In page 3, line 9, after the word 'dog,' to insert the words ' so seized.' "—(Earl Beauchamp.)

Amendment moved—

To insert (6) The chief officer of police of a police area shall keep, or cause to he kept, one or more registers of all dogs seized under this section in that area which are not transferred to an establishment for the reception of stray dogs. The register shall contain a brief description of the dog, the date of seizure, and particulars as to the manner in which the dog is disposed of, and every such register shall be open to inspection at all reasonable times by any member of the public on payment of a fee of one shilling. (7) The police shall not dispose of any dog seized under this section by transferring it to an establishment for the reception of stray dogs unless a register is kept for that establishment containing such particulars as to dogs received in the establishment as are above mentioned, and such register is open to inspection by the public on payment of a fee not exceeding one shilling."—(Earl Carrington.)

LORD BURGHCLERE

said he should like some provision beng put in the Bill for lethal chambers.

EARL CARRINGTON

I cannot do that, but I can assure the noble Lord that where there is no lethal chamber there is always a gun and pistol.

Amendment moved—

In lines 27 and 28 to leave out the words 'arising from the sale, or received from the owner, of any dog in pursuance of,' and to insert the words ' received by the police under.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

Drafting Amendments made.

Clauses 3 and 4 agreed to.

Clause 5:—

Amendment moved—

In page 4, line 11, to leave out the word "are duly complied with on the part of and to insert the words ' apply in the case.' "—(Earl Carrington.)

Cause 5, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 6: —

Amendment moved—

In page 4, line 23, after ' any' to insert the words ' head of."—(Earl Carrington.)

LORD CLIFFORD

asked for an explanation as to the necessity of the Amendment, remarking that it did not make the clause read at all well. It did not sound anatomically correct.

EARL CARRINGTON

said it was perfectly true that it sounded odd, but it was found in previous Acts of Parliament, and they ought to have the same phraseology.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7: —

THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN

asked if the noble Lord in charge of the Bill would admit an Amendment so that the name and address of an owner of a dog might be inscribed on the collar in Gaelic characters. He saw that a little lower down there was a similar Amendment to the effect that in Ireland the name and address of the owner might be inscribed on the collar in Irish characters. He wondered why Ireland was to be put in front of Scotland, and where the Scottish Members of Parliament were when the matter was discussed in the House of Commons. He asked whether the noble Lord would have any objection to the insertion of an Amendment to that effect.

EARL CARRINGTON

said he had had no demand for the Amendment, but, if the noble Earl was really serious and was expressing the wish of his fellow countrymen, he did not see any great objection to it.

THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN

As the noble Lord says he has no objection to it I do not propose to move.

Clause 7 agreed to.

Clause 8:—

Drafting Amendments agreed to.

Amendment moved—

In page 4, line 19, after paragraph (c), to insert the following paragraph ' (d) Orders under Section 2 of this Act may permit the name and address of the owner of the dog to he inscribed in Irish characters-' "—(Earl Carrington.)

LORD ASHBOURNE

asked the noble Earl to give a sketch of how the Amendment came to be moved in the House of Commons. He asked if it were a brand-new idea, whether the Government divided upon it, and whether it was suggested that there should be a Royal Commission to inquire into the matter.

EARL CARRINGTON

said it was rather difficult to explain, but he believed that the last Government got rather into difficulties with their Irish supporters by refusing to allow people to put their names in Irish upon their bread carts. Since the present Government came into power, that difficulty had been met.

LORD ASHBOURNE

I believe that the noble Earl is not right up to date.

EARL CARRINGTON

said he was informed it was so. The Amendment seemed very harmless, and it was moved because Irish Members in another place urged that there were districts in Ireland in which the Irish language was spoken and used. They pleaded for this small concession, and he could not see that there was any great objection to it.

*LORD LANSDOWNE

asked if the noble Earl was quite sure the Amendment was so harmless as he supposed. The object of the Amendment, under which dogs were to be decorated with collars and labels, was to enable the police to identify owners of dogs. Was the noble Earl quite satisfied that in all parts of Ireland there was sufficient knowledge of the Gaelic language among the police to enable them to decipher the mysterious inscription with which the unfortunate dogs would be labelled. Unless it were so, the Amendment was far from harmless.

EARL CARRINGTON

said he was informed that the Royal Irish Constabulary did not speak Irish and could not read it. It therefore seemed very evident that if an Irishman put an Irish name upon the collar of his dog, the police would not be able to read it or to trace the owner, but would keep the dog for seven days, and then would put it into a lethal chamber or shoot it through the head. The object of the Bill was to get rid of stray dogs, and he did not think any better plan could be adopted in Ireland than to allow the Amendment to go through.

*LORD LANSDOWNE

said they had to provide against the Amendment in the interests of the dog. It was very hard that the dog should be taken from its "public resort "To the lethal chamber simply because the owner chose to have his name inscribed upon its collar in characters which could not be read.

THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE

pointed out that the very reason just put forward by his noble friend was the reason given by the Department of Agriculture in another place for refusing the Amendment. It refused the Amendment in the interests of the dog.

EARL CARRINGTON

said the fact of a dog having an address and the name of a man upon its collar in an unknown language did not make the dog less of a stray dog. If the dog were not claimed within seven days,it would be shot through the head and a very good thing too.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

New clause;—

In this Act the expression 'cattle' includes horses, mules, asses, sheep, goats and swine."—(Earl Carrington.)

On Question, new clause agreed to, and added to the Bill.