valuable and exhaustive Report of the Royal Commission; and if the Government had been really sincere in the commendation bestowed on the Royal Commission, Parliament would have been prepared to receive a Bill based on the recommendation of that Commission, and so have paid it the attention it deserved. There is, then, no justification for the statement of Government, that the Parliament would not have been prepared to deal with the measure in an early Session. I ask the Committee to look at the provisions contained and to be contained in the Bill about to be submitted. Does any hon. Member who heard the clear statement of the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department believe that a Bill deal

a very serious matter. He had in his pocket a letter from a gentleman living near Edgeworth, who informed him that in the high road near his residence there were heaps of manure which had been taken from sheds in a town in which over 100 cattle had died of the plague. He need scarcely say that no course could possibly be taken better adapted to spread the disease than this. The matter was one that deserved, and he trusted would obtain, the prompt attention of the Government. Officials should be appointed, whose duty it should be to watch over the conveyance of manure, and see that every precaution was taken against unnecessary risk of infection. It would be most improvident and unwise to endeavour to throw the whole burden of the loss upon our posterity instead of meeting with so vast a complication of objects, ing it ourselves; and, therefore, Government should be prepared to deal with the financial part of the question by means of a rate, and thus avoid the objectionable plans proposed out of doors founded upon a system of rent-charges. He thought a poll tax of 58. per head would effectually meet the requirements of the case.

with omissions here and exceptions there, and embracing a whole course of sanitary regulations, can be passed within a period when it could be effectual in stamping out the disease? The right hon. Gentleman himself has given us a pretty broad hint that Government will be obliged to divide the Bill into two or three separate measures, merely proceeding with those measures which it is essential should be speedily passed. The more I reflect on the measure sketched forth, and on the speeches which have been delivered, the less becomes the prospect of a satisfactory measure at the hands of the Government. The Govern

LORD JOHN MANNERS: The right hon. Gentleman loudly cheered the proposition contained in the speech of the hon. Member for Northamptonshire that it would be necessary to have an open time after Lady Day next, when transfers of stock might be effected in cases where there was a change of tenancy. The conclusion Iment have been threatened, and no wonder, draw from this admission is that Her Ma- with a rival Bill from my hon. Friend the jesty's Government acted wrongly in not Member for Northamptonshire. How is calling Parliament together at an earlier that rival Bill to be considered? The Godate, as it is obvious that in so short a vernment is going to allow its introduction; period as must elapse before the restriction but the second reading of the Government is removed much good cannot be effected. Bill is fixed for Ash Wednesday, and the We are told that the reason why Parlia- House does not meet until two o'clock. Is ment has not been called together earlier is my hon. Friend's Bill to be taken on Ash that at the end of last year public opinion Wednesday after the Government Bill has was so immature upon the subject that had been discussed? This kind of legislation, I we been assembled the action of Her Ma- fear, on so critical a subject, is likely to run jesty's Government would have been found the risk of complete failure. I feel so far in advance of the proceedings Par- deeply on this subject, that at the risk of liament would have been inclined to the charge of making yet another suggessanction. That is begging the entire tion to the Government, I should propose question. I am prepared, on behalf of my- that as the Government cannot carry this self and of every Member present, to re- great and complicated measure within a pudiate the charge that our ideas were reasonable period of time, they should behind those of the Government. Why, in proceed by way of Resolution in both what frame of mind, and with what know- Houses of Parliament, which will test ledge, should we have come to the considera- the opinion of the Legislature on many tion of any measure which the Government important points. Orders in Council might might have proposed at the end of October be issued immediately founded on those and the beginning of November? We should Resolutions. If that were done the House have had in our hands the whole of that could then proceed to the consideration

of the great and complicated proposals up the report would find, not a decrease, of the Government, and to permanent but an increase in the fresh cases occurring legislation on the subject. But I must say, in that part of the country. What reason, after the speech of the right hon. Gentle-in fact, have we to hope that this plan reman, that if we are going to legislate commended by the Home Secretary, and on the principle that the first thing to be now carried on and failing in Yorkshire, will considered is how the temporary wants of meet with any success at all? The right the great towns of this country are to be hon. Gentleman says that great difficulty supplied, and the next how the extinction would be felt in slaughtering cattle if all of the cattle plague is to be accomplished, removals were positively prohibited, and legislation will inevitably fail to produce the in providing proper slaughtering places, latter object. But if, on the other hand, and afterwards transmitting the meat we legislate on the principle that the cattle to the large centres of consumption. Diffiplague is first to be extinguished, whatever culty there may be, but can anyone suptemporary inconvenience might be felt by pose that so great an evil can be got rid the manufacturing towns, success may, of without some trouble and annoyance. and probably will, with the blessing of On the part of the agricultural community, Providence, crown our efforts. That I ask are they not subjecting themprinciple lies at the root of the mat- selves willingly and with alacrity to every ter, and I regret that the Home Se- amount of inconvenience and pecuniary cretary should have said that, from in-loss at the present moment? And are formation derived from deputations and they to be the only classes to be called on Mr. Thompson, he was disposed to give a by legislators to bear inconvenience and temporary convenience to the manufac- pecuniary loss for the sake of a great public turing towns of the West Riding prece advantage? Does anybody mean to say dence over measures for the extinction of that in localities adjoining these manuthe cattle plague itself. I should like to facturing towns means for slaughtering know whether during the month which has animals could not be devised at a small elapsed since Mr. Thompson's letter was cost? and I appeal to any chairman of written the terrible strides made by the railway companies in the House, to the plague are not calculated to alter the hon. Member for South Lincolnshire, the opinions of men even more influential than Chairman of the Great Northern RailMr. Thompson? I am convinced that if way, whether there would be any practical Mr. Thompson had consulted the great difficulty in conveying dead meat by railbody of the people, they would not have way to the north? Means and applihesitated a moment in recommending not ances in this direction would not be found the palliation merely, but the extinction, wanting. From any measure the northif possible, of this terrible visitation. western portions of Scotland ought to be With respect to the manufacturing towns exempted, as by their geographical poin the West Riding, the right hon. Gentle- sition they enjoy a complete immunity, man says the Bill will be based on the and stand on precisely the same footing practice which now prevails in the West as Ireland. There is a clear geographical Riding, the practice in the North Riding boundary in those districts beyond which being different. But is the practice of nobody has hitherto succeeded in passing the West Riding so successful? Have any cattle. With these exceptions at the results in the West Riding been so this late period of the calamity the successful that the House will be justified in giving that practice the effect of law? I find it stated in the last Report of the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council, that in the week ending the 3rd February sixty-two fresh centres of infection of the plague had broken out in the West Riding. I find that 470 animals have been attacked in the last week in the West Riding. But it is confessed that that return is incomplete, for in a note it is added that "especially from Yorkshire" the returns are not complete, and it is likely that the gentleman who drew Lord John Manners

only sound principle is the total and entire prohibition of the removal of all cattle throughout the country for a limited period. As to other principles of the Bill relating to compensation and the prohibition of all imported cattle inland, I have not a single observation to offer. With respect to the latter, I think the principle sound; but I think that the whole machinery of the measure is so complicated that it cannot become law in a reasonable time. The only sound principle to adopt under the circumstances is that the House of Commons

should declare that, for a limited period, | cattle slaughtered by order of the Govern. there should be a total prohibition. My ment inspectors, and not compensating own belief is that the whole of these com- those owners whose cattle were, if he plicated, costly, vexatious, inconvenient, might use the term, allowed to die by and interfering provisions of the Bill pro- order of the inspectors. Any retrospecposed by the right hon. Gentleman will tive measure, he thought, ought not fail in the one result we have in view to recognize any such distinction. He namely, in the extinction of this fright-protested against their taxing those who ful cattle plague within the period con- had already lost stock for those who had templated by the Government. I make as yet not suffered any loss. Such counthese observations with great reluctance, as I had been in hopes, from many parts of the speech of the right hon. Gentleman, that the Bill might have received the hearty concurrence of the House. But after the debate which has occurred, and after the full explanation given by the right hon. Gentleman, I feel convinced that such concurrence will not be had, and that the measure, based on the principle announced, will not succeed in the object which I feel sure every Gentleman in this Committee has at heart.

ties as Aberdeenshire who by their energy had stamped out the plague-who had paid money out of their pockets for effecting that object-should be repaid that expense, and thereby be placed in the same position as other counties were to be under the proposed arrangement. The gentlemen of Aberdeenshire ought not to be losers by the benefit they had conferred on the country.

LORD ROBERT MONTAGU said, he wished to offer two suggestions, by the adoption of which the Government might, he considered, improve their measure. The right hon. Baronet (Sir George Grey) proposed that all diseased animals should, of necessity, be killed; but that as to those animals which had come into contact with disease animals, and had thereby become

MR. CARNEGIE said, it was not his intention to go into the merits of the Bill of the Government further than to remark that it appeared to him that by the principle of compensation proposed those counties which had suffered most from the cattle plague would suffer most by the assess-infected, it should be left to the local ment. The benefit to be derived would be in exact inverse ratio to the assessment. Therefore in some counties, as in the one he himself represented (Forfarshire), where nearly all the cattle had been swept away, the people would be called on to pay very large rates for stamping out the plague; whereas those counties where the disease did not exist would have to pay absolutely nothing. Now that was manifestly unfair and unjust. The rate should be a general one extending over the whole country. This was not only a stockowners', but a consumers' question, and therefore extending over the whole country. The consumers were at this moment paying for the effects of the cattle plague-it was answered-in the increased price of meat. To a certain extent they were; but if the cattle plague were not stamped out they would have to pay twice as much. To a certain extent the burden ought to fall on them, but that that burden should fall on those localities least able to pay was manifestly unjust, and he should oppose any such proposal to the utmost of his power. He could not see the justice of the distinction sought to be drawn by the right hon. Gentleman between compensating the owners of

authorities to decide whether they should be slaughtered or not. This, he thought, was radically wrong. If they desired to stamp out the plague they must do as other countries had done, and slaughter not only the diseased but also the infected animals. The example of Aberdeenshire had been adduced as perfect; but what had they done there? They were not content with destroying merely such animals as had the disease, but they bought up the whole herd and killed it. He now came to his second suggestion. He agreed with the noble Lord the Member for North Leicestershire (Lord John Manners), that they must entirely stop all movement of cattle. The right hon. Baronet had warned them that if they did that they must resort to a dead-meat market; but he did not show that any evil would result from adopting that alternative. Many advantages would, in his (Lord Robert Montagu's) opinion, attend the establishing of a dead-meat market. At present, animals often suffered a great deal in travelling to market; and, moreover, the bones, hides, hoofs, and offal of cattle, to the extent of many thousands of tons, were now brought long distances into large towns, where they were utterly useless, and therefore they had

to be sent away again to some place where | compensation for the loss which he suɛthey were wanted for manufacturing or tained. It must not be forgotten, also, that manuring purposes-thus entailing much every restriction placed upon a particular needless trouble and expense. All that industry spoilt the sale of the article would be obviated by the establishment of which that industry supplied, and that dead-meat markets. Besides, by establish- thus the value of cattle would be diminished ing dead-meat markets a further advant- under the operation of the stringent rules age would be gained. A beast purchased about to be laid down. This large interfrom the farmer or grazier in the London ferences with private property, as well as market for £28 was retailed by the the extensive slaughter of cattle, were butcher for £40; consequently, the in- to be carried out for the good of the habitants of towns were paying more for public. The farmer, under those circumtheir meat than they would have to do by stances, had a right, he contended, to the establishment of dead-meat markets. demand full compensation. The question But it was said, "Oh, but meat was a was one in which, not only he, but the perishable commodity; if it came up to large towns-in short, the whole country town one day and was not then bought, -were interested; but what did the it must be sold next day so much cheap- Home Secretary propose? He proposed er." But what was the Home Secretary to relieve the farmer by laying on his going to do? He said they might send shoulders one-third of the two-thirds which their fat cattle to market, but they he intended to give him in the shape must not take them back again. But of compensation. Now, for his own part, when the butchers knew that the cattle he could not see, as everybody in the councould not be taken away again, would they try was interested in stamping out the not be sure to hang back in buying them plague, that there would be anything unfair until the seller consented to yield them in making good out of the Consolidated up for far less than their value? The Fund the loss of capital which the farmer consequence of that regulation would be must sustain. to deprive the farmer of the full price of his cattle, while the result of a deadmeat market would be to enable the public to get their meat at a cheaper rate. The Home Secretary, he might add, had made no provision for the movement of cattle from Ireland, from which, as hon. Gentlemen were well aware, the cattle fattened in England to a considerable extent came. By that means an injury would be done, not only to the English grazier, but to the Irish farmer also, who found in this country the best market for his stock. Now, too, that no cattle were being bred in England, we must in the spring resort to Ireland for a supply; and, therefore, it was, he thought, desirable that the cattle from Ireland, being free from infection, should be allowed to be landed at our quays, and taken straight to the grazing ground. Next came the question of compensation. The right hon. Gentleman proposed to give a compensation amounting to two-thirds of the value of every diseased animal killed, and three-quarters of the value of those animals which might be slaughtered without showing any symptoms of the plague. It was, how-fore we are legislating under difficulties, ever, in his (Lord Robert Montagu's) opinion, a most arbitrary proceeding to say to the farmer, "You must have your cattle killed in the interest of the country," and not to acknowledge his right to ask for full Lord Robert Montagu

MR. MARSH said, he quite concurred with the noble Lord as to the expediency of killing all cattle which had come into contact with those which happened to have been diseased. A committee of the Legislative Council of New South Wales, of which he was a member, had succeeded in completely stamping out disease in that way. He did not know how it was with cattle; but from his experience in the management of sheep, he was able to state that the disorder by which they were attacked sometimes remained latent for five or six months before breaking out.

MR. GATHORNE HARDY: I wish, Sir, to call attention to one part of the right hon. Baronet's statement, which I confess does not appear to me altogether clear. I cannot but think that if Her Majesty's Government consider that the plague requires a short and sharp remedy they must feel that the delay which has already taken place is very much to be deplored. We are legislating when nearly arriving at a period when the movement of cattle is an absolute necessity. There

and so far as I can understand from the right hon. Baronet's speech, very much in the same way as we have been going on under the Orders in Council which have preceded it. A great deal is to be

thrown on the local authorities; but I am interests antagonistic to each other—it is at a loss to understand what those local a consumers' case as well as a producers' authorities are to be. Petty sessional divi- case, and it is difficult to reconcile both. sions under the Orders in Council have not The question requires to be promptly dealt given the slightest security for carrying with and I hope the House of Commons out the rules and regulations ordered, be- will not hesitate to decide peremptorily cause we have seen the same Orders carried and absolutely what shall be done during out with vigilance and care in one division, the five or six weeks which remain before whilst through negligence they have been a removal of cattle will be necessarily ineffectual in another. Power was then called for, and not leave the matter in transferred from the petty sessions to the the hands of local authorities, fluctuating quarter sessions. as they may be, overruling the decisions one of the other, and thus throwing things into a state of confusion.