Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

animals."

says that it is within the spirit of the Act; | causing notices to be given of the appearance and then, that it goes beyond the strict of any disorder among sheep, cattle, or other letter of the law. Now, I cannot quite concur with the doctrine laid down by the noble and learned Lord, that the Order in Council comes within even the spirit of the Act, because the law lays down distinctly what are the offences it creates, and in what manner they are punishable. On the other hand, it is quite true that although the amble refers to sheep alone, the enactments refer to cattle generally. Now, what are the enactments contained in the Act?

pre

"That in case any sheep or lambs infected with or labouring under the said disorder, or any disorder of the like nature, be exposed or offered for sale, or be brought or attempted to be brought for the purpose of being so exposed or offered for sale, in any market, fair, or other open or public place where other animals are commonly exposed for sale, then, and in any such case it shall be lawful for any clerk, or inspector, or other officer of such fair or market, or for any constable or policeman, or for any other person authorized by the mayor, or by any two justices of the peace having jurisdiction in the place, or for any person authorized or appointed by Her Majesty in Council, to seize the same, and to report such seizure to the mayor or any justice of the peace having jurisdiction in the place; and it shall be lawful for such mayor or justice either to restore the same, or to cause the

Then come the words on which the noble and learned Lord relies "and to make any other orders or regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of the Act," not for the purpose of giving object "of the Act, but for effect to the " the purpose of giving effect to the proIt enables the visions of the Act. Lords of the Council, by Orders in Council, to issue any Orders that may be necessary for the purpose of enforcing its provisions. I would humbly submit to the noble and learned Lord that it is a most extraordinary stretch of the provisions of an Act of Parliament to use the powers which were given for the purpose of enforcing its provisions to enable you to make any order you may think fit for the purpose of giving effect to what you consider the object of the Act-namely, to provide against contagious diseases in cattle. The noble and learned Lord frankly admits that the object, though within the spirit and intention, did not come within the letter of the Act. Well, a number of farmers have had their cattle destroyed under the ausame, together with any pens, hurdles, troughs, litter, hay, straw, or other articles which he may thority of the Government and by the judge likely to have been infected thereby, to be direction of inspectors acting under their forthwith destroyed or otherwise disposed of in orders, but contrary to the law. Now such manner as he shall deem proper, or as may I say that, under these circumstances, be directed in manner hereinafter provided; and the any person bringing or attempting to bring any persons so deprived of their property sheep, lambs, oxen, bulls, cows, calves, or other I will not use harsh words-have a horned cattle into any such market, fair, or open fair and legitimate claim for compensaor public place as aforesaid, knowing such sheep, tion, and for compensation not to be lambs, or cattle to be infected with or labouring levied on their neighbours and themselves, but compensation from the Government on those persons acting under the authority of the Government, who, contrary to law, deprived them of their property. Any one of those persons whose cattle the inspectors destroyed has a perfect right to bring an action of damages against them. I do not complain of the Government for the steps they have taken

under either of such disorders as aforesaid, shall, upon conviction thereof, forfeit and pay for each and every such offence a sum not exceeding £20." Now, these are the whole of the offences contemplated by this Act. The fourth clause is as follows:

"And for the more effectually preventing the spreading of contagious or infectious disease be it enacted that it shall be lawful for the Lords and others of Her Majesty's Privy Council, or any two or more of them, from time to time, to make such-except in this case, they have rather orders and regulations as to them may seem necessary for the purpose of prohibiting or regulating the removal to or from such parts or places as they may designate in such order or orders, of sheep, cattle, horses, swine, or other animals, or of meat, skins, hides, horns, hoofs, or other parts

of any animals, or of hay, straw, fodder, or other articles likely to propagate infection; and also for the purpose of purifying any yard, stable, outhouse, or other place, or any waggons, carts, carriages, or other vehicles; and also for the purpose of directing how any animals dying in a diseased

state, or any animals, parts of animals, or other things seized under the provisions of this Act, are to be disposed of; and also for the purpose of The Earl of Derby

fallen short of their duty; but I say that in a case where they have undoubtedly gone beyond what the law allowed, compensation to any person suffering from their wrong ought to come from the public funds, and not from their neighbours. Let me observe that until the Bill brought in yesterday no intimation was given in the slightest degree that any of these persons would receive compensation from the public or from any other source. I rather think it was intimated to them they need not

expect compensation from any source. But, spectors authorized by the Government, I would much rather look forward to the declare that the owners shall be entitled future than back to what has been rightly to compensation. These three or four or wrongly done. I would much rather simple Resolutions might be passed by the look forward to what can be done best at two Houses together, leaving out of conthe present moment; and I think the sideration for the present all the details of Members of Her Majesty's Government the Bill. In my mind, nothing is more will admit that in this House, and also in doubtful than the provisions as to compenanother place, no indisposition has been sation; but I would suggest to Her Mashown fairly to consider the questions jesty's Government that they should probrought before them. Certainly there has pose a Resolution merely affirming that been no factious spirit-no disposition to owners of cattle slaughtered under these create embarrassment to the Government. circumstances should be entitled to comOn the contrary, all parties have been pensation; and then pass another Resoludesirous of pushing forward the remedy tion, authorizing Government to pass Orders proposed as fast as possible. But, if I am in Council for giving effect to these Resorightly informed—and I have no means of lutions, such Orders in Council being of no information other than those which all the validity after the 25th of March. If Her public have the measure proposed is one Majesty's Government will take that course of a very intricate and complicated charac- you may have an effective measure in three ter. There is another Bill-a rival Bill- days. I am quite certain, that with eyery brought forward by an independent country desire to forward the Bill, there is very Gentleman, and which is also of a some- great doubt whether a Bill of such com what complicated character. But there are plicated provisions can pass the two Houses certain general provisions with regard to in less than three weeks. Well, but these which all parties seem agreed, and there three weeks are of the utmost value, and if are, on the other hand, a variety of minute you could anticipate that by ten days, or details on which the greatest possible dif- even a week, by proceeding by way of Resoference of opinion prevails. Now, I would lutions rather than by Bill, when the object offer a suggestion to Her Majesty's Go- is to meet a temporary emergency, which The emergency is pressing, will last only from this time to the 25th and must terminate towards the end of next of March, you will remove the greatest month; it is, therefore, essentially neces- possible difficulties, you will save the counsary that the measure should be brought try an enormous sum of money, and take into operation with the least possible delay, the best means in your power of putting I would suggest whether it is not practica- an early stop to this most formidable plague. ble, instead of proceeding through all the Of course, it rests with Her Majesty's Godetails of the Bill, and through all its vernment to adopt it or not. I only sugstages in both Houses, open as it is to dis- gest that arrangement. As far as I am cussion in various complicated provisions, concerned, if they are disposed to take that to introduce simultaneously in both Houses course, I shall not be too strict in criticizResolutions embodying those points on ing the terms of the Resolutions they may which there is no difference of opinion. bring forward, the great aim and object Take, for example, the power to prohibit being to give the Government the requisite fairs and markets; the power to prohibit powers of promptly, expeditiously, and, I the moving of stock between this period hope, successfully, dealing with this great and the 25th of March; the power in cer- calamity. tain circumstances to slaughter diseased animals, or infected animals- the word "infected," I believe, has been interpreted elsewhere to mean animals brought into contact with diseased animals, and are, therefore, supposed to be infected with disease, it may be quite right to take absolute power to slaughter them. Pass Resolutions prohibiting the transit of cattle on roads and railways, except fat cattle for immediate consumption; give power to slaughter infected animals, and where they are slaughtered under the direction of in

vernment.

EARL GREY: I hope the Government will be very cautious before they adopt the suggestion which has just been thrown out. It seems to me a very dangerous principle to establish, even under the pressure of such an emergency as now exists, to legislate by Resolutions. I think nothing is more important than that Parliament should adhere to the ordinary practice of legislating on graver matters itself, and there are many points connected with the proposed Resolutions which obviously and clearly exceed the powers of the law. The reason

why the Bill is brought forward is that they | particularly in the West of England, it find there are powers necessary which could not be prevented after the end of the the existing Act does not enable the Go-month, without certain relaxations. The vernment to exercise by Order in Council. question then arose, in whose hands should For instance, one of the great faults of the the power of granting these relaxations bo present system is that there is no power of placed? It was not merely necessary to stopping animals on the road. In my own pass general Resolutions expressing the county parties openly defy the law. [The opinion of Parliament on the more imporEARL of DERBY: Why don't you take that tant matters; but every minute detail power?] It seems to me that it would be should be considered if they desired to pass better that Her Majesty's Government on a measure giving satisfaction to all parties the one side, and independent Members of affected by it. He would suggest whether the two Houses on the other, should show it might not be possible, while the Coman earnest desire to come to an agree-mons were passing the Bill through their ment as to what ought to be done. I House, for their Lordships to appoint a cannot help thinking that by proper com- Select Committee to consider the subject, munications between some of the leading so that they might be ready without loss of agriculturists on the one hand, and Her time to recommend alterations in the meaMajesty's Government on the other, the sure when it should come before them. principle of the arrangement to be made EARL RUSSELL: I do not think it might be agreed upon; and, that having necessary, after the explanation given by been done, the case being one which does not my noble and learned Friend the Lord admit of delay or long discussion, the Go-Chancellor, to detain your Lordships on vernment might be allowed to pass their Bill as rapidly as the forms of the Houses would allow, Parliament taking it very much on their judgment and responsibility. I am quite prepared to take that course. I do not think it would be impossible that the decision of Parliament should be pronounced on some of the great leading questions -for instance, on the point mentioned the other evening, whether cattle should go to the butcher or the butcher should go to the cattle. Guided by the opinion pronounced by Parliament, I do not see why the Government should not pass a Bill, such as they have laid on the table, modified, if need be, according to the expressed opinion of the two Houses, the details being taken pretty much as a matter of confidence in the Government.

THE MARQUESS OF BATH said, he thought the Government ought to be careful before adopting the course suggested by his noble Friend (the Earl of Derby). A great deal might depend on the details of the arrangements to be adopted. One point to which farmers and owners of stock attached importance was the question of slaughtering cattle, and another point of importance was in whose hands the power to slaughter cattle should be placed. He had no hesita. tion to say generally that it would not be satisfactory to the country that that power should be in the hands of the present in spectors. With regard to the movement of cattle, he believed that that might be safely prohibited until the end of this month; but in many parts of the country, Earl Grey

the question of law. It appears to me that the Act of 1848 being for the purpose of preventing the spread of disease among sheep in the first place, but its provision being made applicable to cattle also, the regulation which the Privy Council made came, in fact, within its scope. The order given for slaughtering diseased cattle was necessary to prevent the spread of disease; and within the last fortnight various resolutions have been passed in different parts of the country, recommending the slaughter of such cattle as the one thing needful. A good deal of objection was at first made to the slaughter of these cattle, but after a time, opinion settled down generally as to the measures which ought to be taken. The special question which the noble Earl opposite has raised, as to whether public funds should be employed to pay the compensation

THE EARL OF DERBY: Only in respect to those cases where cattle have been slaughtered by inspectors without sufficient authority by Act of Parliament.

EARL RUSSELL: If the inspectors have. done anything illegal, no doubt there would be a legal remedy against them. Of course, the Government would not allow the inspectors to bear the loss. But I do not admit, what my noble Friend takes for granted, that the order given by the inspectors for the slaughter of these cattle was beyond the authority of the Act of Parliament. In fact what these inspectors did was to de

Council which they were now discussing power was taken not to slaughter sheep or lambs, but cattle as well. Now, he wanted to know how it happened that the Order in Council took a power which did not appear in the Act. These Orders in Council ought not to be called Orders in Council at all, for they were not the Orders of the Queen in Council, but of certain Lords of the Privy Council. The Queen in Council had power to exercise a certain authority, but any authority which the Lords of Council exercised must be derived from some Act of Parliament. The fourth clause of the Act of 1848, which was the only clause which dealt with this matter, gave the Lords of the Privy Council power from time to time to make certain regula tions and orders; but it seemed that the Lords of the Privy Council had transferred these powers to local authorities, though nothing could be more distinct that the legal maxim, delegatus non potest delegare. He should be very glad to receive some explanation from the Government on the points to which he referred.

stroy a nuisance which would have resulted from allowing these cattle to go through the country, and so spread the disease. As the diseased cattle were actually doing mischief and evil they constituted a nuisance. There is an enactment by which certain officers in the City of London are empowered to destroy all unwholesome fish in the fish market, and as these cattle, being diseased, would have spread the infection throughout the country, it was quite right that they should be slaughtered. The noble Earl (the Earl of Derby) has made an important suggestion to the effect that certain Resolutions should be passed by both Houses, and that the Government should be empowered to carry out those Resolutions by Order in Council; but I agree with the noble Earl who spoke from the crossbench (Earl Grey), that it would be very dangerous to take that course. The very same question as has been raised to-night might be raised with regard to the authority of those Resolutions; because it would be impossible in those Resolutions to provide for all the minute details which would be necessary. It would be better to accept another suggestion, that all matters most urgent should be taken out of the Bill of the Government, and passed in the ordinary way. If Resolutions were good for the purpose, I do not see why the same Resolutions should not be put in a Bill which should be brought in and passed in the usual way. I quite agree with the noble Earl in thinking that, without distinction of party, your Lordships will concur in any measure necessary for preventing the spread of the cattle disease; and I hope that the House will pass it soon, as time is of the utmost importance.

THE EARL OF CARNARVON said, that with regard to the legal part of the question he must say that after reading the Act of 1848 he was more and more puzzled, and he must ask for some further explanation on one or two points. The Act, as his noble Friend stated, referred in the first instance to disease among sheep, and, in the second place, to disease among cattle; and these two subjects appeared to be jumbled together in the most extraordinary and confused manner. By the first clause power was given to justices of the peace to slaughter any sheep or lambs; so that their Lordships would perceive that the power of slaughtering simply related to sheep and lambs; but, by the Order in

EARL GRANVILLE said, the Government had acted in the course which they pursued in accordance with the best legal advice-that of the Law Officers of the Crown. The Orders in Council were, under the operation of the Act of Parliament, prescribed to be passed some in one way, some in another, and there could not be the slightest doubt that those to which the remarks of the noble Earl pointed had been passed in conformity with the law. [The EARL of DERBY: The Lord Chancellor says not.] He appealed to the noble and learned Lord whether that was not the case; but, be that as it might, if the noble Earl who had raised these legal questions would give notice that he would again bring them forward, he should be prepared to give him a distinct answer.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he must protest against the assertion that he had admitted that the course that had been taken in reference to the Order in Council was illegal. What he had admitted was that the Government found themselves in great difficulty owing to the loose manner in which the Act was worded. The preamble referred only to sheep; but in the body of the Act there were general words, which included cattle as well. He had also stated that the Act was of a remedial character, and that therefore it must be construed with a view to promoting the object intended to be effected by it. With

THE BANK CHARTER ACT.

QUESTION.

MR. SAMUELSON asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he intends, during the present Session, to introduce an Amendment of the Bank Charter Act of 1844, enabling the Bank of England to increase its issues against securities, beyond the amount to which they were at present limited by that Act?

respect to the observation of the noble Earl, delegatus non potest delegare, this point had not escaped the notice of the Attorney General. The Law Officers came to the conclusion that there had been no delegation. The acts authorized to be done were authorized by the Council:-what the justices were to do was to say whether the Orders were applicable to particular districts. He had not the clause before him, and could not therefore analyse or scan its provisions, but if the noble Earl looked at the wording he would see that this was so. THE EARL OF MALMESBURY suggested, that the only way of settling the question satisfactorily would be to bring an action either against the Government or their inspectors, for the slaughter of cattle in some particular instance.

EARL GRANVILLE said, he should like to know what amount of damages would be obtained under the circumstances.

House adjourned at a quarter before Seven o'clock, to Thursday next, half past Ten o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,

Tuesday, February 13, 1866.

MINUTES.]-Select Committee - On Standing Orders, Mr. Hastings Russell added; on Education appointed.

SUPPLY-considered in Committee

to be reported to-morrow.

Resolution

PUBLIC BILLS-Resolutions in Committee-Tests (University of Oxford); Parliamentary Oaths. Ordered-Church Rates Abolition*; County Infirmaries (Ireland) *; Church Rates Commutation; Tests (University of Oxford); Juries in Criminal Cases*; Parliamentary Oaths. First Reading Church Rates Abolition [11]; County Infirmaries (Ireland)* [14]; Church Rates Commutation [12]; Tests (University of Oxford) [15]; Juries in Criminal Cases* [16]; Parliamentary Oaths* [13].

COMMONS AND OPEN SPACES
(METROPOLIS).-QUESTION.

MR. DOULTON asked the First Commissioner of the Board of Works, If it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce, early this Session, a Bill having for its object the preservation of Commons and Open Spaces in and around the Metropolis?

MR. COWPER replied, that it was his intention to propose a Bill on the subject. He had it in preparation, and he hoped that he should be able to introduce it very shortly.

The Lord Chancellor

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE. QUER said, that considering the state and prospects of public business, he was more than doubtful whether it would be in the power of the Government, during the present Session, to make any proposal relating to the difficult subject of the issue of bank notes. As regarded the particular Question put by the hon. Member, if it implied that the Government might have an intention of enabling the Bank of England to resume the discretionary system which prevailed prior to the passing of the Act of 1844, he was bound not to limit his answer to the present Session; and he would, therefore, say that the Government would not be disposed to enable the Bank of England to resume that system either in the present Session or in any other.

[blocks in formation]

SIR GEORGE GREY replied, that his hon. Friend the Under Secretary for the Home Department intended to give notice on an early day of his intention to ask leave to introduce a Bill to give effect to some further recommendations, beyond those which had already formed the subject of legislation, made by the Commission on the employment of women and children.

THE SMOKE NUISANCE.-QUESTION.

SIR ROBERT PEEL asked, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce, during the present Session, a measure for the purpose of abating nuisances arising from the smoke

« AnteriorContinuar »