Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors][merged small]

be called upon

[ocr errors]

SIR JOHN TROLLOPE: We should | metropolis would be obliged to bear the in that case come to the temporary pro- burden of paying the proposed compensavisions of the Bill at once.

If you do not tion. have such a clause as this you will not SIR GEORGE GREY said, that anycarry out the provisions of the Bill at all. body bringing diseased cattle to the me

SIR GEORGE GREY said, he had no tropolitan or any other market would be intention of abandoning this clause. liable to a penalty. He had prepared a Clauses 7, 8, and 9 postponed.

proviso in reference to compensation, the

effect of which was that it should not be Clause 10 (Appointment of Inspectors given in the case of any animals removed and other Officers).

from one place to another in contravention MR. HUNT proposed the addition of of the Act. words continuing in office inspectors al- MR. BRIGHT: I wish, before we go ready appointed under the Orders in further, to ask the right hon. Gentleman Council.

the Home Secretary whether he does Sir GEORGE GREY said, he had no not think it desirable to postpone for the objection.

present the clauses relating to compensaClause postponed.

tion. It is admitted on both sides of the Clause 11 (Power of Entry for Inspec- House that it would be well to pass as tors, &c.).

quickly as possible a measure which is MR. LONG said, he hoped that when meant to put an end to the plague ; but this clause should come under considera

then this question of compensation might tion, the right hon. Gentleman would make

be discussed more at leisure. I beg hon.

Gentlemen to bear in mind that the purport provision for the compulsory disinfection of cattle inspectors

, it being strongly felt of this Bill is almost entirely unknown in in many counties that the greatest carriers the country. There are hundreds of thouof cattle disease were the cattle plague in

sands of persons who may spectors.

to pay the tax under this Bill who have

never seen the Bill and do not know in the Clause postponed

least what we are discussing at this moClause 12 (Limit of Duration of Part I). ment. I have never known, since I have Mr. HUNT said, he would suggest the been in Parliament, a general measure of addition of words providing for the revival taxation, as many feel, of a very doubtful of any provisions which might have been character, hurried through the House in discontinued.

the manner in which from the pressure of Sir GEORGE GREY said, he assented the case—I am not blaming anyone for it to the proposal.

--but from the pressure of the case it is Clause amended, and agreed to.“[cl. 11.] sought to hurry this. I yesterday made

some observations to the House upon this Clause 13 (Slaughter of diseased Ani- question. I feel we are in danger in our mals).

haste of committing a mistake, which, MR. AYRTON said, that the clause, as after all, is of no great pecuniary importance it stood, held out a premium on the shift. probably to anyone, but is of great iming of diseased cattle from one place to portance as establishing a precedent on another, inasmuch as while it provided which this House may be called upon in that compensation for the slaughter of a future times to do that which we shall find diseased animal should be paid by the it difficult to refuse, and I hope still more local authority, it contained no condition difficult to grant. The three clauses that the animal should have been in the which touch the question of compensation particular locality for a certain number of are the 13th, the 16th, and the 18th. The days previous to its being killed. The 31st bas reference to the rate. The 13th point was a very important one for the says that every animal diseased shall be Metropolitan Market, for he was afraid that slaughtered, and that the owner shall reif any one in the country districts suspected ceive, providing the amount does not exceed that his cattle were diseased, he would £20, for any beast a sum equal to twoimmediately hurry them up to that market, thirds of its value. Now, bear in mind where of course it would soon be discovered that this is an animal already ill of this that they were attacked by the plague. complaint. It is not a sound beast—as we They vould, upon that discovery being call it in Lancashire-in the " shippen" made, be at once slaughtered, and the or in the field. It is a beast that, judging

Sir George Grey

1

from experience, has no great chance of, fected farm to a healthy farm. Now, if life. Now, this clause enacts that it shall you are killing diseased cattle, supposing be slaughtered by authority — that the that my position with regard to that be owner of it, who in all probability would right, you are killing a man's sick cattle part with it with pleasure for a sovereign or in order that you may save the best of his two sovereigns, is to receive two-thirds of cattle. [An hon. MEMBER : His neighits value in case the sum is not more than bours'.] No! an hon. Member says his £20. My hon. Friend the Member for neighbours'. Of course his neighbours', if Westminster (Mr. Stuart Mill) yesterday their cattle are allowed to commingle in put this point to the House, and he put it the field. But if kept separate and isoin a manner which is absolutely unanswer- lated, then, I say, he is not doing this for able. You are killing this beast by autho- the good of his neighbours, but for the rity, but that in all probability is precisely good of his own stock and the good of what the tenant, the owner himself, would his own farm. I think I am only argudo to save from danger the rest of his ing fairly from the statements made during stock. It is not worth, at the moment you these debates. Now, you come to kill kill it, one-quarter, perhaps not one-tenth the healthy stock on some farm. Why that which you propose to give, and, there do you do it ? You do it to prevent the fore, I say you are departing even from risk to that stock from the infection spreadthe recognized principle of this Bill—you ing from the diseased portion of his stock. are giving compensation where it is not for That is clear. Well, if you kill that the public good and not to prevent the healthy portion, you kill it clearly to avoid spread of the disorder. You are buying the extra risk to the farmer, and you

offer from an owner, an unfortunate owner—but him a compensation which, perhaps, it may fortunate, if this Bill passes-you are be better for him to take than stand the buying from him at a high price a beast risk. If the infection does not spread, he in the last stage of existence whose price will not gain by getting the compensation ; in the market would perhaps be nil. Now but if the infection do spread, and the rest this is one point. I understand the hon. of his herd have to be destroyed, then of Member for North Northamptonshire (Mr. course he is a great gainer by getting three Hunt). He believes in the efficacy of isola- quarters compensation. I am placing this tion. I wish some other authority—the right before the House to show how almost enhon. Member for Calne (Mr. Lowe), for tirely the course you are pursuing by the instance, who appears now he is out of Bill is a course directed to the special adoffice to be an authority on everything-I vantage or the special salvation of the prowish he could tell us, as one of the Cattle perty and interest of the farmer. I am Plague Commissioners, whether he consi- not at all going to argue that nobody else ders that if cattle on a particular farm can has any interest whatever. We all, I be entirely isolated from all communication hope, have some interest in each other's with cattle on any other farm, whether, welfare. But as far as the question of under such circumstances, it is necessary legislation is concerned, this Bill is directed for any purpose but saving the healthy - I am not going to say unwisely directed stock on the farm to destroy that portion -for the advantage of those who are the of the stock which is diseased. I heard owners of stock. If this be so I cannot the other day of a gentleman, in the county comprehend how any man in this House of Surrey, who has some fields with a high can imagine that you have any claim on wall round. No man is permitted under the general property of the country or upon any pretence to go inside those divisions, in the property of those who are not the which he has valuable cattle. The plague owners of land, the cultivators of the soil, has raged all round bithertomin fact, I am or the possessors of stock. If a man had told by the hou. Member for Guildford that his house on fire, it would be a monstrous he does not know of any part of the coun- proposition that he should bring an action try in which the plague has been worse ; against the fire-brigade because injury yet in these particular spots there has beeu had been done by a deluge of water. In no plague whatever, because there was an this case you kill diseased cattle that those entire absence of communication with any around the sick may not be infected; but surrounding farms where the plague existed. if you think the danger is great, you kill Now, if you could assure this isolation, then I them, and you offer a compensation equal take it to be granted that you would pre- to three-fourths the original value of vent the spread of the disease from an in the healthy stock. Now, I believe every Gentleman in the House will agree with me the ownership and cultivation of the soil. that it is a misfortune that there has not Hon. Gentlemen may fancy that I am been established throughout the country arguing this way from some personal oplong ago powerful insurance societies--1 position to that class. I have never im. mean powerful by the possession of large puted to any Member on that side of the capital for the purpose of providing during House so mean a motive for anything the ordinary course of years for calamities which he did. In all probability-in fact such as this. That, I think, is the general -certainly, as far as I am concernedopinion on both sides of the House, and this matter will have the least possible you now come to ask that the House shall influence—it would not take more probado that on account of this pressing emer- bly out of one's pocket than the dinners of gency-this unexpected calamity-shall do a week. I am not speaking with reference that which, if the farmers had been as to what any person will have to pay. I prudent as many other people, they would think the House- and I hope they will have done for themselves. Now Gentle believe me-are about to adopt a principle men, do not let it be supposed that I am which heretofore they have never adopted, contending you should do nothing, or that and which, if they accept it now, will bring Parliament may not wisely do much in them into great difficulty at some future this matter. I am not arguing that Par. time. I think it will have a most perni. linment may not now, if it likes, assist the cious influence upon every class of the landowners and tenants by some general country that may chance to come under organization of insurance. In the ordinary any special calamity. Lately we have form it may be now too late. It would had some great calamities. There was in seem to be thought so, for you look to Yorkshire, a few years ago, the bursting taxation, by which the same result, as near of a reservoir at Holmfirth. At Sheffield às may be, may be brought about as would there was but recently another accident of have been brought to the unfortunate far- the same kind, which caused an enormous mers who have losses, had they in past amount of damage. In Lancashire there years established a general and great has been a failure in the supply of cotton. system of insurance. I am not against In all these cases there has been a magthat, but I ask hon. Gentlemen of this nificent generosity shown on the part of House this question, and I hope I shall the public, so much so that in each case not be met by insulting and offensive ob- there was a very considerable percentage servations, which have nothing to do of the money subscribed returned to those with this question, and which have no who subscribed it. Nothing could be more thing to do with my argument. I put generous on the part of the nation; nothing it to every gentleman here who has could give more pleasure than such a fact. a sympathy with farmers, and who has, as But if you establish the principle of this I hope we all have-a sympathy with jus- Bill, that when the cotton spinners or the tice- ask him would he think it likely, shipowners on the one hand, or the farmers were a general system of insurance estab- on the other, shall come under the pressure lished for cattle, that people that had not of a great calamity like this—and espeany cattle, or any land, should be compelled cially a calamity against which they might or expected to subscribe to the funds of a have provided that they may come to this great insurance society for the purpose of House for assistance, it will do much to relieving the calamities that might fall upon dry up the springs of benevolence and those concerned in agriculture? Clearly bring many other persons to the Bar of not. If there was a great insurance so- this House asking for similar measures ciety for farmers' cattle, farmers and cattle founded on the pernicious principle on owners would be the only persons who which this Bill is built. I appeal to hon. would subscribe to that insurance associa- Gentlemen opposite, as the most wealthy tion. Therefore now, when Parliament class in this country—as the class with wishes, as it were, to bring into one com- the greatest amount of certain property prehensive scheme a general plan of relief, -as the possessors of the income, I would I think we ought to have regard to that say, that is most unvarying except that principle and that fact, and abstain from it is constantly increasing. Hon. Genthe imposition of any rate or tax whatso- tlemen know perfectly well-much better ever in connection with this matter except than I do-how much their incomes have upon that great, influential, and most increased since we ruined them in bulk wealthy class of society connected with about twenty years ago. Supposing that

Mr. Bright

compensation must be given—if the mea- bear in mind what was said by my hon. sure be confined as it ought to be confined Friend the Member for Westminster (Mr. to owners and occupiers of land-you may Stuart Mill) as to the question of the extent give extensive relief as much as you will of the compensation. I protest against the by this Bill, and it will not make any Chancellor of the Exchequer coming here essential difference to any Gentlemen I see in two characters. My right hon. Friend before me or to any of their friends. On refines to a sixpence in a speech on the the other hand, it will keep Parliament Budget. If we want to get rid of the most from the commission of an error that if trumpery licence duty, the fate of the whole committed now will bring us, I am per- country might be depending upon it. But suaded, into many occasions of difficulty now, because this is a matter of county exhereafter. The clauses of this Bill are penditure — and local expenditure that so intimately connected that it is almost does not come into his great speeches; he has impossible to offer observations upon one not a word of sympathy for the persons who of them without touching upon the others. are to pay the tax, nor does he seem to care I

may be allowed to say, therefore, how much the House is likely to saddle that the proposition to give retrospec- the country with. I ask the Chancellor of tive compensation is one that the House the Exchequer to give us his opinion on should not tolerate for one moment. We this matter. He ought to be as much an have heard from many Members of the economist now on a question of local taxaHouse what has been done in different tion as if the measure had reference to counties. There have been subscriptions, the taxation of tea or coffee, or to the insurance societies, and arrangements expenditure for the military or civil sersuited to the ideas of the different gentle- vice. I have spoken fully; therefore, almen and farmers in the different counties, though it would be possible to say a great and compensation of one kind or another deal more, I will just in a few words of has been made. That is infinitely better summary put the matter to the House than what is proposed by this Bill. There thus :-- This Bill has been brought in in was not a single landholder or farmer who great haste, and under a feeling of great anticipated, until the Bill was introduced, excitement. The haste is apparent in the that the Government measure would con- fact that there are almost as many opitain a provision for retrospective compen- nions on it in the House as there are persation. It would be well that the Govern- sons. Clauses are postponed, Amendments ment should consent to have that clause are proposed, and possibly in this emerleft out of the Bill. I have heard of a gency a Bill satisfactory to do one, and case to-day in which a farmer, who was least of all to those who brought it in, very foolish, bought three or four beasts will be passed. The districts not being that were not in good health when he known no one in the country can discuss bought them. He introduced them amongst it, nor will an opportunity be afforded sixty or eighty head of cattle, and lost for their doing so. It is not put off till nearly the whole of them. He had a the Easter holidays—that every one may sympathizing and generous landlord, who see it. It would not be wise that it should told him it was a bad thing, a great mis. be so ; but it is a thing unusual that we fortune, and said he would help him to should go on from day to day with the pass over the difficulty. But though this different stages of a Bill of this kind infarmer was a foolish man in buying sickly volving a large amount of taxation-it may stock, he was a man of great independence be an entirely new kind of taxation-for and pluck. He confessed to the landlord a purpose hitherto never recognized by that he had done a foolish thing ; but at this House. I have had no communicait was entirely his own fault, and that tion from Birmingham. I have had no being his own fault he would carry himself communication from Lancashire, except through it, and would not ask the landlord from one person, who wrote that surely to give him anything. I see an hon. the Members for his town will not be likely Gentleman who looks very much as if he to let a Bill of this kind pass in a hurry, wished his tenants were of the same mould. involving as it does this new principle. In the generosity of that landlord, and the The House will not do wisely if it passes independence and courage of that tenant the compensation clauses of this Bill, goes you have, if you like, the model for the through Committee with it to-night, and best class of landlords and tenants through reads it a third time tomorrow, it having out the country. I beg the House also to been read a second time so recently as yesterday. Avoid this precipitation in a tendency of the farmer in the great multimatter of taxation about which the great tude of cases to hope too much. He calcubody of the people know nothing, having lates too favourably on the chances of his never been consulted in the matter. I own cow or beast recovering where other have only further to move that this clause, people's cattle have died. It is not the in. and the other clauses respecting compen- terest of the farmer alone we are now consisation, shall be postponed for the further dering. We wish to offer an inducement to consideration of the Government.

him to come forward and make known THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE- directly any cases of disease which may QUER: Sir, my hon. Friend has just laid occur among his cattle. Under these cir. down the principle that the clauses of this cumstances, it would be useless to fix the Bill are so connected together that it is im- amount of compensation at too low a rate; possible to discuss any one of them without while, at the same time, I admit that there considering the others at the same time, is considerable danger in fixing it at too and I must say he has acted very largely high a rate. We should not only have the in accordance with that principle. I must, magistrates meeting in quarter sessions, however, be allowed to say, that if his im- but the tenant-farmers acting with them, pression be shared by many Members of and it might have the effect of slackening the House, we have but little chance of their energies ; but I think we ought to gaining the object most of us have at heart wait until we come to that portion of the -namely, that of passing this Bill quickly. clause. I hope my hon. Friend will permit Differing respectfully from him, there ap- us to go on with the clause before us before pears to me no reason whatever why the he calls upon us to consider what reduction various questions, doubtless very important shall be made in the amount of compensa. ones, referred to by my hon. Friend, should tion to be paid for the slaughter of sick be discussed on the consideration of the animals. But I do not think it would be clause before us. My hon. Friend has necessary or very wise to allow in the case spoken upon the amount of compensation, of the slaughtering of such animals so high if any, that should be given; upon the a compensation as that fixed by the Bill. sources from whence that compensation is Upon the question of slaughtering sick to be raised; upon the question as to animals I cannot agree with the hon. Gen-whether the Bill ought to be hastily passed; tleman, who says that it is only necessary upon the principles of isolation and of to isolate a farm to prevent the spread of the slaughtering, and of the manner in which I disease. In a part of the country with am disposed to treat the question. Now, which I am familiar the traffic has been these questions are entirely distinct from stopped, and the farms have been altoeach other. In the first place, I will answer gether isolated, yet the disease has flown the question addressed to myself. My from farm to farm. To use the form of exhon. Friend says I have no interest or care pression adopted by the right hon. Gentlefor any expenditure, so long as such ex. man the Member for Calne (Mr. Lowe), penditure is local and derived from local when the volume of infection reaches a resources, To show how far that accusa- certain point the air becomes impregnated tion is from being correct, I will at once with it, and you cannot trust to isolation as acknowledge that, in my opinion, both my a protection. It appears to me, I confess, hon. Friend and the hon. Member for that the slaughtering provisions in the Bill Westminster (Mr. Stuart Mill) hit a blot lie at the very root of the matter. In point in the Bill when they pointed out that the of fact, if it were not for these provisions rate of compensation for the slaughter of there is no reason why we should be assick animals was too high. Still it would be sembled here at all. It is in order to pass a great mistake, in my opinion, to fix the rate provisions of this character that this Bill of compensation in such cases too low. The has been introduced. With regard to the hon. Member for Westminster says that the source from whence this compensation outside value of the sick animals is to be should be provided, that is a question which ascertained by taking the ratio of the num- will arise upon the clause to which my hon. ber of animals that recover to those that Friend has referred; and the question of die. No doubt the value of the animal compensation is one entirely different in might be easily ascertained in that manner, character and principle from that of the but there is something else to be considered source from which that compensation is to before you determine this question. You be provided. I submit that there are only must take into consideration the natural two questions before us arising out of

Mr. Bright

« AnteriorContinuar »