itself in the clauses of an Act embodying grass; and all the rules that we may enboth the rule and the exception, so that act here, like the web of a spider, will be they who run may read, and so that every broken through by the necessities of manman throughout the country may know by kind. It is just this precious time that what rule to regulate his conduct; or whe- we have got, and we cannot be too strict ther you will send this question back again or too careful in the use we make of it. to be legislated upon by I know not how We may be able to improve the opportunity; many local authorities. These local autho- but it can never be recovered if lost. If rities have just got through the labour, im- we do not get the disease under by the posed upon them by the Order passed in middle of April prepare yourself for a December, of framing codes of rules. For calamity beyond all calculation. You have this purpose they had to construe about seen the thing in its infancy; wait, and twenty Orders in Council; they had the you will see the averages, which have been utmost difficulty in passing these rules; thousands, grow to tens of thousands, for and now that they have been passed, in there is no reason why the same terrible many parts of the country they are utterly law of increase which has prevailed hitherto discordant and at variance with each other. should not prevail henceforth. It is the The question is whether you will send last opportunity we have of stopping the back the matter to these local authorities, disorder. I hope the House will not be embarrassed by a new and complicated Act led aside by any local interests or feelings of Parliament, in order that they may re- of selfish advantage which particular counconstruct, with reference to this new Act ties may fancy-and fancy most falselyof Parliament, their own former rules, their that they have in this matter, contrary to own complicated and inconsistent codes. that of the nation at large. All that will take two or three weeks to accomplish, and when accomplished the state of things so brought about will remain in existence two or three weeks more. Will the House act upon such principles, or will it lay down one single unvarying rule, to be acted upon by the whole country? When the House has once laid down a general rule it will, of course, be competent to any gentleman to give effect to whatever opinions he may entertain as to the relaxation of the rule, by proposing such exceptions as he may think fit to introduce. But the question, in this case, where the whole interests of the nation are concerned, is, whether one uniform rule should be enacted by Parliament, or whether Parliament shall shrink from the duty which its high position imposes upon it, and delegate that which it ought to do itself to a number of local bodies, well knowing that they cannot possibly discharge that duty. If this suggestion of one simple rule had been laid down and carried out by the Government at the time when it was recommended by the whole Cattle Plague Commission, at the end of October, I believe we should not be sitting here to deliberate upon this question. The option of doing right in this matter returns to us again, and returns to us for the last time we do not avail ourselves of the opportunity now it is gone from us, and we know not what may be the consequence. We all know that when the grass grows again, cattle must be put out to feed on that CAPTAIN JERVIS undertook to say, from a conversation held by him with the traffic manager of one of the principal railways, that there would be no such difficulty as suggested in conveying to the metropolis a supply of dead in place of live meat for the London market. In forty-eight hours from the time the order was given the whole of the appliances of that railway, which brought more meat to London than any other of the metropolitan railways, would be so regulated as to meet the requirements of the novel traffic; and that, not merely between the points from which the supply was drawn and the metropolis, but from town to town and from market to market. MR. H. A. BRUCE said, that though nothing could be easier than to convey by railway any number of cattle to the various centres of population, they must be first brought to the railway, and in very many parts of the country there were no facilities whatever for killing cattle and then conveying them to the railway. During the course of this debate the House had been treated liberally by hon. Gentlemen with their own personal experiences. His right hon. Friend (Mr. Headlam) had been twitted for having given an imperfect instance when he stated that Newcastle would be deprived of its 2,000 head of cattle with the sea open. But he would give an instance within his own personal knowledge. His own borough (Merthyr Tydvil) was the centre of a district of 200,000 people entirely removed from the sea. Within the limits of that district for ten miles around the actual quantity of meat produced would not be sufficient for a tenth, or even a twentieth part of the population. How, then, was it possible that all of a sudden cattle could be killed and brought to such a district? If he was told that their meat might be got from Gloucester, Worcester, and other such towns, he would ask how were these first to be conveyed there, all access by railway being prohibited by the Bill, and by highways by the local anthority? They made it necessary for the butcher to go to every farmhouse and kill the animals under what conditions he could, and the meat was to be conveyed to some railway station. How did the hon. Member for Northamptonshire meet the difficulty? Put up slaughterhouses in every parish he would say. But would not that keep up a constant stream of infec. tion? In fact, the exceptions which were introduced in the Bill of the hon. Member for Northamptonshire himself were so considerable, and those which he had authorized were so great that the general rule which he proposed to lay down was no general rule at all. The hon. Gentleman and those who supported him would expose many districts of the country to great inconvenience, without giving the smallest degree of security that they would extinguish the disease. SIR JOHN SIMEON, who was met with loud and continued cries for a Division, was understood to oppose the Amendment. LORD ELCHO said, he could wish that this Amendment had been moved by some hon. Gentleman sitting behind the Treasury Bench, because he believed the point involved to be the touchstone of the Government Bill, and the keystone of its success. What he feared was this-that the Motion having been made by an hon. Gentleman opposite, it might assume in the division somewhat of a party character. ["No, no!"] He trusted that would not be so, because he and other hon. Gentlemen believed that we were in the midst of a great national calamity. Taking simply a national view of this great question, he firmly believed that if this Amendment was not carried the time they had spent upon the measure was so much time thrown away, and that the Bill which they would send forth as the result of their labours to-night would not be worth the paper upon which it was printed. Within the Mr. H. A. Bruce last few days he had attended two meetings, one held in St. James' Hall, the most influential he had ever seen-half the House of Lords and half the House of Commons, without distinction of party, were present on the occasion. A rule, and a wise one, was laid down that the Members of either House should not take part in the discussion, but should hear what the representatives of the agricultural interest from all parts of the country had to say. Well, without the slightest opposition, except from two butchers who came from Scotland, a Motion similar to that of the hon. Gentleman was carried unanimously. He attended on Monday last a conference, or rather meeting, of certain persons, Members of both Houses, who were specially selected as representing parties on both sides. A Whig nobleman, Lord Spencer, the Chairman of the Commission on which his right hon. Friend the Member for Calne sat, was in the chair, and the Earl of Lichfield, another Whig nobleman, lord-lieutenant of Staffordshire, and who lived in the midst of a dense population who would suffer much if the supply of meat was stopped, was the person who suggested the course which had now been followed by the hon. Member for Northamptonshire, and not a single dissentient hand was held up. Nor were the interests of the great towns neglected, because there were gentlemen present who represented the great railway interest throughout England and Scotland, and they assured the meeting that they could carry any quantity of meat as fish was now carried, and much more easily, as fish was more delicate. They also said that it would come to market in a much better condition than it did now; and they added that the difficulty which they felt was in dealing with a state of things in which one local authority did one thing and another another; whereas, if there was one rule they would then know what to do. He believed that this was not a party but a great national question, and unless they accepted the Amendment of the hon. Member a heavy responsibility would lie on the House. MR. OWEN STANLEY said, that by this clause it was provided that all cattle coming into this kingdom by sea should be slaughtered at the ports at which it arrived. It seemed to be generally supposed that all the Irish cattle came to this country through Liverpool and Bristol; but while some 54,000 head arrived in Liverpool to be taken to London and other places, nearly 40,000 came to Holyhead. At Liverpool there might be means for slaughtering the cattle thus imported, but there were no such facilities at the small ports. He hoped that provision would be made for enabling cattle coming from Ireland to be brought to the principal markets in London and the great towns without danger. COLONEL PACKE said, that he was one of the Members who attended the meeting alluded to by the noble Lord (Lord Elcho), and it was quite true that he then stated that the railway companies would cheerfully sacrifice their trade in the transmission of live stock to London, and undertake to bring up any quantity of dead meat, and distribute it all over London wherever required. The fact was, that there were clauses in the Bill which prevented them from carrying live stock, as it was impossible to travel from Aberdeen, Holyhead, or Bristol to London without passing through infected districts without being liable to be stopped. What were they to do with all these trucks of cattle if they were stopped? The railway with which he was connected would not attempt to do it. MR. WEGUELIN said, that although the people of Wolverhampton were partly supplied from the agricultural districts surrounding them, they drew their chief supplies from foreign countries through the ports of Liverpool and Hull; and the members of the Town Council had asserted that if the supply of food to that large mining population were interfered with they would not answer for the peace of the borough. He desired also to assert that no case was known of the disease having followed a line of railway. In his own county of Berkshire instances had occurred of the disease having followed the river most closely, and apparently quite neglected the line of railway. MR. CUMMING-BRUCE said, he had received particulars that morning of the disease having been communicated to cattle in Inverness by the straw which had been taken from a railway truck. SIR GEORGE GREY inquired whether dead meat was not packed in straw to be carried. "That the word 'except Question put, stand part of the clause.' The Committee divided:-Ayes 181; Noes 264 Majority 83. Amendment made. AYES. Grosvenor, Lord R. Acland, T. D. Hamilton, E. W. T. Hay, Lord W. M. Bright, J. Calcraft, J. H. M. Colthurst, Sir G. C. Cowen, J. Cowper, hon. H. F. Cowper, rt. hon. W. F. Crawford, R. W. Crossley, Sir F. Dalglish, R. Dawson, hon. Capt. V. Dilke, Sir. W. Dundas, rt. hon. Sir D. Dillon, J. B. Dunlop, A. M. Enfield, Viscount Erskine, Vice-Adm. J.E. Esmonde, J. Ewart, W. Fawcett, H. Fildes, J. Foley, H. W. Forster, C. Forster, W. E. Gaselee, Serjeant S. Gavin, Major Crosland, Colonel T. P. Foster, W. O. Gibson, rt. hon. T. M. Goldsmid, Sir F. H. Gower, G. W. G. L. Graham, W. Grey, rt. hon. Sir G. Gridley, Captain H. G. Holden, I. Howard, Lord E. Howes, E. Hughes, W. B. Leatham, W. H. Leeman, G. Lefevre, G. J. S. Lindsay, Colonel R. L. Locke, J. Lewis, H. Lusk, Alderman A. "No cattle shall be carried along any highway or any canal navigation, or river, except in those cases expressly named in the Bill." If this were assented to he should then propose to make those exceptions which he had embodied in his Cattle Plague Bill. It would be open to any number of additional exceptions, in favour of any district, in accordance with the third Resolution. The principle of the paragraph, however, was this, that the movement of cattle on highways should be restricted, and that all exceptions to that movement should be named in the Bill. MR. BOUVERIE said, that he and many other Members had only considered the Government Bill, and they were now asked to adopt the clauses proposed by the hon. Member for Northamptonshire in his Bill. He thought that time should be given for the consideration of those clauses, and he therefore moved that the Chairman report Progress, and ask leave to sit again. MR. HUNT said, that if the Committee agreed to the paragraphs it would not commit itself in regard to any exceptions. SIR GEORGE GREY concurred in the Motion for reporting Progress. It was impossible to assent to the principle that the Committee were to adopt exceptions, without knowing what the exceptions were to be. MR. DISRAELI said, it was competent to decide whether there should be exceptions or not, and then what was to be the nature of them. He thought the proposal to report Progress a reasonable one at that advanced hour (a quarter past twelve.) MR. HUNT asked whether the right hon. Baronet proposed to go on with the VOL. CLXXXI. [THIRD SERIES.] Bill to-morrow; and if not finished then, whether the House would sit on Saturday? SIR GEORGE GREY said, that by the rules of the House the first Order to-morrow must be Supply. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said, that no notice of Motion had been given upon the Order for Supply tomorrow; therefore, there was nothing to prevent its being the first business of the day. MR. HUNT feared that he should have no other opportunity of giving notice of the exceptions he intended to propose. He would, therefore, state that he intended to move the exceptions enumerated in his Cattle Plague Bill with the addition that male animals might be moved for breeding purposes. With regard to the practical suggestion made by the Member for Berkshire, there might also be a special exception as to moving young calves, not on foot, but in carts. Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow. SAVINGS BANKS AND POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANKS BILL-[BILL 5.] SECOND READING.. Moved, "That the Bill be now read the second time."-(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.) MR. HUBBARD asked for some further explanations of this measure. The title of the last Bill would exactly suit it, for it was really a Bill for the reduction of the National Debt. It permitted the Chancellor of the Exchequer to cancel £5,000,000 Three per Cent Stock, and to substitute for it an equal value in terminable annuities. The interest of the £5,000,000 was £150,000 per annum, while the annual payment required on terminable annuities would be £330,000. The difference would be that in the first year of the operation of the Act the country would have to pay £180,000 more than the previous year on the same security. The House had been engaged the whole evening in discussing the terrible calamity of the cattle plague, and it was undesirable at the present moment to go out of their way and make a forced march with the view of reducing the National Debt. objected to make this reduction by means of terminable annuities. The fact was, that these securities were not negotiable at all, and were only held in the Government offices. They required a constant re-in U He |