Imágenes de páginas

beasts to be killed. The clause pro- tion. The answer was per head. He vided that the certificate of the inspector wished to know whether the meaning of should be conclusive in all courts of an the clause was for each head or for not animal having had the disease. It not allowing the inspector to enter different only applied to the animal in question but parts of the farm. to other animals in the same yard, or to Mr. BARING said, the power contained any person who had been dealing with such in the clause was a modified power. It animals. He should prefer the introduc- did not authorize the inspector to enter at tion of a few words protecting from actions any time, but only when he had reasonable at law inspectors acting bona fide and to ground for suspecting that cattle infected the best of their judgment in the execution by the plague were to be found. With of their duty.

respect to the question of the hon, and MR. HENLEY said, that the power was gallant Member (Colonel North), the point great. Notwithstanding, it was proposed in question had not been decided by the to intrust comparatively ignorant persons Court of Queen's Bench at the time rewith it. The duties of the local authorities ferred to. It was settled by the Bill, also were heavy, and he thought their in- MR. WALDEGRAVE-LESLIE said, spectors should be men upon whom they he had seen so much during the last four could depend. He could not believe they months of the manner in which the cattle would feel safe in trusting to the word of plague was carried about by the inspectors, a shoemaker. Persons having not the that he thought some check ought to be put slightest medical knowledge might be ap. upon their power of entering cattle sheds at pointed inspectors. Common constables all times. The inspectors went into sheds were to have this power, that the moment among cattle which were infected, and then, a fiat went out that cattle were diseased without changing their clothes, they went they must be killed. It was next provided among cattle which were perfectly healthy, that the local authorities should set to work and he thought that if that were to conand cause the field in which the beast had tinue some parts of the country that had been to be disinfected. Now it was not a hitherto escaped the plague would become very easy process to disinfect a field. Since liable to it. 'A cattle owner was liable to the proviso had been introduced without a penalty if he did not send notice that notice he thought the least the hon. Gen- his cattle were diseased, and this was a tleman the Under Secretary could do would sufficient protection. He therefore moved, be not to press the matter, but introduce it as an Amendment to the clause, that after to the notice of the House when the Report the words " for the purpose of carrying was brought up.

into effect the provisions of this Act,” in MR. BARING said, he was aware that the seventh line, the following words should notice should have been given if possible be added : of his intention to introduce the proviso.

“And before entering, he shall be bound to proHe also felt the force of many of the ob- duce an affidavit, sworn before a justice of the jections, but time pressed, and he trusted peace, to the affect that he has such reasonablo the House would decide upon the case at grounds for supposing that cattle affected by the once.

cattle plague are there to be found.” He felt the necessity of the provision he had suggested, because without it

MR. CARNEGIE said, he should supany of the local authorities acting on the port the Amendment. He believed it was Bill would be liable to actions for so doing. dangerous to allow the inspectors to go Words “cattle overseers” struck out.

about among all the herds in the country.

A man who owned a valuable herd would Proviso agreed to, and added to clause. rather give an inspector £5, £10, or even Clause, as amended, agreed to. [cl. 9.] £20 than allow him to enter his premises

I and spread the infection. Cases had been Clause 11 (Power of Entry for Inspec- known where inspectors had forced their tors and others).

way into unipfected cattle sheds to get the COLONEL NORTH said, he wished to fee. have some definition of the words that per- MR. ST. AUBYN said, he should supsons committing “such offence should be port the clause as it stood. liable to a penalty not exceeding £20.". Sir FITZROY KELLY said, he agreed He had put the question to the Home that some check ought to be put upon the Secretary, whether the £20 applied to power of inspectors. In many districts each head of cattle or to each transac- persons had been appointed who were utterly incompetent to discharge the duties he believed that some of the inspectors of the office, simply for the want of com- were unable to write. He hoped that the petent inspectors: Instead of an affidavit: Government would adopt his Amendment obtain the authority of a magistrate to every constable was empowered to take empower him to inspect cattle against the action under this Bill, and now they were will of the owner. The inspectors would to be required to record their reasons for have no difficulty in obtaining that autho- acting in writing. That was getting on, rity when it was necessary, and the autho- he thought. They had to provide as far as rity would be some protection to the cattle possible against the spread of the disease, owners.

and they must remember that on the first MR. ACLAND said, he thought the appearance of the plague in a district there best course would be to require the in- were always a good many gaping peoplespector to act on the information of one or constables sometimes, as well as others, more neighbouring cattle owners or other who went to the farms where the disease credible persons. The inspectors would existed to have what they called a "look,' then be compelled to show their authority thereby spreading the disease. It was before going into any cattle shed. In his always dangerous to encourage people to part of the country there was no human visit those spots at their own will and being so detested and dreaded as the cattle pleasure, and they should remember that inspector.

the grounds upon which policemen acted MR. AYRTON said, he was sorry to were not always the soundest. By fining see that the zeal which had been shown at a man £20 if he did not announce the apfirst in discussing the subject of the cattle pearance of the disease, and by offering plague had somewhat fallen off. He thought him compensation if he did, they were they ought to sustain the tone they had at holding out the two strongest inducements first adopted, and support the hon. Gentle by which people were influenced-hope man the Under Secretary in these mea- and fear. He thought that the clause was, sures, notwithstanding their stringency. on the whole, likely to be more productive There could be no fair objection to the of mischief than of good. inspectors having power to visit the cattle MR. GOODSON said, he thought that sheds. It was only carrying out the same all objections would be met by providing principle which was observed in the case that the officers should act by direction of of inspectors of factories, and inspectors of the local authorities. mines. Why did they not strip the in- MR. WHALLEY said, he thought that spector, wash him, and fumigate him at if the inspectors recorded in writing their once, instead of only making him swear reasons for acting, it would soon be seen an affidavit ? Ho ridiculed the idea that whether they exceeded their powers or not. inspectors would carry the plague about If, however, inspectors were only to act in with them, and thought they ought to be individual cases upon the authority of the fettered with no obstructions in the per local authorities, they would frequently formance of their duties.

have to lose much valuable and important MR.KINNAIRD said, he was astonished time in gaining access to the authorities. to find the hon. Gentleman the Member LORD ROBERT MONTAGU said, that for the Tower Hamlets disagreeing with by a clause in the Bill, the disinfectiou of the principle that a man's house was his inspectors was already provided for. As castle. [Mr. AYRTON : Cattle shed.] He it was the interest of local authorities to thought that the farmer ought not to have prevent the spreading of infection, they his premises invaded unnecessarily, and would take precautions against the inhoped that the hon. Member (Mr. Walde- spectors going about to spread the infecgrave-Leslie) would press his Amendment. tion.

MR. WHALLEY said, that the object MR. HENLEY said, he would suggest would be obtained by requiring the in. the omission of the words “any constable spector, if he should be requested to do so, or police officer.” to state in writing the grounds on which MR. BARING said, he would agree to he entered the premises.

the suggestion. MR. BARING said, he would accept MR. HUNT said, that in many instances the Amendment suggested by the hon. police officers were appointed inspectors, Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley). and as they were always bound to appear MR. WALDEGRAVE-LESLIE said, in uniform, their disinfection would not be

Sir FitxRoy Kelly

an easy matter. So notorious had this legal all persons whose animals had been fact become, that in some counties, instead killed under those Orders had an undoubted of being called " inspectors," the people right to bring an action at law and claim styled them “infectors.” He thought it damages. The farmers throughout the might be better to strike out the whole country had, however, behaved most submisclause,

sively. For the good of the nation they THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE- had never resisted the Orders in Council or QUER said, he approved the omission of questioned their legality ; and not only had the words “ any constable or police officer.” | they had their diseased animals slaughThe objection of the right hon. Gentleman tered, but many sound cattle bad also been (Mr. Henley) was a sound one. It was slaughtered through the ignorance of the advisable that the inspection should be inspectors. Now, the effect of the clause limited to officers properly qualified. It would be to take away the farmers' legal was, however, necessary to retain the right in such cases. He did not desire to clause, because as the local authorities prevent the passing of the clause ; but he were empowered to slay suspected animals, thought the Government should state that they must have means of arriving at a they were willing to bring up the 18th judgment upon the matter. He thought clause, which they had themselves origithe Amendment proposed by the hon. nally introduced, and grant retrospective Member (Mr. Whalley) would act as a compensation. check on inspectors.

MR. HUNT said, he did not see the ne. Words proposed to be left out by Mr. cessity of raising that question then, because

when the 18th clause was left out it was BARING, struck out.

understood that they were to deal with it MR. WHALLEY then moved the ad- subsequently. The right hon. Gentleman dition of the following words at the end of the Member for Calne (Mr. Lowe) had sugthe clause :

gested to the Secretary of State that the “ Provided always that such inspector shall, if clause should be withdrawn, on the ground required, state in writing the grounds upon which that it ought to be considered separately, he has entered such premises for the purpose and that it was doubtful whether the reaforesaid.”

trospective compensation ought to come out MR. M‘LAGAN moved an Amendment of the same fund as that which was to be that inspectors should be required to visit provided by the Bill; and it had been withthe places in which diseased animals were drawn in accordance with that suggestion. buried, and see that the requirement was It was understood when Clause 18 was carried out.

struck out that something of a similar kind MR. BARING said, that would lead to was to be proposed subsequently, not in the spread of infection.

this Bill, but in another shape. He hoped, Amendment negatived.

therefore, no doubt existed that the Go

vernment were pledged to the retrospective Clause, as amended, agreed to. [cl. 10.] principle. Clauses 19 and 20 struck out.


QUER said, he was very sorry that his Clause 50 (Confirmation of Orders).

right hon. Friend the Home Secretary LORD ROBERT MONTAGU said, that had been obliged, through over exertion the clause was intended to indemnify all and the pressure of public business, to quit persons who had acted under the Orders of the House, and also that he had had no the Privy Council, and, indeed, to indemnify opportunity of consulting with his right the Privy Council themselves for the Orders hon. Friend as to his exact meaning in rethey had issued ; and the fact that it was spect to that dropped clause relating to proposed at all was a proof that the Go- retrospective compensation. But having vernment had a doubt as to the legality of himself been present when it was dropped, their proceedings. The Lord Chancellor he could say that it was dropped, not bewas reported to have said the other day cause the case of these parties ought not that although the Government had acted to be considered, but because relating to a under his advice in promulgating these back claim, whatever it was, it was in no way Orders of the Privy Council, yet it might urgent, and need not interfere with the other be doubtful whether they came under the parts of the Bill that required to be pushed terms of the Act, or, in other words, whe- forward. His right hon. Friend, he was ther they were legal; and if they were not sure, was now quite as much disposed to consider the case of these persons as when complain of having to pay £100 out of he introduced the clause.

£400, the remaining £300 being paid to MR. HENLEY said, the explanation of the assurer by way of compensation out of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was quite the county rate. satisfactory if the right hon. Gentleman SIR JAMES FERGUSSON said, he meant to say that those persons who had thought the clause would operate unjustly willingly obeyed what they thought to be to the assurer, inasmuch as he would have the law should not be put in a worse posi- paid the premium to the association, as tion than those whose cattle might be well as having to contribute towards the slaughtered hereafter.

county rate, while his more unthrifty neighTHE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEbour would get the same amount of comQUER said, he did not say, nor would he pensation having only contributed to the then pretend to form an opinion on the county rate. subject, that the parties who preferred re- MR. NEATE said, he thought the trospective claims should be dealt with matter required further consideration. precisely like those who had to be dealt LORD HENRY THYNNE moved that with prospectively. He thought the former the clause be postponed. He said that it case was different in some respects from benefited the insurance offices at the exthe latter, but he had no doubt his right pense of the county rate. hon Friend would be as ready as he was at MR. BARING said, he hoped the Comfirst to consider it

its merits.

mittee would pass the clause, as it would MR. HENLEY: Nullum simile est idem. benefit the insurance associations without I take it to be admitted that they have a throwing any additional burden upon the fair claim to compensation, and that the county rate. Unless the clause were carried Government will, at all events, bring up the Act would impose great hardship upon some clause upon the subject.

the insurance associations, since the sound Clause agreed to.

[cl. 32.] cattle slaughtered under the provisions of On Motion of Mr. BARING, Clause 6 A effects of the disease, and therefore the

the Act might not have died from the (Power to assemble adjourned Sessions), Act, without the clause, would simply deand Clause 7 B (Meeting of Local Authority prive the associations of so much money. in Scotland), added to the Bill.

The effect of the clause had been quite MR. BARING moved to add a new. correctly stated by the hon. and learned clause (Clause 20 C)

Gentleman (Sir Fitz Roy Kelly). If it were “ Where any animal has been slaughtered under not inserted in the Bill the owner of an ani. the provisions of this Act, the owner of such ani- mal ordered to be slaughtered would be en. mal shall not be entitled to receive, in respect of the insurance of such animal, any sum which, to- titled to receive three-fourths of the value of gether with the payment ho receives for such the animal, and the same amount from the animal under the provisions of this Act, shall ex- insnrance company, so that he would receed the sum which he would otherwise have been ceive the full value of the animal and oneentitled to receive in respect of such insurance.”

half more.

The county rate would, under The relief such a clause would give to the the clause proposed, be bound to pay cominsurance associations would enable them pensation, and then the insurance company to continue in existence. The object of would pay any difference there might be the provision was to ensure the proper between the amount of the compensation working of the insurance companies, and and the sum for which the animal was in. of the means of providing proper compen- sured. sation.

MR. AYRTON said, the clause merely MR. HUNT said, he thought that if the enabled the owner to deduct from the clause passed the persons assuring should compensation what he received from the have returned to them a proportionate part insurance office. The principle of the inof the premiums paid to the insurance as- surance company was only to pay the sociations, since they would only receive a salvage. small sum from the associations.

Clause agreed to. Sir FITZROY KELLY said, the effect of the clause would be to do justice be- MR. BARING proposed a clause that tween the parties. It would be unfair to the Act should continue in force until the compel the insurance companies to pay the first day of June, 1867, and until the end whole sum assured for animals slaughtered of the then Session of Parliament, and no under the Act, but they could scarcely longer.

The Chuncellor of the Exchequer

MR. HUNT reminded the Government SIR FITZROY KELLY said, he wished that power was to be taken to discontinue to inquire whether it was the intention of the Bill supposing a remedy were found the Government to pass the Bill to-morrow? for the cattle plague. He did not under- THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEstand that any clause to that effect had QUER said, he hoped so. It was intended been introduced.

to move the third reading after the Report MR. BARING said, a clause would be had been received. brought up to that effect on the Report.

House resumed. Clause agreed to.

[cl. 34.] Bill reported; as amended, to be conSchedule 1.

sidered Tomorrow. Amendment proposed, to insert the

CATTLE PLAGUE BILL-[BILL 7.] words “counties including any town or place which does not return or contribute Bill considered in Committee. to return a Member to Parliament."

House resumed. (The Lord Advocate.)

Bill reported; to be printed, as amended Sir JAMES FERGUSSON moved to [Bill 20); re-committed for To-morrow. insert words limiting the operation of the schedule in the case of Scotch towns to

House adjourned at One o'clock. such as have a population of not less than 20,000.

Amendment proposed to the said proposed Amendment, by adding, at the end thereof, the words “and which has not a

HOUSE OF LORDS, population of twenty thousand inhabitants.”—(Sir James Fergusson.)

Saturday, February 17, 1866. Question put, “ That those words be there added.”

MINUTES.)-Took the OathThe Earl of Dudley.

Public Bills-First Reading-Habeas Corpus The Committee divided : - Ayes 24; Suspension (Ireland) (12), read 2^, Comm. Noes 26 : Majority 2.

negatived, read 3" and passed, and Royal As

sent; Art* (15); Telegraph Act Amendment On Question that the Schedule, as

(13); Cattle Diseases * (14). amended, stand part of the Bill,

MR. CRAUFURD said, he wished to HABEAS CORPUS SUSPENSION ask the Lord Advocate whether he intended

(IRELAND) BILL. to introduce into the Bill those clauses

PASSED THROUGH ALL STAGES. which he suggested giving permissive

Bill brought from the Commons; read powers to the magistrates in boroughs to unite with counties, or to place themselves 1“; and to be printed (No. 12). under the counties in cases where they

Order of the Day for Standing Orders should think it desirable for the purposes

Nos. 37 and 38 to be considered in order of the Act.

to their being dispensed with, read. The LORD ADVOCATE said, it would EARL RUSSELL: My Lords, in moving be very desirable that such a power should that this Bill be now read a second time, be introduced into the Bill; but consider- I have to inform your Lordships that it is ing the stage at which the Bill had now with great regret Her Majesty's Governarrived that could only be done in another ment have felt themselves compelled to place.

propose the present measure for the susSchedule, as amended, agreed to. pension for a limited time of the ConstituSchedule 2 agreed to.

tion in one portion of Her Majesty's doPreamble agreed to.

minions; and it is now my purpose to On Question that the Chairman report which have induced Her Majesty's Go

state shortly to your Lordships the reasons the Bill, as amended, to the House,

vernment to consider that an extensive THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE- and formidable conspiracy exists in IreQUER said, that the Bill would come ou land, against which all the regular powers as an Order of the Day to morrow after the of the law have been put in force by the notice with respect to the suspension of Lord Lieutenant administering the Governthe Habeas Corpus. Act in Ireland, ment in that part of the United Kingdom.

« AnteriorContinuar »