CATTLE DISEASE BILL
…
Sir W. JOLLIFFE, in reference to the deficiency of the dead meat markets in the metropolis, suggested that the subject was one which demanded the immediate attention of the government, more especially as the local authorities of London were the members of the Privy Council. Unless proper regulations were made, and the government came forward and offered loans for the establishment of new markets, or some other means were taken to effect this object, great inconvenience would arise. He thought that markets should be established on the south bank of the Thames, where there was a large population engaged in the manufacture of leather, for hides and for the live stock imported from the Continent.
…
Sir J. PAKINGTON suggested to the hon. member for Forfarshire that he should alter his amendment so as to let it read ‟Shall be defrayed as to two-thirds thereof out of the local rate provided by this act, and as to the remaining one-third out of money to be provided by parliament for such purpose.” He agreed with the hon. member for Stockport that this was a national calamity, but he opposed the proposition to raise a part of the compensation money by a rate on cattle. The hon. member for Petersfield had disposed of that question. He had no objection to raising a large portion by a tax on rateable property. The money would be locally administered, and therefore it ws but fait that a large portion should be paid by owners of property. Still, the misfortune was a national one. There was not a man, woman, or child who would not suffer for it.
…
THE CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—The hon. member said he would. He should feel doubtful as to the justice of that proposal. The cattle owners of Wales were in a peculiar position. Two counties of Wales, Flintshire and Denbighshire, were suffering very severely from the cattle plague. They, with Cambridgeshire, Huntingdonshire, Cheshire, and Forfarshire—those six counties, he believed to be suffering more severely, comparing size and head of cattle, than any other portion of the country. It was a curious fact that during twelve years of the plague in the 18th century nine out of ten counties were untouched, and the only county that was touched was Montgomeryshire—a county bordering upon the infected counties and on the English border. He was by no means clear about the equity of laying upon that portion of the country, or the cattle owners of that portion, a burden which it had not pleased Providence to lay upon them. That was a matter which might be open to discussion, but it was by no means self-evident to him. It was perfectly clear that they must not consider a national cattle plague as an escape from all the difficulties of the case. He apprehended that the objections of the hon. member for Petersfield would, of course, be greatly extended in operation if the cattle plague were made national. He thought the proposition under consideration was founded on the principle of the immediate and special interest of those cattle owners who were in the immediate neighbourhood of infection, and in that sense it was both just in itself and quite conformable to the principle of the bill. He did not say that this was a matter on which they were entitled to form an conclusive opinion, but he stated it as a ground which had induced the government to include the proposition in a bill, and because they believed that including it would pave a very material tendency to gain another important object, and that was to prevent the unhappy accident, he ought to say calamity, of any battle between the town and country in reference to this taxation. he thought there was great reason to fear that if the subject were managed in a certain way a conflict might arise which would waste valuable and precious time, and they believed that the including of this proposition in the bill would have the important effect of preventing any such unfortunate incident; they were further encouraged by the significant circumstance which happened on the first night of the session, when immediately after the delivery of the excellent speeches of the mover and seconder of the Address, a gentleman of great authority—the representative of one of the most important of the agricultural districts—introduced the whole subject of the cattle plague, and distinctly proposed that a portion of this rate should be laid on the rateable property of the country, and the remainder on cattle. But the honourable member for the Tower Hamlets, taking compassion on the farmers of that part of London, thought they were exposed to a great deal of injury from the free trade in cattle which had subjected them to contamination. He did not intend to enter into the vexed question whether the disease had been imported from abroad, but common fame and rumour were extremely unjust to the farms of the eastern parts of London if it was true that these farmers gave no scope and no encouragement with reference to measures for the prevention of the disease. They had not the highest reputation for the perfect cleanliness, fairness, and ventilation of their cattle shed which were supposed to contribute materially to the restriction of the disease. But that was not a matter which affected the present question. He had ???? house would accept it (hear, hear).
…