The Sun.
London, England, 1865-09-06 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER' 6, 1865.

want of ventilation which in other cases caused it, that
was an instance in which everything had been done
that could be done, and yet the plague raged and the
mortality ensued. (Hoar, hear.) In his neighbourhood
twenty or thirty cows had been lost, and yet in Dulwich
none had been affected. The northern part, too, seemed
far more affected with the disease than the southern part.
Under these circumstances, something should be done ;
and the corporation would not misapply their money by
contributing £l,OOO towards the Compensation Fund. In
every pact of the kingdom some system of compensation
had been adopted, and London should not be behind in
raising a fund. Besides, if the corporation headed the sub-
scription list with £l,OOO, the cattle salesmen would sub-
scribe another £l,OOO, and the public would come forward
with their money. It might be said that the sum proposed
would not be sufficient to meet the emergency, but at all
events let the corporation not stand by and see the poor
cowkeepers losing their all, recollecting that, if the dis-
ease progressed, butchers' meat would rise by-and-bye to
such a price as that no poor man could purchase it. He
concluded by moving the resolution.
Mr. WALTER asked to what extent the disease had af-
fected the City ?
Mr. GIBBINS replied that in the City of London proper,
out of 19 cowsheds there was not one in which the disease
had made its appearance. In Warwick-lane there were 28
cows, and no disease among them. Ile was happy to say
that all the vestries and boards in the metropolis had been
communicated with on this subject, and that they had re-
turned very favourable answers.
Mr. BUTCHER asked whether it was contemplated to pay
the rich owners of cattle out of the Compensation Fundfor
their losses.

Mr. GIBBINS replied that the committee were confining
their operations to the metropolis, and that no compensa-
tion would be given to anybody unless he sent a timely
intimation that his cattle were affected with the disease.
At the market, during the month of August, 175 beasts
were seized, of which 25 were condemned and destroyed.
In the same month there were seized in the slaughter-house
connected with the market 190 beasts, of which 150 were
condemned and destroyed.
Mr. Deputy FARRAR asked whether it was part of the
committee's scheme that persons from all parts of the
country should send their beasts to the proposed sani-
toriums to be experimented upon.
Mr. Grunnis replied in the negative.
Mr. Deputy BURNELL asked whether it was the object of
the committee to confine the remunerations to persons
keeping licensed cowhouses, or whether the whole of the
cowkeepers were to share in it.
Mr. Grimm said these were matters of detail which could
only be answered hereafter. All who contributed to the
fund would bo entitled to compensation in case of loss.
Mr. WHEELER asked whether the cowkeepers were not
at present insuring their cattle.
Mr. GIBBINS replied that they were not generally doing
so, but the fact was one which had not been very accurately
ascertained.
Mr. WHEELER asked whether there were any unlicensed
cowsheds in London.
Mr. GIBBINS was sorry to say there were, particularly in
the Strand.
Mr. WHEELER asked whether any of the unlicensed par-
ties had made any demand for compensation.
Mr. GIBBINS replied in the negative.
In reply to Mr. Woodley,
Mr. GIBBINS said that correct statements from the owners
of the cowsheds were not obtainable, and that the figures
sent by them could not be vouched for.
Mr. ROWE asked whether the Government would take
action in the compensation business.
Mr. GIBBINS replied that the subject of the cattle disease
had been a matter of great anxiety with the Government.
Professor Symonds had called particular attention to it,
and it was not improbable that next session a bill of in-
demity would be brought in.
Mr. Alderman PHILLIPS said the visitation was a most
serious one, and that the committee were doubtless actu-
ated with the most benevolent intentions when they now
came forward and asked for a subscription of £l,OOO. These
questions, however, were deserving of consideration :
Who was to give it ; what was the object of it ; if given,
who was to have the disposal of it ; and were the rich
cowkeepers to share in it ? It now appeared that within
a given time something like 2,000 cows had fallen victims
to a pestilential disease, and that these would represent
£30,000 or £40,000. Let the corporation look the matter
fairly in the face, and not deal with ephemeral experiments;
but come to facts. Where was this £30,000 to come from,
and where was the matter to end ? Was the Government
to subscribe, and was the subscription to be taken up by
the City and the metropolis at large ? If the principle were
right that they should subscribe, then they should know
what they were going to subscribe for, and to whom they
were going to give the money. His own opinion was that
£l,OOO was inadequate. He believed they were all influ-
enced by the same kindly motives in this matter, and that
the discussion of the question would be useful. But, when
the great veterinary professors of the day were differing
as to the course to be pursued with regard to the disease,
ho was free to confess, that with the kindest and the most
benevolent intentions, he was utterly at sea as to whether
he should do right or wrong in supporting the motion.
Mr. Deputy FARRAR read a paragraph from the report of
the committee, and said it seemed to him to hold out an in-
vitation to the whole country to send their cattle to the
sanitoriums.

Mr. GIBBINS denied that there was any such intention on
the part of the committee.
Mr. M'GEoncE said he agreed very much with the ex-
cellent remarks which had fallen from Alderman Phillips.
lie thought an application should be made to Government
for power to impose a charge on the whole of the cattle sold
in the market, for then a fund would be raised adequate to

meet the evil. To talk of anything like a subscription of
Xl,OOO was preposterous. Even £50,000 raised by the whole
of the metropolis would be insufficient to remunerate the
unfortunate sufferers.

Mr. RUDKIN was sorry that the report seemed not to
have been listened to very attentively, because it stated
very clearly the mode in which the Compensation Fund was
intended to be laid out. It proposed that sanitoriums
should be established, that compensation should be brought
to bear, that persons who had cows affected with the
disease should give timely notice of the same, and that
their diseased cattle should be sent in proper conveyances
to the sanitoriums, where the medical men would try their
hands in effecting a cure. The great principle of the Com-
pensation Fund was to get at the facts, and to ascertain the
localities in which the disease existed. The present in-
spectors were clothed with full powers to brand on the
horns every head of cattle which was infected. These
powers, however, were not efficiently carried out, for at
the Cattle Market infected cows were arriving from all parts
of London without a Government certificate, and without
being branded on the horns, and these travelled through
the streets and spread the disease. Now it was proposed
to carry these beasts by means of conveyances to the sani-
toriums, to explain to the cowkeepers the advantages de-
rivable from better ventilation, and to impart to them
advice as to the best means of meeting the disease. It was
wori by of remark that Professors Symonds and Gamgee,
and all the medical men, were in favour of the Compensa-
tion Fund. The committee believed that a sum of £lO,OOO
or £15,000 would be adequate to meet the immediate
necessities of the case. They had not as yet received
any answer from tho Government respecting their
sanction to the establishment of the sanitoriums, but the
inhabitants of the metropolis might do, independently of
that sanction, what had been done by Edinburgh and
Glasgow—they might establish those hospitals for them-
selves.

Mr. LAWLEY was of opinion that in a case so urgent as
the present something should be done, and that tho mar-
kets committee were deserving of the fullest support. He
thought tho committee should be armed with full powers
to act to the best of their judgments, and that the £l,OOO
should at once be placed at their disposal. He was more
in favour of establishing hospitals than he was for com-
pensating cowkeepers, and he thought the corporation
ought to form the nucleus of the fund.
Mr. PEDLER characterised the cowsheds of London as
wretched places, and said the infected cattle in going along
the streets breathed a terrible poison into the asmosphere.
He believed that the removal of the cows from the cow-
sheds to the hospitals would only promote the disease, and
the medical men would not be more successful in curing
the disease in the hospitals than thoy were now in curing
them in the cowsheds. He was of opinion that the cow-
keepers should remove their animals to the country, where
they would have better air and water than they could have
in London, and from whence they could most easily send
their milk to London by railway. He could not believe
that the opening of three or four sanitoriums or the sub-
scription of £l,OOO would over meet the magnitude of the
evil.

Mr. RowE said that no member of the corporation would
raise up his hand against the vote if he thought it would
form the nucleus of an adequate fund. He thought it a
reproach to the Government that they had allowed the
disease to spread so extensively as it had without taking
any steps to arm the local boards with powers to meet the
emergency. To talk of £l,OOO was ridiculous. In his
opinion £200,000 was more likely to be the sum that was
necessary to encounter the evil. The vote was nothing
but a charitable contribution, exceedingly laudable in its
design, but by no means sufficient to check the calamity.
He hoped the Government would be moved to some action
in the matter. How was it possible that five or six gen-
tlemen on the committee, who perhaps never saw a cow
in their lives—(loud laughter)—could take upon themselves
to meet a disease of that magnitude.
Mr. BURKE supported the motion, and expressed his
belief that there would be a fund of £lOO,OOO raised before
the end of the month.

After, some observations from Mr. Woodley and Mr.
Fricker,

Mr. IsAacs suggested that part of the compensation
should be given as a premium for an effectual remedy for
the disease. He asked what was the use of establishing
hospitals when it was admitted that there was no known
remedy for the disease.
Mr. HORRIDGE opposed anything like a "rest and be
thankful"
policy, and deprecated such a mode of meeting
the disease as that recommended by Professor Symonds--
namely, the poleaxe.
Mr. DAVIS was of opinion that the Government should-