The Sun.
London, England, 1866-02-10 00:00:00

The Earl of LICHFIELD said that 44 counties
were certainly represented.
Earl GRANVILLE said it would perhaps be as well
if the Government could be supplied with a list of
those who were present at the meeting, and it was
promised that such a list should be furnished.
Mr. GOODLET, as the . representative of the
Scotch Farmers' Club in Edinburgh, explained that
opinion among the agricultural community of Scot-
land, and others interested in the cattle trade
there, had been considerably modified lately, and
he could say that so far as his own feeling went,
his previous opinion had been very much shaken
by the meeting of the previous day. The Scotch
farmers were at first very much in favour of
various curative measures that had been proposed,
but ultimately they had come to the conclusion
that the stamping-out process was the one which
ought to be adopted. He then handed in a state-
ment of his own views on the question to Sir G.
Grey in addition to some resolutions that had been
passed by the Scotch body he represented.
Sir G. GREY said it appeared from the written
views of the last speaker that he thought all danger
would not be avoided even by the prohibition of the
removal of cattle, as slaughtering would still be
carried on in Scotland by butchers who might carry
the infection with them, about themselves or in the
materials they used. The resolution forbade the
removal of cattle on a highway, or by rail. Sup-
posing the road intersected a farm, were the cattle
to be allowed to cross that road ?

A MEMBER of the DEPUTATI ON—Distinctly not.
Sir G. GREY—Not even with a licence ?

Several Vo ES—C ertainly not.
Sir G. GREY asked what was meant by the term
cattle—did it apply only to neat cattle, or did it in-
clude sheep and pigs ?
The Earl of LICHFIELD said he had used the
word in its common acceptation, as meaning only
neat cattle, leaving it to Parliament to use definite
terms.

Mr. RYDER, as representing the Manchester and
Liverpool Agricultural Society, said he could not
undertake to say that the resolution expressed the
feeling of either Manchester or Liverpool generally,
and did not think deputies from any society could
claim to represent the feeling of the towns in their
own counties generally. There could be no doubt
that the interests of the towns were antagonistic to
what was sought to be done. In his own case, he
did not wish it to be supposed that the Manchester
and Liverpool Agricultural Society represented the
general feeling in those towns.
Sir G. GREY said he understood that nothing in
the resolution would prevent the unlimited importa-
tion of cattle, so that Liverpool, in fact, might be
supplied with the greatest possible abundance, but
that cattle so imported must no go inland—to Man-
chester, for instance.

Mr. PELL said that the cattle, by the resolution,
must not go inland.

Sir G. GREY—So that every head of Irish cattle
as well as foreign cattle coming to England alive
would have to be slaughtered at the port of debarka-

tion ?

Mr. PELL said it must be slaughtered or sent
away again.

Sir G. GREY—Then the result looked forward to
would be that the Irish butchers would be able to
carry their cattle to Liverpool, and that Manchester
and all the great towns of Lancashire would have to
be supplied with dead meat.
Mr. PELL said that would be so ; only he expected
that the adoption of the resolution would have the
result of inducing those who carried on the trade to
slaughter the beasts in Ireland, and to bring the
beef_ over in the carcass.
Earl GPaNVILLE—IIas Liverpool facilities at pre-
sent for Slaughtering all the cattle that might be
brought the
Mr. RthEe for supplying the country around it ?
ltNcas afraid not, but those facilities
could be created ,If the Legislature compelled it,
it would be easy to obtain the necessary means.
Mr. SMITHERsa.d he considered the facilities
already existing
in s
oports would really be found
sufficient, for when ur
the
market was reduced to a
dead-meat market on the
hang
nt of the butchers,
animals would not be kept ilngi
in the slaughter-
e slaughtered houses, but would be disposed'i
rapidly, and an
immense number of beasts inio• ht b
in
rapid succession.
Mr. TOLLEMACHE, M.P., thought the Prohibition
of the removal of cattle would not have the
desired
effect, and he instanced the case of Cheshire, which
had suffered more than any other county from the
cattle plague, where the most stringent regulations
to that effect passed by the magistrates, though most
strictly enforced, had been ineffective, as the cattle
disease was extending in that county.
Mr. G. W. HUNT, M.P., said time reverse had been
the case in Northamptonshire. On the 11th of
January an order was issued prohibiting the removal
of any animal for more than 100 yards on its own
farm, and in one week the deaths decreased from
199 to 95.

Sir G. GREY—AII I can say to the deputation is
what I have already stated this morning to a depu-
tation from Yorkshires that the Government do not
differ at all from the principle of these resolutions.