The Sun.
London, England, 1866-01-23 00:00:00

SOMERSETSHME.

On Saturday, by adjournment from the Quarter
Session, a numerously-attended meeting of Somer-
setshire magistrates was held at Highbridge, in order
to consider such further steps as might be neces-
sary for the prevention of the spread of the cattle
plague. The chair was taken by Sir W. Miles,
`Bart. A deputation of the butchers of Bristol was
in attendance, and they addressed the Court on the
hardship resulting to large towns such as Bristol
from the restrictions of the magistrates. The Glou-
cestershire justices had modified their orders, and
no increase of the disease had taken place in conse-
quence. The Bristol butchers had prepared pla-
cards stating their determination to assist the ma-
gistrates in preventing the spread of the plague, and
in consequence of their promise to their own bench
to do all they could to prevent diseased beasts
being brought into the city their own market
was kept open. Mr. Baker, grazier, Bridgewater,
on behalf of the farmers of the district, wished that
they should be placed on an equal footing with
the Irish dealers, as the latter could carry their
stock to Bristol, but the former were unable to
sell theirs unless first slaughtered, which depre-
ciated its value. He had seen animals slaughtered
on farms that were not when removed fit for food.
(Hear, hear.) Sir A. H. Elton complained that
Bristol, Yeovil, and other places by having
their markets kept open were neutralising all that
had been done in neighbouring districts, and setting
up s focus of disease. They formed a temptation to
break through the regulations of the magistrates in
the county, and he therefore moved that the Secre-
tary of State be memorialised to act as the local
authority for Bristol and Yeovil, and issue orders
similar to those in the county of Somerset. Mr M.
King seconded the resolution, and he thought with
greater facilities for slaughtering there was no fear
of a large city like Bristol being amply supplied.
Mr. Strangways intimated that he would move an
amendment asking Government to take action them-
selves in the matter of the cattle plague and thus re-
lease the magistrates from their responsibility. The
original resolution was, after a discussion, adopted.
Mr. M. King moved that under certain restrictions
animals should be removed by the licence of two jus-
tices being obtained, piovided they were taken from
a district not infected to another locality also free
from disease ; that the name of the seller and pur-
chaser were given, that the animals had been in the
seller's possession at least 30 days, and that they
were slaughtered within 48 hours of their removal.
Mr. F. H. Dickinson seconded the resolution. Mr.
R. N. arcu %dile, M.P., hoped die muciou woula Ue
carried, as it would make the restrictions more popu-
lar, and their chance of having the plague would be
less, for the very stringest resolutions of the Court
set everybody to work to see how they could evade
them. Sir A. H. Elton and Sir A. Hood, M.P.,
thought if such liberties to carry cattle were given as
the resolution asked, they might as well put their
orders behind the grate. Col. Acland, M.P., advised
the justices not to interfere with the great town sup-
ply of meat, as in the case of Bristol, and he stated
that if the system of close exclusion went on they
would not be able to stock their meadows with cattle
in Somerset, for the county was a grazing and by no
means a breeding one. The chairman would warn
the people of Somerset that although the county
was nearly the last to be struck by the plague
a century ago, yet it took twelve years to get
rid of the plague, and it was worse felt than
in any other county in England. He
would leave the decision of the matter to the jus-
tices, but he would wash his hands of the business.
He was as large an owner of animals, he thought, as
any man in the room, and they would, he considered,
do more to injure the cattle trade of the county
eventually by giving lax reins to their orders than
by any other method they could adopt. The reso-
lution was, after lengthy discussion, lost, as also
was one proposing that no justice should sign a
licence for removal unless they received a certificate
from two farmers of adjacent lands in the parish, as
to the state of the cattle. Soon after the court rose.