Friday, November 4, 1892. 
clxxxi 
The Phbsident of the Board of 
Agriculture in reply said : My Lord 
Duke and Gentlemen, — I may say at 
once that I recognise to the full the 
importance of the deputation which 
has done me the honour of being pre- 
sent this afternoon. I recognise the 
composition of the deputation which 
is here to-day, containing, as it does, 
so many eminent agriculturists, and I 
recognise that the opinion of the 
various influential societies repre- 
sented must carry great weight with 
any Government that may happen to 
be in oflSce. With regard to the pre- 
sent matter, 1 am sure everyone will 
agree that it is a source of deep re- 
gret that circumstances should have 
arisen which should have obliged us 
even to consider the necessity of im- 
posing restrictions on the trade not 
only of our fellow-subjects across the 
Atlantic, but also on those on this 
side who have found the importation 
of store stock both advantageous and 
profitable. 
How important the Canadian trade 
has become in many parts of the 
country is shown by the fact that the 
number of cattle imported has risen 
from 65,125 in 1887 to 107,524 in 
1891, and the value of these imports 
has increased from 1,136,000Z. to 
1,771,000Z. It is true, of course, that 
the last-mentioned figure does not 
amount to 2 per cent, of the aggregate 
meat supply of this country, and it 
is also true that the restrictions on 
Canadian animals — which you, gen- 
tlemen, have come here this afternoon 
to advocate — would not be prohibi- 
tive of the importation of fat stock 
for slaughter at the ports. But al- 
though our imports of Canadian stores 
form a small item in our cattle trade, 
they form one of the largest items of 
the imports from Canada. However, 
there would still be nothing to pre- 
vent our Canadian friends from feed- 
ing their stores at home, and sending 
them over as fat stock, which some 
advocate as the best course for the 
Canadian farmers to follow in their 
own interests. Yet, on the other 
hand, I am bound to say that it will 
be impossible for them to obtain, 
under the requirements of slaughter 
at the ports, such good prices as they 
would otherwise have received. And 
we must remember that the losses to 
graziers through restriction of the 
Canadian trade would not be equally 
distributed all over the country. At 
the same time, I cannot say that that 
fact affords a conclusive argument 
against the restrictions which you ad- 
vocate, because much of the work 
devolving upon the Board of Agricul- 
tiure under the Contagious Diseases 
Act consists of the balancing of indi- 
vidual and local disadvantages against 
the interests of the agriculturists of 
Great Britain as a whole. I mention 
these points without the slightest in- 
tention of minimising the action of 
the Board of Agriculture with regard 
to the disease. The safety of the 
flocks and herds of the country is as 
dear to us as to our predecessors, and 
we will spare no means of giving as 
full a measure of security as it is in 
our power to do. 
It is almost unnecessary to remind 
you, who are so well versed in agri- 
culture, of the enormous benefits that 
have resulted from the working of the 
Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act. 
I have referred on a previous occasion 
to what has been done with regard to 
foot-and-mouth disease, and perhaps 
a few figures as to pleuro-pneumonia 
may be acceptable to the deputation. 
In 1887, there were 618 outbreaks; 
in 1888, 513; in 1889, 474; in 1890, 
295. You see the gradual diminution 
of the figures, and last year, in 1891, 
there were only sixty outbreaks. And 
whereas, in the month of September 
1890, there were forty-six outbreaks, 
in September 1891 there were only 
eleven, and in September 1892 only 
two. These results are startling. 
The success of our efforts to protect 
our herds and flocks must be admitted 
as striking and most satisfactory. 
Everyone, in my opinion, even in the 
localities which have temporarily suf- 
fered from the restrictions put upon 
them, will admit that the sacrifices 
which have been made will be thrown 
away if the disease is again introduced 
by reason of importation from abroad. 
Therefore it is that, after the most 
elaborate and personal investigation 
of the facts, and after a most lengthy 
consideration of the matter in all its 
bearings, we have come to the con- 
clusion that these facts are inconsis- 
tent with the “ reasonable security ’ 
contemplated by the law ; and that 
o 2 
