View report page

169
themselves with a verdict of "Death from glanders," with a rider to the effect that
the provisionns of the Act above cited had not been carried out, and that the provisions
of the Slaughter-Houses (Metropolis) Act, 1874, had been violated : the jury
desired, moreover, that the facts of the case might be formally laid before the Privy
Council. Proceedings were subsequently taken by the Local Authority against the
proprietor of the horses, for not having given notice of the disease to the police, as
required by the Act, and he was fined in the full penalty of £20, with costs, in
each of two cases. The Local Authority declined to take proceedings against the
horse dealer who had removed and slaughtered so many horses on premises not
licensed for the purpose. But the business was put a stop to; and, as a result of
the proceedings generally, there was an immediate and a large increase in the
number of glandered horses reported to the police. In the report of the Veterinary
Department of the Privy Council for 1879, it was stated that "more cases of
glanders and farcy have been returned in the metropolis than in any previous
year;" but it was added, that there was "no evidence to show that the
disease was more prevalent than in former years .... the increased
number of cases returned being due to the activity of the executive in carrying out
the Act of 1878 and Orders in Council relating to these diseases "—as a result of
the proceedings that I had instituted. The disclosure of the cases was due,
doubtless, to the announced resolve of the magistrates to inflict the full penalty of
£20 for every offence against the Act, which was done in several instances. In
1877 and 1878 respectively, cases of glanders and farcy to the number of 486 and
571 had been reported; the numbers in 1879 and 1880 were 987 and 990, the
largest totals ever recorded. The Lords of the Council, I may add, tendered me
their thanks for the action I had taken in connection with the above outbreak and
enquiry.
The law at the time when I reported on this subject, in
August last, was contained in The Animals Order of
1886, issued by the Privy Council under the provisions of the
Contagious Diseases (Animals) Acts, 1878 to 1886; chapter 6
of which dealt with glanders and farcy. It would have been
fairly sufficient for its purpose, probably, had the requirement
as to notice to be given by the owner or person in charge of
a sick animal, always been carried out, for then there would
have been some hope that the disease might in time be
stamped out, although account has to be taken of cases in
which it exists undetected and even unsuspected. There can
be no doubt, however, that cases were often wilfully concealed,
the object of the owners being to make use of their horses as
long as possible, the heavy fines for neglecting to give notice