View report page

48
This would be the solution of all the difficulties of controlling
the meat supply; it certainly would cost a little more, but the
public surely would not mind a little additional cost with the satisfaction
of efficient supervision.
The Tuberculosis Order, 1909, of the Board of Agriculture,
Which was to come into force on January 1st, 1910, but which was
unfortunately referred back, it was hoped would be the commencement
of the compensation question, but this Order contained many
very weak clauses. A bovine animal must be "emaciated" from
tuberculosis before it can be dealt with, and therefore is allowed
to spread infection amongst other cattle; with regard to slaughter,
the owner or person in charge can have the affected animal which
is isolated slaughtered at "any" time, but the Act says nothing
of notifying the Local Authority, and the Local Authority is the
Local Authority administering the Diseases of Animals Acts,
which, of course, is the County; so the Act simply ignores Urban
Districts, who may be doing their utmost to tackle the question
of disease of cattle and milk supply. The Urban District on
the spot with responsible officials is much more likely to be
able to solve, or at any rate go a long way to solve, this
question than the County Authority, who know none of the local
conditions, etc. The Urban District has officials on the spot who
can keep in touch with these matters, but the County officials
may be here to-day and not seen again until sent for.
Although the Order not only included cows and heifers,
in its operation, but all bovine animals emaciated from tuberculosis,
its main object was protection to the public health from risk
of the spread of tuberculosis by milk rather than the eradication
of tuberculosis in animals. The proposal to place the whole cost
of the carrying out of this Order, including the slaughter and
compensation of animals, upon the County ratepayer, is, however,
indefensible. The principle that cost incurred for the benefit of
the whole public should be paid from the general taxation of the
country is sound, local taxation for this purpose is manifestly
unjust to the ratepayers, while taxation on the basis of the
Order, which was payable by county ratepayers only, is both
unjust and unequal.