Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Nov 1953

Vol. 143 No. 2

Private Members' Business. - Export and Slaughter of Horses—Motion.

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

I move:—

That, in view of the cruelty and suffering caused to live horses in their export to the Continent and slaughter there, under inhumane conditions, Dáil Éireann is of the opinion that our national prestige, as well as our economic advantage, would be enhanced by the prohibition of this trade and the substitution for it of a dressed meat trade.

I put down this motion about a year and a half ago so that the House would have an opportunity of discussing this question fully. This matter of the export of live horses is something which has been the subject of public grievance and feeling for quite a considerable period. The question was raised in June, 1952, by Deputy Dockrell in a parliamentary question and subsequently on the Adjournment. It is hardly necessary to recall to the House that public opinion at that time felt very strongly about this subject. You will recall that there were very many meetings and demonstrations in Dublin. Some of these meetings were the largest that many Dublin Deputies had seen for many years.

Public opinion felt strongly, not only in the country but outside the country.A series of articles covering a full investigation into the export of live horses for slaughter was run by the Irish Times.TheManchester Guardiancarried out an investigation into the trade. Questions were raised in the British Parliament on the matter. It was the subject of a good deal of publicity throughout England and there were petitions even from the Continent itself from some of the countries to which this export is actually taking place and where slaughter occurs under conditions which we here find so unsatisfactory.

Let us examine the trade as it stands and see what are our objections to it and where those objections are placed. First of all, there is the question of the long sea voyage, often of 60 or 70 hours. Many hundreds of horses are brought across to Dieppe and other continental ports. It has been shown from the articles which were written in the newspapers, the investigation done by Mr. Keatley, and from the observation of many other reliable witnesses that the horses undoubtedly suffer great hardship during transit. I realise that efforts have been made as far as the Irish authorities are concerned to try to ensure that there is a proper standard for the accommodation of these horses on board during the sea crossing but, nevertheless, instances have occurred, one in particular, where 29 out of 51 horses had to be destroyed as a result of the injury they met with during the voyage.

It has been pointed out again and again that horses are not suitable for a long sea journey. Horses suffer much more from sea-sickness than other animals and, being unable to vomit, they suffer a great deal of colic during transit.

However, the actual sea voyage is not the worst of the journey. Far greater cruelty and hardship take place when the animals reach some of the continental ports and from then onwards. In the investigations which have been carried out, it has been pointed out that after the sea voyage, which sometimes extends to 60 or 70 hours, the horses are entrained at the port of Dieppe or other continental port, and after waiting there for someconsiderable time are brought by rail to Paris. This stage of the journey is something which we object to very strongly. In all, the horses are travelling some 36 hours by train. They are put in groups of 12 or 13, irrespective of size, into wagons at sidings at Dieppe. The wagons are closed and the horses are left there, often without food or water, for at least 36 hours.

I put it to members of the House, do they really think that it is fair that animals should be put into a wagon like that, that there should be no method of seeing that they have proper accommodation and that they should be left to run about inside these wagons, injuring one another? It is quite common while these animals are being transported by train that certain horses take fright, bolt from one side of the wagon to another, and on many occasions animals have been taken out of these wagons in an injured condition and have had to be destroyed.

Apart from this very unsatisfactory method of rail transport, there are the very dreadful conditions of slaughter in France. People may say that this is not a responsibility of ours, that it takes place in another country, but we must remember that we are allowing this trade to continue, we are selling these horses to the Continent and we cannot discard the responsibility for what happens to them afterwards. I have no desire to interfere in the affairs of another country, but as long as we are selling these horses to the Continent we must accept responsibility for the way they are transported and for what happens to them subsequently.

I was in France in September, 1952, and I went to Vaugirard to see the slaughter conditions there. When I read the articles by Mr. Keatley that were published in the Manchester Guardianand subsequently here in theIrish TimesI thought it was possible that there might have been some exaggeration in his description of the slaughter conditions at Vaugirard. I went there and saw the horses being slaughtered. I do not think there is any exaggeration in his description of the conditions.

I think that it is something which the French will probably admit themselves that Vaugirard abattoir is completely inadequate to deal with the number of animals which were being slaughtered there at the time I visited it. It is a premises which was probably built to deal with some 70 or 80 animals a day and in September, 1952, when I was there, there were some 300 horses a day being slaughtered there. The conditions of overcrowding and the speed with which those who work in the abattoir had to carry on to try to complete that number would have to be seen to be believed.

It only took them some 15 minutes to slaughter and completely butcher a horse. That in itself must convey to the members here in the House the overcrowding and the complete lack of consideration and the crude methods which are adopted. When I came back from Vaugirard I went to see our own abattoirs here in Dublin. I went to see the Corporation abattoir and I compared the conditions in the two. There is a vast difference. There is no comparison whatsoever. It is quite obvious to anyone that our standards in these matters are entirely different from continental standards. What Mr. Keatley described in the articles of horses being led in and being slaughtered in front of the remains of other horses, the blood flowing across the floors, offals and various products of butchery scattered around the abattoir, are all absolutely true.

That is something which is not done here in the Dublin abattoir. It is considered an essential that when a horse is being brought in to be slaughtered that it should not be brought in and see the remains of another animal which has been previously slaughtered. That is a fundamental standard in the construction and in the running of an abattoir, so that I can personally vouch for the fact that there is no doubt but that these horses are being subjected to cruelty and are being treated in a way when they leave this country that we as Irish people would not treat them if we were slaughtering them at home.

I do not think that there is any doubt but that the case has been made that there is cruelty here. The last time that Deputy Dockrell raised this and we discussed it with the Minister for Agriculture his contention was that the cruelty had not been proved and, that if it had been proved, anyway it happened outside this country and was not our responsibility. I do not think the objection is valid, or that the case can be disproved. I think it is there, I have seen it myself, and I do not propose to go over it any further, because I think that any fair-minded person who looks into the evidence of all the reliable witnesses who had interested themselves in this case will see the facts for themselves,

In this motion a dressed-meat trade is suggested. What are the objections to altering the situation? Why cannot it be changed? In other words, what is the case of the other side? The case of the other side is, first of all, that there will be a loss of revenue to the farming community and, secondly, that there is a fear of damage to the beef trade. Now, as far as damage to the beef trade is concerned I do not accept that the establishment of a dressed-meat trade here would affect the beef trade. I notice, indeed, that in the Six Counties a factory has been set up in County Down, where they are carrying out the industry of the dressed-meat trade. No doubt, in the Six Counties they are interested in the beef trade too, and they are not going to take any steps that are going to interfere with their beef trade. Yet they do not see anything wrong in establishing a dressed-meat trade.

However, it is not sufficient for those of us who are fighting for this cause just to prove that the cruelty exists. We must be practical in this thing, we must offer an alternative, and we must see that the public and this House understand what the alternative is. First of all, the animals must be slaughtered in this country. If the animals are slaughtered in this country I think it is possible that, if the dressed-meat trade is not acceptable, these horses, both on the hoof and the fallen animal, could very usefully be put into the manufacture of animalfoodstuffs. There is a great shortage at the moment in this country of animal foods of high protein content, and it is a strange thing that we are leaving ourselves short of these animal foods and that we are leaving ourselves short of fertilisers and that we should be exporting to another country which can make all those products from the horse, the raw material which we require. There are other factories here which require the live horse and which cannot compete with the price which the Continent is paying. There is a dog-meat factory in Dublin and I understand that they cannot get live horses because they cannot compete with this price that is being paid. In regard to the use of the horse on the hoof or the fallen animal for the production of the high protein foodstuffs and the fertilisers, a factory has been started in this country, in Ballinasloe, and I am given to understand that they will be using cattle and horses, both on the hoof and the fallen animal, for the manufacture of these foodstuffs.

I am glad to say that the export is declining somewhat, and I believe that if there were a few other factories like this in the country it would be very possible that they would be able to take up entirely what is the present export trade. That would mean that we would have valuable foodstuffs which we require. It would mean that we would give employment in this country and that we would be able to put an end to this trade which is so disgusting and which is so very offensive to so many people in this country.

There is one point, supposing that those factories are set up. I do not know what the position would be, but I doubt very much if they are going to be able to pay the high prices that the continental firms pay, but I consider that there is a problem for the farmer himself. If he wants a high price for a horse I suppose he would be prepared to pay a high price for the bone meal. If he only gets a low price for the horse then I am sure it should be possible to make available foodstuffs at a very much lower price. However, I do not want to take up too much time, because I know that Deputy Dockrell and myself who arevery interested in this thing intend to do what we can, but what is aimed at in this motion now is to get the views of the House on it, and to see if we can, by putting down this motion, make some progress in doing away with this form of export trade which, as we have said in the motion, and as I firmly believe, is very, very damaging to the country's interest and which is most unnecessary in itself.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

I make no apology for again speaking to the House on this matter because I think that apart from the ethics inherent in it, it is very important to us from the point of view of national prestige. We are a country which owes a great deal to the horse, and we are getting, through really no fault of our own, a reputation which we do not deserve and which those of us who are interested in this matter feel should be set right by Government action. I will enlarge on that aspect of the matter later on. This motion has come about largely from a meeting which was held in the Mansion House on the 28th April, 1952. That meeting, which was representative of all conditions of people in the country, sent a message to the Government protesting against this trade and asking that something should be done about it. As a result of that, Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and myself put down this motion. It takes a long time to reach a Private Deputy's motion, so that it is only now possible to bring it before the House.

I think Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll has dealt very fully with all the hardships and cruelties involved in a voyage to the Continent and I have only to support what he said in that respect. The first incident that shocked people occurred when the S.S. Clarinaset out from the port of Limerick in a storm and, as a result of that storm, 29 horses were killed or died on the journey. That was the most spectacular of the cases of hardship to horses at sea but every week during which horses cross the seas around our shores, they are injured and in certain cases die. That is due to the fact that hardship is inseparable from a sea journey for horses, no matter how carefully the Governmentauthorities here carry out their examination of the horses before they leave, because, of course, a sound horse can break its leg during a storm just as easily as an old or a sick animal.

I might say that the veterinary authorities carry out an examination of the horses and they do not permit any animal over 15 years of age, or any animal in a sick condition, to be exported. I mention that because it is important to state that the veterinary authorities do their work properly and, I am sure, very carefully. Actually that was one of the defences put up by the Minister on the last occasion this matter was raised by me in this House. He said that our veterinary officials examine the horses and that they leave here in a fit condition. I quite accept that that takes place. There may be certain cases when an animal may slip through but in the main the horses are in a fit condition. Such, however, are the rigours of travel that they arrive at the port of destination in a very different condition. I also am convinced that hardship and cruelty are inseparable from the journey from here to continental abattoirs. I say "continental abattoirs" because I do not think that there are actually conditions of cruelty on the ships. Such is the publicity given to this matter, that regulations have been tightened up and the conditions on the ships, I am sure, preclude actual cruelty but there is nothing that can be done during a rough crossing to alleviate the condition of the horses. That is the great difficulty we are all up against.

I might mention that as recently as this time last year a cargo of 166 horses arrived at Antwerp and it was stated that they were in a pitiable condition. Many were hardly able to stand upright, some were badly injured and covered with bleeding wounds. Four had died en voyageand were thrown overboard. That is the sort of thing that goes on and it is attested by very many people from different countries. I have read reports from French authorities, Belgian authorities, English authorities and Irish authorities and they all bear out the contention that horsesare badly treated on voyages and that there is no way to ensure that they will not arrive in an injured condition.

There is also, as was pointed out by the previous speaker, the question of cruelty on the journey up to Paris and then the condition inside the abattoir, the famous abattoir—perhaps, I should call it the notorious abattoir—of Vaugirard. Photos were taken and in those photos one could see horses being led past the remains of another animal on the ground. The same conditions exist in Belgium. Abattoirs in that country we have no reason to believe are in any way better than the French abattoirs.

Mr. McQuillan

On a point of order, I wonder is it in order to criticise adversely in this House the conditions that exist in abattoirs in France or Belgium?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I cannot see that it is out of order on this particular motion.

Mr. McQuillan

I think we are casting a slur on the countries concerned.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is relating his remarks to the motion and that is definitely in order.

Mr. McQuillan

I only wish for your guidance in the matter.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Certainly the statements as to the conditions existing there have never been contradicted and many continental sources themselves, both French and Belgium, have attested to the conditions existing in abattoirs which the more humane people in those countries do not like to see and in fact are making strenuous efforts to have altered. Not only are conditions bad in continental abattoirs, but, since this motion was put down, a good deal of publicity has been devoted to conditions in England. The conditions there leave a great deal to be desired so that there is no advantage, from the poor horses' point of view, in being sent to England rather than to the Continent.

They also have to undergo a sea journey there and, after landing, they have been known to be driven long distances. They have also been known to be left withoutwater in similar conditions to those obtaining on the Continent. A number of the abattoirs also leave a great deal to be desired. The difficulty, of course, in regard to the whole question of the slaughter of horses in the last few years has been that owing to the shortage of beef, generally speaking in Western Europe and the disorganisation consequent on the war both in England and in continental countries, a whole black-market trade grew up in meat, and animals were not felled in conditions which we would regard as being humane.

In connection with the conditions in England at present, a committee was set up by the Minister of Food to look into the slaughter of horses and a number of recommendations were made by that committee. Some of the conditions laid down were that it should be an offence to slaughter a horse in any place where there is another horse or the remains of a horse; that lairages should be improved and made weatherproof ; that there should be a constant supply of water; that the law should be amended to make it necessary to offer horses water immediately on arrival at a port; that persons should be specially licensed to slaughter horses and should use specified weapons. I mention those to show that the conditions in Great Britain were not good and that in feeling anxiety as to the conditions under which horses were slaughtered and the general conditions surrounding the transporting of them we were not being over-fussy in the matter. This committee has recommended to the Minister that the law should be amended to make those precautions necessary.

I should like to mention a few things concerning the economic advantage, because part of this motion says that our economic advantage would be enhanced by the prohibition of this trade. First of all, when we export horses on the hoof we lose all the valuable by-products and those of us who are interested in this matter feel that we could build up a trade in this country which would benefit us by ensuring that the by-products, such as the hides, offals, etc., could be put to use in this country and thus giveemployment by the use of these by-products. The Government argument has been that they would not allow an export trade in dressed horse meat for fear it would interfere with the beef trade. I personally fail to see how that is a valid objection. I think that the people on the Continent or in England who are engaged in the meat trade know perfectly well the difference between horse flesh and the flesh of other animals and there should be no question of beef and horse flesh being mixed up.

With regard to the question of price, if an export trade in horse flesh were built up there is no reason why a factory or factories here should not be able to pay a price to the Irish farmer comparable with what he would get for an animal exported on the hoof. It looks now as if the very high prices paid a year ago are not going to continue and, as I say, we believe that the factories concerned in this could pay a price comparable with that paid by continental countries because they would be presumably exporting dressed horse flesh to those countries. I am glad to see that there is a factory opened or about to be opened at Ballinasloe to deal with non-edible meat for animal feeding stuffs. That should absorb some of the horses in this country.

In connection with the dressed horse meat trade, a factory has been started in Northern Ireland at Saintfield, County Down, and I understand that in this factory they are dealing with 80 horses a week and do a big trade with Holland, the horse meat being carried in refrigerator ships. I think we could do something like that with Government encouragement. It would be a very good way of providing extra employment in the country. As I said, it would also ensure that these by-products would be kept in the country and that we could make the profit we should out of them.

I could go on talking about this matter for a good while, but I should like to hear the views of other Deputies. It is of interest that at the present moment the figures for exports have fallen. In the year 1952 we exported 32,998 horses. Great Britain took 10,529; Northern Ireland,3,122; France, 7,107; Belgium, 11,710; and other countries, 534. Up to August 31st of this year 11,089 horses were exported. Great Britain took 4,239; Northern Ireland, 2,931; and Belgium, 3,691. France took none at all. Apparently, the French trade is dying out because the French Government has not the currency to give for this purpose. It is interesting to find that the export figures to Northern Ireland seem to be maintained. It looks as if the factory there is getting a good many of its horses from the South. That would seem to be a pointer for us here.

There is one last point that I would like to make. Through our exports during the last few years, we have been denuding the country of our horses. That is a point on which I would like to hear the views of some of the country Deputies. A number of us feel that it cannot be a very healthy thing in a country like this.

Although it is necessary to have as many tractors as possible in connection with the agricultural industry, yet we know there are a large number of farms on which tractors cannot be used economically. It is not in the national interest to see the horse population dropping too much and the drain on it during the last few years has been very grave.

We have mentioned the question of national prestige in this motion. That is something which is of importance. We breed the finest racehorses and jumpers in the world. Out of our love of horses, and as a result of our export of them, we have built up a vast trade for the country. We are known to be the producers of first-class animals and to be lovers of horses. It is an unfortunate thing that owing, as I have said, to the cruelty which is inherent in the movement of horses in large numbers across the sea to the Continent, we have, to a certain extent, been blamed for some of the cruelties which have taken place although these did not occur in this country. I know, of course, that the Government take very stringent steps to ensure good treatment for the horses on these seajourneys, but it is after the horses leave our shores that the difficulties arise. We cannot entirely divorce ourselves or wash our hands of that situation. Therefore, those of us who are interested feel that, as Irishmen and Irishwomen, we should take the necessary steps and play our part in stopping the cruelties in this trade.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I have no doubt that the latter proposal in this motion which has been tabled by Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Deputy M.E. Dockrell to provide a dressed-meat trade in horseflesh here would meet with the approval of every Deputy if it were a practical suggestion. This question was raised in the House 12 months ago. It was examined in great detail by the Minister for Agriculture and his advisers, and it was then found that the suggestion was not a practical one. I think that the only alternative we have is to accept that point of view.

I believe that the main object behind the motion is not to establish a dressed-meat trade here but to stop the export of horses. All of us are well aware of the value of our export trade. Deputies time after time have agitated in this House for the development in every possible way of export markets so as to bring money into the country from outside sources. Since the country established an export trade in horses large sums of money have come in through that medium.

What, in effect, this motion is asking, is to wipe out that trade and to revert to the position that obtained here some years ago. The only ground put forward by the sponsors of this motion is that they are opposed to this export trade on the grounds, as they say, that horses exported have been cruelly treated. I think that every member of the House is just as anxious as the two Deputies I have mentioned to see that when horses are exported they will be treated in a proper manner and with every care and attention. I have no doubt but that the Department responsible takes all necessary measures to see that proper inspections are carried out.

Speaking as a member of the House who has never travelled abroad. Ibelieve that the people of France and Belgium are not as unnatural as Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Deputy Dockrell would lead us to believe they are, or that they would be so inhuman in their handling of these live animals. If this motion were passed, how would it affect these alleged cruelties of horses? I take it that it would mean reverting to the position that obtained before this export market in horses was developed. What happened then to these old horses? Even on the case made by Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll, we find that the horses are killed within four days of the time they leave here. Therefore, the alleged cruelties are confined to within that period of four days.

I remember the time when, in my part of the country—I am sure the same position applied from Cork to Donegal—we had no market for these old horses. The farmers, unfortunately, were not sufficiently well-off to keep them as pets after they were no longer useful for work on the farm. Those farmers were not like the big racehorse owners in London who can afford to keep the animals as pets. Therefore, they had to dispose of the old horses, and the only market for them was to sell them to itinerants and others who used to travel through the rural areas. Those of us who are acquainted with those people are well aware of the cruelty and hardship which the animals suffered at their hands.

There is no need for me to elaborate on that question. We know very well that many of these vagrants who bought up these old horses caused immense cruelty to them. Now, when an end has been put to that type of cruelty and operation and when we have an export market here you find two Deputies, one from Fianna Fáil and one from Fine Gael, people who never probably owned a horse themselves and who know little or nothing about them—I think I am not exaggerating in any way—coming along and saying to the farmers of this country: "You are not entitled to export your horses; you should revert to the position that obtained before when you got 10/- or 12/- for them."

It has been mentioned that this export of horses is a very disgusting business. That contention is confined to relatively few people in this country. There are few such people living in the city of Dublin and a few retired old ladies who have nothing else to do and who could be better employed if they had something else to worry about. We heard very little from them some time ago when horses did suffer cruelty. I would like to see people who are endeavouring to promote this type of legislation going around my constituency of West Cork and standing at the fairs or markets in Bantry, or Castletownberehaven or at any of the smaller fairs in these districts or in any other county where farmers are getting £40 or £50 for these horses. £40 or £50 is a very big sum so far as many of these farmers are concerned and they are very grateful to the people who developed this export trade for those horses. It is very important. I think every member of the House is very well aware that horses which hitherto—before this export market opened—were selling at from 10/- to £2 or £3 are now fetching from £35 to £50.

Let us examine the economics of this question. Because of the alleged cruelty of which we are told by Deputies Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Dockrell and the retired old ladies in this city who support them, this business must be changed and the farmers must go back to the position that obtained a few years ago. They must either keep these horses as pets or sell them to vagrants for 5/- or 10/-. That is not the Deputies' aim. They intend setting up a dressed-meat trade in this country and I have already adverted to that proposal. We were advised here last year that there was no hope of that taking place.

Before I leave that question I will go back a little further. While I do not remember it myself I have heard that horses were being exported during the first world war to Great Britain for warlike operations and we know very well the cruelty that was likely to face those horses at that time. But the ancestors of the people who are nowopposing the export of these horses— and I am not referring to the two Deputies—put up very little opposition at that time. I regret very much to have to make such statements but I believe the occasion demands it. We heard very little from these people when horses were being exported for warlike purposes at that time, to Britain and the Continent.

I would indeed support, and I am sure every Deputy in the House would support, any move to ease any cruelty that is occurring at the present time so far as horses are concerned. I think that instead of trying to cut out or do away with a very important industry in this country, if the Deputies who put down this motion and the people who support them would turn their efforts towards trying to get the authorities or the people responsible for the export of these horses to provide better facilities so that they would not suffer cruelty such as is alleged, I think that would be a very much better day's work for this country.

I do not want to delay the House unduly on this question. Many small farmers in my constituency and throughout the country can feel very satisfied with the prices they are getting at present for horses, and I would like to impress on the Parliamentary Secretary the need for the Minister to ensure that they will get the best prices possible and that they will not be exploited. I need not stress the importance of that money to them. Now, here we are in Dáil Éireann on the 18th November, 1953, discussing a motion to stop the export of horses when at the same time many of our Irish people, due to economic circumstances have to export themselves to England and other places in order to eke out a livelihood. Is it any more cruel to export horses that will not live for more than four days, according to the case put up by the Deputies themselves, than for husbands to leave their wives and children for the next four years, perhaps?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is not relevant to the motion. Will the Deputy please listen? What theDeputy has said has no relation to the motion before the House, which deals solely with the export of horses.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

I am well aware that this motion deals with the export of animals, but you would think that some of these Deputies are putting animals in the same category as humans. I never heard Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll here—and I think this is relevant—commenting on the human suffering that was entailed by our people having to emigrate to eke out a livelihood.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have told the Deputy that does not arise on this motion.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

Well, that is the position, and I think it is relevant to the motion. My argument is that I represent a rural constituency where the people are as fond of animals as they are in Dublin. They would feel very annoyed and very disgruntled if they thought the horses suffered unduly in transport. They would make every effort to avert that and to see the position alleviated, and if Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Deputy Dockrell get this motion through, then perhaps next week, next month or next year they will have a motion here before us stating that it is very cruel and out of place to export cattle. We will find them with a subsequent motion stating that it is not right or that it is out of place to export pigs. That is the logical conclusion. I do not see that it is any more cruel to export horses than it is to export cattle or pigs, and everybody knows what will become of our country the day the export of live animals is finished.

That is the position we are leading ourselves up to. Surely these Deputies, having aired their alleged grievances in this House, should have the common sense to withdraw this motion. It seems rather out of place that it is not two Deputies from rural constituencies who are bringing this motion before the House instead of two Deputies from the City of Dublin. While I recognise the right that every member of this House has to put his views before the House without fear or any other deterrentto confront him, I think it is out of place for these two Deputies to interfere with a very important rural industry. I would not like to see the farmers' or the workers' representatives down the country coming up here to dictate to some of these people who are behind this motion of Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Deputy Dockrell. I think they should leave well alone. If they think these horses are being cruelly treated, they should direct their efforts and attention to rectifying that position instead of coming in here in the year 1953 endeavouring to prevent a very important trade, namely, the export of horses.

I have no hesitation in opposing this motion with all the force that I can command. I think it is an ill-timed and an ill-advised motion to bring before the House. If we were to accept it it would have fatal consequences for those living in the rural areas because it would mean an end to the export trade in horses. It would lead to a closing down of that trade and it could ultimately lead to a closing down of the export trade in cattle and pigs, because should they win this motion we will have similar motions later dealing with cattle and pigs.

I am only expressing my own individual opinion in this matter. As a Deputy representing a rural constituency I believe I could not take any other line. I have a great respect for Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll and Deputy Dockrell; I know they are softhearted gentlemen and do not like cruelty to animals. It is cruel at times to see rabbits killed and vermin exterminated, but will anybody say that should not happen? I know these Deputies are men of common sense and I appeal to them to think over this motion. I feel sure that, if they sleep on it to-night they will withdraw it and find a reasonable excuse for that withdrawal to put before the old ladies who are the real movers of this motion.

Mr. Corry

Rural Deputies, like Deputy Murphy and myself, spend our lives looking on the horse as our friend. I am sure that many a time Deputy Murphy, like myself, came in fairly wetand cold and hungry out of the field and saw that the animal that was working with him during the day was cleaned and fed and looked after before he went in for his own meal. I am afraid that is a point that neither Deputy Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll nor Deputy Dockrell has considered.

The horse is our friend. He is our co-worker on the land. What was the fate of the horse hitherto when his working days were over? Deputy Murphy has given a fair description of it. That crippled animal was either lured into a cart or driven along the road to the nearest pack of hounds. He was there slaughtered and his unfortunate comrades could look at the hounds being fed with his carcase in the next field. I never heard the word cruelty mentioned in connection with that in those days.

Mr. O'Donnell

Was the horse dead?

Mr. Corry

His comrades were not dead. They were waiting to make the next feed for the dogs. Deputy Dockrell has told us that this is an important trade as far as the Irish agricultural community is concerned. He mentioned a figure of 32,000 horses exported last year. That means roughly £1,280,000. We will give £280,000 to the jobber and the old farmer gets the rest. What is the alternative? If Deputy Dockrell and his friends put up factories and enter into competition in that trade, giving as good a price, they will get the horses and none of them will be exported.

Deputy Dockrell referred to the number that were killed or died in transit. Deputy Dockrell was in this House when the Cattle Insurance Act was being passed and he heard read out here by me the number of cattle that were injured in transit from this country to Britain, the number that broke their limbs on the boats and in the wagons. When those wagons halted at a station large enough to keep an insurance agent they were hawked off and sold to the knackers.

I remember reading out the cases here to support a plea that a referee be appointed to ensure that theowners of these animals would be properly paid. The claims of one cattle dealer alone over a three-year period amounted to close on £3,000. That represented 500 head of cattle injured in transit from this country to Britain. I did not hear any protest then, or since, in connection with these cattle but I am sure that if Deputy Dockrell takes the trouble of looking up the number of cases that come before the cattle insurance company in any 12 months he will see the number of cattle that are injured every year.

I wonder would either of these two Deputies take their friends for a little trip some morning to one of our bacon factories and take a ramble around there and see what is happening to the pig? They will see there the unfortunate live pigs hooked up by the legs on a bar and pulled along and slaughtered one after the other. I am sure the poor old pig has as much feeling as the horse. Anyone who wishes can see that sight here in the City of Dublin or in any bacon factory in the country. But I have heard no complaints about that. Deputy Dr. ffrench O'Carroll's grievance is that the animal is driven in and slaughtered whilst the blood is still there from the animal slaughtered before him. The pig is hanging up there looking at his next-door-neighbour getting the knife.

Mr. Dunne

He may be his brother at that.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Or his sister.

Mr. Corry

We do not hear any complaint in connection with the pig. That cruelty is happening in Dublin and anywhere that animals are slaughtered for human consumption. A certain amount of cruelty is inevitable, apparently, if the people of the world are to live. I am sure that Deputy Dockrell and Deputy ffrench-O'Carroll and all their friends will enjoy their rasher in the morning without any qualms of conscience as to how the poor animal met his fate. I am certain they would regret the cruel manner in which the poor pig was slaughtered, but I amequally sure that they would not give up eating rashers.

It happened that there was a shortage of meat in the world market. The agricultural community of this country endeavoured to supply that shortage instead of leaving the horses out on grass. I have often driven an old horse of my own that I would not like to see meeting with a cruel end down the fields to live on the grass. I have often seen such poor horses dropping in the fields, and on some occasions remaining there dying for days, dying a far worse death than they would meet in the boat or the abattoir of any country. We have all seen it.

Mr. O'Donnell

Shame!

Mr. Corry

Who has not met a group of the travelling fraternity going along the road with a number of skin and bone horses limping along, travelling nine to 15 miles per day? There is more cruelty in that than there is in the shipping of horses to a foreign country. We must view this matter sensibly.

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

Are these people being prosecuted?

Mr. Corry

God bless you. If these things were happening in O'Connell Street somebody might go to the bother of kicking up a row about them.

Mr. O'Donnell

Any decent citizen should kick up a row, and it is his duty to report it to the Guards when he sees a horse being so cruelly treated.

Mr. Corry

Certainly; but every Deputy, even Deputy O'Donnell, has seen them.

Mr. O'Donnell

I certainly have never seen them.

Mr. Corry

You never saw a skinny horse travelling along the roads with the tinkers?

Mr. O'Donnell

Never being cruelly treated. I would make it my duty to report it to the Guards or the authorities.

Mr. Corry

Did you ever travel around to see what they get to eat at night?

Mr. O'Donnell

No, I am afraid I did not.

Mr. Corry

There is far more cruelty to horses in such conditions than there is in the shipment of horses. Horses were far more cruelly treated before the development of this export trade than they have been since. Take the business aspect of it. Any of those horses is worth at present between £40 and £50 as meat for human consumption. That is what they are sold for— to feed people who are hungry. Take any farmer who goes in for blookstock. A foal costs him up to £50. He rears the foal and cares for him well, but the animal suddenly develops spavin which renders him useless for the farmer's purpose. The owner may have been involved in an expenditure of about £100 on that animal. He is then sold. At present he will fetch £40. If this motion is accepted he will fetch £5 and the farmer will be lucky to get it. Who will make up the £35?

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

Is not the farmer insured?

Mr. Corry

What becomes of the animal with spavin? Who buys him? What is his life afterwards? I would ask Deputies to regard it from that point of view. I would ask Deputy ffrench-O'Carroll who, apparently, has witnessed the slaughter of animals on the Continent, to do as I have suggested, to go to-morrow morning to one of the bacon factories and ask to be shown the conditions of slaughter there.

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

I hope to bring in a Bill about that too.

Mr. Allen

Does the Deputy want to get the factories closed down?

Mr. Corry

What will you do then when all your friends will be without rashers?

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

Turn vegetarian.

Mr. Corry

There is more to this than meets the eye. I can assure both Deputy Dockrell and Deputy ffrench-O'Carroll that there is more cruelty in any bacon factory in thiscountry than they will find on their visits to the continental abattoirs where horses are slaughtered.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Mr. Corry

Charity begins at home.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

That is what we are trying to ensure.

Mr. Corry

I would prefer to prevent cruelty in Dublin than to prevent cruelty as far away as Belgium. I would advise the Deputies to look at conditions here. We will give them an opportunity between now and next Wednesday to examine that side of the picture so that when the debate on this motion is being concluded we will hear of the visit to the bacon factory and what they saw there. Let us have the two sides of the picture.

The acceptance of this motion would mean a reduction to the agricultural community in the value of horses which are not required at home and which are at present being sold on an export market of something like £750,000 per annum.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Not at all.

Mr. Corry

I am taking the present figures.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Not at all.

Mr. Corry

Is Deputy Dockrell prepared to deprive the agricultural community of that £750,000?

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

I do not want to deprive them of anything.

Mr. O'Donnell

He wants to send the carcase out in a tin.

Mr. Corry

I want to know who is going to pay for the horses. I think that is a fair question.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

The dressed-meat factories will pay for them. The ultimate consumers will pay.

Mr. Corry

Will they pay £40 or £50? Are they doing it already? How many horses have the factories that have started on this job already purchased?

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

They are not allowed.

Mr. Corry

What has been the average price paid for them in the County Down or anywhere else? Have they paid a fiver apiece for them? I have very grave doubts. I am sure that if they paid anything near the figure that is being paid for horses at present for export there would be none of the horses exported—they would all be going to County Down. There is no doubt about it but this is a definite motion which in my opinion is going to deprive the agricultural community of an income of something like £750,000 per annum. There is no use in any Deputy bringing in a motion of this kind unless he can point out to those concerned an alternative market which will be at least as good as the market he is asking the agricultural community to sacrifice. As far as I can see about this thing of talking of cruelty, I have shown Deputies that a certain amount of cruelty is necessary and is entailed for any animal exported, I do not care what animal it is.

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

Necessary?

Mr. Corry

This House spent several days discussing the Cattle Insurance Act and amendments to the Act some years ago. Deputy Dockrell, I think, was a member at that time. Deputy ffrench-O'Carroll was not. I would ask both Deputies to go back and have a look at the Official Reports when that Cattle Insurance Act was being passed by this House. They will get there the figures of the number of cattle that are injured in transit from this country each year, and I am sure that their fate is nothing softer than the fate of the horses. I am certain of that. I have asked cattle dealers concerned, for I had to come in here on these benches and move six amendments to that Cattle Insurance Act and fight in this House for justice for the cattle dealers concerned, and I had to produce in this House at that time documents which proved that in the case of one cattle dealer alone the sum of money due by the cattle insurance people to him—and this was apart from the number of cattle that were insuredand duly paid for—the number of cattle that were injured and were not paid for was something far over 50, for the amount was £2,500. Those are facts, and facts that any Deputy can find who will go to the trouble of looking and examining the Dáil Reports. As a matter of fact if there is any doubt in Deputy Dockrell's mind I think I still have at home the documents in connection with those cases, for I know the difficulty I had here at the time in persuading certain Deputies that certain amendments were needed. One cattle dealer in a period of two or three years had that number of cattle injured in transport, and in most of the cases that I read out here: "Handed over to the insurance agent; insurance company's agent sold to the knacker at 32/-." What I was fighting for was the difference between that 32/- that that injured animal was sold for and the £50 that that animal was valued for leaving this country, so that in the cattle trade—and you must remember that practically 50 times as many cattle are shipped as there are horses— you certainly have a certain amount of cruelty. Still I do not think there is any Deputy here, even Deputy Dockrell, who would have the neck to stand up in this Dáil and move for legislation to prevent the export of any further cattle to Britain. Is it cruelty to have a horse injured in transit and no cruelty at all in having a heifer in calf, a number of them, injured in the same manner in transit? Why the difference?

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

Two wrongs do not make a right.

Mr. Corry

Why bring in legislation here which the Deputy knows is going to deprive the agricultural community of something like £750,000 of money per annum——

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

No.

Mr. Corry

——and he knows that there is no alternative; and at the same time as doing that leaving the other thing go; and, worse still, the final fate of those horses, those unwanted animals in this country, is far worse and would be far worse and farmore cruel to themselves than to have them exported. Those are the facts that I want the Deputies to consider between this and next week——

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

To-morrow night.

Mr. Corry

——when we will have another opportunity of discussing this matter. Meantime, I will endeavour during the rest of the period to get some further information that will enlighten the Deputies a little furtherabout the cruelty in the case of other animals. I move that the debate be adjourned.

Debate adjourned.