asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state the number of (a) milch cows, (b) dry cattle, (c) other animals such as goats, pigs, etc., which have been destroyed up to the 20th April as a result of foot-and-mouth disease; and, further, if he will state the total costs and expenses, including compensation to owners, as well as payments to officials, which it is estimated will fall on the Exchequer in respect of the ravages of the disease up to the date named.

The number of animals slaughtered on account of foot-and-mouth disease up to 20/4/1941 is as follows:—

In the case of cattle slaughtered it is not practicable at present to segregate the number into different classes.

The total cost to the Exchequer in respect of foot-and-mouth disease up to the date named is estimated to be £229,299, made up as follows:—

Arising out of the Minister's reply: has he found it necessary to pay any compensation in respect of any dogs destroyed?

No.

Have any dogs been destroyed?

No, not so far as I am aware.

They have.

Have any effective steps been taken to prevent dogs from spreading the disease?

Dogs must be kept under proper control, as I am sure the Deputy is aware.

That is very queer, seeing that dogs can travel seven or eight miles over the country. Does the Minister say that dogs have to be kept under control?

Yes, and prosecutions have taken place in respect of dogs.

I would advise the Minister, seeing that dogs are a dangerous source for the spreading of this disease, to ensure that further and better care is exercised in regard to these animals, and to arrange for their destruction in cases where there might be a possibility of their spreading the disease.

The Deputy, I am sure, is aware that dogs walking across fields would be just as much a source of danger as people.

Can the Minister not give the House the number of dairy or milch cows slaughtered?

Not just now, but we shall know the number very shortly.

Does the Minister intend to give the information to the House?

Yes, if the House requires it.

asked the Minister for Agriculture whether, in view of the fact that the methods hitherto adopted to check the spread of foot-and-mouth disease seem to be ineffective and that the disease now threatens to destroy the whole live-stock industry of the nation he will indicate what further measures he intends taking to successfully combat the ravages of this disease.

The measures taken by the veterinary staff of my Department to control foot-and-mouth disease have been effective where the Department have had the full cooperation of stock-owners in dealing with outbreaks. Improvements in methods of control which experience has shown to be necessary and useful are being adopted. An unsatisfactory feature of the present position is the occurrence of disease at centres in the country some miles apart from previous disease centres. The disease is under control at these new centres, and if stock-owners in the areas would refrain from visiting other premises and not allow their neighbours or others to come in contact with their animals or premises and would give the Department's officials the fullest information they possess, no widespread extension from these centres is anticipated. The Dublin area with its dense stock of dairy cattle is regarded as the most dangerous centre, but there are some signs of improvement recently in this area. While the position generally must be regarded as serious, it does not threaten to destroy the whole live-stock industry.

Can the Minister account for the disease jumping in the way he has indicated?

In some cases.

How is it accounted for?

In some cases we have traced it as being carried by human agency, but that has not been so in all cases.

Has the disease been carried through the agency of a dog in any case?

I am not aware of that, but I shall inquire into the matter.

If the Minister is satisfied with the measures taken by his Department, can he tell us why it is that the disease is spreading and is worse at the present moment than it has been at any time since the 19th February? I want to know—and the country is also asking—what steps the Department propose to take to stop the spread of this disease, or are they really serious about it. I submit that they are not serious about it and that the position is getting worse. A quarter of a million pounds, A Chinn Chomhairle, has been paid out already.

The Deputy may ask a question, but he may not make a speech.

But the matter is very serious, and I submit that the information we are getting here is very questionable information. I am asking the Minister whether, in view of the fact that the disease is spreading, he is satisfied with the measures taken by his Department. Can the Minister say, in a few words, how he arrives at his state of satisfaction, in view of the fact that the disease is spreading?

I am satisfied that the most effective measures are being taken.

And the most effective measures are a failure?

No.

But the disease is spreading?

Yes.

Is not that a confession of failure, when your job is to stop the spread of the disease?

It is coming under control in many areas, but not in others.

Mention one. Can the Minister mention one area where the disease is coming under control? We shall see, in the next question, some of the measures that were taken in Crumlin.

asked the Minister for Agriculture if he is aware that 19 cows affected with foot-and-mouth disease were allowed to remain on the premises of Mr. C. Byrne, Cromwell's Fort, Crumlin, County Dublin, from 29th March to 5th April, when they were slaughtered and taken to the knackers; if, further, he is aware that there are further outbreaks in that district.

The presence of foot-and-mouth disease was confirmed in cows on these premises about 6 p.m. on Saturday, 29th March. The animals were valued on Sunday, 30th March, and 95 in-contact cattle were removed for salvage on that day. The military authorities were requested to dig a pit for the infected cattle. This work was begun on the 31st March, and it was anticipated that the pit would be completed and the infected animals would be slaughtered and buried that evening or the following day. Extremely wet weather intervened, and rocks were met with, which held up work on the pit. It was ultimately found impossible to sink a pit to a sufficient depth, and the burial of the animals had to be abandoned. Steps had then to be taken to have them slaughtered and removed to a destructor. This was completed on 4th April. From the time the disease was discovered until their removal the infected animals were isolated in a house, and the premises were under the supervision of a veterinary officer and of the Gárda. Very complete precautions were taken to prevent the spread of infection from these premises, and I am satisfied that no infection was, in fact, spread from this source.

Is the Minister aware that within three-quarters of a mile of those premises there were over 500 dairy cows? I do not think I am overstating the case when I say that half of those have been affected since and slaughtered. One case was brought before the Minister's notice indirectly by me, the case of Mr. Taylor of Templeogue, who appealed to me as his Deputy to do something to try to keep the disease from his yard. These cows, 112, have since been slaughtered. The disease was nursed there by the incompetence of the Minister's Department.

If the Deputy wants to ask a supplementary question he must do so.

I am speaking as a representative of the county most affected by this disease——

The Deputy must ask his question.

Is it not a fact that the chief veterinary officer disinfected these premises on Saturday and that on the following Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday these cows were roaring with hunger—19 affected animals? Is it true that the military refused to work in the wet? If it is, are these the military upon whom we are to depend if an invasion takes place? Will they refuse to fight in the wet?

Like the Deputy.

The Deputy never refused to do anything that would assist his country.

The Deputy may ask a question, but in doing so he is not permitted to make statements.

I am asking a question —did they refuse to sink a trench in the wet? The Minister laughs at this.

Question No. 23.

It is evident the Deputy is speaking as a representative of Dublin—with a view to the next election.

I am not afraid of the next election, if I am to be judged by my farm.

Does the Deputy desire an answer to Question No. 23?

I am not getting it.

asked the Minister for Agriculture if he is aware that 70 cows, the property of Mr. Craigie, Harristown, Finglas, County Dublin, were, when killed, buried within 20 yards of the boundary of the farm and near a stream used for watering cattle, notwithstanding that the said farm consists of several hundred acres.

The site selected for the pit in which the animals slaughtered on this farm were buried was the most convenient and driest on the infected farm much of which was, at the time, in a water-logged condition due to recent heavy rains. The nearest point of the pit to the boundary of Mr. McDonald's land is about 20 yards. The distance of the pit from the water supply on Mr. McDonald's land is about 93 yards and the fall from the pit is towards the infected farm and not towards the water supply.

These are more of the effective measures that are being taken. On a farm of a couple of hundred acres, a site could not be found for a trench to bury 70 affected cows without going within 20 yards of another man's land.

Does the Deputy want to ask a supplementary question?

The Minister has admitted his incompetence.

The Deputy is not asking a supplementary question.

In view of the fact that it is now recognised, and I think admitted, that the spread of the disease is 80 per cent. due to human beings, and in view of the fact that it is still spreading in the country, will the Minister seriously consider making an order abolishing all sports fixtures of every description in the country until such time as the danger has passed?

And all military parades, too.

Will the Minister say whether in his judgment or in the judgment of his veterinary inspector, it is a reasonable thing on a 200-acre farm to bury 70 infected cattle within 20 yards of another man's mearing? In view of the fact that we all know that this disease is spread by hares and rabbits, is it reasonable where you have 200 acres which are scheduled as infected premises, to choose a place within 20 yards of another man's mearing to bury 70 affected cattle?

I am sure the Deputy will realise that there may be local conditions, such as the waterlogging of the land, which would determine the choice of site. It is not advisable, if cattle are infected in a certain field, to bring them through other fields in through the farm. The less movement the better. As these places are fenced off, I do not think there is any greater danger. If there is danger of infection from rabbits and hares net wire is erected. I do not say it is done in all cases, but in some cases it is erected.

Is the Minister aware that the land adjoining, within 20 yards of the grave, was pasture land and that Mr. McDonald could not utilise it for any other purpose because of its uneven condition?

Would the Minister say how much of the ground is disinfected where a burial takes place?

There is a certain amount of disinfectant used in the pit.

Is it spread over any area?

It is spread, and the place is sometimes limed.

Over what area?

To cover the whole area of the slaughter ground and the burial place.

You would want to go a considerable distance on each side of the grave.

As far as possible the whole area is disinfected. In reply to Deputy Morrissey's question, we have not been able to establish that the disease was spread in any way by sports fixtures of any kind. It is always carried by contact of one form or another.

Is it not evident that if there is a sports fixture within a radius of five or ten miles, people go from the infected area to the sports field and that there is very grave danger of the infection being carried?

May I ask if the outbreak in Rathkeale was not due to the holding of a certain fixture?

It was thought so, but it was afterwards disproved.

Was it not a fact that two horses came down to the fixture from Dunboyne area?

Yes, but the farm from which they came was not infected.

They had an outbreak there two or three days afterwards.

Not on that farm.

What was the cause of it?

It was in all probability carried by a dealer in that case.

Would the Minister say whether netted wire is placed in all cases to prevent hares and rabbits carrying infection?

Can the Minister tell the House whether, after a very wide experience of control of this disease in Great Britain, it is the practice there to stop all sports fixtures and public gatherings in the restricted area?

No, and it was never done here previously.

Is it not a fact that sports associations themselves in Great Britain voluntarily suspended their meetings?

They may have.

And that even the Waterloo Cup meeting was suspended by the British Coursing Club without their being asked to do it?

They may be asked but the veterinary authorities never thought it necessary to ask them. They were never stopped here before.

Can the Minister say how far Mr. Craigie's cowsheds were from the pit in which the infected animals were buried?

I would require to get notice of that question.

Can the Minister say if there were some grazing fields quite close to this grave?

All I can say is that the officers of the Department have only one object in view, namely, to stamp out the disease.

The disease is spreading. That is the farmers' sad experience.

asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state when the premises of Mr. Wilkinson, Tyrrellstown, County Dublin, were inspected for foot-and-mouth disease by a veterinary inspector of his Department, and when the herd was diagnosed as having cases of the disease.

Owing to the existence of foot-and-mouth disease on adjoining premises, the stock on Mr. Wilkinson's farm at Tyrrellstown was kept under observation by a veterinary officer who visited the premises on 13th and 20th March. Disease was not noticeable on these dates. On 21st March one animal was reported as having developed suspicious symptoms, and on examination on that day this animal was found to be affected with the disease. All other animals on the farm were still healthy on this date.

Is the Minister aware that Mr. Wilkinson's cowsheds are constructed with a feeding passage in the centre? Is he aware that the inspector walked down the passage on the 13th and one of the cows licked his hand, and that cow was the one which developed the disease on the 21st? She licked the hand of the inspector who went there to stop the disease. Is the Minister aware of that fact?

The Deputy knows——

The Deputy knows a lot of things which apparently the Minister does not know, and only for the censor the public would know a lot of things.

I was going to say that the Deputy should check up on his intelligence system.

I should like to urge the Minister to give his grave attention to this allegation. The allegation is widespread that in fact, as a result of a veterinary inspector who was carrying out precautionary inspection coming in contact with individual animals in byres, those individual animals subsequently developed the disease. I know that that may have been due to some fortuitous circumstance, but I think the Minister would do well to cause serious inquiry to be made into the case to which Deputy Belton refers, and, if he has been misled in this matter, to give an authoritative denial.

The Deputy knows that that will not satisfy Deputy Belton.

But it will satisfy the public.

I expect it will.

I also have heard the case to which Deputy Belton referred. May I submit to the Minister that those cases, when categorically mentioned, should be examined and settled one way or another. If a mistake has been made, admit it, and provide against its happening again. If a mistake has not been made, public confidence should be restored.

I asked the Minister was he aware that that happened?

No.

He prefers to fling personal remarks across the floor. The disease is spreading and the Minister is not stopping it.

If the Deputy desires to ask a question he should do so.

Those rumours are going around, and the people would like to have them silenced.

asked the Minister for Agriculture if he will state whether the cause of the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease on the farm of Mrs. Morris, near Callan, has been investigated, and reported on, and, if so, if he will state what the cause of the outbreak was.

The source of infection in this case has not been discovered. The nearest centre of disease at the date of the outbreak was over 15 miles away. The Department's officers, who fully investigated all likely clues, were unable to obtain any definite information which would throw light on the source of origin. At the time of the outbreak only two cattle in a herd of 40 were found affected, indicating that the infection was of recent origin.