Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the president of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to enquire into foot-and-mouth disease.

  • Great Britain. Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. Foot-and-Mouth Disease Committee.
Date:
1912
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the Departmental Committee appointed by the president of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to enquire into foot-and-mouth disease. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    32/370 (page 8)
    25 January 1912. ] [ Continued. * stamping-out measures, and all the animals were ‘* slaughtered.” 73. Well, now, in all these outbreaks was there any sort of idea how they-originated in any one of these five different counties? Did the Board ever find out anything P—Well, as regards the Surrey outbreak there was no traceable origin. The Committee will observe that, curiously enough, in this year the outbreaks ran in a complete series; that is to say, that the disease had been entirely got rid of in each of these centres before the next centre appeared. They did not over- lap, as has been the case in the past, and in the Surrey outbreak, I say, there was no traceable origin whatever. In the Middlesex outbreaks suspicion fell to some extent on the pig-pail in the manner which I have described before. The pig-pail contamed materials, some of which were green vegetables, which were believed to have come from an infected country. The owner of the pigs had been in the habit of buying this what we may call hotel refuse, amongst which was found to be uncooked vegetables that had been thrown out into the pig-pail. But as against that theory I may mention —although Sir Edward Clarke will be able to go into the matter in more detail—that in the immediate neighbourhood there was a much larger pig-keeper who also obtained the same materials from practically the same sources, and he never had a sign of disease at all, so that if it was introduced by the pig-pail it must have beena bit of extremely bad luck for that particular owner. 74, (Sir Charles Rose.) You mean he got it from the same place ?—He got it from the London hotels. 75. (Chatrman.) From one of the London hotels P— Yes, collected it, and he was open to the same risk, and he escaped the risk, if, indeed, it was a risk. Then in the Sussex outbreaks—in what I am saying now I am referring to the original outbreak with which the others were probably connected—there was some suspicion attaching to the visit to the markets of the neighbour- hood of French sheep dealers. Perhaps it is rather too high to put it as suspicion, but it is a known fact that French sheep dealers had been in the markets in the neighbourhood not long before. There again the in- spectors who were on the spot will give you the details, but the only circumstance to which any suspicion can be attached is the fact that these dealers, who came probably directly out of French markets, may have pos- sibly brought the infection on their clothes; but there was no evidence that they had visited this particular farm, so that it can only be considered as a very remote clue. As regards the Derbyshire outbreak, there was absolutely no clue whatever, and the same may be said of the big outbreak in Somerset. The Somersetshire outbreak was a very serious one owing to the rapid spread of the disease through the marshes, but the origin remains a complete mystery as regards the first out- break. The owner of the cows kept them in a marsh about a quarter of a mile from his farm buildings, and drove them back daily—or probably twice a day—to be milked along a bit of the high road from Bridgwater to Glastonbury. After the cows became infected they traversed this road for three or four days before the owner discovered what was the matter; and that is an easy explanation of the rapid spread of the disease in those marshes to other stock, but it is no explanation in the least of how it was introduced, and there was no clue so far as I have been able to discover. 76, As regards that outbreak, I may say I have had one or two letters from people down there suggesting things, but I think it is more evidence Mr. Stockman will be able to give as regards the marshes, the rhynes being cleaned out and that P—There was a suggestion that disease had been in the neighbourhood some 30 years ago, and that this having been a very dry summer some of the rhynes, as they call them there, between the marshes which had never been dried before, were dug out, and the stuff dug out of the bottom put on the side of the rhyne. This actually occurred in the parti- cular marsh where this first appeared. At the same time one has to set up the theory that the disease had lain in the water in the ditch for 30 years. That is a veterinary’s question which Mr. Stockman will be able to discuss. 77. Will you tell the Committee the nature of the inquiries made as to the origin of these outbreaks and the steps you took ?—Well, generally speaking, perhaps I had better go into the question generally and not in detail. 78. No, generally ?—Inquiry is made in each case as to the recent movements of animals on to the premises or for breeding purposes; the origin of the food recently given to the affected animals; the purchase of foreign produce of any kind, such as corn, artificial foodstuffs, bone, or artificial manure, peat moss, raw milk, &c.; the origin of the bags in which any such produce had arrived ; the proximity of factories receiving consignments of foreign skins or hides; any refuse of such factories used as manure; any recent visits of foreign traders or stock dealers or of local residents to places abroad ; the arrival of any household requisites of foreign manufacture wrapped in straw or litter, and the possibility of recent purchases of feeding stuffs having been infected by imperfectly cleansed railway trucks. Those are the lines of inquiry which have been suggested to us as time went on by the various occurrences, and the inspectors now always make inquiries into all these points, and, of course, into any other special points that may occur to them in con- nection with that particular outbreak. 79. Directly an outbreak is reported, Mr. Stockman or one of your inspectors immediately goes down and reports ,—Immediately an outbreak is reported our veterinary inspector is sent to make the preliminary inquiry—one of the Board’s own veterinary inspectors. Unless he is completely satisfied and is able to diagnose definitely that it is foot-and-mouth disease, Mr. Stock- man himself proceeds to the premises to investigate and make a full report to the Board. 80. Then, if the report is confirmed, what takes place P—Well, I may say, that during the preliminary veterinary inquiry all the arrangements are made at the office for proceeding with an Order on the assumption that the outbreak may be confirmed. We do not wait till itis confirmed before we put our machinery in motion. On several occasions we have actually got Orders ready for issue, and no necessity to issue them has arisen, but we think it better not to wait till we get the confirmation of the disease before we go through with the preliminary business. Telegrams are dispatched at once to the police con- stable who reported the case, the chief constable of the district, the clerk of the local authority concerned, pointing out that the rules contained in Article 4 of the Foot-and-Mouth Disease Order of 1895 as to foot- and-mouth disease infected places, should be carefully observed, that one person only should be permitted to approach the suspected animals, and that such persons should not be permitted to approach any other animals. Telegrams are also dispatched to those general and district inspectors of the Board concerned, warning them to be ready to proceed to the suspected premises in the event of the report being confirmed. Preliminary arrangements are made as to the staff of inspectors that may be required to deal with the outbreak, and preparations, as I have already stated, are made for the issue of the usual Order prohibiting the movement of animals. 81. Are foreign countries informed of the out- break P—Not on a report, sir. So far I have been alluding only to a report of foot-and-mouth disease. Then the procedure in the event of an outbreak being confirmed is: In the event of thereport being confirmed by the veterinary inspector, or if he is at all doubtful as to the diagnosis, by the Chief Veterinary Officer who, as I have already stated, himself, as a rule, at once visits the premises to confirm the inspector’s diagnosis, and to advise the Board as to the best method of dealing with any infected animal or animals that have been exposed to the risk of infection, the necessary staff of inspectors are at once instructed to proceed to the scene of the outbreak. The Prohibition Order, which has already been prepared in draft, is at once sealed, signed, and issued. Telegrams informing persons directly con- cerned with the administration of the Order are dispatched to the following persons or bodies, acquaint- ing them of the issue of the Order, and of the necessity