assumed as a basis of legislation in any of the national codes of modern Europe. Where there have been any enactments, relating to slaughter-houses or other subjects, they are to be regarded simply as police regulations, without the sufferings of the animals being considered on their own account.

§ 33. The horrible scenes of cruelty and vice displayed in connection with bull-baiting and similar spectacles, and many other occasions of inhuman and wanton cruelty, having compelled the attention of public men, and induced several attempts to procure, by legislative interference, the removal of such dangerous and disgraceful nuisances, a general measure was at length introduced by Lord Erskine in 1809, and passed without a division in the House of Lords. Hitherto the matter had been too much considered only as it related to animals as the property of individuals, but this bill was brought in upon the higher ground, that the Legislature should declare its opinion on the morality of the principle, and on the duties that man owed, not only to man, but to the lower world. It was negatived, however, in the House of Commons, having met with violent opposition, especially from Mr Windham. though this attempt was unsuccessful, the attention. of Parliament was thus fairly drawn to the subject,

For a long time, the generous and Christian feelings of those who interested themselves in behalf of the lower animals were neglected or met by ridicule and hostility, and there seemed to be an unwillingness to interfere with a subject so far below the dignity of the British senate. But such sentiments were gradually overpowered by the voice of public opinion, and on many points inquiries were from time to time instituted, and improvements introduced.

§ 34. In 1824, Mr Martin of Galway succeeded in carrying a general measure, which proved of great benefit. 3d Geo. IV., c. 71. The difficulty, however, of bringing to prosecution and of convicting offenders, the continual evasion of the statute, and especially the exposure of other atrocities equally requiring interference, gave rise to the appointment of a Committee for the further investigation of the subject. After examining many witnesses, there was presented to the House of Commons, along with the evidence, a report, concluding thus: "Your Committee have examined several witnesses, upon whose testimony they are satisfied that numerous and wanton cruelties are practised, to the great and needless increase of the sufferings of dumb animals, and the demoralizing of the people. Your Committee are of opinion that some further legislative

enactments are necessary to prevent, as far as possible, the continuance of the cruel and improper treatment of animals."-- Report on Mackinnon's Bill, August 1832. In consequence of this suggestion, presented by an influential Committee, composed of men of all parties and principles, a more effective measure was introduced, which became the law of the land in 1835.*

§ 35. I shall here take notice of the chief lines of opposition that have been taken up against the measures from time to time introduced, because an opportunity will thereby be afforded of referring to any defences of these cruelties that might be offered; and because many of the arguments thus publicly adduced were prompted by the same sentiments which, in private society, give rise to the indifference, ridicule, or hostility, with which any exertions in behalf of the lower animals are generally met. First of all, with regard to the importance of the subject, and the propriety of any Parliamentary interference, it was maintained, that "such things were too minute, too paltry, to be fit matters for legislation;" and, that "it was absurd to entertain topics of so subordinate a nature, where

* 5th and 6th William IV., c. 59. An abstract will be found in the Appendix. By 1st Victoria c. 66, the Act was extended to Ireland and it is hoped that it will be extended to Scotland also.

the great questions of national polity were discussed." These sentiments could be entertained only by men of narrow and illiberal minds; for surely these measures, although esteemed of inferior interest, ought at least to have received the candid and careful consideration of all those whose duty it was to attend to the statements made, and the petitions presented on the subject. But, even in a political point of view, such questions are of higher importance than many of those prominent and standard topics of debate, for the discussion of which the leaders of opposing parties, in all the pomp of intellectual gladiatorship, descend into the arena of public display and controversy. Any measure that, in the remotest way, bears upon the improvement of the internal condition, and the progress of civilization of a country, must secure the most attentive regard of every enlightened statesman. And, amongst the many motives urged by those who interested themselves in this question, not the least important was, that such laws must inevitably tend to elevate the tone of feeling and whole moral character of the common people, and thereby aid in building up the only real defence of national strength and national greatness.

§ 36. It was urged also, that such laws must

often act upon the dangerous principle of attempting to regulate men's conduct in regard to their own property. The same argument used to be employed by the slave-owners, in resisting any attempts to ameliorate the condition of their living property. Lord Erskine exposed well the weakness of this infamous and stupid defence, as he termed it. He showed, that the animals were not to be considered as if the master stood in no other relation to them than to his insensible machines and material articles of mere property. "That the dominion of man over the lower world is a moral trust, is a proposition which no man living can deny, without denying the whole foundation of our duties. If, in the examination of the qualities, powers and instincts of animals, we could discover nothing else but their admirable and wonderful construction for man's assistance; if we found no organs in the animals for their own gratification and happiness,-no sensibility to pain or pleasure,-no grateful sense of kindness, nor suffering from neglect or injury,—no senses analogous, though inferior, to our own; if we discovered, in short, nothing but mere animated matter, obviously and exclusively subservient to human purposes, it would be difficult to maintain that the dominion over them was a trust; in any other