CO882-(6-8) — Page 200

3

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

19

Reference :-

C.O. 882

8

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

33009

SIR,

12

No. 3.

GOVERNOR SIR C. BRUCE to MR. CHAMBERLAIN.

(Received August 11, 1902.)

[Copy to Board of Agriculture, August 29, 1902. L.F.] [Answered August 29, 1902, by 33009; No. 206: not printed.]

(No. 244.)

Government House, Mauritius, July 1, 1902. IN my despatch, No. 238, of the 28th June,* on the subject of the disease, generally recognised as "Surra," which has, broken out among animals in this Colony, I indicated the reasons which led me to assent to the opinion of the Chamber of Agriculture and of my Executive Council in favour of postponing recourse to the compulsory slaughter of infected animals.

2. In the meantime, the opinion of competent men has been rapidly crystalliz- ing by the process of the study of scientific literature on the subject; the advice of foreign experts; the results of local bateriological experiments; and practical local experience. All these aids to knowledge have undoubtedly confirmed the wisdom of the advice given by Dr. Laveran, and also by the Government of Bombay in the following terms:-

Your telegram of 13th June last; slaughter of marked cases recommended;

equines rarely recover; flies carry infection."

The risk of infection by flies is particularly dangerous on sugar estates during the harvest of the crop.

3. I therefore welcomed the discussion of the subject at a meeting of the Council of Government held on the 1st instant, when, after long deliberation and some amendment, a resolution was carried by a large majority in the following

terms:-

“That regulations be passed under Ordinance 39 of 1881 to have all horses, asses and mules, markedly attacked with "Surra" slaughtered, and this without any indemnity."

4. I have instructed the Director of the Medical and Health Department to draft the necessary regulations, and I have consulted the Protector of Immigrants and instructed him to take immediate steps to have the measures to be adopted made known to, and understood by, the Indian community. I have lost no time in doing this because one of the chief difficulties anticipated was that which might arise from possible or probable endeavours on the part of Indian carters and carriole drivers to oppose or evade the carrying out of the compulsory slaughter of their infected animals. Mr. Trotter has promised to do the needful at once, and assures me that he does not himself expect any serious opposition. I have, at the same time, at Mr. Trotter's suggestion, requested the Medical Department to communicate at once with him in all cases in which difficulty may arise.

5. The clause of the resolution on the subject of compensation is in accordance with Ordinance No. 39 of 1881, and may seem superfluous. It was, however, included in the original resolution introduced by Mr. L..E. Antelme, Member for the important district of Plaines Wilhems, and seconded by Mr. L. Souchon, Member for Rivière-du-Rempart, a district that has severely suffered, and also President of the Chamber of Agriculture, and it was important that there should be no misunderstanding on this point.

6. Article 31 of Ordinance 39 of 1881 provides for compensation in the case of the destruction of healthy animals, not under the immediate risk of contagion. The terms of the present resolution are, however, limited to the destruction of markedly infected horses, asses and mules, and as a main argument in support of the measure is that such animals are practically doomed to a natural death, it is evident that they are valueless, and that there is no justification for indemnity.

• No. 2.

13

7. It is proposed to refrain from exercising the larger powers conferred by the Ordinance and contemplated by Article 31, until, at any rate, we have the advantage of the advice of Dr. Edington.

33760

No. 4.

I have, &c.,

CHAS. BRUCE,

Governor.

GOVERNOR SIR C. BRUCE to MR. CHAMBERLAIN.

(Received 4.8 p.m., August 14, 1902.) TELEGRAM.

[Answered by Nos. 6 and 11.]

Referring to my despatch, No. 238, 28th June,*re Surra disease, and substitu- tion mechanical for animal draught for transport of canes and sugar, I advise raising of a loan to purchase light railway or tramway plant, to be resold to planters; terms of sale: repayment by annuities within 10 years on security of first mortgage on corpus of estate, together with privilege on crop for punctual repay- ment of each annuity. I cannot at present estimate amount of loan as it would depend on number of estates prepared to accept on these conditions. Are you pre- pared to sanction such a loan to extent of Rs. 1,000,000?

34324

(No. 265.)

SIR,

No. 5.

GOVERNOR SIR C. BRUCE to MR. CHAMBERLAIN. (Received August 18, 1902.)

Government House, Mauritius, July 16, 1902.

IN continuation of my despatch, No. 244, of the 1st instant, † on the subject of the epizootic disease known as Surra, I regret to have to inform you that the disease has caused very serious losses, especially among mules.

2. Unfortunately, as I think, the resolution passed by the Council of Govern- ment on the 1st instant has been strongly resisted by the Chamber of Agriculture, supported by several elected members of Council. The resolution, I may remind you, was in the following terms:-

"That regulations be passed under Ordinance 39, of 1881, to have all horses, asses and mules, markedly attacked with 'Surra' slaughtered, and this without any indemnity."

3. At a meeting of Council held on the 8th instant, Mr. Leclezio moved that the resolution passed on the 1st instant be not proceeded with, and he was supported

by three of the elected members who had voted in favour of the previous resolution. Mr. Leclezio's motion was, however, defeated by a large majority,

4. The opposition to the measure was then transferred from the Council of Government to the Chamber of Agriculture where a resolution was, on the 9th instant. passed requesting me to suspend action on the resolution adopted by the Council of Government.

5. I replied that I found it impossible to override a decision of the Council of Government at the request of a constitutionally irresponsible meeting, but I pointed out that the statutory procedure in the matter of regulations provided for their discussion in the Council of Government.

6. I accordingly lost no time in proceeding with the resolution of the Council of Government of the 1st instant, and at the next meeting of the Council I submitted the regulations drafted by the Sanitary Authorities and approved in Executive Council.

• No. 2.

† No. 3.