England) International Health Exhibition (1884 : London.

The Health Exhibition literature (Volume v. 5 pt. 2) online

. (page 1 of 26)
Online LibraryEngland) International Health Exhibition (1884 : LondonThe Health Exhibition literature (Volume v. 5 pt. 2) → online text (page 1 of 26)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


COLUMBIA LIBRARIES OFFSITE

HEALTH SCIENCES STANDARD



HX00042145




tiwiiiu,itmii iT!Tff?i?





@



>w<M?y



HEALTH

IN DIET





mammmBSmH^immfmm



WiLLuaCLOwES %9 Sons* Umit£0>






/



•4viBPii«aMirtl^ih«^



/-^






Columbia ^Knitie r^itp
intlieCttpoflettjgork

CoUege of $})p£(tctan£( anb burgeons:
Hitjrarp




O UMAMK S

HEALTH
SCt£RC£S
LIBRARY



^'^



Internatioiial Health Exhibitio7iy

LONDON, 1884.



THE



HEALTH EXHIBITION
LITERATURE.




VOLUME V,
HEALTH IN DIET



CONFERENCES.

THE MEAT SUPPLIES OF THIS COUNTRY.

THE ADULTERATION OF FOOD.

BEE-KEEPING.



PRINTED AND PUBLISHED FOR THE

anb far Ih Council of the Somlir of 3lrts,

BY

WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, Limited,

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH EXHIBITION,

AND 13, CHARING CROSS, S.W.

1884.,



kA



2SZ
V.S



LONDON.

PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,

STAMFORD STREET, AND CHARING CROSS.



CONFERENCES.



*o*-.

PAGE

THE MEAT SUPPLIES OF THIS COUNTRY . . . . i

THE SOURCES OF OUR MEAT SUPPLY. By Major P. G. Craigie . 4

THE CAUSES WHICH HAVE CHECKED THE DEVELOPMENT OF

OUR HOME PRODUCTION OF MEAT. By Thomas Duckham, M.P. 12

HOME-GROWN MEAT SUPPLY AND THE INCREASED PRODUC-
TION OF HOME-GROWN MEAT. By John Clay .... 32

THE MEANS OF SECURING THE SUPPLY OF MEAT TO LARGELY

POPULATED CENTRES. By S. B. L. Druce 46

THE ADULTERATION OF FOOD 77

FOOD ADULTERATION AND ANALYSIS. By Dr. James Bell, F.R.S. 79

BEE-KEEPING 169

FOUL BROOD (NOT MICROCOCCUS, BUT BACILLUS) : THE
MEANS OF ITS PROPAGATION AND THE METHOD OF ITS
CURE. By F. Cheshire 1 73

ADULTERATION OF HONEY. By Otto Hehner, F.C.S. . . . 220



THE MEAT SUPPLIES OF THIS COUNTRY.



CONFERENCE ON WEDNESDAY, JUNE iWi, 1884.



THE SOURCES OF OUR MEAT SUPPLY.

THE CAUSES WHICH HAVE CHECKED THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR HOME

PRODUCTION OF MEAT.

HOME-GROWN MEAT SUPPLY AND THE INCREASED PRODUCTION OF HOME-
GROWN MEAT.

THE MEANS OF SECURING THE SUPPLY OF MEAT TO LARGELY POPULATED

CENTRES.



VOL. V. — H. C. B









THE MEAT SUPPLIES OF THIS

COUNTRY.



Conference on Wednesday, June i8, 1884.



1. " The Sources of cur Meat Supply ^^ By Major P. G. Craigie.

2. " The Causes which have checked the Development of our Home

Production of Meaty By Thomas Duckham, M.P.

3. " Home-grown Meat Supply and the Increased Production of

Home-grown Meat.''' By John Clay.

4. " The Means of securing the Supply of Meat to Largely Populated

Centres:' By S. B. L. Druce.

The Earl of Suffolk and Berkshire (Vice- Chair-
man of the Central Chamber of Agriculture for 1884), who
presided, in opening the proceedings and stating what
would be the order of business, said those who had urged
on the Government the necessity of adopting the House of
Lords' Amendments to the Cattle Diseases Bill, had almost
pledged themselves to the statement that the restrictions
proposed on the importation of foreign cattle would not
materially enhance the price of meat. He himself took
the very strongest view on that subject, for he felt per-
fectly certain that increased security would be followed by
such increased production, that in reality the price to the
consumer wouia be reduced ; and he should be both sur-
prised and disappointed if this view were not borne out
by the proceedings of that Conference.

B 2



The Soiirces of our Meat Supply.



THE SOURCES OF OUR MEAT SUPPLY.
By Major P. G. Craigie,

Secretary of the Central Chamber of Agriculture,

Recent controversies over the spread and consequences of
imported diseases among the Hve stock of this country
have not unnaturally directed the attention of enquirers
into the present extent and the possible expansion of the
meat supply of this country, while there is probably no
question during the recent years of agricultural depression
which has been more frequently agitated than the propriety
and profitableness of meat production being attempted in
this country on a larger scale than has been customary in
the past epoch, when prices of corn were remunerative to
the farmer. Before inviting discussion, therefore, on these
points, it may be useful to make some endeavour to set out
what is the probable amount of butchers' meat furnished
in one shape or another to the inhabitants of the United
Kingdom.

There may be raised in one or two quarters, but hardly,
I anticipate, with any emphasis in this room, what I may
call in a sense " the previous question," whether it is well for
our people to demand a meat diet at all, or, at least, to rely
so largely as we do on animal food. Without inviting a
vegetarian discussion, I may be allowed to quote the old
plea in favour of meat-eating, that it is but one form of
economy of labour, and that the use of flesh as food may
be supported on the ground that, in eating meat, we are
simply using the stomachs of other animals to do that
which we could not so well do with our own. In butchers'
meat we are certainly able to receive in a more concen-
trated and more easily appropriated form certain elements
of necessary food, which, in any other shape, we could not
possibly assimilate with anything like the same rapidity
and ease. Granted, therefore, that we must have animal



The Sotirces of our Meat Supply. 5

food, my object to-day is to ask from what sources do we
usually gather our suppHes.

Beef or veal, mutton or lamb, pork, bacon or ham are not
of course the only animal food which might come under
review in a survey of our meat supplies. If the horse has
not yet descended from the place which he holds in an
Englishman's sense of propriety, and claimed an entry
among food-yielding animals in this country, there is still
a large amount of animal food involved in the poultry, the
game, the rabbits, the wild fowl of all sorts, and, I should
probably add, the eggs which are annually consumed in the
United Kingdom. Important as they are, I do not propose,
for the purpose of this merely introductory paper, to em-
brace any calculations of the peculiarly uncertain statistics
of what I may call the minor and miscellaneous articles of
the larder ; nor do I attempt to include the cognate, but
distinct, branch of animal food involved in the supply of
milk, butter, and cheese. No record of our home produc-
tion, in Great Britain at all events, is kept that I could
appeal to as furnishing any figures worthy of your con-
sideration. Limiting the question, then, to the produce of
cattle, sheep, and pigs, the statist who would estimate the
present consumption of the country has at least two guides to
rely upon — the yearly census of these animals, so far as they
are enumerated on British and Irish farms, and the records
of the imported animal produce, alive or dead, which comes
from other lands to feed the growing wants of our popula-
tion. This population, we must all of us admit, has for
long been in excess of the number who could be exclu-
sively supported on the yearly out-turn of our home
produce. There were in the United Kingdom, in the
middle of last year, some 35,631,000 persons of all ages,
and there were available for food, or in process of develop-
ment, in round numbers, 10,000,000 head of cattle, 28,000,000
head of sheep, and 4,000,000 pigs. By no process of calcu-
lation of which I am aware, and under none of the estimates
of the annual yield of meat from the stock above enumerated
which I have met with, could we feed, with the customary



The Soiu'ces of our Meat Supply.



allowance of animal food, the population of the islands,
unless we very materially increase these totals of our
stock. No inconceivable portion of the people's rations
must in some form or another be raised abroad, and it must
not be forgotten that the acres of other lands than our own
are now laid under yearly contribution to fatten our British
live stock, and this not alone in the foreign feeding stuffs
and cake employed, but in the additional produce of our
farms due to the application of manures of foreign and
often distant origin.

The meat-producing animals of the United Kingdom
have by no means increased in the same ratio as the meat-
consuming animal, viz., the human race. It is true we
possess only an authentic live stock census for the past
sixteen or seventeen years, yet the growing gap between
home supplies and home wants is very clearly apparent
when anyone compares the figures of the past with our
present statistics. We had in the year 1868 9,000,000
cattle, 35,600,000 sheep, and 3,000,000 pigs — in all nearly
48,000,000 living animals, and there were but 30,300,000
inhabitants of the United Kingdom in that year. To
come to a still later period, let us contrast the 48,500,000
animals of 1874, with the 32,400,000 of our population in
that year, and then turn to the figures which confronted
us last season when our 35,600,000 people possessed a
total live stock which did not then reach 42,500,000 head,
even after a recovery from the losses apparent a year or
two before. This is an absolute as well as a relative de-
crease, and while the mouths have multiplied, the meat
forthcoming at home is less. Indeed, if certain old writers
are to be believed, the decrease of available meat supply
is even more apparent if we were to carry our survey
further back, and place any reliance on the estimates of
what I may call, not certainly pre-historic, but, perhaps,
pre-statistical times. A hundred years ago Arthur Young
would have it England by herself stood possessed ci
3,500,000 cattle, and we know that the population of this
section of our island at that period is not believed to have



The Sources of our Meat Supply.



exceeded 7,000,000, that is to say, we possessed one
head of horned stock for every two persons Hving on our
soil. To-day, England, with her 27,000,000 souls, only
rears, it would seem, some 4,200,000 cattle, so that were we
isolated from the surplus beef produced in Ireland and in
Scotland, as well as abroad, we should stand in the
position, as compared with our forefathers a century ago,
of having, with what is generally recognized as a larger
appetite for meat, nearly seven persons instead of two
claiming his share of each head of cattle.

Nor is the case better as regards our flocks. Several
foreign estimates have been made purporting to show that
Great Britain was early in this century the mistress of
forty or fifty million sheep. I have seen, however, no
evidence, that this was ever proved to have been the case.
A far more reliable calculator, like McCuUoch, used figures
which will suffice for my case. He put the entire English
flock at 26,000,000, the Scotch at 3,500,000, and the Irish
at 2,000,000, as recently, as 1847. England had then a
population well under 17,000,000, that is to say, less than
two persons for every three now living. But, according
to the authority just quoted, she then maintained half as
many more sheep as she now has when she is blessed
with 27,000,000 inhabitants. It will be obvious, therefore,
that the increase in the Scotch and Irish flocks which,
if McCuUoch is right, has occurred in the course of a
single generation [from five and a half to ten millions] is no
sufficient set-ofl" for the reduction of the sheep stock of
our English and Welsh pastures from 26,000,000 in 1S47
to 21,000,000 in 1868, and now to 18,000,000 in 1S83.
With such data before us, it cannot be wondered at that
some uneasiness has been occasioned at the increased
reliance of the nation on foreign meat supplies, that con-
sumers are paying more for their meat, and that the
scramble to share in these bigger prices has led occa-
sionally to a degree of carelessness in the sources of our
foreign supplies which has resulted in the importation of
disastrous diseases among what is left of our stock, some-



8 The Sources of our Meat Supply.

times, as statistics have proved, with the ultimate infliction
of far greater real loss to the food supply of the nation
than the actual absence of such dangerous imports would
have caused. It cannot be, therefore, amiss that we should
meet together here in a building devoted to the illustration
of the best means of maintaining the public health and
securing the best form of food for the people, to discuss
how we may develop the animal wealth of our own country,
and, if we must supplement our home efforts, how we can
feed our huge workshop population with meat, either im-
ported alive from healthy as distinguished from more or
less diseased districts, or else imported in what many of
us regard as the safer form of dead meat which the re-
sources of modern science now place within reach of the
importer.

In offering you an estimate of what our supplies are,
whereon to found this day's discussion, for I do not attempt
to do more in the course of this paper, I take as my basis
for the meat product of each year from our home stock,
which is so immensely the largest factor in the calculation,
the estimate that something like one fourth of the cattle
enumerated in June, two-fifths of the sheep, and at least
one-sixth more than the enumerated pigs are annually
slaughtered for the people's food. Although I am aware
this is a point on which opinions differ, I believe such a
basis may be roughly relied on as indicating, for compara-
tive purposes, the available supply.

Of course it would be rash to assert that in a calculation
attended by many elements of uncertainty the method
employed reflects with exact accuracy our present meat
outturn in the United Kingdom ; but I could quote, were it
needed, a fairly long record of authorities who have deemed
the scale, if rough and ready, yet a fair and practicable
one. We may accept it, at least for such general purposes
as our discussion to-day, pending the time when, either by
means of the enquiry the Royal Agricultural Society have
been urged to make, or by other researches, more definite
data are forthcoming. I fear, however, we shall be much



TJie Sources of our Meat Supply.



in the dark as to the actual weights of animals slaughtered
until such time as farmers abandon their apparently inex-
plicable practice of failing to use the only true measure of
value, viz., weight, in the daily business transactions by
which they sell the meat that is manufactured upon British
farms.

Working out, on the plan above indicated, and on the
basis of the 1883 animal census, the weight of home-grown
meat would come out as 1,307,000 tons. The official
records of our imports shew that in the same year 301,000
tons were imported as dead meat from foreign or colonial
ports, and the estimate most nearly in accord with the
recently issued official weights of live foreign animals,
leads to the conclusion that 173,000 tons will represent
quite the outside figure of the foreign live supply. The
total consumption of 1883 thus reaches 1,781,000 tons of
meat ; and in the accompanying diagram I have in a form,
appealing more directly to the eye, shown the relative magni-
tude of our home and foreign meat supplies. These consist
in far the largest proportion, three pounds out of four, of our
own produce. Only the rest is derived from foreign sources,
alive or dead, as the case may be. In this diagram I have
also indicated the proportion of our supplies coming from
countries tainted more or less with foot-and-mouth disease.



1-..L I



^



A. Proportion of meat received alive from countries which have sent us

foot-and-mouth disease.

B. ,) „ received alive from countries which are undoubtedly

free from foot-and-mouth disease.

C. ^ V, produced at home.

D. „ „ imported as dead meat.

I leave it to those who are to treat of the special points
of this Conference to explain the causes underlying the
changes that have been from time to time apparent in our
home meat supplies, and especially the decline which fol-



lo TJie Soiirces of our Meat Supply.

lowed 1874. I leave it to them also to argue how larger
supplies are to be raised at home, and how the problem of
finding the capital required for heavier stock-farming is to be
met ; and I leave it also to other and to foreign or colonial
speakers, to tell us what are the prospects of larger foreign
supplies, remembering that we must never dissociate from
this problem how the risk of importing disease is to be
eliminated, and how we can improve our machinery of live
or dead meat distribution at home.

There are, however, two or three notes on the composi-
tion of our supplies I desire to offer. First, as regards the
relative proportions of the cattle, sheep, and pigs consumed
as meat. In so far as our home-stock is concerned, it
would appear that the 1,300,000 tons I assume for the
purpose of this paper to have been placed on the market
last year, rather more than half, or some 670,000 tons,
consist of beef or veal. This is a larger figure than in any one
year since 1873-5. Notmuchover4percent. of this has been
computed to consist of veal. Half as much as the beef, or
somewhat over 350,000 tons, may be credited to our flocks
in the shape of mutton or lamb ; and, according to the esti-
mates made in some quarters, more than 1 2 per cent, of this
is consumed as lamb. Unlike the beef supply, that of mutton
i.'>, with the exception of the two immediately preceding
years, 1881 and 1882, considerably less than could be
estimated in any year from 1867. The pork, bacon, and
hams, which are the produce of British or Irish pigs, are
computed as supplying us with something under 280,000
tons. Owing to the form of our Customs records we cannot
tell with perfect accuracy how much of dead meat is beef,
and how much mutton, for any long series of years. Since
the great trade in frozen mutton sprung up, some three years
ago, a separate entry of the mutton thus prepared has been
given, but there is no distinction drawn in the imports of
tinned and preserved meats between the produce of the
cow or the sheep, while I understand that the meat of
another animal, the rabbit, is now not by any means an in-
frequent item of this class of provisions. Grouping, there-



1 Jie Soiiices of our Meat Supply. \\

fore, in one item foreign dead supplies of beef and mutton,
we find a total of over 98,000 tons in 1883, a figure
greatly in excess of any previous year, while more than
twice this amount, or 203,000 tons, represents the bacon,
hams, and pork imported in the same year. Owing, no
doubt, to the much greater ease of transporting and
handling salted provisions, it will be seen that in the dead
meat imports the English pig meets a far stiffer competi-
tion than falls to the lot of the ox or the sheep. In
the live animal trade the positions are exactly reversed, the
entire weight of foreign live pigs landed on our shores does
not apparently reach 2000 tons, quite 99 per cent, of live
imports being beef and mutton.

Lastly, I would invite attention to the remarkable
changes in the sources of our foreign live supplies. Thus,
in 1883, taking the case of cattle alone, 208,000 head out of
a total of 473,000 — that is to say, 44 percent. — come across
the Atlantic, i.e., from the United States or Canada. Ten
years before, this trade did not even appear in the Official
Returns, and in 1877 it did not reach 20 per cent, of the
whole. Another remarkable increase is in the Scandinavian
trade, where Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, which sent us
only 8000 cattle in 1869 out of 220,000, now supply 147,000
out of 473,000 last year. It is at least satisfactory to those
who contend that our duty is to welcome supplies from
those countries which have made a successful effort to keep
themselves free from disease, to contrast these figures with
the stationary or receding amount of the live animal trade
from countries like Spain and Portugal, whence the im-
port in 1870 was even greater than it is at present ; or the
trade with Belgium, Holland, France, and Germany, whence
we get no growing supply, and whence we need under no
circumstances look for an increase. All of them collectively
do not send us nearly as many cattle as their little neigh-
bour Denmark ; and though the German sheep exports, if
not actually increasing, form yet a very considerable trade,
it is one which we know to be carried on from a steadily
diminishing source. The reduction of the flocks of Germany



12 The Causes which have checked the Development

and several Continental nations have been of late years
even greater than our own. Even, therefore, if our farmers
cannot in this Conference show us that our own soil
can rear a full and sufficient supply of meat for our own
people at present — and even if any check should occur to
what I believe to be the growing dead-meat trade — on the
whole it cannot but be gratifying to note that it is precisely
from those countries whence the safest imports may be
brought that any increased supplies to fill up the vacuum are
likely to be obtained. This should give our statesmen
courage to resist the offer of these exceptionally dangerous
imports from countries which are tainted with disease,
which in time past have been too often a cause of a dimi-
nishing meat supply to the people of the United Kingdom.



THE CAUSES WHICH HAVE CHECKED
THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR HOME
PRODUCTION OF MEAT.

By Thomas Duckham, M.P.

It is, I consider, beyond any question, that of all other
causes, the seasons have the most direct influence in
increasing or decreasing our home productions of animal
food, and, as those are regulated by the Divine will, over
which the cultivators of the soil can have no control, their
duty to their country ceases when they have used their
best exertions towards making it render its full increase.
Under the heading of this paper it becomes my duty to
consider whether that desiderata has been attained, and if
not, what have been the counteracting influences. Agri-
cultural statistics were first collected for Great Britain in
1866, but, as they were for that )car very incomplete, I
commence my researches in those for 1867. They show
that in Great Britain and Ireland, including the Isle of
Man and Channel Islands, there were 45,387,066 acres of
land under corn and other crops, bare fallow and grass ;



of otir Home Production of Meat. 1 3

of that acreage there were in Great Britain 11,967,988 acres
of permanent pasture, 9,284,780 acres of corn crop, 3,498,163
acres of green crops, 3,989,974 acres of grass, clovers, &c.,
in rotation, and 922,558 acres bare fallow. In Ireland
there were 10,057,072 acres of permanent pasture, 2,115,137
acres of corn crops, 1,432,252 of green crops, and 1,658,451
acres of grass, clovers, &c., in rotation, and 26,191 acres of
bare fallow. But the acreage of permanent pasture for
Ireland included a large area of mountain or other lands
which were retained in the returns up to the year 1877,
when 364,022 acres were transferred to mountain, bog or
waste lands. Therefore the permanent pasture in Ireland
for 1867 should appear as 9,693,050 acres, and the total
in the United Kingdom as 21,661,038 acres. In 1883
there were 47,655,230 acres under corn and other crops, bare
fallow and grass, being an increase of 2,632,186 acres. The
acreage of permanent pasture in Great Britain had increased
to 15,065,373 acres, and in Ireland to 10,191,118 acres,
making a total of 25,256,491 acres, showing an increase of
3»595>453 acres. Of that great increase there are 3,097,385
acres in Great Britain, and 498,068 acres in Ireland. A
further reference to the returns show that in Great Britain
there were 754,714 acres less wheat, and 20,081 acres less
roots grown in 1883 than in 1867 ; whilst there were
32,287 acres more barley, and 224,894 acres more oats,
and 405,948 acres more clover, sainfoin, and grasses in
rotation grown in 1883 than in 1867. In Ireland there
were 167,106 acres less wheat, 11,378 acres more barley,
278,541 acres less oats, 201,999 less roots, and 272,650
acres more clover and grasses in rotation.

The foregoing statistics show that, notwithstanding there
was, during the past 16 years, a very great increase of
cultivated land, the area of wheat was very greatly de-
creased, the question naturally arises, What is produced
as compensation for this great decrease as food for man ?
For the answer we naturally look to the live stock returns.
In doing so, I feel it right to take the returns for 1868,
because those for 1867 were seriously affected by the losses



14 The Causes wJiich have checked the Development

sustained from that direful calamity the cattle-plague
and other diseases amongst our flocks and herds. I also
consider it the more correct course, as the returns for live



Online LibraryEngland) International Health Exhibition (1884 : LondonThe Health Exhibition literature (Volume v. 5 pt. 2) → online text (page 1 of 26)