On Friday week, the House of Lords threw out the
Cruelty to Animals Amendment Act Bill, which would have put an end to the cruel and completely unsportsmanlike pigeon matches by which the country has been disgusted, rejecting it by a majority of 30 against 17. In the House of Commons, it had been carried by a majority of 155. But in the Peers there was a good muster of young men of no note, who care a good deal more for the amusements of the country than they do for its duties. Lord Granville and the Duke of Argyll both supported. Lord Balfour of Burleigh in defending the Bill, as one aimed at a sport altogether ignoble,—indeed, the attractiveness of it. consists chiefly in the betting to which it gives rise, and the little skill which it requires,—and only Lord Redesdale amongst the Peers of weight opposed it. The real argument in favour of the Bill is, as Lord Granville said, just the same as the- real argument against cock-fighting, which has been put down in England,—that it degrades those who take part- in it, and gives rise to all sorts of cruelty in order to bias the direction of the pigeon's flight. The House of Lords however, is very Conservative of low amusements, and not at all anxious to improve the tone of English recreation. The Prince of Wales might, perhaps, have saved the Bill ; but, unfortunately,. he did not intervene.
Previous page
