The politics of animal health: The British embargo on Canadian cattle, 1892-1932

Prairie Forum

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 1-16

  Foran, Max ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURAL HISTORY; AGRICULTURAL TRADE; LIVESTOCK FARMING; NINETEENTH CENTURY; TRADE POLICY;

CANADA; UK;

EID: 0031660233     PISSN: 03176282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. Store cattle refers to animals not classified as "fat," and therefore not subject to immediate slaughter at the port of entry. Generally, they equated to today's feeder or stocker animals, although it was common that animals, ready for slaughter upon leaving Canada, might not be classed as "fat" by the time they landed in Britain. It was estimated that 70 percent of Canadian store cattle were fattened in Scotland.
2. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 50, 1893, "Correspondence Between Canada and the United Kingdom With Respect to the Scheduling of Canadian Cattle." (Hereafter cited as "Scheduling Correspondence.")
3. "Scheduling Correspondence," op.cit.
4. The first action was to trace the infected animals to their source. They were found to have come from Manitoba in the Minnedosa district. All animals in the surrounding area were subject to inspection with no disease being located.
5. The inspection which was continued well into 1893 was both time-consuming and extensive, with up to eleven veterinarians visiting each farm and ranch. In his report one inspecting veterinarian wrote, "In my opinion if Great Britain and the United States were as free from disease as Canada, there would be no need for any inspection or quarantine."
6. "Scheduling Correspondence," op. cit. The examinations were conducted by two veterinarians, one being the Principal of the College. Their conclusions were supported by the Head of the Agricultural Department who had been to North America and had seen firsthand the same postmortem condition in animals suffering from Cornstalk Disease, a layman's term for broncho pneumonia.
7. "Scheduling Correspondence," op.cit. Doubtless the fact that these findings were by Scottish veterinarians was not lost on the British proponents of the embargo. After all, the chief opposition to the embargo was coming from Scottish graziers and farmers. Most English farmers were in favour of it.
8. Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, Fourth Series, Volume 8, 6 February 1893, p. 1394.
9. This point was emphasized by Tupper who felt that the British might have gone along with the Canadian offer to pay the cost of a British veterinary team to come to Canada to verify any absence of pleuro pneumonia had they been able to do so legally. According to Tupper, government lawyers had advised them that they had no choice but to impose the embargo. See, "Scheduling Correspondence," op.cit.
10. See Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, 6 February, 20 March 1893, 16 August 1895, 9 May 1896.
11. Ibid., 10 August 1895.
12. Quoted in The Globe (Toronto), 19 January 1903.
13. See "Royal Commission on the Importation of Store Cattle. Report of His Majesty's Commissioners, 30 August 1921." In the embargo debate in the House of Lords, 1922, the Marquis of Lincolnshire recalled that as a member of that ministry in 1906, he and several other Ministers were indeed favourable to removal but did not do so. The Marquis' somewhat specious argument, probably dimmed with time, suggested that the reason was linked to no one submitting a bill to that effect plus the fact that they had not made a pledge to do so. Great Britain, House of Lords, Parliamentary Debates, Fifth Series, Volume 51, 12 July 1922.
14. Canada, Senate, Debates, 19 July 1895.
15. See David H. Breen, The Canadian Prairie West and the Ranching Frontier 1874-1924 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1983), 225-26.
16. Later popular and academic discussions tended to re-affirm the Canadian case that the embargo was imposed on purely economic grounds. For examples, see L. V. Kelly, The Rangemen (Toronto: n.p., 1913) and Breen, op. cit.
17. Later popular and academic discussions tended to re-affirm the Canadian case that the embargo was imposed on purely economic grounds. For examples, see L. V. Kelly, The Rangemen (Toronto: n.p., 1913) and Breen, op. cit.
18. J.R. Fisher, "The Economic Effects of Cattle Disease in Britain and Its Containment, 1850-1900," Agricultural History 54 (April 1980): 280.
19. David Zimmerman, "Live Cattle Export Trade Between United States and Great Britain, 1868-1885," Agricultural History 36, no. 1 (January 1962).
20. Opinion seems to differ on this. Fisher, op. cit., 28, gives the impression that Canada was the only country allowed to export stores, but there is some evidence to suggest that while several European countries were scheduled including Germany, France, Belgium, Holland and Portugal, the Scandinavian countries were exempt. Of these, Denmark was the only one exporting stores in any quantity. Essentially, Canada was the only country bringing store cattle into Britain in any quantity.
21. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 10, 1880, "Department of Agriculture Annual Report."
22. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 12, 1887, "Department of Agriculture Annual Report."
23. Quoted in Canada, Senate, Debates, 15 April 1890.
24. "Scheduling Correspondence," op. cit.
25. Ibid.
26. The British seemed smugly secure in this argument stressing their utmost confidence in the health of Canadian cattle while hinting at the impossibility, despite every best effort, of preventing American cattle from coming into the country, the ninety-day quarantine notwithstanding.
27. Canada, Senate, Debates, 2 February 1893. Bowell was responding to a suggestion from a Senator from British Columbia that quarantine regulations should not be extended to British Columbia. Three years earlier another Senator had tried to convince the House that American cattle should be allowed to be shipped to Britain from Canadian ports. See 14 February 1890 in Canada, Senates, Debates. Both were rejected by the Upper House.
28. Canada, Senate, Debates, 2 February 1893. Bowell was responding to a suggestion from a Senator from British Columbia that quarantine regulations should not be extended to British Columbia. Three years earlier another Senator had tried to convince the House that American cattle should be allowed to be shipped to Britain from Canadian ports. See 14 February 1890 in Canada, Senates, Debates. Both were rejected by the Upper House.
29. "Scheduling Correspondence," op.cit. Quoted in English press. It was an oft-repeated comment, and one doubtless reinforced by misleading impressions about the severity of Canadian winters.
30. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 7B, 1891, "Export Cattle Trade in Canada." This inquiry came as a result of British reformer Samuel Plimsoll's efforts to have the live cattle trade discontinued altogether on humane grounds.
31. For information, see Macleod Gazette, 4 June 1891.
32. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 8d, 1894, "Appendix to the Minister of Agriculture Report, 'The Scheduling of Canadian Cattle, the Canadian Case'."
33. See Macleod Gazette, 18 June 1891 quoting Canadian Gazette, 28 May 1891.
34. See Macleod Gazette, 18 June 1891 quoting Canadian Gazette, 28 May 1891.
35. "Scheduling Correspondence," op. cit.
36. Edinburgh Scotsman, 5 November 1891.
37. Canada, Senate, Debates, 15 April 1890.
38. A statement made by Sir Charles Tupper in his early correspondence to Canadian officials following the identification of pleuro pneumonia. Tupper appeared far more upset than surprised by the action taken by the British.
39. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 13, 1893, "Department of the Interior Annual Report."
40. Zimmerman, op. cit., p. 52. Zimmerman was quoting a statement made by the Canadian Minister of Agriculture in 1881. Other figures mentioned in 1890 were between $10 and $20, and a differential of 20 percent. See, Canada, Senate, Debates, 14 February, 15 April 1890.
41. Zimmerman, op. cit., p. 52. Zimmerman was quoting a statement made by the Canadian Minister of Agriculture in 1881. Other figures mentioned in 1890 were between $10 and $20, and a differential of 20 percent. See, Canada, Senate, Debates, 14 February, 15 April 1890.
42. Kelly, op. cit., p. 391. This assertion was made by the Dominion Veterinary General, Dr. J. G. Rutherford. Kelly had inserted the entire text of a report Rutherford had written in 1909 entitled, "Cattle Trade in Canada."
43. Kelly, op. cit., p. 391. This assertion was made by the Dominion Veterinary General, Dr. J. G. Rutherford. Kelly had inserted the entire text of a report Rutherford had written in 1909 entitled, "Cattle Trade in Canada."
44. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 13, 1893, Department of the Interior Annual Report, 1892. "Report of the Dominion Superintendent of Lands and Mines."
45. Ibid., "Report of the Dominion Superintendent of Lands and Mines, 1894."
46. Ibid., "Report of the Dominion Superintendent of Lands and Mines, 1896."
47. This view is shared by Simon Evans who has done extensive work in the history of ranching in western Canada. See Simon Evans, "Canadian Beef for Victorian Britain," Agricultural History 53, no. 4 (October, 1979): 757.
48. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 13, 1896. Department of the Interior Annual Report. "Report of the Superintendent of Lands and Mines, 1895."
49. William Pearce had argued strenuously for this removal in his annual reports after the embargo was imposed, feeling that the freer movement of cattle across the line would augment the stocking of the Canadian ranges. Interestingly, however, the first resolution passed by the newly formed Western Stock Growers Association in 1896 was one in favour of maintaining the present quarantine regulations. Clearly, the southern Alberta ranchers were holding a narrower view than Pearce in that they feared American cattle would encroach on their leases.
50. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 8, 1898, "Department of Agriculture Annual Report."
51. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 8, 1898, "Report on Cattle Quarantine in Canada from November, 1896 to October, 1897."
52. Kelly, op.cit., p. 341.
53. Alberta, Department of Agriculture Annual Report, 1912, "Report of Livestock Commissioner."
54. For full export numbers on cattle exports to Britain, 1874-1937, see Canadian Cattlemen, June 1938.
55. Evans, "Canadian Beef," op.cit., p. 757.
56. "Export Cattle Trade of Canada," op.cit.
57. Ibid.
58. See Calgary Herald, 29 October, 11 November 1892.
59. Glenbow, Western Stock Growers Association Papers (hereafter WSGA Papers), "Minute Book, 1896-1914," Box 1, ff.3.
60. Alberta, Department of Agriculture Annual Report, 1906, Appendix C, "Report of Alberta Cattle Breeders' Association."
61. Alberta, Department of Agriculture Annual Report, 1908, Appendix B, "Alberta Cattle Breeders' Association Annual Report." The remarks were made by Duncan Anderson, Special Representative of the Livestock Branch of the Dominion Department of Agriculture, at the annual meeting of the above association.
62. So much so that when asked by Canadian interests for assistance when the embargo debate was heating up in 1920, the FICCA chairman, E. Watson informed W.F. Stevens, Secretary of the Stock Growers Protective Association, that he felt there was no hope for the cause and that the fruitlessness of his long tenure as chairman had left him drained and exhausted. WSGA Papers, Box 8, ff.45. Correspondence dated 15 November 1920.
63. For a good account, see Simon Evans, "The End of the Open Range Era in Western Canada," Prairie Forum 8, no. 1 (1983): 71-87.
64. In 1911, it was reported that cropped land around Fort Macleod had increased by 20 percent in one year. In the same year grain shipments from Stavely and Claresholm in the heart of former ranching country totalled over 1.5 m bushels. Sessional Papers, No. 28, 1911, North-West Mounted Police Annual Report, "Report of Supt. P.C.H. Primrose, D Division, Fort Macleod."
65. C.H. McKinnon, Events at LK Ranch (Calgary: Phoenix Press, 1979), 59. This is an excellent account of the history of one of Alberta's most enduring and successful livestock enterprises. Consisting mainly of detailed reminiscences, particularly those of the family patriarch, Lachlin McKinnon, the narrative chronicles the evolutionary nature of ranching in Alberta.
66. Canada, Sessional Papers, 15C, 1912. epartment of the Interior Annual Report, "Report of the Livestock Commissioner." Other comments referred to the "ranching industry dying as quickly and as decently as it was able"; to "the rancher's day being a thing of the past"; to "many ranchers ... disposing of as much stock as possible"; and as a "general tendency being to market anything and everything."
67. Agricultural Gazette, December 1914.
68. Farm and Ranch Review, 20 September 1913.
69. See Evans, "End of...," op.cit.
70. For information on the United States tariff structure up to 1935 see F. Albert Rudd, "Production and Marketing of Beef Cattle from the Short Grass Plains Area of Canada" (Master's thesis, University of Alberta, 1935), 105.
71. Farm and Ranch Review, 20 September, 4 November 1913. Tbe magazine also noted that United States beef exports had declined by 96 percent during the same period.
72. This was the period when Alberta rancher Alfred Ernest Cross consistently topped the Chicago market with his range fed steers. For example, see Calgary Herald, 22 December 1915. On 5 December 1918, a 1,700-pound Alberta Shorthorn Hereford cross brought the highest price ever paid for a range steer on the Chicago market. The price of $18.75 cwt led the Canadian Cattlemen, which reported the incident in December 1938, to reflect nostalgically, "Will those days ever return?"
73. Calgar Herald, 3 October 1916. Lane had also noted in 1913 the enormous potential of the emerging market in the northwest United States. He stressed Alberta's decided locational advantage over American suppliers and felt that profits would increase by as much as $7 a head over the average. Time was to vindicate Lane's prophecy, a prophecy more accurate today than when Lane made it in 1913. See Farm and Ranch Review, 20 September 1913.
74. Calgar Herald, 3 October 1916. Lane had also noted in 1913 the enormous potential of the emerging market in the northwest United States. He stressed Alberta's decided locational advantage over American suppliers and felt that profits would increase by as much as $7 a head over the average. Time was to vindicate Lane's prophecy, a prophecy more accurate today than when Lane made it in 1913. See Farm and Ranch Review, 20 September 1913.
75. See "Extracts from the Discussion at the Imperial War Conference, April 26,1917"; Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 42A, 1917. "Minutes of the Proceedings of the Imperial War Conference, 1917." During the debate, Rogers also commented that the embargo was a matter of policy for the development of British live cattle and that "we have no objection to a policy of protection."
76. See "Extracts from the Discussion at the Imperial War Conference, April 26,1917"; Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 42A, 1917. "Minutes of the Proceedings of the Imperial War Conference, 1917." During the debate, Rogers also commented that the embargo was a matter of policy for the development of British live cattle and that "we have no objection to a policy of protection."
77. See "Extracts from the Discussion at the Imperial War Conference, April 26,1917"; Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 42A, 1917. "Minutes of the Proceedings of the Imperial War Conference, 1917." During the debate, Rogers also commented that the embargo was a matter of policy for the development of British live cattle and that "we have no objection to a policy of protection."
78. "Extracts from Discussion," op.cit., pp. 3-4. Doubtless, the British gratitude towards Canada for her significant contribution to the war effort contributed to their feelings of benevolence at the time.
79. Great Britain, House of Lords, Parliamentary Debates, 12 July 1922. Remarks by the Duke of Devonshire.
80. Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 157. Quoted in embargo debate, 22 July 1922.
81. Ibid., Vol. 119, 14 August 1919.
82. Ibid., Vol. 119, 6 August 1919; Vol. 121, 12 November 1919.
83. Ibid., Vol. 119, 6 August 1919; Vol. 121, 12 November 1919.
84. Ibid., Great Britain, Vol. 157. Quoted in embargo debate, 24 July 1922.
85. The Young Emergency Tariff passed in 1921 was given permanence by the Fordney-McCumber Tariff in 1922.
86. Glenbow, Cross Fonds, Box 113, ff.908, "A.E. Cross to James A. Lougheed, Minister of the Interior, March 24, 1921." Cross rightly believed that the embargo had far greater implications for Ontario producers.
87. For a good contemporary article, see E.C. Hope, "Livestock Cycles in Canada," Scientific Agriculture 11, no. 2 (October 1930).
88. "A Half Century of Service," Canadian Cattlemen 1, no. 2 (September 1938).
89. For example, see address given by R.B. Bennett, 20 August 1921, in Western Stock Growers Association Papers, Box 8, ff. 45.
90. WSGA Papers, Box 8, ff. 45. "UGG Livestock Superintendent to W.F. Stevens, September 16, 1921."
91. Farm and Ranch Review, 20 May, 5 October 1921.
92. WSGA Papers, Box 8, ff. 45. "W.F. Stevens to E.L. Richardson, Secretary, Western Canadian Livestock Union, October 12, 1920."
93. Cross Fonds, Box 113, ff. 913, Correspondence dated 23 July 1921.
94. WSGA Papers, Box 8, ff. 45. "Stevens to E. Watson, November 30, 1920."
95. The incident in the Dudley by-election was discussed at great length in the House of Commons debate on the embargo in July 1922. Apparently, Beaverbrook's Daily Express flooded the electorate with leaflets. One MP was quoted as saying that "we were threatened with consequences should we dare oppose Lord Beaverbrook's will."
96. See "Royal Commission on the Importation of Live Cattle. Report of His Majesty's Commissioners, August 30, 1921."
97. Calgary Albertan, 24 July 1921.
98. See London Times, 15 June 1922.
99. "Royal Commission...," op. cit.
100. Ibid.
101. Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 150, 9 February 1922.
102. Great Britain, House of Lords, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 53, 12, 26 July 1922.
103. Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 157, 24 July 1922. Prominent cabinet ministers voting against the removal of the embargo included J. Austin Chamberlain, Lord Privy Seal and Leader of the House, Stanley Baldwin, President of the Boards of Trade, and of course Arthur Griffith-Boscawen, President of the Board of Agriculture.
104. The Royal Commission was right in its conclusions. Meat prices did not change appreciably with the lifting of the embargo.
105. Canada, Sessional Papers, No. 36, 1924, "Record of Proceedings and Documents, Imperial Economic Conference, October-November, 1923."
106. Great Britain, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 171, 17 March 1924.
107. See Calgary Herald, 7 January, 15 February 1921.