battlesforlegalrightsforanimalswerefoughtinBritain,and
the initial reactionof the British Parliament indicates that
Bentham’s ideas had had little impact on his countrymen.
Thefirstproposalforalawtopreventabuseofanimalswasa
billtoprohibitthe“sport”ofbull-baiting.Itwasintroduced
intotheHouseof Commonsin1800. GeorgeCanning,the
foreign secretary, described it as “absurd” and asked
rhetorically:“Whatcouldbemoreinnocentthanbull-baiting,
boxing, ordancing?”Since noattemptwas beingmadeto
prohibit boxing or dancing, it appears that this astute
statesman had missed the point of the bill he was
opposing—hethoughtitanattempttooutlawgatheringsof
“the rabble” that might lead to immoral conduct.^34 The
presupposition that made this mistake possible was that
conductthatinjuresonlyananimalcannotpossiblybeworth
legislating about—a presupposition shared by The Times,
which devoted an editorial to the principlethat “whatever
meddleswiththeprivatepersonaldispositionofman’stime
orpropertyistyranny.Tillanotherpersonisinjuredthereis
no room for power to interpose.” The bill was defeated.
In 1821 RichardMartin,anIrishgentleman-landowneranda
memberofParliamentforGalway,proposedalawtoprevent
theill-treatmentofhorses.Thefollowingaccountconveysthe
tone of the ensuing debate:
WhenAldermanC.Smithsuggestedthatprotectionshouldbe
givento asses,there weresuch howlsof laughterthat The
Timesreportercouldhearlittleofwhatwassaid.Whenthe
Chairmanrepeatedthisproposal,thelaughterwasintensified.
Anothermember saidMartinwouldbe legislatingfordogs