/\ ('/>(> r/s to flic Foreign Office. 149 



Ani«It>pc, ctr., nlthoiiijli imiltiplyiiii,' in their Itlorxl, litit that it is deadly to 

 introluced dniuesticutcd aniinals. Mcnc', it is Kn|'jK)scd, it fhnirishes in 

 the wild game and is more al»nndatit ain<>n^ them than it would l)e if it« 



Eresence caused death. I am imline*! to believe this theory correct, but it 

 lus not Iweii pr<)p<rly te-ted. 



Hefore the destruction of Hudalo in the vicinity of herds of domesti- 

 aiti-d cattle is authorised, it ou«,'hL to be clearly s/ioim by exi)eriment and 

 ol)servation of competent medical men that the IhifTalo harbours the 

 p;ir.isito, or at any rate that it ra/i harbour it without beini; kilh-d off as 

 are doinesticate<l animals. It W(»nld be a matter of small expense, ia 

 comjvirison witii the enormous jKcuniary interests involve<l, for the 

 British South Africa Company to employ a medical authority to exj^eri- 

 ment on wild ButTalo, cap:ure(l and kept in a paddock for tiie purj>ose of 

 settlintr the question. 



And it seems to me that authority to destroy the Buffalo should not Ikj 

 pr:int<-d to the ('omjKiny until they jiave furnislie«l satisfactory scientific 

 evidence of the harbourini: of the Naj^ana jwirasite by the BiilTaU*. 



I am. Sir, 



Your most obedient humble servant, 



(Signed) K. K.vv L.wkkstkr. 



Foreign Office, 



15/;i October, 1901. 



SiH, — Willi reference to your letter of the iMth Juno, I am directed 

 by the Secretary of State for Forei^ru Affairs to transmit to you for your 

 information the accompanyiui; copy of a despaUdi from His Majesty's 

 Commissioner in the Eji-st Africa rrotectoratc relative to the connexion 

 Ix'twecn TseLso-fly and the Buffalo. 



I am. Sir, 



Your most (dxdient hmnble ."^ervant, 



(Signetl) Mautin 'Iosski.i.v. 

 Pbofessob E. Ray Lankkster. 



MOMRABA, 



0th Stptnnbcr, 1001. 



To the Marqiess of Laxsdowxe, K.fJ., etc., etc. 



My Lord, — In reply t^* Your Lordship's desiKitch, No. I'.Mi of 

 July '20th, rcsjHtlin;? the connection iKtween the IVtse-fly and the 

 Buffal(», I have the honour to tninsmit lelterH fmm Messrs. Sionly and 

 MacClellan and I)<Kt>or Itulford. 



After rwwlinj; tliis corresi>ondencc and discmwin;; the qui'Stion with 

 other p'rsons, my own opinion is that where there are Buffiil<»es, Tset*k>-fli«-s 

 are usually (but not always) foun<l, but that the tlies also inx-ur in ilisirict^s 

 where there are no Buffalin-s. Hence it wouhl appear that the Buffahi 

 cannot W the only host of the imnwitc which the Tsetse-fly intnnlucx>s into 

 the blood of domestic animals with faUd results. 



I have, etc., 



(Sialic*!) C. Eliot. 



