21 



More Easily Handled and Less Dangerous. 



Evidence was submitted to show that hornless cattle could be more easily 

 handled, and at a considerable saving of labor. In feeding and watering, driving 

 to and from pasture, shipping by rail, and handling at the markets, the change of 

 conduct rendered the work of caring for the animals lighter than before, and 

 fewer men were required to look after them. It was also pointed out that the 

 removal of the horns does away with an element of danger to which farmers and 

 their families have always been exposed. The possession of horns by domestic 

 cattle has always been, more or less, a source of dread, suffering and death to 

 mankind, and many witnesses spoke of injuries and narrow escapes they had 

 sustained, as well as the constant liability of their children to such attacks. Much 

 stress was also laid upon the fact that cattle frequently inflict serious injury upon 

 each other, and that this danger no longer exists when the horns are removed. 

 Especially in the markets and station yards is the vindictive spirit of cattle 

 noticeable, owing largely to the fact that the animals are strangers to each other, 

 and have been rendered irritable by long journeys and privation. 



Less Liable to Suffering on the Farm and in Transit. 



If it is true that there is considerable commercial loss involved in cattle 

 hooking and chasing each other, there must, in the same act, be a great amount 

 of pain inflicted. Many farmers testified as to cases of prolonged suffering occur- 

 ring in this way, and the consensus of opinion was — in the case of dairy cows 

 more especially — that the aggregate of suffering in an average lifetime was far 

 greater than that inflicted in the removal of the horns. Men like Messrs. W. W. 

 Hodgson, William Levack and Sylvester Halligan, in constant attendance at the 

 cattle market, were also strongly of opinion that even in the shorter life of cattle 

 raised for beef, more pain was caused bj^ the horns than would be inflicted in their 

 removal. 



Their Value is Increased. 



A considerable variety of evidence was received tending to show that the 

 commercial value of the animal is greatly increased by the operation. It is 

 claimed that the dehorned and therefore quiet animal sooner reaches a prime 

 condition than a beast that is habitually wild and unsettled, either by its own 

 possession of horns or the proximity of other horns. It is also more likely to be 

 free from bruises at the time of sale, and would, in consequence, command greater 

 favor with the butcher. This increase in value was estimated by witnesses at 

 from $5 to $8 per head. Tanners also stated in evidence that the damage caused 

 to hides by hooking was from 20 to 25 per cent., and this is avoided by the 

 removal of the horns. In feeding steers for export the benefit was claimed to be 



