Ill 



would be worth from $2.60 to $3, so that the loss would be one-fifth of one per cent. But there 

 are 150 ways of damaging the hides. The drovers often use prods that pierce the hid j , then 

 there are the barbed wire fences, warbles, and so on. 



t 



Daniel Walker, Toronto, sworn, said : I am the caretaker of the western cattle market, 

 and have been in that position about seven years. I have the oversight of the market and 

 receive yard and weigh the cattle. 



Q. What number of cattle do you handle in a year ? A. As near as I can remember the 

 number last year was 100,892. 



Q. Would there be an average of 80,000 per year during your seven years ? A. No, not 

 •quite that many. Last market day we had sixty carloads including everything. 



Q. Tell us what you think of the damage done by horns ? A. Well, I have often remarked 

 the pain of the cattle from breaking their horns. You will see a bullock droop his head, get 

 into a corner and refuse to eat, and the horn will Meed a great deal. The drovers usually tie 

 up the stump with tar and a rag. I have not yet seen any cattle that were dehorned. 



Q. From your experience would you say that if the operation of dehorning could be per- 

 formed without inflicting great pain it would be a desirable thing % A. Yes, I think so. I have 

 seen cattle kept on the go all the time by the horns. The timid ones are chased by the others, 

 and they seem to pick on the white bulljcks. Some of these cattle are so abused by the others 

 that they will try to jump the fences to get away. 



Q. What is the size of your yards ? A. The main yards are 30 x 50 feet. They are intended 

 to hold one load. We have no yards large enough for two loads. 



Q. Have you ever seen cattle killed by the horns \ A. We found a bullock of Crawford's 

 •dead in one of the yards the other clay with a hole punched in its side and the Inspector said it 

 died from being hooked, though I thought it was a natural death There has been a good deal 

 of damage done by the cattle to each other. We often have to take an animal out of a yard and 

 put it by itself on account of it being set on by the others. 



William Kelly, Toronto, sworn, said : I have been in the cattle business for about forty 

 years. I am a wholesale butcher, and buy at the western market. I am in favor of dehorning 

 cattle, because I think they would thrive better. Most of the trouble from hooking occurs in 

 the country where drovers bring together a lot of strange animals, cows, steers and bulls. They 

 suffer a great deal from the bruises they get, and the flesh swells up and is spoiled for beef. I 

 have seen dehorning done in Ireland, where they would simply cut the skin around the base of 

 the young horn and twist it off. I regard the horns as a serious inconvenience and loss, and' I 

 think that the gain in having them off would be much greater than the pain of the operation. 

 Butchers would give $2 more for a dehorned animal. I don't think there is any danger of 

 farmers or butchers being deceived in the age if the horns were off. They can judge by the 

 teeth and the general condition. I think it is justifiable to take the horns off when the animal 

 is young, but not after it Ins grown four or five years old. 



William Mole, V. S., Hamilton, sworn, said : I am a member of the Royal College of 

 "Veterinary Surgeons, London, England ; I have been in the veterinary business since I was fifteen 

 or sixteen, and graduated in 1876. I have now been two years living in this country. I am 

 strongly opposed to the practice of dehorning cattle ; no useful end can be served by it and it 

 is cruelty in the extreme to dehorn after six months old. If necessary at all, I think disbudding 

 would be the best way. The only good reason that has been advanced is that without the horns 

 they travel better. 



Q. Have you read the proceedings in the Norfolk case ? A. Yes. I watched that case in the 

 interests of the Society for the prevention of cruelty to animals. 



Q. Now in that case witnesses claimed that the practice increased the value of the animals 

 from 30s. to £2. Do you think that was established? A. That was just the opinion of those 

 .men ; they were trying to prove the benefits of the operation. I don't think there i» much 

 financial advantage in the operation. 



Q. Well, suppose there was an increase in value of 30s. would that be sufficient justification \ 

 A. Hardly. 



Q. Is it a question of degree with you — would 60s. be sufficient > A. I don't think that 

 any financial benefit would justify the practice, though if absolutely necessary it might be done 

 when rhey are young. I look at this question from the humane aspect, and think it should only 

 be allowed if it is necessary for the protection of man or of the animals themselves. 



Q. In all these matters would you say th.it the commercial aspect should be dropped out \ 

 A. Yes. I would not clip dogs' ears or horses' tails. 



Q. Now, I understand you wrote an article in this month's Farmer's Advocate, advising 

 farmers to take up the practice of spaying sows l A. Yes The animal is deprived of a natural 

 .function. I don't think it suffers to a great extent and there is a benefit to it. 



