llcS 



Mr. Drury. — Whal was your leading idea in doing this '. A. Well, I read a good deal about 

 it in the agricultural papers and also the trials in the old cuuntry. The thought of dehorning 

 was at first very repulsive to me, but I have been studying the question of saving manure in the 

 most approved method, and I came to the conclusion that the proper way to save manure was 

 under the cattle. I therefore built a stable 30x80 and 16 feet deep, and decided to fatten a 

 number of steers loose in it. When the building was complete T got a man to drive in the cattle, 

 and the tirst thing they did was to begin to tear each other to pieces. I saw then that with the 

 horns on. my scheme was going to be a failure. I wrote to Prof. Robertson about dehorning, 

 ami also went to Montreal and had a long consultation with several of the large cattle shippers, 

 all of whom spoke approvingly of it. We then borrowed Prof. Robertson's tools and took the 

 horns olf on December 13. Although I was at home I did not see the operation, as I purposely 

 avoided it. However, I questioned the man who performed it, very closely, and from all he told 

 me and from the results following the operation, I believe it is more humane to cut the horns 

 off a lot of steers and allow them to feed in their natural way loose, than to tie up an animal on 

 a hard floor and keep it confined in a narrow stall lor six months or more without any freedom 

 or relaxation. The natural condition in which to keep an animal is loose. In this cold climate 

 cattle must be housed in winter time in comparatively narrow limits, and the most natural and 

 humane way is to let them run loose. Bumptious steers particularly would tear each other to pieces 

 with their horns if allowed this natural freedom, and in my opinion it is a positive kindness to 

 deprive them of these dangerous weapons. 



Q. What was the effect of the operation on your steers ? A. It made them as quiet as a 

 flock of sheep. It took away all their evil nature and made them settle down to making beef. 

 Then as to the profit of dehorning feeding steers. — They are more cheaply fed so far as labor is 

 concerned. The manure from them is saved in the best possible way and they make a greater 

 gain for the feed given, as there is a certain amount of food wasted in keeping up that fiery, 

 restless spirit they show before dehorning. Generally our cattle recover from the effects of the 

 operation very rapidly. Only two of them showed any symptoms of real sickness, and even they 

 were soon over it. 



Q. Now, Mr. Edwards, as a business man have you been satisfied with the operation ? A. 

 So much so that we have put up another building to double our operations this year. When 

 the steer feeders of Ontario get into the way of it and feed loose in buildings such as we have 

 erected for the purpose, it will be millions of dollars annually in the pockets of our farmers, in 

 the saving of manure and the economy of feed and labor. Generally adopted I think it would 

 mean a gain of ten or fifteen million dollars. I believe it is the biggest advance yet in modern 

 agriculture. 



Q. How far do you think a man has a right to do as he likes with his own property in the 

 shape of a domestic animal ? A. So far as dehorning is concerned I do not think a man would 

 have a right to do it if the operation was of a very serious nature. 



Q. Would you say that an additional value of $5 per head warranted you in inflicting pain? 

 A. No ; I don't think that any money compensation would justify it if there was undue suffer- 

 ing. My view of it is this — the natural condition is to allow an animal to be loose — it never was 

 intended that an animal should be tied up. In a wild state the horns were given to the animal 

 as a means of defence. He is now a domestic animal, and if he uses these weapons to destroy 

 his neighbors the proper thing, instead of tying him up in an unnatural state, is to remove the 

 horns. This I would regard as an act of humanity. As to the amount of suffering I think it 

 depends on the expertness with which it is done. If done properly I think it is no more than 

 the prick of a sharp pin would be to you. There is, by far, more suffering involved in the hook- 

 ing of one animal by another than there is in the operation of dehorning. 



Hon. Robert Read, Belleville, sworn, said : I am a member of the Senate of the Dominion. 

 My chief occupation has been that of a farmer, though I have been engaged in other lines. I 

 have been handling cattle all my lite, as many as 500 at a time. I keep about forty-five dairy 

 cows at present. 1 have heard the evidence of Mr. Edwards and agree largely with what he 

 says. I have never dehorned my cattle, but I have three neighbors who have had experience 

 that way with good results. I have seen a great deal of damage done with horns in. my time ; 

 you can see the injury done almost every day. I have looked into the dehorning question 

 pretty carefully, and I believe it would be humane to the cattle to take the horns off. I daresay 

 1 would have dehorned mine only I have been away from home a good deal. As a matter of 

 humanity I think it is a desirable thing and should not be prohibited. 



Friday, Jult 8. 



On Friday. Jnly 8th, the Commissioners paid a visit to Mr. Edward's farm at Rockland, 

 and were very favorably impressed with the system of saving manure. They also had an oppor- 



