33 

 87. 



1. April, 18G1. 



3. 125. 



4. No disease, and no symptoms. 



12. Thii'ty-fivc head out of 125 died. Used butter of antimonr, and Venice turps. Ilad a 



good cllect. 

 15. 1 do. 



88. 



1. Early in the year 1863. 



3. Aboiit 150 head. 



4. The cattle were in good condition, being chiefly milking cows and young cattle, about 



10 per cent. 



5. About one month. 



12. Two or three deaths occurred from excessive swellings, at long intervals, after inoculation ; 



but no means were tried to cure. 



13. There were no more fresh cases in that portion of the herd after inoculation. 



14. Generally, where the operation of inoculation was performed upon sound cattle there 

 were no more fresh eases ; at the same time, it is well tnown that where strict super- 

 vision was exercised over a herd, such as destroying the alTectcd, and maintaining a 

 rigid sei^aration, the disease also ceased. The properly inoculated animal, however, is 

 safer from future contact. 



89. 



1. November, 1863. 



3. About 1,200 head. 



4. The herd were in good condition, and about 5 per cent, showed symptoms of the 



disease. 



5. Symptoms of the disease were visible about a week previous to the inoculation. 



12. The loss by deaths were about 3 per cent., through excessive swelling. Turpentine and 



tar were applied to keep off flics, &c., and I think tended to relieve the swellings. 



13. Reduced stock in condition ; but after recovery from swellings (which would be about 

 three weeks from time of inoculation), usual condition took place, disease disappeared, 

 and the herd has not been visited with it since. 



14. I believe the inocidation to be an invaluable remedy against pleuro-pncumonia. My 



stock were all inoculated, and were very often among other cattle that had the disease, 

 and were not affected by it. I know of one case where a party inoculated their cattle, 

 but did not get them all in at the time. About twenty head were got in afterwards, 

 and having no virus were not operated on. They were placed in a paddock with other 

 cattle that had been inoculated some two or three mouths previous. They all took 

 the disease and died. They were in good condition when placed with the others. 

 From my exjiericnce of the disease, I think if it once made its ajipearance in a herd, 

 and the inoculation not attended to, the ravages would be very great. 



15. I consider such an Act very necessary. 



90. 



1. 21st November, 1866. 



3. About 600. 



4. Infected, and the losses were about 150. This disease is very stealthy — no appearance 

 of illness until near death. 



5. Eight or ten mouths. 



12. One. 



13. I lost a few after the operation ; but I conclude they were diseased before, and that 



hastened their death. But the disease soon died out, and I have seen none for a long 



time — in f\iet, I hear but little or nothing about it now. 

 11. I certainly approve of inoculation ; but I was always of opinion that the disease was 



more epidemic than infectious. I have had "no appearance of the disease a 



second time, but I have ascertained from a friend that he tried the experiment of a, 



second inoculation, and it had no effect whatever. This was done a year after the first. 



I know of nothing more to add, or I would gladly do so. 

 15. I do not consider there is any necessity for legislative interference in the matter, most 



pcox^le beiug too much alive to their own interests to make such a measure necessary, 

 D 



