36 



14. I do approve of inoculating at the time I had mine done. I had some cows on the run, 



and although the disease was not so fatal as at first, odd ones of the inoculated 

 continued to die ; but so few fatalities, that I did not consider the losses by it so great 

 as to induce me to do the whole herd ; and it continued in them up to 1867, when I 

 sold the herd to Mr. . 



15. I do not. 



100. 



1. No record kept. 



3. No record kept. 



4. A few died previous to inoculation. Cannot say percentage. 



5. Disease showed itself about two mouths previous. 



12. None. 



13. Lost only two calves from disease after inoculation ; and one heifer took disease after 

 inoculation, and recovered. 



14. Our cattle were exposed to infection for six months after inoculation. Tlie joint lessee 



of this place at the time, Mr. , did not inoculate his cattle, and he lost a 



large percentage. We lost none, although ovu;s were running amongst his, and when 

 his cattle were inoculated, they ceased dying. 



15. Yes. 



101. 



3. 1,000 head. 

 5. About three months. 

 12. Of what was seen, about 5 per cent, deaths. Those that were swelled, if seen in time, 

 by cutting the tails off they got well. 



14. I have inoculated over 1,000 head, but not of the above-named cattle, and believe that 



it (inoculation) is a preventive ; but to what extent cannot state, as all cattle I have 

 had to look after were in the bush, and not seen often, therefore cannot state perfectly 

 what good (if any) had been done. 



15. No. Should inocidation prove cflectivc, owners of cattle will look to it tliemselves. 



102. 



1. Spring of 1864. 



3. About 1,000. 



4. About 4 per cent, diseased. 



5. Some four months previously solitary cases of disease had appeared. 



12. Yes, several — say, 2 per cent. No means used to cure swellings, except some turpentine 



and tar to clear out maggots when the raw sores got fly-blown. 



13. We believe that inocidation, when properly performed, acted as an immediate stopper 



to the disease at . 



14. We beheve that out of the 1,000 licad inoculated at , there was no greater 



loss than the pei-ccntage stated in answer to question 12, say 2 per cent. A portion of 

 this loss may have been owing to inJJammation and getting Jlii-hJown, neither being 

 seen until it was too late to attempt any remedies. Since the inoculation in the spring 

 of 186'?, t'lc disease has not made its appearance, and consequently no inoculation has 

 been performed at . 



15. As the result of former experience, we are decidedly of opinion that where pleui'o- 



pneumonia sets in, if the owner of the cattle will not voluntarily take the most eil'ectual 

 means to have them properly inoculated, lie ahov.hl he compeUed to do so ly Act of 

 rarliam''nt. 



103. 



1. 12th Augiisr, 1864. 



3. Sixty. 



4. Several badly diseased ; about 20 per cent. 



5. I coidd not say, as I was ignorant of the disease till they began to die. The second 



week they began to die I inocidated. 



12. Only one animal dii-d — a very valuable cow. She was the first to swell, and 1 did not 



know what remedy lo ajiply. She swelled very much, and became unable to pass any- 

 thing. Others swelled, but on observing the first symptoms, I was advised to cut off 

 1h' tail about the centre. They all recovered. 



13. The deaths ceased imnu'diately,^ls if by magic, and very few died afterwards. Several 



showed no symptoms of inoculation, but never took the disease afterwards. 



