81 



7. NcTci" cntircl}', odd cases occasionally, generally after very wet weather. 



8. Altogether above 2,500 head. 



9. \cry good. 



10. A severe drought followed close upon the pleuro-pneumonia, and losses occurred, very 



great ; and tlie Oovernnient, although iaxiii;j the S(iuatters and cattle proprietors, gave 

 no compensation, whicli, injustice, 1 consider they ought to do. 



11. I should consider it an Algerine Act. I am not aware tliat any one knows the effect of 

 inoculation, scientific or medical, and people are working in the dark. 



9. 



1. On or near the commencement of 1866. 



3. About 600. 



4. I cannot say. 



5. Nearly twelve months. 



6. I cannot state. 



7. About the middle of the vcar, or a Uttle later, of 1857. 



8. About 150. 



9. Sound. 



10. Wliile the disease lasted they were dying fast, at first in the fields. I then began to 

 boil them down for their hides and tallow. At first I tried medicines, but to no pur- 

 pose. Still a lot of them got well of their own accord. The lungs, when very bad 

 before they were killed, were in a most shocking putrid state. 



11. I do not consider any necessity for any legislative interference in this matter, most 

 people being too much alive to their own interest to make such a measure necessary. 



10. 



10. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your circular respecting inoculation for pleuro-pneu- 

 monia, and to state that we have here only a small herd of about 200 head of cattle, 

 which has not been inoculated, nor have the cattle suffered from plcuro since in my 

 charge, some three years. A bidlock, apparently dying from plcuro, was impounded 

 by me about eighteen months ago, but none of the cattle have shown any symptoms of 

 disease. I lost a good many cattle from plcuro in Queensland, and these 'cattle were, 

 cci-tainly infected while travelhng on the road through a run where plcuro had broken 

 out. After these cattle were inoculated no deaths occurred, and in Queensland the 

 general opinion was decidedly in favour of inoculation. In Victoria the same impression 

 prevails, and also in this district. I believe a measure making inoculation compulsory 

 in the ease of those herds in which the disease appears would meet with general favour. 



11. 



1. I have seen cattle, few in a herd, no great number of them, have the disease from tLn-.e 

 to time and season to season for years past. 



3. Covdd not rightly say. 



4. In good and poor condition. 



5. Only a short time ; few died, and the disease disappeared without inoculation. 



6. 30 per cent. 



7. At different times — casually, as it infected them. 



8. 10 per cent, on the herd. 



9. Healthy. 



10. I look upon inoculation like vaccination. If tlie virus is good, and obtained at the 



proper stage, and cattle inoculated before the disease appears, it is good to do it ; but 

 if bad virus is got, and the cattle inoculated after the disease gets among them, it is, I 

 think, useless. 



11. Decidedly not, because then I believe it is useless. I would prefer inoeidating healthy 



cattle, and thus prevent the disease attacking them ; but it would rest with me whether 

 the virus was good or not before I inoculated, because if had, like vaccination, you 

 would certainly by inoculating lodge the disease in your herd, and the deaths from bad 

 virus would be equal to letting tlie cattle take their chance. I am of opinion the 

 matter for the present shoidd be left an open question, and let people inoculate or not 

 ns they think fit, and not make it compulsory. I think the disease is dying oU'; when 

 it appears, its ravages are not great, only a few in a herd infected, and then it goes oUV 



a 



