105 

 130. 



1. April, 1804. 



3. About 130. 



4. Good order. 



5. Nine months or abouts. 



6. 50 or 60 per cent. 



7. December, 1804. 



8. On or about thirty. 



9. IjOW in condition. 



10. Never had any experience in the diseases of cattle. 



11. We tl)nik that an Act should be passed, obliging owners whose cattle arc infected, to 



inoculate them. 



131. 



1. 1865. 



3. 130. 



4. Low in condition. 



5. Two years. 



6. Fifty. 



7. 1868. 



8. 200. 



9. Poor. 



11. I consider it would be a benefit to the country to have an Act passed to compel people 

 to have their cattle inoculated if diseased. 



132. 



I. June, 1866. 



3. 150. 



4. Good healthy condition. 



5. About one month. 



6. About one half. 



7. About the latter end of July, 1866. 



8. Four died before inoculation, none after, 



9. In a healthy state at present. 



10. Healthy cattle running along with inoculated cattle will take the infection from them. 

 I have experienced it myself on several occasions. 



11. From my experience among cattle I am of opinion that all owners of cattle that are 



infected should be obliged to inoculate them immediately. 



133. 



1. July, 1864. 



3. 450. 



4. In good condition. 



5. About fifteen months. 

 r>. About 1 per cent. 



7. Latter end of December, 1864. 



8. Impossible to say, but certainly very trifling. 



9. Healthy. . . -c n e 



10. I have no remarks to state, as I consider my experience to be too msigmhcant to torm 



a proper opinion for or against inoculation ; although I rather mcline to inoculation. 



11. Yes. 



134. 



11. Yes. 



135. 



1. Can't say. 



3. About 5,000. 



4. Good condition. 



5. Can't say. 



6. Can't say. 



7. Never left it. 



8. Can't say. , , -. i 



9. A few are dying, but the disease now seems to be Cumberland, not pleuro. 



10. None to make. 



II. I do not consider that such an Act would have any good effect, but the contrary. 



