118 

 206. 



3. 2,000. 



4. Breathe heavy, and keep shifting the ears backwards and forwards. 



5. Not long. 



6. Abont one in 200. 



8. From ten to twent}'. 

 !). Soiuid. 



10. I have seen cattle that had been inoculated show the disease the year following, bnt 



whether the inoculation had taken effect I could not tell. I don't believe in inocula- 

 tion ; bleed them the same as you would a horse, and put them in a paddock where 

 they could not get water — that is what I did— and lost but few while some of my 

 neighbours lost thousands. 



11. No. 



207. 



9. Very healthy. Neither having inoculated any cattle, nor ha\'ing had any cattle affected 

 with pleiu-o-pneumonia on the run for several years, with the exception of one lot 

 which I purchased, and through which the disease had nearly passed, I cannot answer 

 the above questions. I am of opinion that inoculation is an effectual remed}'- when 

 applied in time, that is, when the cattle are only slightly affected with the disease, but 

 when applied in a later stage I think it does very little more good than clearing your 

 herd quickly of diseased cattle, most of the badly affected ones dying after the opera- 

 tion. The disease is not infectious, but I think is contagious, and you might have 

 cattle in one paddock dying fast fi-om pleuro-pneumonia when in the adjoining one 

 they would be quite healthy. We are now qnite free from the disease here. 



10. When pleuro-pnetmionia has been tlu-ough a herd and decimated it, the cattle are dis- 

 posed to fatten rapidly and assume a more healthy appearance than they had before, as 

 there are very few that escape the disease in some form or other, and the probability is 

 that after the disease having been thus through a herd that herd will be safe for some 

 years, and I would always rather buy cattle from a herd that had lately suffered 

 severely than from one that had been free from disease for some time. 



11. No ; I think that one to prevent owners traveUing with or selling diseased cattle 

 would be of more use. 



208. 



1. 1866 ; a few died, but very few. 



3. In 186G there were about 10,000 head on this station. From drought and removal of 



fat and store stock, reduced to less than half. 

 ■ 5. There were a few cases of disease through 1866 and 1867, and in fact I do not think 

 the herds can be said to be quite free from it yet, though the cases are so few as to be 

 scarcely noticed. 



8. Could not tell. 



y. Very good, but much reduced from di'ought and robbery. 

 10. Any Act which would oblige owners of cattle to inociilate must result_ in the de- 

 struction of great niunbers of stock. The disease is evidently on the decline, thoiigh 

 not gone yet ; and any action taken which maj' add to the already fearful destruction 

 should only be upon such indisputable evidence as none could refute ; this you cannot 



get. In this district, the lierds I believe ai'e reduced hy one-half their original 



number by drought ; in some cases, to one-fom-th. 



209. 



1. In I860. 



3. 200. 



4. Unknown. 



5. Eighteen months. 



6. 30 per cent. 



7. Unknown. 



8. Abont 40. 



9. Healthy. 



10. No particular notice was taken of numbers and dates. The above statement is an 



approximation. 



1 1 . We do think it both advisable and necessary. 



210. 



1 I never inoculated any cattle. I have had but a few head, and I have not seen any 

 diseased cattle near here this last three years. I do not know any party near here that 

 has 200 head of cattle. 



11. Yes, I consider that tbey should be obliged to inoculate. 



