430 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc. 



In 1893 (chapter 306) both of the previous compensation 

 sections were consolidated into one which provided, — 



Sect. 2. When any member of the board of cattle commissioners, by 

 an examination of a case of contagious disease among domestic ani- 

 mals, becomes satisfied that the public good requires it, he shall cause 

 such animals to be securely isolated at the expense of the owner, or he 

 shall cause them to be Killed imthoiit appraisal or payment, but may 

 pay the owner or any other person an equitable sum for the killing 

 and burial thereof, and may also pay a reasonable sum for the animal 

 destroyed, sliould it appear by a post-mortem examination or other- 

 wise that said animal was free from the disease for which it was con- 

 demned. 



This act also, for the first time, defined the contagious dis- 

 eases : — 



Sect. 3. Contagious diseases within the meaning of this act shall 

 include glanders, farcy, contagious pleuro-pneumonia, tuberculosis, 

 Texas fever, foot and mouth disease, rinderpest, hog cholera and 

 rabies. 



This law placed all diseases on the same footing, did away 

 with the appraisal in every case, and required that ia no case 

 should an owner receive any compensation. 



From this brief examination of the history of the law prior 

 to the passage of the act of last year, it is apparent that the 

 general tendency of the law had been uniformly in the direction 

 of the payment of no compensation. This Board did not adopt 

 the tuberculin test until long after the passage of the law under 

 which it is now operating. When, therefore, this commission 

 made its report to the Legislature in 1894, its experience was 

 entirely based upon physical examinations, condemning only 

 such animals as clearly demonstrated that they were affected 

 with tuberculosis, and which generally had ceased to have any 

 apparent earning capacity; and when, therefore, it advised a 

 thorough revision of the law relating to contagious diseases 

 among domestic animals, it did not feel that it could recom- 

 mend a change in the law on the matter of compensation, until, 

 at least, it had ascertained by experience the practical effect of 

 the law which it recommended. 



In the bill submitted by it, therefore, the matter of compen- 



