No. 4.] CATTLE COMMISSIONERS' EEPORT. 433 



out compensation to the owner," and claim that, as this course 

 has been held constitutional, it is unwise to depart from it. 

 They further say that in matters of public health the policy of 

 the State generally has been for the owners to bear all the bur- 

 dens ; citing the laws requiring that persons infected with con- 

 tagious diseases may be quarantined and required to pay the 

 entire expense, that lunatics may be confined at their own ex- 

 pense or that of their relatives, that owners of property may be 

 required to bear the expense of disinfection, that owners of 

 orchards attacked by the gypsy moth ma}^ have them destroyed 

 without payment, or that owners of houses may have them 

 pulled down under the same circumstances, to prevent the 

 spread of fire. They claim that, in the case of diseased ani- 

 mals, the reason in favor of the destruction of such animals 

 without compensation is, that there is no cure or preventive 

 which can be successfully used wdien once the animal is affected ; 

 that not only will such disease ultimately destroy the animal, 

 but that such animal will be the centre of infection, and spread 

 the disease among others not only of their kind l)ut among 

 human beings ; and that therefore the loss which the owner 

 suficrs is not due directly to their destruction by the State, but 

 to the fact that the animal has contracted the disease, and that 

 such destruction by the State is merely the removal of a w^ortli- 

 less thing. They further assert that, while the public gain a 

 benefit by the destruction of such animals, the direct benefit in 

 the first instance, at least, is to the owner of such stock ; because 

 if such diseased animals arc allowed to remain thev will event- 

 ually contaminate the whole herd, with the result, therefore, 

 that the owner loses not only the one or two affected animals, 

 but possibly all the animals in his barn ; and that when the 

 State undertakes, without expense to such owner, a careful and 

 thorough examination of his stock, and by that examination to 

 remove all sources of contagion and thus enable the owner to 

 save the lives of all the balance, it is bearing its just proportion 

 of the expenses ; and, finally, they assert that, as these diseased 

 animals are in fact worthless, the payment of anything to the 

 owner for such animal is not a compensation for property de- 

 stroyed, but is a gift by the State in exchange for something 

 which is worthless, and will encourage the surreptitious intro- 

 duction into this State of diseased animals from other localities ; 



