127 



In the third experiment the dry cattle and young stock of the dairy at 

 Marjri were used. The^ were fed with pear and a mixture of cotton-seed hulls, 

 cotton seed (1 lb.) and molasses (1 lb.). " The animals had fallen off condition, 

 owing to the grazing having become scanty, but when put on the feed above- 

 named they rapidly regained their former condition. They exhibited no signs 

 of abnormal looseness of the bowels at any time, neither did they require any 

 coaxing to eat the mixture, even on the first day. The bullocks did not take 

 any water worth mentioning, except when salt was added to the pear, but 

 with the addition of 2 oz. of salt they drank a normal quantity." 



The fourth experiment partook of the nature of a demonstration, and 

 was made at Ahmednagar whilst famine conditions obtained ; eleven bullocks 

 were used, which, when taken in hand, were in poor condition. "The consumption 

 of pear per 1,000 pounds live weight averaged 58 lb., but, in addition to this, 

 10 lb. of hay per 1,000 pounds of live weight were fed and cotton seed was 

 added to the ration as at Kirkee." " The animals were given hght continuous 

 work such as harrowing, sowing, and bringing the prickly-pear. They remained 

 practically in the same condition throughout the demonstration." 



During the course of the demonstration the native graziers had over- 

 come their prejudice to the use of prickly-pear in stock feeding, so that the camp 

 at Ahmednagar that had commenced with these eleven bullocks increased by 

 additional animals being brought in to a total of 800. 



Similar demonstrations with like results were made at Lakli and at Miri, 

 and " when the camps were closed owing to improvement in local conditions, a 

 number of cultivators at Lakh borrowed the stoves (one of several types of primus 

 stoves that had been deemed most suitable) and continued to feed the pear to 

 their cattle at their own expense." 



(2.) INTRODUCTION OF PRICKLY-PEAR TO AUSTRALIA. 



With regard to the part alleged to have been taken by Captain A. 

 Phillip, in introducing in 1788 the prickly-pear into Australia (vid. p. 112), 

 it may be of interest to cite the testimony of one who saw living plants of 

 Opuntia in his possession during the course of his memorable voyage hither. 



On Phillip calling in at the Cape of Good Hope, Captain John Cox, who 

 is referred to in this statement, went aboard his vessel and was shown 

 not only the plants, but also the cochineal insects that were being conveyed 

 to the new settlement that was to be formed at Botany Bay. "The insect, he 

 wrote, was fixed on the plant under a very white down, and Commodore Phillip, 

 who brought both from South America with him, did not wish that either 

 should be in the least disturbed." 



Previous to this incident, Cox had visited Madras, and whilst there had seen 

 Opuntia monacantha, Haworth (Roxburgh's Cactus indicus) that Dr. J . Anderson 

 had been growing there, with a view also to the cultivation of the cochineal 

 insect, and instituting a comparison between Captain Phillip's Opuntia and the 

 latter, and relying on his memory. Captain Cox wrote, on 27th November, 1787, 

 to Dr. Anderson regarding the former, that " the prickly-pear appeared to me 

 to have more thorns and to be not nearly so luxuriant," and again on 29th 

 November, 1787 : " Having had an opportunity of inspecting both the cochineal, 

 as wll as the prickly-pear on which it is cultivated," I find that : "They 

 resemble both as nearly as possible that I have seen in your garden, except 

 thg^t the prickly-pear appeared to me to have many more thorns." [Anderson 

 (j.) Letters to Sir Joseph Banks, JMadras, 1788. Appendix.] 



