1^0 
THE TROPICAL AGRICULTURIST. 
[September i, 1890. 
undoubtedly inferior to the prairie grasses of America 
and Australia, no one can speak with so much 
authority, founded on experience, including the 
application of fertilizing substances, as our corre- 
spondent himself. He can tell us whether 
Thwaites was correct in stating that the wiry 
patana grass, and other coarse grasses, so poor 
in nutriment in their growing state and so 
little relished by cattle, were capable of great 
improvement when converted into hay and then 
chopped and pounded ? Mr. de Silva advances the 
proposition that “the cause of local cattle being 
generally of a poor type is not owing to any im- 
perfection in the variety itself, but because they have 
degenerated by bad treatment.” Our correspondent 
must surely have written rather rashly when he 
penned the following criticism: “ Not so: they are the 
product of the soil,” Surely the cattle are as much 
the product of treatment as of the soil ? The Beport 
of the Commission of 1869, to which we shall refer 
in another article, explicitly recognized the de- 
generacy of the local breed of cattle as due to bad 
t reatment which specially predisposed them to disease. 
Beyond question the Sinhalese breed of cattle, during 
ages of starvation, in the two senses of inferior 
food and insufficient protection from the weather, 
have degenerated, and are capable of very con- 
siderable improvement, with reformed treat- 
ment, as draught animals, as flesh suppliers, 
and even as milk yielders. To coma to 
the opposite conclusion would be the pessimism of 
despair ; for we do not suppose that our correspon- 
dent contemplates improving the indigenous 
cattle off the face of the earth and superseding 
them by introduced stock ? The country is scarcely 
prepared for measures even less revolutionary. We 
have always felt that the Sinhalese people were 
inexplicably indifferent to the value of milk as food, 
and we have not the slightest doubt that to neglect 
of this most valuable source of nutriment is due a 
large portion of the excessive mortality amongst chil- 
dren in Ceylon. But we know that native cattle, when 
properly fed and treated do become fair milkers, and 
it requires only a little sum in arithmetic 
to prove that a Sinhalese cow yielding half-a- 
dozen bottles of milk per diem and consuming 
food only in proportion to its bulk and yield may 
be as good an investment and a far safer one 
than a big European, an Australian or an Indian 
animal, the first cost of which is heavy and which 
is costly to keep. Let us have better breeds intro- 
duced by all means, but surely on the improvement 
of the native cattle, and on measures founded on 
faith in their capability of improvement, our main 
hope of successful effort must rest ? On some points 
our correspondent is at one with Mr. de Silva ; 
and while he characterizes cotton seed as one of 
the best feeding stuffs for cattle, he is still more 
emphatic in his approval of poonac, the local term 
for oil cake. Beferring evidently to coconut cake, he 
writes : “ Poonac is the only indigenous artificial 
food we have, and too much cannot be said of its 
valuable nutritious properties. When fresh and 
sweet, it is, in my opinion, second to no cake, linseed 
or cotton seed not excepted.” Such being the 
case, can our correspondent tell us why so large 
a quantity of gingelly poonac is imported 
into Ceylon from India and used as food for milk and 
draught cattle m preference to the coconut cake? 
The qualification “fresh and sweet” is important 
as regards coconut poonac, which even in its freshest 
condition is possessed of an odour that so tells on 
the milk of cattle fed on it, that such milk is not 
considered suitable for children. What has our corres- 
pondent to say on this point? As a flesh former, no 
doubt coconut poonac is a valuable cattle 
food, but is it equally valuable as food for 
cattle yielding “ the lacteal fluid ” ? On cattle 
disease our correspondent remarks: “ Our two con- 
tagious diseases are rinderpest, (murrain) and, 
second, vesicular epizootic (foot and mouth disease).” 
The word “ our ” sounds as if our correspondent 
agreed with the view that the diseases referred 
to are practically indigenous to Ceylon, which we 
shall certainly hold until we have evidence to the 
contrary. Some years ago we dealt with a 
mass of reports and recommendations, by the head 
of the Medical Department, amongst others, which 
showed that (contrary to the deliverance of the 
Cattle Commission of 1869,) cattle disease in Ceylon: 
was as prevalent and destructive in the early period 
of British rule at the beginning of the century as it 
is now. Then as now it was traced to poor food, 
foul water and specially exposure to the influences 
of the inclement monsoon weather. The real 
remedies are more obvious now than they were 
at the period referred to. Our correspondent will 
say: “Yes: quarantine and stamping out.” We 
also say: “ Yes, if the latter were possible. But as 
we fear it is not, and as the disease is, now at 
least, as native to the soil as the cattle 
themselves, we must resort and trust mainly to 
less heroic measures of gradual improvement in 
breed and treatment of cattle, and largely in im- 
proved pasturage.” We are very much surprised 
to see the adverse criticism on what we consider 
a very sensible passage in Mr. de Silva’s pam- 
phlet, which runs thus : — 
“ The principal causes which lead to the spread of 
cattle murrain and the destruction of such a large 
number of cattle in this island may be attributed to 
the want of proper shelter from the extremes of weather, 
their degenerate condition, protracted droughts and 
the want of a proper knowledge of preventative measures. 
“ The great hardships and the evils attended on cattle 
for want of shelter was dwelt upon at length in a 
previous section. When cattle suffer on account of ex- 
posure to night air, &c., and hence become weak, they 
are liable to get the contagion easily. A weak animal 
is always liable to disease.” 
Now it is quite true that when rinderpest breaks 
out amongst animals, as in the case of cholera 
amongst human beings, the strong and healthy 
are liable to attack with the weakly and dis- 
eased ; but certainly not in the same proportion, 
and to deny that a degenerate state, arising from 
bad treatment, as well as unfavourable meteorological 
conditions, predisposes to disease, is to go counter to 
experience and commonsense. As a comment on Mr. 
de Silva’s recommendations that diseased animals 
should be segregated and treated, our corres- 
pondent interjects the exclamations, “ Kill them 
at once 1 and bury them 1” That, of course, would 
be effectual, (if the carcases were not, as 
they have been, dug up and used as 
food !) were there only one, or even half-a- 
dozen centres of contagious disease; but if, as 
we contend, the germs of the disease and the 
tendencies to contracting it are widespread and 
general, stamping out by destruction is impossible. 
Of course we are writing of rinderpest, the equiva- 
lent in the bovine race of cholera in the human 
being ; for even our correspondent concedes that 
foot-and-mouth(disease, which in veterinary nomen- 
clature becomes “ vesicular epizootic,” may 
possibly be best treated by segregation. — Let our 
position as regards the much more serious and 
fatal disease be clearly understood. We most 
thoroughly believe that the true remedy 
is “ stamping out,”— were it possible. But if, as 
we believe, it is not, then we must address our- 
selves to so altering existing conditions in the 
treatment and condition of cattle as to render its 
appearance and ravages gradually rarer and rarer, 
and ultimately impossible. 
