Annual  Report  for  1910  of  Royal  Veterinary  College.  291 
police  whenever  he  has  reasonable  grounds  for  suspecting  that 
any  animal  in  his  possession  is  affected  with  anthrax,  and  this 
statement  has  to  be  read  in  connection  with  that  part  of  the 
Order  which  says  that  “ where  the  owner  or  person  in  charge 
of  an  animal  or  carcass  is  charged  with  an  offence  against  the 
Act  of  1894  relative  to  anthrax,  he  shall  be  presumed  to  have 
known  of  the  existence  of  that  disease,  unless  and  until  he 
shows,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Court,  that  he  had  not  know- 
ledge thereof  and  could  not  with  reasonable  diligence  have 
obtained  that  knowledge.”  It  is  a very  important  fact  for 
owners  to  remember  that  Courts  of  Law  have  decided  that  when 
an  animal  has  died  from  anthrax  knowledge  of  the  existence  of 
the  disease  must  be  presumed  if  the  death  has  occurred  in  the 
circumstances  which  are  usual  in  cases  of  anthrax.  In  other 
words,  if  the  death  has  been  sudden,  unexpected,  and  not 
obviously  due  to  some  other  cause  than  anthrax,  a Court  of  Law 
would  almost  certainly  hold  that  the  owner  knew  or  ought  to 
have  suspected  that  the  case  was  one  of  anthrax.  To  laymen 
that  may  appear  unjust,  and  no  doubt  it  has  sometimes  led  to 
the  conviction  of  persons  who  failed  to  report  simply  because 
they  had  never  suspected,  but,  nevertheless,  a laxer  view 
of  the  owner’s  responsibility  would  be  opposed  to  public 
interests. 
Since  anthrax  was  first  made  a notifiable  disease  a constant 
feature  of  the  annual  returns  regarding  it  has  been  the  small- 
ness of  the  average  number  of  animals  attacked  in  each  out- 
break. During  the  last  ten  years  the  average  has  always  been 
less  than  two,  and  the  fact  indicates  that  the  measures  which 
have  been  in  force  during  that  period  have  been  fairly  efficient 
for  preventing  the  spread  of  infection  at  the  places  where  the 
disease  has  broken  out.  In  previous  reports  it  has  been  pointed 
out  that  the  small  number  of  animals  attacked  in  proportion  to 
the  outbreaks,  and  the  fact  that  recurrent  outbreaks  on  the 
same  farm  or  premises  are  exceptional,  constitute  the  strongest 
evidence  that  a great  many  of  the  outbreaks  occurring  in  this 
country  have  their  origin  in  infected  materials  (cake  and  other 
feeding-stuffs,  and  bone  manure)  imported  from  abroad.  Such 
infection  may  antedate  the  shipment  of  those  materials,  but  it 
is  very  probable  that  in  a good  many  cases  the  contamination 
takes  place  during  transit  to  this  country,  owing  to  the  custom 
of  carrying  such  notoriously  dangerous  articles  as  raw  hides 
and  hair  on  the  same  ship  as  feeding-stuffs.  It  would  appear 
to  be  not  unreasonable  to  demand  that  precautions  should  be 
taken  against  this  danger  by  shippers. 
It  is,  of  course,  very  satisfactory  to  be  able  to  assure  an 
owner  who  has  just  lost  an  animal  from  anthrax  that  the  chances 
are  in  favour  of  his  not  having  a second  case  at  that  time.  It 
