59§ 
E. P. NILES. 
is said that in some herds the per cent, of tuberculous cattle 
runs as high as 98, while in others no trace of the disease ex¬ 
ists. These latter have been fortunate enough not to have had 
a tuberculous subject introduced in their midst. The following 
figures will give some idea of the ratio of infection in the differ¬ 
ent sexes. Although the statistics are probably somewhat in¬ 
accurate, it will be seen that cows head the list, oxen second, 
bulls third and yearlings and calves fourth. The fact that 
steers are usually allowed to run at large, which lessens the fre¬ 
quency of exposure, and that they are usually marketed at from 
two to four years of age, explains why they are less frequently 
affected than cows. Bulls, too, are usually kept by themselves 
and are, therefore, not so easily exposed. The disease being 
more prevalent in older animals accounts for the low per cent- 
age in yearlings and calves. Germany furnishes us with the 
following statistics from a number of its abattoirs as follows: 
Cows, 6.9 per cent.; oxen, 3.6 per cent.; bulls, 2.6 per cent.; 
calves and yearlings, 1 per cent. In Leipsic, tuberculous cows 
were 26 per cent.; oxen, 19.5 percent.; bulls, 15.4 per cent, and 
calves, 9.3 percent. Amsterdam shows a steady increase of the 
disease for the last six years as follows: In 1888 out of a total 
number of 28,016 animals slaughtered, 495, or 1.76 per cent., 
were tuberculous. In 1889, out of a total number of 26,225 ani- 
male slaughted, 793, or 3.5 per cent, were tuberculous. In 1890, 
out of a total number of 22,813 animals slaughtered, 755, or 3.3 
per cent, were tuberculous. In 1891, out or a total number of 
23,392 animals slaughtered, 1,246, or 5.3 per cent., were tu¬ 
berculous. In 1892, out of a total number of 25,454 animals 
slaughtered, 1,332, or 5.3 per cent, were tuberculous. In 1893, 
out of a total number of 28,342 animals slaughtered, 1,491, or 
5.26 per cent., were tuberculous. 
If accurate statistics could be gotten in this country no 
doubt they would be equally, if not more alarming, than the 
above. 
The prevalence of tuberculosis in the human family has been 
mentioned above, and the question may be asked, why is the 
