106 
PLEURO-PNEUMONIA AND INOCULATION. 
repressive measures adopted; and the Commissioners, as 
they acquired further means of observing the disease, were 
not agreed as to the contagious or non-contagious character 
of the malady. 
In the adjoining colonies stringent measures were also 
adopted, but these failed to combat the malady. In August, 
1862, the alarm caused in the colony of New South Wales 
by the sudden appearance of the disease in various districts 
induced the Legislative Assembly to appoint a Commission 
to consider and report upon the circumstances connected with 
the slaughter of cattle by the authority of the Government, 
under the Cattle Disease Prevention Act. The Commission 
not only considered the subject in relation to the compen¬ 
sation to be paid for cattle slaughtered, but extended the in¬ 
quiry so as to embrace the operations of remedial measures 
which had been adopted by several owners of stock, espe¬ 
cially as to the effects of inoculation. We gave in a previous 
article on this subject a digest of a portion of the evidence 
taken by the Commissioners in relation to the effects of 
inoculation, as it had appeared in the Victorian Farmers’ 
Journal , and we continue to glean from the same source the 
principal points brought out in the report. The report con¬ 
cludes with the following most contradictory statements : 
“ Your Committee cannot conclude their report without 
some reference to inoculation; and from the evidence which 
has been given by Messrs. Pottie and Bruce, and several 
other parties who have tried it, apparently with great success 
in both diseased and sound cattle, it appears to your Com¬ 
mittee that if it is judiciously performed at an early stage of 
the disease, there will be no necessity in future to resort to 
the destruction of infected cattle, unless they are attacked 
very severely; and they strongly recommend, as a preventive, 
that the increase should be inoculated while young. But 
sufficient time has not elapsed since the operations were 
performed to test their efficiency, so as to warrant your Com¬ 
mittee in giving a decided expression of opinion whether 
inoculation can be considered as a cure or preventive, or both.” 
The concluding paragraph of this report is most significant, 
and may be taken as conclusive evidence that the Commis¬ 
sioners did not attach much importance to inoculation, either 
as a cure or a preventive ; for although it is strongly recom¬ 
mended “ as a preventive” by the Commissioners, yet in 
the next sentence it is stated that " sufficient time has not 
elapsed since the operations were performed to test their 
efficacy F 
In connection with the conclusion of the report, it is 
