236 QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. [1 Srpr., 1898. 
It should be mentioned that the cattle used in the present experiment 
were very wild, so that they were with great difficulty yarded and got into the 
crush. For this reason the daily process of temperature-taking, together with 
their constant efforts to escape from the paddock, made the test of exposure 
to virulent ticks, in their case, a particularly severe one. 
It should also be explained, in reference to this experiment, that some 
time ago an attempt was made to determine definitely whether the quantity of 
recovered blood injected had any bearing on the amount of reactionary fever 
produced. ‘With this object, 15 bullocks were injected with 40 c.c., 15 with 
10 c.c., and 15 with 4 ¢.c. of the same recovered blood. The temperatures 
were not recorded, but the animals were observed daily by Mr. James 
Armstrong, of Messrs. Archer Brothers’ cattle station, who is a very careful 
observer, and has had a great deal of experience in inoculating cattle. He 
noted that they all showed distinct reaction, but he was unable to detect any 
difference in the amount of, sickness in the different groups inoculated, 
respectively, with 40, 10, and 4.c.c. None died. 
The inference, as far as this particular experiment went, was, obviously, 
to the effect that the quantity injected has no relation to the amount of 
reaction produced. 
Tt still remained, however, to ascertain if there was any difference in the 
protective efficacy of the different quantities employed, and this was the 
primary object of the present experiment. Tive of the 14 bullocks tested 
were from the group that had been inoculated with 40 c.c., 5 from that done 
with 10 ¢.c., and the remaining 4 and the bull had received 4 ¢.c. No. 1 
(that became blind, and fell into the shaft) and also No. 8 (that died of the 
peach-poison) were both of the group inoculated with 40 e.c. The animal 
believed to have died of tick fever was of the group done with } c.c. Ido not, 
however, think that this circumstance is sufficient, in itself, to warrant the 
conclusion that inoculation with 4 c.c.—when followed by reaction—is 
generally of less protective value than where larger quantities are used. 
‘One other word of explanation seems necessary. In referring to the 
cattle brought down from St. Helens and exposed at Gracemere some time 
ago, you will notice that I have classed them with the cattle from Boolburra 
as “‘ not inoculated.’ I have done this because, as eyents showed (as stated in 
report already forwarded to you of those experiments), they were, to all 
intents and purposes, in the same position as though they had never been 
inoculated at all. They had been injected only with blood of tick-infested 
Boolburra cattle, which, though grossly infested for some time, had never 
had Texas Fever amongst them, and were themselves (as also shown in 
the report just referred to) as susceptible to that disease as clean cattle. 
The injection of 20 cc. of this Boolburra blood caused no reaction, and 
afforded no protection. It was not in any sense “recovered blood.” TI have, 
therefore, here spoken of the 7 St. Helens cattle, that had been injected with 
it petore they were subjected to the ticks at Gracemere, as “ot inoculated” 
cattle. 
TICK FEVER EXPERIMENTS. 
Yeppoon, Rockhampton, 
27th July, 1898. 
Tux following report to the Chief Inspector of Stock, by Dr. Sidney Hunt, of 
three experiments recently carried out by him at Gracemere, has been handed 
to us for publication :— 
The respective objects of these experiments were to ascertain— 
1. If it is possible to protect clean cattle against tick fever by inoculating 
them immediately on arrival on virulently infested country. 
