Original Correspondence.

Bruce Herald, Volume III, Issue 61, 8 June 1865, Page 9

Original Correspondence.

INOCULATION OF CATTLE. (To the Editor of the Bruce Herald.} Sir — In my last letter I promised you a problem on inoculation of cattle, ! it having been much spoken of for the last twelve months, and from all that I have heard about it I rarely find two persons agreeing as to whether inoculation is beneficial of not. I will now propound my^problem, begging to be excused giving dates : as I am only an Inspector without pay, I did not keep any journal. Last spring, or early in summer, I inoculated 20 of my own cows with matter as I took it from the lungs of a diseased beast, keeping a very keen eye towards them for one month, and up to that date not one of them showed any symptoms of disease ; I was then encouraged to inoculate the whole of my dry cattle, and procured some more fresh matter from another diseased beast, and this matter I reduced by adding a little water, and put it through a process of fire, in order that it should not be so severe upon the tails of the animals, and afterwards inoculated 200 head ; in this case the cattle did not lo3e their tails, as they did in the first, but you could see many of them with their tails completely powerless for many weeks, which proved that the inoculation had taken effect. Of those 200 I have lost many since, while of the first 20 cows not one has given way up to this date. It would appear here that the only reason that could be given is that there was a difference in the lymph : certainly there was. But on the same day that I inoculated the 200 head, and with the lymph out of the same vial, I inoculated for one of my neighbours about 15 head, (two of them bad with the disease, one of which died, the other recovered), and from that time 'till now not one of these cows have shown any symptoms of disease of any kind ; and in another herd of 20 or more, which I itibculated with the same lymph, the same result has followed up till now, which, as far as I recollect, must be over six months. These two herds of cattle have been surrounded with disease ever since. How is it that the inoculation has proved effectual in these two herds while it did not in the other, all having received the same treatment 1 I shall be most happy if any individual will solve this for me : in the meantime I reserve my own opinion. But to those that may be desirous of having their cattle inoculated, I would say that in no instance whatever allow your cattle to be inoculated 'unless that you are sure of the lymph having been taken from the lungs of the animal only a few days before. I believe that the lymph is of too rotten and corruptive a nature to be kept fresh by any one for any lengthened period, at same time I have no wish to press this idea upon any one that may think otherwise. PETER ROBERTSON, Tuapeka,3oth May, 1865.

(To the Editor of Bruce Herald). Sir, — " Elector" has made another effort to justify the charges brought against me iv his first letter, and be feels the position he has taken up so unassailable that he can afford to be witty on the subject. Not content with these superior efforts of his spite, he has added to his former epistle by importing a quantity of matter so foreign to the original subject, that I am afraid you could scarcely allow me space to reply to it, were I so. inclined. 'ihe chief argument contained in "Elector's" last letter is— That my name \ppears on the division list in favor of a cerfcam motion, against which I had spoken ; in other, words, as I did not vote for the amendment, I must have voted for the motion. Sir, if " Elector" were not the veriest tyro in political matters, he would never have shown his ignorance by arriving at such a conclusion. He is destitute of all knowledge of parliamentary usage, or he would have known that when a member desires to quash- a- particular motion, he may with consistency oppose ten amendments on I it, and last of all, the motion itself. There were three amendments on" Mr Burns's motion. I was opposed to the motion and to every amendment founded on it. i Sir, I am too busy threshing corn just now [-to be able to follow the 1 >fty nights of 'fancy, and silly wit that adorn several portions of , 4 f Elector's" letter ; but when his gifted mind can condescend to discuss the common' things of life. I will not be far off to correct him when he goes astray again ? and, in the meantime, I would throw, out a suigesjtion that in future he should refrain from expressing himsieif on a subject so evidently beyond his com- i prehension. JAMES ADAM, i