H.—2

44

Mr. Pack said he had frequently seen them in March when the cattle had been housed. He had seen cattle covered over with warbles, and squeezed them out fully matured. As Mr. Eitchie had suggested, they might get on board the ship, and thence overboard. Mr. Eitchie said they burst in June or July. That being so, they might drop about the ship, and be ready to fly away when they reached the New Zealand shores. Mr. McClean said it appeared to him that when the cattle arrived they would be able to have a good idea as to whether they had warbles or not. Mr. Beuce was rather inclined to agree with Mr. Eitchie in doubting whether they were in a position to fix any particular period. They might refer the matter Home to the best authorities, explaining what risk they ran, and asking what was the best course to take to avoid it. Mr. Eitchie thought the best way would be to ask the different Governments to make inquiries in reference to. warbles, and as to the best months to ship cattle, and then to frame regulations on that basis. He was afraid that without further information they might be taking the worst months possible. Mr. McClean did not think any benefit was likely to arise from taking that course, as all the information obtainable was already in the colony. They had the views of Miss Ormerod and Neumann, and he thought they might accept what had been said as fairly correct. Mr. Beuce proposed that this pest should be added to the list of diseases. The pest might come out any day. It might be necessary to retain the cattle a longer time in quarantine, but if they kept the pest among the list of diseases they could deal with it at any time. Mr. Tabaet moved, " That this Conference respectfully recommends the various Australasian Governments to make inquiries through their Agents-General as to the most suitable months in the year in which to ship cattle from the United Kingdom to the colonies, so as to prevent the introduction of so serious a pest as the gad-fly (GUstrus bovis)." Mr. Eitchie seconded the motion.—Agreed to. Subclause (7), as amended, confirmed. ' Subclause (8) : " That the Agents-General for the several colonies be asked to appoint one (i.e., the same) qualified veterinary surgeon at each port of shipment, to examine all stock intended to be exported to any of the colonies; such veterinary surgeon to give a certificate of health to accompany the animals." Subclause (8), as amended, confirmed. Subclause (9) passed as printed. Subclause (10), as amended, confirmed. Subclause (11), as amended, confirmed. Subclause (12) struck out, and substitution of new clause confirmed. Subclauses (13) to (17) passed as printed. Subclause (18). Mr. Tabaet moved, " That the word ' sheep ' in paragraph (b) be omitted," with the view of further reducing the period of quarantine for sheep to thirty days. In doing this he was studying the interests of the importers. The period of incubation for diseases in sheep was fully covered by the fifty days' voyage and thirty days' quarantine. The longest period of incubation for any disease was that of scab, which, as he had shown in his paper, was from sixteen to eighteen days, and as a provision against this the sheep were dipped twice or three times at the discretion of the Inspector. He hoped the colony would support him in this amendment, as the hardship his colony suffered from —the long quarantine of sixty days when sheep were imported—was very great. Their business with the stockowners of Australia was a large one, and brought them in from £50,000 to £80,000 a year. Tasmanian stockowners would not recommend a quarantine such as he had proposed if they saw there was the slightest chance of their interests being injured. Mr. Eobeets seconded the amendment. Mr. Beuce said that mistakes had been made, and might be made again. They wanted to be satisfied that sheep were not affected with scab or any other disease before they left quarantine. So far as he understood the feeling of the stockowners of his colony they were content with a quarantine of sixty days. The time of quarantine was of little moment compared with the risk. The more they reduced the cost of importing stock the more chance they ran of getting inferior stock. He was in favour of allowing the clause to stand as it was. Mr. Tabaet asked if Mr. Bruce feared scab with a fifty days' voyage and a thirty days' quarantine. If an Inspector was not qualified to deal with scab in thirty days he was not fit to hold his position. If sheep were dipped under the supervision of a man who knew his duty he maintained that there was not the slightest chance of introducing scab. He (Mr. Tabart) had had a lifelong experience of scab, and he was not afraid of allowing sheep to be introduced with a thirty days' quarantine; neither were the stockowners of his colony. They had dealt with scab for seven years. The Tasmanian Scab Act came into force in 1870, and in 1878 scab was a thing of the past. This was the result of the employment of an efficient staff of Inspectors, who carried out the law irrespective of persons. They had never had it reintroduced, and had never had an outbreak after the proclamation of cleanness had been issued. Mr. Gordon said if Mr. Tabart had dealt with this matter the previous day he would have favoured the proposal, but he did not think the matter should be reopened. Some of the stockowners of Queensland had said they would like the period reduced, but the Conference had debated the question, and he thought the resolution should stand. Mr. Tabaet said that his paper was the first introduced to be read, but Mr. Bruce had moved that the resolution be dealt with prior to the reading of the paper. The Conference divided on the question, "That the clause stand as originally amended." Ayes, 6 : New Zealand, 3; New South Wales, 3. Noes, 6 : Tasmania, 3; Queensland, 3. The voting beiug equal, the Chairman gave his casting vote with the " Ayes." Subclause (19) passed as printed.