I.- -8

26

92. Do you think it is absolutely necessary that every Inspector should be a veterinary surgeon ? —No, I think not. ■93. You think that if there are a sufficient number of veterinary surgeons to attend to the wants of the local Inspectors, that would meet the case ?—Yes ; the local Inspectors have so much to do otherwise, in acquiring a knowledge of the country and the habits of the people, that I do not think you can expect thsm to be qualified men. I have found in the South that people seem not to care about telling the Inspector about their cattle, because the Stock Inspector is also Eabbit Inspector, and they do not want him to see their rabbits. They say to me many a time, " Come; but I don't want the Inspector." 94. Hon. Mr. Montgomery .] You have spoken of isolating the animals ?—Once they are tested, if you isolate those that are diseased quite away from the healthy ones, you could gradually replace them. You would keep them isolated until they have their calves ; and after being tested the healthy calves could be put with the healthy stock, while those that are very bad could be gradually eliminated. An animal may react to the test, and on killing it there might be found a little lump, only the size of a marble. This might cause as much reaction as if the disease was far advanced. 95. If an animal be tested and be found to have the disease, should it be killed ?—-Under the Act it should be. 96. How, then, do you determine when an animal should be isolated ? If you apply the test and the animal is found to be tuberculous you have to kill it; there can therefore be no isolation under the Act ?—At present we do not kill them straight out. Suppose you were the owner of a herd and wanted them tested; if you were to know that the Inspector would kill everything that reacted, you would not be anxious for the application of the test, consequently we could never use the test at all with satisfaction. But we will not test at present unless the owner states that he is willing to isolate when it is found necessary. 97. But, under the Act, if, when tested, they are found to be tuberculous, they must be killed ? —Yes. 98. Mr. Wason.] The whole of the evidence which you gave in reply to Mr. Ormond's questions seems to be beside the Act we are discussing altogether. Are you of opinion that the dairy stock in the colony should be subject to much more rigid inspection than at present?— Yes; I think there is an urgent necessity for the inspection of dairy stock. 99. With reference to the question that fell from the Minister of Lands : clause 27 of the Bill reads, " Provided that no person (other than a duly qualified veterinary surgeon) shall be appointed as an Inspector unless he has passed the prescribed examination before the Government Veterinarian," &c. Do I understand you to say, in reply to Mr. McKenzie, that you do not think that would be necessary? —No. For inspection of meat under the Bill I think it would decidedly be necessary to have an examination. Even many of the older veterinary surgeons, who have not given any attention to meat inspection, would not do for this work. 100. You stated the other day that there were only five or six in the colony ?—Yes; they would have to be imported. 101. For instance, there is a man in Christchureh who has been there inspecting for nine years for the Selwyn County Council, and for the Christchureh Municipal Council for the last four years. He must have had a great deal of experience with reference to tuberculosis, and also with reference to actinomycosis. Would not a person of that sort do as an Inspector under the Act?— Well, if he could pass his examination, he would ;if he could not, Ido not think he would do. Ido not mean that it would necessarily be a written examination. It might be vivdvoce. 102. Would there then be any objection in altering the wording of the clause in reference to " prescribed examination " to such as " satisfied the Government Veterinarian " ?—Yes. You see, as I told this Christchureh Inspector myself, that in Christchureh they would require an assistant besides the Chief Inspector ; and he would be a most useful man for that; but I certainly would not put him on to examine the whole of the meat killed in Christchureh on his own responsibility. 103. Then it is not intended that assistant Inspectors should pass the prescribed examination? —No, not necessarily a written examination. 104. They would merely have to satisfy you as to their knowledge. Have you any objection to putting words in the Bill to meet this ?—There is no objection, so far as I know. 105. In the Pharmacy Bill, where the lives of human beings are concerned, it is provided that a man is qualified if he has carried on business, I think, for two months on his own account or six months if in employment ?—Yes; that is quite a different question from this, because there is no inspection at present. There is no place at present where a man can get a knowledge as Inspector in the colony, and the inspection is purely perfunctory. You have never heard of an instance of an Inspector walking into a slaughterhouse and condemning an animal that he saw hanging up there. An Inspector would also require a certain knowledge of hygiene, in order to be able to inspect such matters as water-supply and drainage. For instance, in Invercargill they have an Inspector at £50 a year, and the state of things there at the slaughter-shed is simply disgusting. The wells are merely little holes about the slaughter-yard, and are liable to contamination of every kind ; the water from these being used to wipe the meat with. 106. You would then require an Inspector to pass an examination, and the deputy Inspectors to satisfy the department as to their knowledge?— Yes ; the deputy Inspectors could be trained—it would be sufficient, indeed, if he satisfied his own Inspector. Of course, if a deputy Inspector applied for an inspectorship he would then have to pass the examination. Mr. Ritchie examined. 107. Hon. J. D. Ormond.] You have heard that I asked Mr. Gilruth if he could supply information as to the number of cattle that have been killed on account of tuberculosis—you will have the record ? —Yes; I have the record before me. For the last two years there were about 1,600.