, 1885-08-11
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
The Missouri Governor says something
10 Our Veterinarian.

To our Veterinarian.
Mr. w. A. Bright. of Missouri, who
has cattle interests in Wyoming and who
is sojourning hero temporarily, has re-
ceived the following letter from the gov
ernor of Missouri, through the medium
of the latter's private secretary, which
explains itself.
CRY OF JEFFERSON. STATE OF
MISSOURI, EXECUTIVE DEPART
MENT, July 81, 1885.
Sm;-XOurs Of the Doth to the COVER
nor, enclosing a newspaper clipping con
tanning the statements OF Territorial Vet
erinarian John d. Hopkins, on the sub
iect of pleuro pneumonia in Missouri. is
at hand. In reply l will say that DR..
Hopkins remarks are untrue in the fol-
lowing particulars; Pleuro pneumonia did
not spread among the cattle of Missouri
through the absence of any law to check
it, nor did it spread through the cattle
Of Missouri at all. The fact is, there
were as active, y%igilant and intelligent
measures taken to prevent its spread,
after its presence was declared, as would
have obtained had there been the most
vigorous law on our statute books. Our
people, as you know, are intelligent, and
fully recognize the law of self preserva-
ton.
Second-There was a daily examina-
ton of suspected cattle so long as our
state veterinarian and the United States
veterinary surgeons thought necessary.
This examination was rigid and by sur
geons Of undoubted competency.
Third-There has been ever since the
last of March, and Il still continues, or
ganized search after disease among Mis-
souri, cattle, and no case OF pleuro Dneu-
monia has been found since April 80, as
shown by official reports of DR.. Paquin.
| cannot say how far back OF April 80 no
case has occurred.
Fourth--it is not true that the disease
exists in Missouri, whatever ample evi
dence' to the contrary may be in posses
sion of the authorities of Wyoming terri
tory.
Fifth-It is not true that the state of
Missouri had no law to enable them to
stamp out the contagion, and it is true
that the most heroic treatment was re-
sorted to in our recent scare, and u large
number of animals, supposed to have
been exposed to the contagion, were
slaughtered.
The point of this gentleman's remarks
and the burden of his complaint seems to
be that Missouri has no such law, as
would meet his approval, on the subject
Of pleuro pneumonia, and hat without
such law he will decline to allov Missouri
cattle access to the territory over which he
exercises control.
The lawmakers Of Missouri are in the
habit of consulting, first, the irisdou of
any proposed enactment, and, second, the
appreciation of their own people. Guided
by such considerations, they have not
sought to make the state veterinarian one
of the most influential officers in the state
by placing in his hands the privilege of
unlimited demand upon the state treas
ury, or the control of intel state com
merce with reference to live stock. They
have given us conservative and sensible
laws providing for the sanitary care of
both our citizens and our live stock. The
execution of these particular laws are in
the hands of wise and practical men.
1t would be well if the officials of other
states and territories would abandon this
selt-imposed task of taking care of the
people of Missouri, through her l[egisla-
ture, and confne themselves in this mat
ter OF the shipment of cattle and other
live stock, to the only questions that con
Germ them. namely. Is this particular
shipment of stock healthy? and hasi n been
exposed to contagion within a term hat
would endanger stock with which it might
come in contact? If our people offer De
ceased cattle, or if the healthfulness Of
the cattle is not reliably established, let
other states refuse to receive them. But
when the healthfnlness and freedom
from exposure to contagion are properly
and u~ndisputably verified, such cattle
ought to pass freely from one state to an
other without being compelled to pay
tribute in the guise of veterinary surgeons
fees. Very truly yours,
V. c, YANTTs,
d. C