horses with glanders, the firm would not be entitled to pay for more than ten horses in any one year. You will note that the Act in providing for the payment of horses dying with the glanders, says: Section 9, "The owners of such animal or live stock shall be entitled to be paid for such animals or live stock by the State Board of Health in the following manner;" then the manner is prescribed in the remainder of the section. If the stock belongs to a partnership, then the partnership is the owner, and the members of the firm as individuals are not the owners of the stock. The law provides that the payment shall be made to the owner. Answering the other question, I beg to advise that a woman may be the owner of property-a horse-and entitled to pay therefor although she is not a free-holder. Yours very truly, Attorney General. Whereupon the State Health Officer had vouchers prepared to cover these two claims in accordance with instructions contained in the opinion of the Attorney-General, and wrote the following letter to claimants: Letter from the State Health Officer to Tompkins & Cobbs "Messrs. Tompkins & Cobb, Ocala, Fla. Gentlemen: Key West, Florida, Sept. 13, 1909. Referring to the claim of A. C. Cobb for reimbursement for ten animals destroyed account glanders, July 7, 1908; and also to the claim of D. W. Tompkins for reimbursement for ten animals destroyed account glanders, same date; and referring to my letter of the 3rd instant in regard to claims entered by individual members of a partnership: Enclosed herewith is a copy of opinion rendered in this matter by the Attorney-General of the State, from which it will be seen that payment will have to be made to Tompkins & Cobb, a partnership, for ten animals, and that it is not possible for the State Board of Health to pay the ir dividual claims entered. Vouchers have therefore been prepared covering ten animals, and are enclosed herewith for signature. A copy of this letter has been made a part of enclosures to accompany the claim. The enclosed vouchers should be signed in duplicate, and returned to the State Board of Health at Jacksonville, and when received there will be placed in the way of settlement as soon as it is possible. It is indeed unfortunate that your firm should have to undergo such an expense on account of glandered animals, but under the provisions of the Statute-Chapter 5933-no reimbursement other than for ten animals can be made. Yours very truly, (Signed) JOSEPH Y. PORTER, On September 27th, 1909, the State Health Officer received from Messrs. Tompkins & Cobb the signed vouchers; also a letter regarding the claim which they requested should be attached to the claim and to the vouchers when forwarded to the State Comptroller; this was done by the State Health Officer, and the letter from Messrs. Tomkins & Cobb will therefore be found attached to voucher No. 10,964 in Special Requisition No. 67, October, 1909, of State Board of Health upon the State Comptroller. On the same date, September 27th, 1909, the State Health Officer having written Messrs. Tompkins & Cobb in acknowledgment of the receipt of vouchers and letter, and having stated to them that their letter would be made a part of and would accompany the claim and vouchers, also wrote a letter as follows to the State Comptroller: "Hon. A. C. Croom, State Comptroller, Dear Sir: Key West, Fla., Sept. 27, 1909. I am today in receipt of a letter from Messrs. Tompkins & Cobb, of Ocala, Fla., returning to the State Board of Health signed vouchers covering reimbursement for ten horses, $750, condemned and destroyed at Ocala, Florida, July 7th, 1909, account glanders. Payees request in letter mentioned that that letter be made a part of the record in this claim, and I have today granted the request, notifying Messrs. Tompkins & Cobb of such action. The statement is made in that letter that the vouchers are signed under protest, as this payment is not satisfactory. But in accordance with the opinion of the Attorney General, as shown in his letter of Sept. 7th, copy attached herewith, this office can only render vouchers to cover ten animals, although 23 animals belonging to the partnership of Tompkins & Cobb were killed on account of glanders. In connection with the above settlement and protest, I beg to state that the records of the office of the State Board of Health show that in 1905 glanders was introduced from South Dakota into this State-at Ocala, Coleman and Tampa. Thirty cases of glanders were diagnosed at Ocala by the Veterinarian of the State Board of Health. Ten of these animals showed the disease in its incipiency by reacting to the mallein test. They were apparently in good condition and showed no clinical evidence of the disease; and the owners, against the advice of the State Board of Health, refused to destroy the ten animals. Eventually some of these animals died and some were sold. However, the infection was planted at Ocala and this past July 62 cases of glanders were diagnosed by our Veterinarian. It is presumed that should this matter be presented to the Legislature for relief in the premises, in 1911, that the claim will be referred to your office for confirmation and information, and it is for that reason I desire these facts to be on record with the accompanying vouchers. The State Health Officer is of the opinion and firm belief that had the ten horses, diagnosed as afflicted with glanders at Ocala in 1905, mentioned above, been destroyed as advised, that the epidemic, 62 cases, would never have occurred in Ocala last July (1909). Satisfactory evidence has been secured to warrant the belief that the 1909 epidemic of glanders was a sequence of the infection not destroyed in 1905. Yours very truly, (Signed) JOSEPH Y. PORTER, State Health Officer." On voucher No. 10,964, dated Sept. 30, 1909, drawn in favor of Tompkins & Cobb, in the sum of $750., covering reimbursement for the loss of ten animals, the following statement appeared: “The payees hereof agree that this payment is in full satisfaction of their individual claims as entered for reimbursement of said animals and other animals described on attached blanks of appraisement." SYNOPSIS OF PREVALENCE OF GLANDERS IN ALACHUA COUNTY, JANUARY-FEBRUARY, 1911 Officials in charge of outbreak: Dr. Thomas J. Mahaffy, Veterinarian State Board of Health, assisted by Dr. J. G. Burneson of the United States Bureau of Animal Industry. History of Outbreak, Source of Infection, etc: On January 16th, 1911, the Jacksonville office of the State Board of Health, through the veterinarian, was advised by a long distance telephone message from Mr. Lee Hughes, of the Newberry Stable Company, Newberry, Florida, that two cases of glanders had been diagnosed by Dr. A. D. Galbraith in the stables of the said company and that the company had shot and killed the animals. The next morning's mail brought a letter from Dr. Galbraith confirming the telephone message. Dr. Thomas J. Mahaffy, veterinarian of the State Board of Health, then in Jacksonville, was detailed to go to Newberry, and he left for that point on the morning of the 17th of January. On January 19th a telegram was received from Mr. S. K. DuPuis of Trenton, also reporting the occurrence. The letters from Dr. Galbraith and Mr. DuPuis were promptly answered, giving the information that the veterinarian had left on January 17th for Newberry. Upon Dr. Mahaffy's first visit to Newberry he obtained from the Newberry Stable Company a complete list of those persons and firms to whom they had sold animals from a shipment of three cars of horses and mules from Oklahoma; and the State Health Officer at once wrote to each of these owners, forty-three in all, a letter requiring them to isolate such animals as they had bought from the Newberry Stable Company and to have them in readiness for examination by the veterinarian when he should reach each in turn. The several owners complied with the request contained in that letter and isolated such animals and also contact animals, until they could be tested. Source of Infection: From information obtained from various parties at and near Newberry during the prevalence of the disease, the veterinarian ascertained that 76 horses and mules were received at Newberry by the Newberry Stable Company during September and November, 1910, from Miller Brothers' 101 Ranch, Bliss, Oklahoma; that 26 horses and mules were bought by the Newberry Stable Company at the same time, these 26 animals coming from the following points: 4 from Punker, 8 from 50 miles east of Bliss, I from 2 miles east of Bliss, 2 from 6 miles east of Bliss, 3 from Red Rock, 6 from Gonzalez Co., (address not known), 2 mules from unknown localities; These were all from Oklahoma, the localities mentioned being in that state. Of the 76 animals particular attention is directed to number 640 (see tabulations attached), which remained in the stables of the Newberry Stable Company for four days after arrival; was sold to a Mr. Hodges and then traded to Mr. W. P. Jones, and infected his animals. No. 640 died February 6th, and a post mortem showed evidence of the animal having had glanders for some time. Mr. Jones lost this animal and three others which became infected. Some of the 76 animals were scattered throughout Alachua county, in eight towns, among forty-three owners, with the exception of one animal which had been sent to Georgia, and a few which had been sold by the first purchasers. Only two of the 76 animals were not located. It is believed by Dr. Mahaffy that the infection was brought into Florida from the 101 Ranch by these animals. Among the 76 were several circus ponies which had served circus duty for Miller Bros., IOI Ranch, but were returned to the ranch and shipped to Florida. Regarding the second lot of animals mentioned-26 in number: One of these gave clinical symptoms of glanders when inspected, and others reacted to the mallein test, but it is believed that these became infected from contact with animals in the lot of 76 after arrival at Newberry. Total number of animals tested with mallein 141 14 The fourteen animals just mentioned had not been in contact with any of the infected animals. Number of animals reported as killed by owners, Nos. o and oo Number killed by order of the Veterinarian 27 2 I 35 Killed by owner Killed by owner 0 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-16-11, $ 00 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-16-11, 535 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-17-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 536 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-17-11, 300 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 537 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-17-11, 160 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 538 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-17-11, 135 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 539 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-17-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 544 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2-28-11, 100 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 547 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2-28-11, 125 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 549 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-23-11, 225 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 551 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2- 2-11, 175 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 554 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-23-11, 140 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 562 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2- 2-11, 175 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 566 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2- 2-11, 210 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 568 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-23-11, 175 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 570 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2- 2-11, 165 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 573 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2- 2-11, 275 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 574 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-23-11, 250 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 583 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 1-23-11, 300 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 587 J. W. Griffin, Newberry 1-24-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 588 J. W. Griffin, Newberry, 1-24-11, 100 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 1-26-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 590 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 1-26-11, 275 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 595 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry 2-2-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 601 Peach Farm (Cummer Lumber Co., Newberry 2-28-11, 606 Newberry Stable Co., Newberry, 2-23-11, 614 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 589 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 617 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 619 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 75 Killed by order of the Veterinarian 200 Killed by order of the Veterinarian Died in isolation 2-24-11, 621 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 622 Long Lumber & Tie Co., Newberry 623 Long Lumber & Tie Co., New berry 2-3-11, 624 Long Lumber & Tie Co., New berry 2-28-11, 2- 6 11, 2- 6-11, order of the Veterinarian 2- 6-11, 173.33* Killed by order of Veterinarian 2- 8-11, 150 Killed by order of the Veterinarian In appraising the value of the following animals, the appraisers could not agree on a figure, so the value stated by each appraiser was recorded in the claim for reimbursement, and is as follows: The value of these animals as given above is simply an avarage of the values stated by the appraisers. Veterinarian's Number |