Consider the following premises. For all x_10, if x_10 climbs a mountain, then x_10 is a cashier. For all x_10, x_10 is excited or x_10 is not fast. For all x_10, if x_10 were a cashier, then x_10 is fast. There is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 works, then x_10 is climbing a mountain. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_10, the fact that x_10 works does not imply that x_10 is excited.
That contradicts the premises. Therefore the answer is no.