300 ANNUAL REPORT OP THE Off. Doc. 



pseudo scientists wlio use a miscroscope and so on. All honor to the 

 fellow that is an honest investigator, as was Prof. Kopp, but I 

 desjjise the man who is not an honest investigator and does not give 

 us the actual results of his experiments — all the facts and factors 

 that make them up; not his conclusions, as did Dr. Moore when he 

 made the stockyards in Chicago and became offended at me when I 

 made a contradiction because 1 did not publish his letter. I did not 

 publish his letter because it had four flat contradictions in it. If 

 the test did the business, we would all welcome it with open arms, 

 as I did in my graded herd until 1 had proved that it was a failure. 

 Animals tested in January were re-tested in May, when they said 

 sufficient time had elapsed to give them a second test, and out of 12 

 animal reacting in January, only 8 of that 12 reacted in May. It is 

 accurate? Were they sound or were they unsound? How are you 

 going to tell? This we know — those that have been stamped as re- 

 actors and some of these gentlemen say ought to be branded, have 

 gone into barns under the reacting of Bang's system, stayed there 

 nine or ten or eleven or twelve years and it apparently perfect con- 

 dition, performing all the functions of the dairy cow, four good 

 quarters to a mighty good udder, making high official and semi-of- 

 ficial records, producing a calf every year, and lived there till they 

 were 16 and 18 years way past the ordinary age of the common dairy 

 cow when she is discarded and goes to the scrap heap. That I have 

 discovered in two reacting barns, one maintained by the State of 

 Pennsylvania at Media, and I say we ought to demand, as citizens of 

 Pennsylvania, a book, if it's as big as Webster's, the Encyclopedia 

 Britannica or the Century Dictionary. 



We ought to have a detailed report of everything that happened at 

 Media. It rests with us; we can get it if we demand it, and the 

 first appropriation that ouglit to be made to the Livestock Sanitary 

 Board ouglit to be made for the purpose of giving us the facts they 

 have been unearthed. I have a lot of respect for Dr. Gill, he has 

 handled this thing in a very moderate, fine manner. If we could get 

 all the veterinarians to apply the tuberculin test as I believe Dr. Gill 

 would apply it and as I believe that Dr. Marshall in person would 

 apply it, we would welcome it, but you cannot find them, they are 

 not on the map. The editor of a leading dairy paper stated "I think, 

 that we'd better call off this tuberculin test." There are a good 

 many institutions turning out young men to take a squirt gun in 

 one pocket and a bottle of tuberculin in the other and go around pre- 

 tending to eradicate tuberculosis, but they don't eradicate it, that's 

 the trouble. Prof. Hastings, a very fair, broad minded gentleman, 

 with whom I had my first controversy, came back to me in a letter 

 and said the tuberculin test is not 98% accurate, the most you 

 can claim for it, in my experience, is about 86%. He says the Tuber- 

 culin Congress stated that tuberculin will not always cause a re- 

 action when the disease is in incubation; when the disease is started, 

 and, third, when the disease is extensively generalized. But that 

 Tuberculin Congress did not add, what Prof. Hastings did, that it 

 often condemns perfectly sound, healthy animals. I will admit that 

 in that case tlie veterinary who made the test probaibly read the 

 signs wrong. The veterinarian may mistake sometimes a rise in 

 temperature due to another cause for a reaction; I think that has 

 often been done and that Dr. Gill will agree with me on that pro- 

 position. 



