486 



THE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



into a state of gfeat debility, their eyes became very weak 

 and watery, and why ? because the flukes destroyed the vita- 

 lity of the liver. The sheep went away and died just like 

 thoee that died from starvation. Some thought, and Pro- 

 fessor Spoouer did, that sheep got these flukes by drinking 

 animalcules in the water. Now, all the animalcules he had 

 seen in water, were of a fish kind. The earth kind had all 

 been of the animal kind. Now, then, take the fluke ; that, 

 if it was fish taken out of the water, would not live, and if 

 exposed to air it would not live there. That was strange, for 

 it was neither fish nor animal, but soniething between, but 

 still of the animal kind. The great question was, what caused 

 flukes? if they could tell they would be able to prevent the 

 consequences. The first thing he would introduce was a 

 vegetable, which grew in July, bearing several flowers. They 

 all appeared to be something alike, being very adhesive. 

 Flies alighted on tiiern, and if sheep eat those flowers at that 

 particular time they were sure to have flukes in them by 

 Christmas. Professor Simonds, in his lecture, had made no 

 discovery beyond what was made 300 years ago, and Mr. 

 Bickford had thrown out nothing as a preventive, and they 

 had now to think how these vegetables should be spawned or 

 should have eggs upon them. There was no proof to show 

 that it was fly that alighted on these plants, but still it was 

 highly probable that it was. Let them look at the history of 

 the fly. Every house cook could tell them that if a fly blew 

 upon her meat she would have worms in it, and not only so, 

 but this insect destroyed living animals. It blew its eggs in 

 the wool, and if not destroyed they would eat the sheep. 

 Farmers knew that their bullocks ran away by the wasp, as they 

 called it, but what was it ? why the fly blew its eggs upon it. 

 This he regarded as strong relative evidence in his favour. 

 The gad fly stung the horse and deposited its eggs in its hair, 

 and the horse took off the eggs, carried it down into its 

 stomach, and brought it off in the shape of worms. Mr. 

 Thomas then referred to Mr. Bickford's argument with re- 

 spect to keeping those eggs, and said that it was one that 

 every schoolboy would laugh at. Another thing, flukes were 

 fouud in unyeaued Iambs. They would be very small, and, 

 perhaps, there would be five, six, seven, or eight. Now, 

 that was very remarkable, but still he was able to prove it. 

 After explaining the circulation of the blood and chyle, he 

 said that no evidence had been given to show that flukes came 

 from animals ; it was all a matter of opinion ; and, in con- 

 clusion, he advised them to remember what a certain Grecian 

 writer said, " You must not believe any doctrine because you 

 see it written, nor because you hear it from tradition, nor 

 because the philosopher believes it, nor because a certain 

 doctor asserts it; but you must search for the truth and 

 know it yourself, and then you may venture to believe it." 



Mr. Bickford : As far as I am personally coucerned in this 

 discussion, I have net the slightest desire to make use of a 

 single expression that may be deemed personally offensive to 

 the lecturer. At the same time, I feel that my view and his 

 on this important disease are so diametrically opposite, that I 

 shall not be able to avoid the occasional use of somewhat strong 

 language, in order that I may express my disapproval of some 

 of his statements, and at the same time convey to you my 

 reason for so doing. The lecturer has so often alluded to his 

 love of truth, that really I have almost been led to infer that 

 he imagines himself to be in the possession of a monopoly of 

 that virtue. I have not come here this afternoon to offer a 

 factious opposition ; but as I have given the disease a great 

 deal of attention, I have come to the conclusion that a rational 

 system of treatment cannot be adopted without the aid of 

 scientific principles, or without an acquaintance with the struc- 

 ture and function of the liver, which organ is the seat of 

 disease under discussion. Although such is the case, in my 

 opinion there are certain prominent points, landmarks as it 

 were, that can be readily understood when pointed out. I 

 will not endeavour to mystify you by using scientific terms or 

 technical expressions, but I will endeavour to employ common- 

 place language to illustrate well-established facts. Most of 

 you have had the opportunity of reading the able, scientific, 

 and exhaustive lecture on the " Kot in Sheep," recently deli- 

 vered by Professor Simonds, before the members of the Royal 

 Agricultural Society. As such is the case, it would be both 

 tedious and unnecessary for me to go much into detail. But as 

 there are many statements of the lecturer, and several other 

 points that I disapprove of, I think some harm would be done 

 if they remained uncontradicted. The lecturer has repudiated 



the fluke theory, recently advanced by myself, as absurd, It 

 matters but little to me, comparatively speaking, whether you 

 agree with him or not ; but I do hope that you will not sanc- 

 tion such oljections, as they are entirely opposed to all modern 

 research ; for of this I feel assured, that if the disease continues 

 to prevail, fresh investigations will be called for ; and I 

 have not the least doubt but that similar opinions, though they 

 certainly admit of further development, will be advanced and 

 put forward by future investigators. The lecturer has made 

 a most unfortunate mistake in denying that fluke eggs pass 

 off with the dung. It may or may not be true that the pro- 

 duct of these eggs pass through the successive changes that 

 have been described by those who have spent much time and 

 who have employed great ingenuity in the process. It is not 

 enough for the lecturer to reject the experiments of others, 

 without his own tend to contradict them. In one of his 

 letters he has expressed his high admiration of the inductive 

 system of philosophy. Has he this afternoon given us even a 

 rough outline of a single experiment that he has performed 

 with that object ? The boldness of a man who rejects 

 the experience of every investigator when it is contrary 

 to his ov/n maij be admired. I do not despise originality of 

 thought; ou the contrary, I feel admiration for an original 

 thinker ; but, really, when I find that his explanations of disease 

 are contrary to every approved principle of practice, I think 

 they ought to be condemned, and in as strong language aa 

 possible. The lecturer has spoken of the advantage of relying 

 upon his own independent judgment. Surely if we depend 

 upon our own unassisted observation for a knowledge of 

 disease, the science of medicine must stand still or cease to 

 be. "If no use (says Dr. Samuel Johnson) be made of the 

 labours of past ages, the world must for ever remain in the 

 infancy of knowledge." So long as lectures are given which 

 are but epitomes ol the opinions of old authors, so long as we 

 continue to go on the old and beaten track, nothing new will 

 be discovered ; we may expend much labour, but no real pro- 

 gress will be made. All who have recently studied this disease, 

 who have had the advantage of a scientific education, have 

 sought to clear up the mystery by studying the natural history 

 of the liver fluke, perhaps the only point connected with the 

 disease that is obscure. The changes that it successively 

 passes through, from the egg to the perfect fluke, may or may 

 not be traced with perfect satisfaction ; but I think no reflec- 

 tion on that account ought to be cast upon the members of 

 the veterinary profession, when we know that such men aa 

 Owen, Ehreuburg, Steeuatrup, and many other names almost 

 equally illustrious v\ the annals of en^ozoological literature, 

 have after much laborious research failed to make the disco- 

 very. I, for my part, cannot help thinking that their opinions 

 on such a subject are immeasurably superior to the empirical 

 and uuBcientific researches advanced by old authors, even 

 although they may enjoy the advantage of being sanctioned 

 by immemorial antiquity. If you examine the writings of all 

 who have written on the "rot," from a period the most remote 

 down to the present day, you will find a surprising agreement 

 in all the main .points ; they differ only as to the specific 

 cause. I think it is a matter for congratulation that so much 

 unanimity of opinion does exist. Whether you attribute the 

 cause of rot to sheep eating the coathe plant — to the decom- 

 position of grasses, aided by warmth and moisture — to the 

 taking-in the germs of the flukes, which become perfectly 

 developed either in the stomachs or livers of sheep — I say does 

 not the scientific teacher and the simple agricultural labourer, 

 who has nothing but common sense for his guidance and 

 Nature for his instructor, equally agree that wet, boggy, and 

 lands that have been flooded, ate especially, nay, exclusively, 

 dangerous to sheep ? Perhaps the most general idea that is 

 entertained is, that the disease is caused by the sheep eating 

 the coathe plant. Where is the origin of this idea ? If we 

 search for this plant, where are we most likely to find it ? 

 Why in those parts of the field that are the wettest. Cannot 

 almost every agriculturist who has suffered a loss from this 

 disease readily point out the particular field or fields, ay, pos- 

 sibly even the particular spot, where, in his opinion, his sheep 

 contracted the rot ? The general idea is, that if sheep eat these 

 plants, which are acrid, that they drink the stagnant water 

 which collects in pooh around or near them. But then we 

 know that the disease is only contracted during the summer 

 and autumn months. If we taste these plants at any period 

 of the year, are they not especially hot to the palate. If sheep 

 eat them in the winter months, are they not equally likely to 



