36 



prevalent, has caused considerable discussion in the local papers. 

 It is, however, worthy of note that, barring a preliminary tone of 

 hippancy and the presentation by. one paper oi the usual fallacies 

 in regard to the non-existence of such a disease, the press has al- 

 most unannnously supported the measure — that is, on the pre- 

 sumption that dogs coming from countr.es where the disease is 

 othcially announced not to exist are to be admitted without de- 

 tention. This latter point, which was discussed at an extraordi- 

 nary meeting of the Board on December 29, did not meet with 

 the approval of the members present, who considered that the 

 embargo should apply to all dogs alike, regardless of their com- 

 ing from infected or uninfected countries. The rule, however, 

 did not receive the required approval of the Governor, who held 

 that it was unconstitutional to quarantine against a disease in a 

 country where it does not exist. 



It will be remembered from my last report that two of the 

 leadin^^ '''^^' breeding countries were mentioned as being free from 

 rabies, namely, England and New Zealand, and that so long ^s 

 proper precautions were taken to prevent infection in transit it 

 was considered safe for me to recommend that dogs from these 

 two countries at least should be admitted to the Territory witliout 

 quarantine. Since that time, however, an article in an English 

 newspaper, Lloyd's Weekly News, by Dr. Andrew Wilson, and 

 entitled "About Hydrophobia,'' has come to notice. Erom this 

 article it would appear that an English master of foxhounds had 

 died recently (the paper was dated November, 1911) from hy- 

 dropholjia as the result of having been bitten by a fox some 

 months previously. This case, which undoubtedly is authent.c, 

 is so much more remarkable, as no case of rabies in dogs or hy- 

 drophobia in man has been recorded in Great Britain and Ireland 

 since 1902, or nearly ten years ago. and the author's explanation 

 to the effect that "the animal, the fox, is wild, and very unlikely 

 to infect anybody who does not come in close contact with him," 

 does not seem very plausible. A careful perusal of the current 

 English veterinary periodicals containing weekly "."-Nummary of 

 Returns" of diseases of animals officially reported has failed to 

 show the presence of a single case of rabies. That this disease — 

 which must be contimiously transmitted from animal to animal 

 in order not to die out, as nearly every case terminates fatall}' 

 within a few days after the a])])earance of the sym])toms, and l)e- 

 fore which time the infection cannot be transmitted — should ])er- 

 sist among the wild canines for ten years, and espccialh- among 

 the foxes, without a single case of rabies among the dogs or the 

 foxhounds occurring, does not seem likely, especially when it is 

 considered that the l-inglish fox is being constantly luuited with 

 hounds, and that no fox is ever killed without inlhcting numerous 

 wounds on its natural eiu'in'es. I am tluixt'orc strongly incline<l 

 to believe that cither the maslc-r of hounds in (luestion did not die 



