Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria. 125 



said, that information had been withheld. He did not 

 know how far it was proper to say that it was withheld, 

 deliberately withheld, for some purpose ; but certainly, 

 they had not got specific information as to the spread of 

 the disease from fowls to other birds. In the year 1883 

 a report was made by a well-known veterinarian, in a 

 fowl-fancier's journal, published in Dresden, as to an 

 examination which had been made of the bodies of a 

 large number of birds that had died. His report was, 

 that out of 865 birds examined after death, no fewer 

 than J 22 had died of this fowl typhoid. Included in 

 the number of birds that had died of this disease were 

 79 fowls, ] 7 pigeons, '.) geese, 8 turkeys, 5 ducks, 3 ordinary 

 pheasants, and a foreign pheasant. Considering that only 

 domesticated or semi-domesticated birds were likely to 

 be found d3'ing of disease, and have their bodies examined, 

 it miffht be taken for ^-ranted, iudoino- from the laro-e 

 variety of birds that had been affected, as stated, that the 

 disease would spread through all kinds of birds. It had 

 not been proved that it affected any special kind. In so 

 far as birds were known, there was apparent evidence that 

 it would spiead to any kind. It could not be limited to 

 fowls and rabbits. If it once got into this community 

 it might possibly sweep over the country, and, if not 

 exterminate, gradually diminish the number of both tame 

 and wild birds. That was an important point, and might 

 be taken as supplying evidence that Dr. Wigg and himself 

 thought should rightly and properly have been supplied. 

 There was another important matter to be considered, 

 and that was the relation of this disease to diseases in 

 other animals. He found that in the year 1S78 a disease 

 was very prevalent in Germany amongst game animals, 

 particularly deer. A very large number died from some 

 not well understood epidemic disease. An inquiry into 

 the nature of that disease was conducted by a well-known 

 veterinarian. His first suspicit)n was that it w^as anthrax. 

 He did find, correctly or not, that there was abundance of 

 room for a difference of opinion. He found an organism 

 that he considered w^as the cause of th.e disease. If not 

 identical witli the organism found in fowl cholera and 

 the disease affecting rabbits, yet it l>ore a very close 

 resemblance to it. The disease in fowls, the disease 

 afi'ecting rabldts, and one called "swme disease," all bore a 

 great similarity as regards tlie organisms present in all of 



