Contagious Pleuro-Pneumonia of the Ox. 471 



proved that his impression was well founded. A third lot of 

 six cows was purchased towards the end of the year, completing' 

 the number. In the early part of February, 1874, one cow of 

 the second lot, which had been placed in the shed about the 

 middle of December, was taken ill and, from the symptoms, 

 it was suspected that the animal was the subject of pleuro- 

 pneumonia. The disease, however, did not assume a virulent 

 form, and, after a fortnight, the cow was put back into her place 

 in the shed. About ten days afterwards, on March 6th, another 

 of the same lot was attacked with pleuro-pneumonia, and was 

 slaughtered by order of the local authority. In this case both 

 lungs were affected. It is evident, therefore, that the disease 

 had existed for some time before it was detected. On March 15th 

 two more cows—one of the old stock and one of those last 

 brought in— were found to be suffering from the disease, and were 

 slaughtered. On March 20th, another of the old stock was 

 attacked. On March 23rd, another succumbed, and at the 

 same time one of those recently purchased was attacked. On 

 March 25th, another cow was attacked, and on March 31st, 

 another ; both of them recently-purchased animals. Thus, 

 from March 6th to March 31st, eight cows, which had been 

 successfully inoculated by one of the most experienced opera- 

 tors, had succumbed to the disease. One of these cows was 

 inoculated in January, 1873, and two others in May of the same 

 year, the remaining five had all been inoculated in the latter 

 part of the year between October and the end of December. 



From the rapid progress of the disease there was some reason 

 to apprehend that a large proportion of the herd would be sacri- 

 ficed ; and it was not, therefore, to be expected that the usual 

 preventive measures would be neglected, in order to test the 

 effects of inoculation. On the contrary, every precaution was 

 taken to prevent the spread of infection. The premises were 

 conveniently arranged in every respect, and the greatest care 

 was taken to isolate suspected animals as soon as the thermo- 

 meter indicated rise of temperature ; the sheds were frequently 

 and thoroughly washed by means of a hydrant, and the atmo- 

 sphere was kept charged with sulphurous acid gas. 



No attacks of the disease occurred after the end of jNIarch, 

 and the vacant places in the shed were shortly filled up by other 

 ■cows, and the herd has since remained healthy. 



If it were allowable to take the results of the two outbreaks 

 which have been described as illustrative of the ordinary pro- 

 gress of the disease in inoculated and uninoculated herds, there 

 would be little to say in favour of the system of inoculation 

 in comparison with that of isolation and slaughter. It would 

 indeed be easy to refer to many similar cases, but they are not 



