2/2 Abstract Report of Afjricultiiral Discussions. 



would appear from the writings of Dr. Layard, who was consulted by 

 the Government, that the authorities were very much upon the alert, 

 and that Orders in Council were issued, and the provisions of a special 

 Act of Parliament j^assed in 1745 were enforced, which precautions 

 appear to have been sufficient to stamj) out the disease. Certain out- 

 breaks had been described as having taken place in 1779 and 1805 ; 

 but although Orders in Council were issued in each of these instances 

 for the purpose of suppressing these supposed outbreaks in different 

 parts of England, he was inclined to believe that the disease had no 

 real existence from 1770-71 down to the last outbreak in 1865. 



With regard to this outbreak and its origin there Vv'as much differ- 

 ence of opinion. A great deal might, however, be said with reference 

 to the disease having come from Eussia, from the circumstance that 

 the Koyal Commission had failed to show that there was any disease 

 in Western Eiu'ope at the time. But be that as it might, it subse- 

 quently appeared in Holland, Belgium, and France, having been 

 ex2)orted from England ; and it was not a little singular, that with 

 the disease in this country about the middle of June — for animals 

 were then sold in the Metropolitan Market whicli are known to have 

 been tainted — we should have sent the disease from England so early 

 as July. It was hardly necessary to say that the disease still existed 

 in Holland, although it had been stamped out com^iletely in France 

 and Belgium, where the Governments had adopted measures to ensure 

 tlie slaughtering of all animals subject to the disease or exposed to it. 



He would now pass on to make a few remarks on 



The Pathology of the Disease. 



He did so for the purpose of recording his opinion as to the specialty 

 of the disease. Notwithstanding all that had been said with regard 

 to its nature, we had yet to learn a great deal as to the true nature of 

 the cattle-plague ; and he thought it had been a judicious course in 

 this country not to give a special name to the affection : for any sjiecial 

 name must have been based upon some foundation, true or supposed ; 

 and in that case we might have found ourselves tied down and fettered 

 in dealing with the disease and its treatment in a manner from which 

 we were now perfectly free. We in England have been content to 

 adopt the name Einderpest, employed by the Germans, which we 

 translated the Cattle-Plague. 



Various distinguished medical men had held tlie opinion that the 

 disease was of a typhoid character. They seemed to think they 

 recognised a connection between it and typhus in the human subject ; 

 but he believed very few persons entertained that opinion now. Some 

 medical men had also adoj)ted the view of its being variolous, or of 

 the nature of small-pox. That opinion was entertained by Dr. Mur- 

 chison and others. He thought, however, that sufficient information 

 had been obtained to show that it was not at all of the nature of small- 

 pox. Indeed, some earlier experiments proved that sheep which had 

 been subjected to the cattle-plague and recovered from it were still 

 liable to small-pox. He for one never thought for a moment that there 

 was any connexion between it and small-pox, save and except its being 



