[ 180 ] a ie 
canine fpecies? Are the two kinds of madnefs pro- 
ceeding from the faliva of the fame dog, as defcribed 
. by Mr. Meyne i, to be confidered as diftin& fpe- 
cies, or rather as varieties? Are they equally conta- 
gious, and alike fatal to human kind? May not the : 
difeafe in the brute, as well as in the human fubje&, ! 
affame a maniacal or melancholic charaéter, or even 
a mixture of thefe, according to the natural tem: : 
perament and difpofition of the individual? 
As the long ftate of anxiety and fufpence muft be 
dreadful to thofe who are bitten bya dog even fuf- 
pected of madnefs, is there any criterion of the canine 
malady after the death of the animal? Has inftin&, 
as has been imagined, {tamped on this fagacious 
creature a diftinétive averfion to the peculiar odour, 
or afpect, of an infected dog? ‘ 
If, according to popular opinion, a piece of raw 
meat be rubbed on the tongue and fauces of the 
~dead animal, and if, on offering it to a healthy dog 
it be refufed with abhorrence, is it a certain proof 
that the difeafed dog died mad? 
A fatisfaétory anfwer to the preceding qieries 
would tend to clear up many doubtful points, but 
would demand reiterated experiments. 
It is earneftly to be hoped, therefore, that Mr. 
MeEyYNELL, and other noted amateurs of the canine 
race, will bend their attention to this important 
; fubjeé&t, and favour the publick with their future 
obfervations, 
From 
