~ 
454 REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE. 
case which occurred about eleven years ago, near Dixon, Lee county, 
Illinois, where I was then practicing. A farmer, Mr. B., came to my 
office with a horse which he had recently bought, and which was appar- 
ently suffering from some pulmonal disorder. The animal was in a mod- 
erately good condition and free from fever. The morbid symptoms ob- 
served consisted in a slightly laborious breathing, a short, dull, but 
somewhat loose (not dry) cough, some discharge from one nostril, and a 
slight swelling of the submaxillary lymphatic glands of the same side 
of the head. ‘The symptoms, consequently, were the same as are usually 
observed in pulmonal glanders; but as none of them were sufficiently 
developed or presented sufliciently characteristic properties to indicate 
with certainty the presence of glanders, and as no ulcers—the most im- 
portant diagnostic symptom of glanders—could be discovered in the 
nose, [hesitated to make a definite diagnosis, but informed the owner of 
my suspicion, and advised him to put the horse, if convenient, to hard 
work for the purpose of accelerating thereby the morbid process (if 
glanders), and to return the animal for further examination within a 
week or so. <A few days afterwards the same farmer came again to my 
office with another horse with a badly torn eyelid and an inflamed eye 
for treatment. This latter horse, which I will call horse No. 2, had been 
bitten in the eyelid and had the same torn by the horse with the suspi- 
cious symptoms, which I had seen before, and which I will call horse No. 
1. In examining the wound, which probably had been made during the 
night, | found the borders very much swelled, and the wound and the 
conjunctiva of the eye in a condition which strengthened my suspicions 
of horse No. 1 being affected with glanders. Still, by means of a few 
stitches, | united the margins of the wound as weil as circumstances 
permitted. After I had performed the operation I examined the horse 
as to his general health, but especially as to symptoms of glanders. 
With the exception of some feverish acceleration of the pulse and the 
very inflamed condition of the torn eyelid and the conjunctiva, no morbid 
symptoms could be found. The horse appeared to be in good health 
and free from any respiratory disorder. The next day isaw both horses, 
Nos. 2 and 1, on B.’s farm, a few miles from Dixon. Horse No. 2 had 
high fever; the wound in the eyelid presented considerable swelling 
and had suppurated; some of the stitches had been torn out; and a 
lump of grayish and glassy mucus had accumulated in the inner cor- 
ner or canthus of the eye. These symptoms, though comparatively in- 
significant under other circumstances, convinced me still more that the 
torn eyelid, would not heal and that horse No. 1 was affected with glan- 
ders, and had communicated the contagion to horse No. 2. tn the cen- 
dition of horse No. 1 no essential changes had taken place, except per- 
haps a slight increase in the discharges from the nose. About a week 
later horse No. 2 presented plain and unmistakable symptoms of glan- 
ders, consisting of lameness, sweiling of the inguinal glands, copious 
discharges from the nose, swelling of the submaxillary glands, and 
diphtheritic ulceration on the septum. The condition of horse No. 1 was 
almost unchanged. Beth horses were killed the next day. The post 
mortem examination cf horse No. 1 revealed, besides the characteristic 
morbid changes in the lungs, indicative of pulmonal glanders of long 
standing, only afew small uleers high up on the septum, while horse No. 
2 showed all the essential symptoms of fully-developed acute nasal glan- 
ders and of incipient farcy, but scarcely any morbid changes in the 
lungs. Whether the inoculation with glanders-contagion effected by the 
biting and tearing of the eyelid constituted the first communication of 
the contagion to horse No. 2 by horse No. 1, or whether a previous in- 
