456 REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE. 
proceeded from a fistule on the withers, from bruising of the upper eye- 
lid, and from a fistule of the spermatic cord. Dupuy (Bulletin de 
VAcadémie de méd., 1836, p. 481) observed that glanders proceeded from a 
seton on the shoulder. Riss (Recueil de méd. vétér., 1837, p. 602) observed 
several cases of glanders which were caused by severe contusions of the 
nose. Rey observed that glanders made its appearance after a fracture 
of the nasal and maxillary bones. Afterwards Renault and Bouley 
(Recueil de méd. vétér., 1840, p. 257) endeavored to corroborate or to affirm 
these observations by direct experiments. They injected matter into the 
veins of horses, and claimed to have produced glanders-uicers in the 
nose of a horse by such an injection of innocent matter. Rey (Recueil 
de méd. vétér., 1867, p. 417) leoks upon the experiment of Renault and 
Bouley as a singular case, but Professor Hering in Stuttgart (Repertoriwm, 
1868, p. 36) does not find it singular at all, and says that he made the 
same experiments a long time ago, and had succeeded in producing in 
some cases glanders, in other cases suppuration (in the lungs), and in 
others no result whatever. Such statements are, to say the least, exceed- 
ingly queer, particularly if made by such a learned and experienced 
man and otherwise so reliable an authority as Professor Hering, because 
such observations are, and must be, based upon a mistake either one 
way or another. There are three possibilities: Either the matter injected 
into the veins must have been taken from a horse affected with glanders 
or farcy, the animals experimented on must have been previously 
infected with the disease, or exposed in some way to the contagion, or 
the disease produced was no glanders at all. A previous infection must 
be considered as the most probable solution, because the horses sub- 
jected to such experiments are usually old or condemned animals bought 
for anatomical purposes at from two to four dollars a head. A great 
many experiments with injections of matter (pus) into the veins of 
horses—probably the most that ever have been undertaken—have been 
made at about the same time, but independently and at different places, 
by Professor Guenther in Hanover (Nebel u. Vix Zeitschrift, 2. B.) and 
Professor Spinola in Berlin (Ueber das Vorkommen der EHiterknoten in den 
Lungen, 1839). The same were afterwards repeated at various times by 
Professor Gerlach, the late director of the Royal Veterinary School in 
Berlin, who died in 1877. Neither of these three very reliable investi- 
gators nor anybody else, except Bouley and Hering, has ever succeeded 
in producing (?) glanders in a horse by an injection of innocent matter 
(pus) into the veins. 
All those hypotheses and theories, notwithstanding some of them 
were only short-lived, contributed a great deal in creating the confu- 
sion in regard to the contagiousness or non-contagiousness of glanders 
(la morve), which, until recently, has been prevailing among the French 
veterinarians. Bouley separated acute glanders and chronic glanders as 
two distinct or entirely different diseases, and considered chronic gland- 
ers as non-contagious, and acute glanders and farcy as contagious and 
pyemic diseases. Godine (Hlémens d’Hygiéne vétérinaire, suivis de re- 
cherches sur la morve, etc., 1815), went still further, and denied the con- 
tagiousness of glanders altogether. Bouley, however, finally admitted 
that contagious acute glanders might, under certain circumstances, be 
developed from non-contagious chronic glanders. These fallacious doc- 
trines of the professors of the Alfort veterinary school, not only caused 
great confusion in regard to diagnosis (glanders not being considered as 
a disease sui generis, was frequently confounded with other diseases), 
but also great losses, amounting to millions of dollars, to the people of 
France, by preventing a strict condemnation of glandered horses, and 
allowing thereby an unlimited spreading of the disease. 
