Canine &3 Spontaneous Hydrophotia. 447 
order, therefore, to appretiate the credit due 
to thefe various hiftories, and to the opinions 
derived from them, I fhall only cite the moft 
re{pectable authorities; and, indeed, chiefly 
confine my attention to thofe cafes, which have 
been fubjected to the infpection of their re- 
{peftive relaters. I proceed, therefore, to con- 
fider, firft, the hiftories and faéts that have 
been adduced in favour of the opinion, that 
the canine poifon haslain dormant for a great 
length of time, and afterwards. been excited 
into a@tion: Secondly, thofe cafes, which 
have been attributed to the contact of the 
faliva of a rabid animal with the furface of 
the fkin; or to its application, internally as 
well as externally, by any other..mode than 
the intervention. of a bite: Thirdly, fuch 
inftances of the difeafe, as have been faid to 
have arifen spOntaDeRAy, * or, at leaft, whofe 
| origin 
* J have adopted the term ‘Spontaneous Hydrophobia,” 
in conformity with the ufage of the generality of medical 
writers. But I wifh it to be underftood in a fenfe dif- 
ferent from that, in which it is commonly ufed. « For, 
notwithftanding all the ufual fymptoms of canine madnefs 
have arifen in many cafes, without the intervention of 
the poifon of a rabid animal, I do not conceive, in fuch 
inftances, any fpecific poifon to have been generated in 
the habit — The canine virus operates, not only as a ftimu- 
lus on the nerves, but alfo appears to produce a {pecific 
attion 
