376 REPOIiT OP THE COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTU2K. 



Wlien called away to Chicago I was about to commence a series of 

 experiments witli cattle, for tlio purpose of deciding whetlier swine 

 X^lague can be communicated to these animals, the same as of sheep and 

 rabbitSj which, I had seen stated, had been successfully inoculated by 

 Professor James Law, at Ithaca, IST. Y. Considering that question at 

 any rate as of great practical and scientific importance, something hap- 

 X^ened while I was employed in the Union, stock-yard of Chicago as in- 

 spector of cattle which made it still more desirable to settle the question 

 as soon as possible. While there I had to inspect, from February 10 

 to May 16, over 300,000 head of cattle. Among that vast number I found 

 only one animal exhibiting symptoms decidedly suspicious of contagious 

 pleuro-pneumonia, or lung fever. The animal in question was a year- 

 ling heifer, and had come in, together with another one, in a car-load of 

 hogs from Sublette, Lee County, 111. It was shipped l3y its owner — so 

 I learned afterwards — because it had been ailing for some time, and was 

 not doing well. In order to decide whether those suspicious symptoms 

 exhibited during life were those of pleuro-pneumonia, or of some other 

 respiratory disorder, I bought tiie heifer and had it killed by bleeding 

 for post-mortem examination. The morbid changes were as follows : The 

 lungs fiUed the whole thoracic cavity so completely as to show on their 

 surface jiiain impressions of the ribs. Their surface was uneven to the 

 touch, and on further examination distinctly limited hepatization, such 

 as is characteristic of contagious bovine pleuro pneumonia, or lung 

 plague of cattle, presented itself. It was most developed in the left lobe, 

 and particularly in its anterior part, but quite large and distinctly lim- 

 ited patches of hepatized lobules, some gray, and sOme red or brown, 

 presented themselves also when the left lobe was cut into, in its central 

 and posterior portion. Externally the central and posterior part of the 

 left lobe, if looked at superficially, seemed to be healthy, because the 

 lobules next to the pleura were not affected. The right lobe, too, con- 

 tained several patches of hepatization, but was on the whole, much less 

 affected than tlie left lobe. I cut off some of the worst hepatized parts, 

 and put them in a bucketful of clean water ; they went to the bottom 

 Uke a rock. Only one small portion of the pleura, say about three inches 

 in diameter, and coating a portion of lung in which the hepatization ex- 

 tended to the surface, was coated with a slight layer of exudation. Most 

 of the lymphatic glands in the chest and in the abdominal cavity ap- 

 peared to be enlarged. No other morbid changes were found. 



As hepatization in the lungs of cattle is, to say the least, an exceed- 

 ingly rare occurrence except in contagious pleuro-pneumonia — in a 

 practice of over twenty years I have never seen it except in that dis- 

 ease, neither have other experienced practitioners whom I have con- 

 sulted (I will only name Dr. J. C. Meyer, sen., of Cincinnati, and Dr. 

 F. W. Prentice, of Champaign, and refer to Professor Gerlach's work on 

 Veterinary Jurisprudence) — and as Prof. James Law, of Ithaca, N. Y., 

 had succeeded in communicating swine plague, a disease also character- 

 , ized by distinctly limited hepatization in the lungs, to other animals than 

 swine by means of inoculation, the question arose : Can swine plague 

 be transmitted also to cattle, and, if so, what is the case in question ? 

 Is it contagious bovine pleuro-pneumonia, or is it swine plague trans- 

 mitted to cattle? It was clear to my mind that if it was contagious 

 pleuro-pneumonia, several cases, or at least more than one case, would 

 be existing at the place where the heifer had come from ; and if swine 

 plague, some lasting and intimate contact or association with diseased 

 hogs must have taken place. I communicated ruy views to John B. 

 Sherman, superintendent of the Union stock-yard, and to Nelson Morris, 



