114 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



and, in this case, is the result of the action of an unknown 

 quantity, which practical observation has led us to think is 

 of an infectious nature. 



Even pathological changes, i. e., disease products, which 

 might be supposed to anticipate so serious a disturbance in 

 the normal functions of the female organism, do not seem ta 

 have attracted much attention, so that we shall have to pass 

 over this part of our subject with the simple remark, that 

 some authors have observed fatty degeneration in the epi- 

 thelial cells covering the placenta, but have given us no indi- 

 cations as to what produced this condition. This form of 

 desfeneration is known to be a cause of abortion in individual 

 women, often occurring at about the same period in each 

 pregnancy, but it never assumes an endemic character. 



Enzootic abortion, as known to veterinarians and agricul- 

 turists, is essentially a bovine malady, although Fleming 

 calls attention to outbreaks of this trouble in other animals, 

 and even in women, sometime in the last century. They are 

 not known to the medical profession of our day, however. 



The entire subject of abortion in cattle is of such an hypo- 

 thetical nature, that its study is a most unsatisfactory task to 

 those who desire to find some confirmed facts in the path of 

 medical research on any subject. 



So far as knowing anything about it is concerned, the farmer 

 knows as much as the veterinarian, and he knows : — 



1st. That it occurs. 



2d. That the manner of feeding, housing and general care, 

 play no essential part in causing it. 



3d. Observation and experience, supported by a very few 

 illy-controlled experiments, seem to indicate that we have to 

 do with an accident which has for its cause influences of an 

 infectio-contagious nature. 



I have said that veterinarians know very little about it» 

 This is especially true of English and American authors. 

 Williams, the best known in America of British authors, 

 makes no mention of it ; and, naturally, we should not look 

 for any in Robertson's late work on Equine Diseases. 

 Steele is most unsatisfactory, and Woodruft' Hill adds noth- 



