452 SHEEP HUSBANDRY IN THE SOUTH. 



The reticulum contracts upon it, forming it into a suitable pellet to be re- 

 turned to the mouth, and also covers it with a mucus secreted in this 

 stomach. By a spasmodic effort (always perceptible externally when the 

 sheep or cow commences rumination) the pellet is forced through the roof 

 of the reticulum, by the opening before described, and returned to the 

 mouth by the contractions of the spiral muscle of the oesophagus or gullet, 

 for mastication. 



This explanation of the functions of the second stomach is not accepted 

 by all the physiologists who have examined this subject. Some contend 

 that all the solider poitions of the food are returned directly from the ru- 

 men for re-mastication ; that when raised to the floor of the oesophagean 

 canal, the hard parts are carried up to the mouth — the more pultaceous 

 ones (but still not sufficiently pultaceous for the fourth stomach) passing 

 into the reticulum, where they are again macerated — the fluid squeezed 

 out of them by a contraction of the stomach and allowed to pass on to 

 the fourth stomach — and then the drier parts raised, like those from the 

 paunch, for re-mastication. More solid and indigestible substances ".may 

 be submitted two or more times to the process of rumination." Such ap- 

 pear to be the views of Mr. Spooner.* 



According to this theory, both stomachs are created substantially for 

 one and the same purpose, and one would seem to be unnecessary. And 

 where would be the use of the opening fnmi one stomach into the other ? 

 And if the second stomach, like the first, is simply for the maceration and 

 return of food, why the superior thickness and strength of the coatings of 

 the former 1 Being of a volume gieatly inferior to that of the latter, it cer- 

 tainly would require less strength, if the functions of both were the same. 



The main support for this, as it seems to me, erroneous theory, is found 

 in the fact that the contents of the reticulum, after death, are usually found 

 considerably more Jfuid than those of the rumen. I conceive that but 

 small portions of solid food are introduced at one time from the rumen 

 into the reticulum — not enough to give to the liquid contents of the latter 

 viscus the consistency of those of the former — proceeding on the supposi- 

 tion that the reticulum of the living animal is filled with fluid, as usually 

 found after death. But why may not a portion of this fluid have escaped 

 by the valve — been decanted, as it were, from the paunch to the reticulum, 

 after death ? I see no violence in this supposition. If this is not so, the 

 uniform fluidity of the contents of the reticulum would be, it seems to me, 

 fatal to the theory based on it — for, according to Spooner and others who 

 adopt it, after the reticulum has " become moderately full," it contracts on 

 its contents, expressing the liquid from the solid parts, which said liquid 

 is forced into the oesophagean canal, and escapes into the fourth stomach. 

 The solid parts would be thus left comparatively dry. Sheep penned up for 

 butchery often do, as every one has observed, ruminate until within a few 

 seconds of the time that all their natural visceral functions are suddenly 

 suspended by death — and when, therefore, this suspension would, at times, 

 as a matter of course, take place at all the different stages of rumination and 

 preparation for rumination — how happens it that the reticulum is not often 

 found with its liquid parts expressed — containing nothing but the solids, just 

 prepared for re-mastication % Or if it be supposed that the act of forcing out 

 the liquid, and forcing up the solids into the cesophagus, are coincident or 

 simultaneous, why is not this stomach sometimes iovcndi entirely empty 1 Can 

 it be supposed that this fluid (I have uviformly found the fluid mixed with 

 considerable quantities of the solid food) is so instantaneously re-supplied I 



* Spoonpr, p. 162-3. , , 



