SECRETARY'S REPORT. 87 



4th. That with a high temperature, roughly made incisions, and 

 serous fluid a few days old, local ulceration and gangrene, producing 

 occasionally the death of the patient, will follow inoculation. 



5th. That the sero-jnirulent matter taken from an inoculated sore, 

 causes more speedy action than the serum obtained from a diseased lung, 

 and that " ronoves " cannot be effected on scientific principles. 



Gth. That oxen are not only susceptible to the action of a second, but 

 of repeated inoculations with the serous exudation of a diseased lung. 



7th. That an animal inoculated with the serous exudation is in no 

 way protected, even from ^/se repeated action of the sei'o-purulent fluid 

 which is produced in the wound as a r^ult of the operation. 



8th. That animals not naturally the subject of pleuro-pneumonia, 

 such as donkeys, dogs, &c., are susceptible of the local action, both of 

 the serous exudation from the lung and the sei'o-purulent matter 

 obtained from the inoculated wounds. 



9th. That the serous fluid exuded from the lungs is not a specific 

 " virus," or " lymph," as it is sometimes designated. 



10th. That inoculations made with medicinal irritating agents will be 

 followed by similar phenomena to those observed in inoculations with the 

 exuded serum. 



11th. That inoculation often acts as a simple issue, and that the 

 security which at times the operation apparently affords, depends in part 

 upon this, but principally on the unknown causes which regulate the 

 outbreak, spread and cessation of epidemic diseases. 



12th. That inoculation of cattle, as advocated and practiced by Dr. 

 Willems and others, is not founded on any known basis of science or 

 ascertained law, with regard to the propagation of those diseases com- 

 monly called specific. 



13th. That pleuro-pneumonia occurs at various periods of time after 

 a so-called successful inoculation. 



14th. And lastly, that the severity of pleuro-pneumonia is in no way 

 mitigated by inoculation, the disease proving equally rapid in its progress 

 and fatal in an inoculated as in an «/iinoculated animal. 



We will also refer to the General Resum^ of the Report of 

 the Scientific Commission (Veterinarian, vol. 27, pp. 339-3-13,) 

 and give their conclusions respecting inoculation, viz. : — 



1st. Inoculation with the liquid extracted from the lungs of an animal 

 laboring under peripneumonia, does not convey to others in health, of 

 the same species, any disease, at least in its seat, similar to that from 

 which the inoculating fluid was taken. 



2d. The appreciable phenomena, following inoculation, are those of 

 a local inflammation, light and confined to the place of inoculation, in a 

 certain number of inoculated subjects. Grave and diftuse, accompa- 



