392 BOVINE PATHOLOGY. 



ticularly liable, probably in consequence of interference 

 with the nervous supply of the superficial parts. 



Post-mortem exa/mination. — The blood dark in colour 

 and distending the veins; petechias of various serous 

 membranes ; congestion of the brain and spinal cord, with 

 apoplectic clots on various parts. 



Pathology. — Gamgee and other authorities on this 

 subject consider that there is present in the blood a specific 

 element. The congested condition of the veins in general 

 and the dark colour of the blood, together with the ecchy- 

 mosis of the serous membranes observed post-mortem, 

 seem to support this view until we consider that the blood 

 must contain many impurities, as a result of defective 

 action of all the excretory organs. Probably those cases 

 in which the disease has been communicated were septic 

 peritonitis, a disease frequently mistaken for that in ques- 

 tion. Another argument advanced is, that the disease 

 sometimes assumes an enzootic form, but this is probably 

 attributable to uniformity of surroundings and mis- 

 management of a number of pregnant cows. The " ana- 

 tomical theory '^ is that this disease is due to the arrange- 

 ment of the arteries at the base of the brain, as a rete 

 mirabile, rendering the cow liable to apoplexy, especially 

 when the supply of blood to the pregnant uterus is cut 

 off, and there is no compensatory determination to the 

 mammary gland. That the arrangement of the arteries 

 has little to with the matter is shown by the fact of 

 the spinal cord, as well as the brain, being the seat 

 of extravasations. Some attribute the disease to accu- 

 mulation of milk-producing elements in the blood, giving 

 rise to fever and, practically, blood poisoning ; to sudden 

 overloadiug of the system with blood, causing nervous 

 disorder; to encephalic anaamia (eclampsia). After a 

 very careful consideration of the various theories on 

 the subject, Fleming ('Veterinary Obstetrics,' p. Q&S) 

 adopts the latter view, as suggested by Franck, and he 

 considers the view of Professor Barlow, one of the ablest 

 of British cattle pathologists, as "most far-fetched.^' 

 He hardly treats this view, which is supported by Pro- 



