38 CANINE DISTEMPER 
not culturally—for upon reference to the table on Pp. 37 
one finds that in all cases inoculation was claimed to 
have produced the true disease, followed by immunity ; 
all were cocco-bacilli, or very short slender organisms ; 
all could be demonstrated in the blood (except Copeman’s 
and M‘Gowan’s); all were motile and non-sporulating ; 
all Gram-negative; and, where records are available, 
none coagulated milk. 
Is it not possible—nay, even probable—that they are 
one and the same organism? Referring to the table 
on micrococci (p. 39), it is evident that all authorities 
except Mathis are in agreement that they do not set up 
the typical manifestations of distemper, nor is immunity 
conferred; they are regarded purely and simply as 
secondary organisms, though doubtless very pathogenic, 
and probably responsible for a greater mortality than 
the specific organism. 
It is noteworthy how few of the organisms were dis- 
coverable in the cerebro-spinal system, the only examples 
being those of Copeman, Taty, Jacquin, Valerio, Phisalix, 
and M‘Gowan, and in all cases the predominant symp- 
toms produced were of the nervous variety; yet when 
M‘Gowan, Sabrazés, and Muratet endeavoured to culti- 
vate growth of any organism from the cerebro-spinal 
fluid of dogs and cats afflicted with paraplegia, their 
results were entirely negative. 
Secondary Invading Organisms.— Whilst admitting the 
difficulty of being able to assert with absolute precision 
that any particular organism is the prime factor in the 
etiology of genuine distemper, we are definitely aware 
of the existence of a multiplicity of germs playing a 
secondary, though important, rdle in the development of 
the disease. On account of the irregularity and infre- 
quency with which these organisms are isolated, pro- 
ducing upon inoculation only local lesions or those of 
