PREVENTIVE INOCULATION 79 
_ ing in strength, the first dose being 2 c.c. of a weak 
vaccine (for a two months old puppy) injected sub- 
cutaneously in the thigh; this to be followed in about 
ten days by the second or stronger vaccine injected into 
the opposite thigh. 
Evidence For or Against the Efficacy of Phisalix Vaccine. 
—He showed that of 298 dogs which had been vaccinated, 
thirteen died. In two packs of hounds aggregating 120 
animals, in which prior to vaccination the mortality had 
been computed at 50 per cent., he stated that no case of 
distemper occurred after his prophylactic treatment. 
Mr. Gray, M.R.C.V.S., said: “As far as my testing 
goes with Dr. Phisalix’s anti-distemper vaccine—which 
was carried out at the suggestion of Mr. William Hunting, 
F.R.C.V.S.—I am satisfied that when properly used, 
according to the directions of Dr. Phisalix, it has great 
‘prophylactic properties.” At a meeting of the Central 
Veterinary Society in 1905, Mr. Livesey, M.R.C.V.S., in 
discussing Gray’s advocacy of Phisalix vaccine, was ex- 
ceedingly sceptical as to its efficacy, and would not 
believe that the Pasteurella was the cause of distemper. 
This practitioner has apparently not had cause to modify 
his views to this day, for he still emphatically pronounces 
against all vaccines as yet introduced for the suppression 
of distemper. At the same meeting Mr. Perryman, 
M.R.C.V.S., expressed himself as in disagreement with 
the general ideas of the success of Phisalix vaccine, 
and still thought a field was open for experimenters to 
find a vaccine for the immunisation of dogs against dis- 
temper. 
In the Veterinary Record for January, 1905, Mr. A. 
Spicer, F.R.C.V.S., related having inoculated eleven 
dogs with Phisalix vaccine and obtaining good reactions 
with each of two inoculations. Three of the dogs, after 
some months’ interval, developed severe attacks of dis- 
