ANTISEPTICS— PAST AND PRESENT 27 



sequelae of wounds, such as septicemia, pyemia, and ma- 

 lignant edema, wliieli were formerly so frequently met 

 witli following accidental and surgical wounds. 



Two factors were instrumental in the erroneous treat- 

 ment of wounds that previously existed. One was the 

 lack of knowledge concerning wound infection, nothing 

 being known with reference to micro-organisms or their 

 effects. Another was^ the prevalent idea that heroic 

 measures were essential to promote healing; hence the 

 employment of "black oils" and similar concoctions, in 

 sublinie ignorance of the deleterious effects of irritants 

 on wounds, and of the existence of natural means of 

 recovery. 



The researches of Lister may be said to have extended 

 from 1865 to 1890, and it is recorded that even up to 

 1880 a number of eminent surgeons were incredulous 

 as to the value of the antiseptic treatment. Hence it is 

 not surprising to find that in veterinary surgery up to 

 this period the Listerian principles are not universally 

 adopted. 



It may truthfully be said that, as antiseptic treat- 

 ment progressed, from stage to stage, in human surgery, 

 its value was recognized by veterinary surgeons and its 

 principles gradually adopted. The earlier attempts at 

 antiseptic treatment would no doubt be considered crude 

 in the present day. 



The Work of Lister 



We read in the Lancet that in 1865-1866 "Compound 

 fractures were treated by the local application of ^car- 

 bolic acid. The antiseptic was freely applied to the 

 interior of the -wounds in order to destroy the air-borne 

 germs which had the property of causing putrefaction. 

 The 'opening in the integuments was then covered with 



