BO VINE TUBERCULOSIS 



117 



ence that has been gained in the successful com- 

 bating of other infectious diseases.' Professor 

 Koch made the startling statement that bovine 

 and human tuberculosis are different diseases, and, 

 practically, not intercommunicable. In other words, 

 that the bacillus of bovine tuberculosis is not the 

 same as that of the human disease, and that the 

 bacilli from the latter will not infect cattle. By 

 those who have had any experience in the subject, 

 it will be admitted that there is a good deal to be 

 said on the other side, and the very few experi- 

 ments (twenty-five) mentioned by Professor Koch 

 are certainly not sufficient to settle the point. Even 

 assuming that Professor Koch's few experiments 

 proved his case, viz., that experimentally it is 

 impossible to graft the human disease on to cattle, 

 the converse does not by any means follow, viz., 

 that the bovine disease cannot be grafted on to 

 man. The literature of the disease appears to point 

 to the opposite conclusion. In any case, the sub- 

 ject is one that calls urgently for a Governmental 

 inquiry, and it is satisfactory to be able to report 

 that a Royal Commission, consisting of Sir M. 

 Foster, Professor G. Sims Woodhead, Dr Sidney 

 Martin, Professor McFadyean, and Professor Boyce, 

 has been appointed. The German Government, 

 too, has appointed a Commission, whilst experi- 

 ments are being conducted in certain of the 

 American States, and the Council of the Royal 

 Agricultural Society has made a grant for special 

 research — all dealing with the same subject. 



"The point at issue is a most vital one, and 

 must be settled once and for all ; otherwise the 

 statement as made by Professor Koch, to the effect 

 that in his opinion stringent measures need no 

 longer be taken with regard to meat inspection and 



