On Abortion in Cows. 



85 



caused by other diseases, such as consumption, dysentery, mur- 

 rain, Sec, there is little probability of any preventive measures 

 being attended with success^ even if it were worth while to employ 

 them. 



2. Remedial Treatment. — It has been stated, that when abor- 

 tion occurs during the first few weeks of gestation, it does not 

 seem to occasion much inconvenience or constitutional disturbance 

 to the cow. At this period, as the fcetus is of small size, the 

 membranes are also in a rudimentary state of development, and 

 are not so firmly attached to the uterus as they ultimately become; 

 on this account they are readily expelled with their contents. 

 Little treatment is required in cases of this kind, beyond keeping 

 the affected cow from her companions, and also from the male. 



Abortion occurring subsequently to the ninth or twelfth week 

 is a more serious matter. Here the premonitory symptoms may 

 also have escaped notice, and the foetus may have been expelled 

 without any difficulty, but the placenta is almost always retained, 

 and becomes an offensive source of annoyance to the cow and her 

 attendants. There is sometimes very little of it hanging from the 

 vulva, and a slow decomposition, attended by discharge of a 

 peculiar and most offensive odour, is established in the protruding 

 portion, as well as in that retained in the uterus. Decomposition 

 is commenced in some cases before abortion takes place, and 

 little or none of the cleansing will make its appearance for some 

 xlays after expulsion of the fcetus. The presence of this now 

 foreign body in the uterus and vagina induces an unhealthy in- 

 flammatory condition of the lining membrane of these organs, 

 and, from the irritation thus established, it is not unusual for the 

 cow to become feverish, refuse her food, and rapidly fall off in 

 condition. 



The foetus is to be securely buried as soon after abortion as 

 possible. All persons agree in the propriety of adopting such a 

 practice, but a singular difference of opinion exists with regard to 

 the propriety of removing the cleansing, or of suffering it to 

 remain. Those who advocate letting it remain, advise that the 

 passages containing it should be kept as clean as possible, and 

 that antiseptic preparations should be used to destroy the offensive 

 odour which it generates. They seem to imagine that danger 

 which they cannot describe is likely to arise if mechanical means 

 are employed to remove it. A person, however, who understands 

 the anatomy and functions of the organs concerned is fully aware 

 that such an idea is fallacious, and knows that, unless under some 

 peculiar circumstances, he can take the cleansing away with 

 perfect safety. It is surely better to do this than subject the cow 

 to the well-known inconveniences of its retention. In order to 

 satisfy himself of the propriety of removing it, the operator, after 



