Abortion in Cows. 
467 
proximity would be more likely to suffer than those more 
distant, and more especially so than those in a separate shed." 
In this part of the country it is very uncommon lor a farmer 
to keep all his milch-cows in one shed, but generally in two or 
three and sometimes more. In no instance have I known this 
malady, where it has assumed the form of an epidemic, confine 
itself to one shed, when more than one was occupied by in- 
calvers ; nor have I known three animals standing next each 
other to abort successively. In a few instances two have done so. 
Farm 3, No. o shed, No. 6 stand, is the only stand in which I 
have heard of a cow showing symptoms of abortion (for she 
did not actually abort there), in which another was placed 
which soon afterwards aborted. Even in this instance, in the 
adjoining stand (same stall) an in-calver remained for thirteen 
days after the first aborted, and eventually carried her calf the 
full time. 
With the exception of Farm 1, in which all the in-calvers 
aborted up to the change of hay. Farm 7, where all aborted for 
two .seasons, and Farm 19, in which the remaining in-calver 
was sold, cows have gone their full time in every shed in which 
abortions have taken place. 
This malady has never been known to follow the cows milked 
by one man. It appears to take no definite course, but to strike 
at random first here then there, very unlike an infectious disease. 
3. " That by intentionally keeping the affected animals in 
closer proximity to healthy in-calvers, by confining them to their 
sheds entirely, the disease would spread with greater rapidity." 
In the only three cases in which I have advised this treat- 
ment, and it has been acted on, not only has the disease not 
spread with greater rapidity, but it has actually stopped, except 
in the cases of those in-calvers who were showing premonitory 
systems prior to their confinement to the shed, and ceased 
altogether when they had cast their calves. The three cases I 
refer to are Farms 1, 7, and 17. In this latter case the heifer 
which showed unmistakable premonitory symptoms of aborting 
did not carry it into effect, the curious treatment for an 
infectious disease being apparently just in time to prevent the 
catastrophe. 
In Nos. 1 and 7, the treatment was not in time to prevent 
the threatened abortions taking place, but it stayed the further 
progress of the malady in both instances. In No. 7, the treat- 
ment was effective as long as it was persevered in onh/, cases 
recurring soon after their being turned out to pasture. Farm 3, 
No. 5 shed, No. 2 stand, may be instanced as affording a crucial 
test of the infective powers of this malady. It could not be said 
that the animal experimented on was insusceptible of the disease, 
