558 Abstract Report of Agricultural Discussions. 
• 
in his immediate neighbourhood, he had recourse to vaccination. 
He went on to say, " I had 860 sheep vaccinated ; I am very glad 
I did so, for I have not had any disease among them. I had 
subsequently to that 20 score of lambs vaccinated, making altogether 
1260." Twelve hundred and sixty sheep were vaccinated, he said, 
and none of them had taken the disease. 
Now I have good reason to believe that these 1260 sheep of Mr. 
Overman's were not vaccinated at all. The same gentleman who did 
these sheep also vaccinated, as it was said, a large number of sheep for 
Mr. Hudson, of Castleacre, a member of the Council of this Society. 
Ho likewise vaccinated, as he called it, a large number of sheep for 
other persons in that neighbourhood ; so that, in all probability, he 
operated upon not less than from 3000 to 4000 sheep. Now, I might 
ask any one who knows anything at all about the matter, where did 
all the lymph necessary to vaccinate 3000 or 4000 sheep in the 
course of about two or three weeks come from ? I find, however, that 
this gentleman had no difficulty whatever about it. He carried 
lymph, as he termed it, in phials pretty well filled to the brim. He 
used this material on the sheep generally, and he used it on the late 
Mr. Overman's sheep, with the exception of about twelve. Accord- 
ing to an admission made by Mr. Overman himself to me there 
were certainly not more than twelve of his sheep that were vacci- 
nated from points charged with vaccine in the ordinary way, and 
he added, " I did not see any difference between the vaccination 
done by points and that done by fluid, and I am satisfied, therefore, 
that all my sheep have been vaccinated." I have already stated that 
a number of sheep were done in the same manner for Mr. Hudson. 
In the course of a short time, however, Mr. Hudson's sheep, being 
exposed to the influence of natural small-pox, took the disease, and 
it went on rather severely in his flock. He then had recourse to 
inoculation ; but the person who was consulted, and who inoculated 
the sheep, knew practically little or nothing about' it, and the 
sheep were consequently done in the most objectionable manner. 
Instead of taking the smallest lancet, or a needle, and just soiling it 
with the virus, and introducing the virus with one puncture under 
the skin, so as not to draw blood, he made large incisions inside 
the arms of these poor sheep, inserting bits of tow charged with lymph 
and pus ; and that he called inoculation. I witnessed this for myself, 
and never saw so painful a scene. Besides the sheep which died, 
others suffered from the sloughing of wounds the loss of an ear, the 
loss of an eye, and so forth. So far as. the pecuniary question was 
concerned, many of the survivors might as well have died as lived. 
Well might inoculation carried on in this manner have got into dis- 
repute in Norfolk ! I mention one other case. A natural outbreak 
of the disease having taken place upon a farm of Mr. Muskett, of 
Narford, the gentleman, who vaccinated sheep from a bottle, went 
there and vaccinated Mr. Muskett's sheep, but the disease went on 
unchecked notwithstanding, and four hundred ewes were lost out of a 
flock of a thousand. 
I return to the case of Mr. Overman's sheep. Mr. Overman sent 
