TO DOMESTICATED ANIMALS. 
343 
the similarity of all the attacks to one another, the liability 
of horses to colic, and the fact that even in man English 
cholera may assume most closely the features of the Asiatic 
disease, and yet not be due to the same causes, suggest the 
probability that these cases were produced by local circum- 
stances, and not by the same widely-extended agent as the 
human epidemic. 
The symptoms and post-mortem phenomena, described as 
having been manifested by cats, and especially by individual 
dogs, so unequivocally and so intimately brought into rela- 
tion with the human sick, wear a much more imposing 
aspect. Either these must have been cases of common 
diarrhoea, or of a simple reactionary diarrhoea and vomiting, 
produced by the sw r allowed cholera-vomits or discharges, or 
else of a specific cholera , which was transmitted indirectly by 
those fluids, or propagated by exhalations from the sick, or 
engendered in the animals directly by the prevailing epidemic 
cause. Finally, the case at St. Ives, apparently spontaneous 
in its origin, marked by the rice-water evacuations, and 
followed by cholera in its owner’s house and person, is the 
most striking instance of all. Still, we have even here to 
lament the want of minute pathological research, and to 
remember the chances of a deceptive coincidence. Whatever 
be the explanation of these cases, we cannot fail to observe, 
that, just as in contemplating the phenomena of general 
epizootic diarrhoeas, we found the limited pestilence of the 
camp, the compound, and the town (especially that amongst 
the dogs of Indian and European cities), arresting the atten- 
tion of pathologists more than the wide spread mortality of 
a continent, so here, in turning from the inhabitants of the 
pasture, the stable, or the stye, to the dog, — which shares in 
our food, participates in our habits, is domiciled in our 
houses, and will follow us to our hospitals, — is our com- 
panion in health, and our adherent in sickness, — we And 
much more frequent examples of and a much closer approxi- 
mation to the symptoms and post-mortem appearances of 
cholera as it is recognised in ourselves. 
It must not be forgotten, however, that in comparison 
with the millions of human beings who have been destroyed 
by this pestilence, few — how very few ! — of even the most 
domesticated animals, have died under circumstances sugges- 
tive of an actual identity of cause. But are we right in 
demanding so strict a correspondence in the effects of any 
morbid agent upon animals and man? Is not a real in- 
fluence on the former compatible with many differences and 
peculiarities in symptoms and effects? Is no allowance to 
