INOCULATION FOR FLEURO-PNEUMON1A IN CATTLE. 453 
practice by any speculations of our own. It is probable that 
their Report may come to hand in time for the particulars to 
be inserted in the present paper ; and if so, they will be given, 
so as to render the subject as complete as it can be under 
existing circumstances. Failing this information for the 
present, we come next to the proceedings of Belgium herself. 
The Commissioners here have spared no pains to arrive at 
the true value of the practice of inoculation, and their Report, 
which extends over 176 pages 8vo, is full of most interesting 
and valuable details. In the majority of cases their experience 
fully coincides with our own, a fact to which we allude, in 
order to show the impartiality of their proceedings, and which 
we regret to see has been called in question. It is unneces- 
sary to select cases from their Report, or to follow the Com- 
missioners through their scientific reasonings on the subject; 
and, therefore, we shall in this place content ourselves by 
giving the conclusions to which they have arrived. 
“ From the preceding facts,” says the Report, “ the Commission con- 
cludes : — 
“That inoculation with the liquid extracted from a hepatized lung, the 
result of exudative Pleuro-pneumonia, is not a certain preservative 
against the malady. 
“ That the phenomena succeeding inoculation may be produced several 
times in the same animal, which may or may not have been attacked with 
exudative Pleuro-pneumonia. 
“ That the two affections may exist together in the same individual, 
and that considerable derangements are manifested in the inoculated 
part, whilst the morbid action of the lungs progresses towards a fatal 
termination. 
“ As to the ascertaining whether inoculation really possesses a 'pre- 
servative power, and if so, in what proportion and for what length of 
time it imparts immunity to the animals subjected to it, these are ques- 
tions which can only be solved by further experience. 
“ Read and approved at a meeting of the Commission. Present — 
“Brussels, Feb . 6 , 1853 ." 
Having now shown that the present position of the question 
of inoculation justifies our remark of its usefulness being as yet 
a disputed point, we shall proceed to a detail of our own 
experiments, and of the deductions drawn therefrom. Before 
doing this, however, we must observe that there is a state- 
ment in the Belgian Report, given on the authority of M. 
WillenPs father, which deeply affects our credit, and which 
“M. Verhezen, President. 
Bellefroid, Deuterluigne, 
Gluge, Sauveur, 
Theis, Thiernesse, 
Fallot, ) Delegates from the Royal 
Marinus, ] Academy of Medicine. 
