INOCULATION FOR PLEURO-PNEUMONIA IN CATTLE. 459 
propagated in this manner. The question of inoculation 
proving abortive as a means of protection, because it was one 
of “a first remove,” cannot be raised in this particular case, 
as it has been in others, from the facts connected with the 
time of the animal’s illness. With regard to the point of non- 
protection from this manner of inoculation, we may remark 
that No. 10, operated upon the same day with No 21, and 
likewise the four cows previously made mention of as being 
also inoculated by “ a first remove,” have now been several 
months on the premises without giving any evidence of dis- 
ease. In this particular they agree with those inoculated 
directly from the lung ; hence we may infer, that, if one is 
protective, so is the other. This point, however, will present 
itself for our examination again in the sequel of this Report. 
From the fluid obtained from the lung of No. 21 it was 
arranged to inoculate more of the herd, and accordingly the 
animals occupying £( Shed 14” were fixed on. 
Mr. Pyatt, in his report of the experiment, says, <c that the 
inoculation, which was done the same in all, on December 
29 th, produced considerable effect on six of the animals , very little 
on four , and none on the remaining four.” Notwithstanding 
these variable results, the experiments upon the whole were 
deemed to be sufficiently satisfactory to warrant the con- 
tinuance of inoculation, and Mr. Paget accordingly determined 
that such should be done. On January 12th he wrote to the 
following effect : — 
“ I am inclined to think that inoculation is protective, for we have had 
in the fifteen hovel two cases of Pleuro-pneumonia out of three non - 
inoculated animals, while the remaining twelve, all of which had been in- 
oculated, have escaped, with one exception. This exception is No. 21, 
which received the virus from another cow’s tail. I think it will be best 
to inoculate several newly-purchased animals, for it is something to have 
protection, even if it be but temporary.” 
(Signed) “ Charles Paget.” 
The inoculations were continued from this period to the end 
of February, with slight interruptions, by which time all the 
animals , amounting to about one hundred , were inoculated . 
The extension of the inoculation was accompanied by a 
marked reduction in the number of the cases of Pleuro-pneu- 
monia. During January three animals died of the disease, 
two of these being ^-inoculated ; the other inoculated, but 
only on the day preceding her illness. For practical deduc- 
tions this animal must be viewed as a w^-inoculated one- 
In the month of February four cows sank from Pleuro-pneu- 
monia; two of these had been inoculated and two not. In 
March a year-old Bull died. This case will be presently 
