INOCULATION FOR PLEURO-PNEUMONIA IN CATTLE. 475 
the small wounds is, that the beasts were not protected, 
because not specific but common action resulted from “the 
virulent matter — the pus” — which was employed ; in other 
words, the inoculation was unsuccessful. Opposed to this, 
first comes the statement of MM. Yaes and Maris, that the 
animal bears the mark of a successful operation ; and then the 
declaration of M. Willems, sen., 44 that this beast was success- 
fully operated on by the same English veterinary professor 
who inoculated the animal that was killed in consequence of 
Pleuro-pneumonia.” The Doctor virtually says that both 
the animals were unprotected ; that neither was successfully 
operated on. The father says 44 that one of them was success- 
fully inoculated, but the material used on both was bad 
and the delegates write, 44 two large cicatrices exist on the tail 
of one of the animals , and the other bears the mark of a successf ul 
inoculation” ^ 
If Dr. Willems knew, in September last, that these cows 
were unprotected, how comes it that they were left in a focus 
of the disease under such circumstances for three months, 
daily exposed to danger ? Instead of such contradictory 
statements, we should have wished to have seen the Doctor 
nobly taking his stand and saying, — These cases are the only 
exceptions, in my own operations, to the rule which I have 
proved in hundreds of instances to belong to inoculation as 
preventive of Pleuro-pneumonia : — as exceptions, they show 
how great is the value of my discovery. And in truth we 
will now say, for ourselves, that if this system of inoculation 
be built on a foundation equally secure with that of inocu- 
lation or vaccination for small-pox, not ten times the number 
of failures which have occurred in M. Willems’ establishment 
will lessen our opinion of its value. It must be remembered, 
however, that Dr. Willems originally took his stand on the 
untenable ground, that inoculation properly performed never 
would fail to give immunity to the animal against Pleuro- 
pneumonia. 
We now turn to the assertion that the animals were 
44 inoculated, as an experiment, with pus {not lymph) ,” an 
assertion, by the bye, equally correct with that of our having 
inoculated the animals. 
Dr. Willems says we made a note of the case ; this we 
have admitted to be strictly true ; and fortunately we have 
that note still standing in our memorandum-book. It runs 
as follows : — 
“ Sept. 1, 1852. — Saw two cows with deep incisions in their tails, 
situated far above the place of inoculation, and freely discharging a glairy 
albuminous or serous fluid. Dr. Willems called this “ bon vii'us." 11c 
