INOCULATION FOR EPIZOOTIC PERI-PNEUMONIA. 517 
was followed by the eruption of a dartrous affection of an ex- 
tensive character. Dr. Ulrich makes mention of these facts 
by way of record, without considering them absolute sequelae 
of inoculation. 
These various results springing from inoculation which have 
come to the knowledge of M. Ulrich, do not appear to be of 
a nature to permit him to pronounce definitively on the value 
of inoculation for peri-pneumonia, since by the side of facts 
in favour of it, come others militating against it ; and especi- 
ally since it has not yet been demonstratively shown that 
beasts inoculated and exposed to the natural contagion 
for a space of time, of sufficient and satisfactory length, have 
remained uncontaminated. To prove this, some direct ex- 
periment must be instituted. 
Afterwards, Dr. Ulrich informs us that the Belgic Com- 
mission have already entered on this undertaking; and to 
settle the point, have instituted a series of direct experi- 
ments, and that similar experiments are about being made in 
Holland and in France. In France, he says, a committee 
well qualified for it, have taken up the question anew of the 
contagion of pleuro-pneumonia; since even up to this day 
has its contagious property been questioned in France, 
though fresh experiments have convinced them of it. 
In regard to M. Willems’ opinion about a beast who has 
once had the disease not being liable to it again, M. Ulrich 
thinks differently ; and his opinion to the contrary is par- 
taken by M. Yerheyen. M. Ulrich adds, that the well- 
authenticated facts of beasts having had the disease a second 
and even a third time are so numerous that we must con- 
sider before we regard them as exceptional instances. 
M. Ulrich terminates his account with some notice of the 
dispute between M. Desaive and M. Willems, as to the 
priority of discovery. M. Lombond, of the University of 
Liege, has assured M. Verheyen that he was made acquainted 
with a single inoculation made by M. Desaive so long ago as 
1836. Still, in regard to Dr. Willems, from whom the first 
intimation of the business comes to us, in December, 1850, 
it does not appear that he received any intimation of the 
fact from anybody. At all events, he has the full merit of 
having persevered in and followed up his operations, col- 
lecting a series of facts to which, by the notice he gave of 
them to the Minister of the Interior, he has called the atten- 
tion and interest of the public. — Rec. de Med. Vet., April, 
1853. 
