MATTER OF TYPHUS. 
547 
1. That inoculation with matter procured from beasts attacked by 
malignant and fatal typhus, whatever be the period of the epizootic, 
transmits a disease equally severe and mortal. — (Bergius, Claus 
Detlof, Vicq. d’Asyr.) 
2. That inoculation with the virus procured from beasts in which 
the disease assumed a mild form, and at every period of the epi- 
zootic, transmitted a typhous malady equally mild, and that was 
rarely mortal. — (Bergius, Claus Detlof, Yicq. d’Asyr, Camper.) 
3. Inoculation practised at the commencement and the violence of 
the epizootic was followed by a fatal result. — (Claus Detlof.) 
4. Inoculation practised during the decline of the epizootic, and 
when the disease was mild, was seldom fatal, and was attended by 
every desired result. — (Claus Detlof.) 
5. Inoculation practised on calves, whose mothers had recovered 
from an attack of typhus, always did well.— (Camper, Munnicks, 
Geert-Reinders. ) 
6. Inoculation with the virus taken from the cutaneous pustules, 
being practised on eight beasts, succeeded with three alone of them, 
and the 'disease was of a mild character. — (Layard, 1757.) 
7. The result of inoculation is, on the whole, satisfactory, for 
more than two-thirds of the inoculated animals have been cured. 
D. Typhus, Natural, or Inoculated, does it render Cattle secure 
from any future attack ? 
Affirmative Cases and Facts. — Camper, Munnicks, and Detlof 
assure us that the beasts inoculated with the matter never, or at 
least very rarely, are attacked by it again. 
De Berg thus expresses himself : “ No beast, cured of this ma- 
lady, ever contracts it again, at least, cases of after-infection are 
exceedingly rare. The great number of cases that I have had oppor- 
tunity of observing does not permit me to doubt the truth of this.” 
“ I am convinced with Messrs. Camper and Munnicks,” says 
Yicq. d’Asyr, “that a beast recovering from this epizootic is not 
capable of contracting it anew ; at least, neither of us has seen, 
either in the South of France or the whole of Flanders, a single 
instance of the contrary. M. Esmangeard, the Intendant at Bour- 
deaux, bought, at my request, several beasts that had recovered 
from the epizootic. We attempted, in various ways, to infect them 
a second time, but we could not succeed. Of the beasts which 
escaped in the last year, and they were very few in number, not one 
was attacked in the present year, although no precautionary means 
were adopted with regard to them.” 
In another place, the same author assures us, that he had in vain 
attempted to communicate the malady a second time to any of the 
cattle. “ This fact,” says he “ ought to give confidence to the few 
persons whose cattle recovered from the epidemic : they can scarcely 
