/ 
I 
CORRESPONDENCE. 671 
There can be no doubt that, generally speaking, the milk from 
tuberculous cows should be avoided as a nourishment. * 
It is true that, even where the udders are not infected, chemical 
products due to the tuberculous process in some other part of 
this body may enter the circulation in greater or less quantity, 
and thus contaminate the milk as well as other secretions. But 
the main question is : Are there exact and conclusive experi¬ 
ments on record from which it is evident that milk under such 
conditions is injurious or objectionable as a nourishment; is not 
the assumption that such milk is unfit for use an hypothesis 
that needs to be proven ? Public hygiene must be based upon 
absolute facts, not upon hypotheses, although they may have in 
their favor some arguments that find support in scientific truths.” 
This seems to bear out in general the views expressed by 
Major Alvord, and I do not believe its author or Major Alvord 
or any one interested in the welfare of stock and public health 
would advocate any compromise in the matter if there was the 
slightest possibility of stamping out the disease by such legisla¬ 
tion as seems to be desired by veterinarians on the Pacific coast. 
Pure air, pure water and sunlight are free to everyone who 
cares to take advantage of them ; and it certainly seems more 
economical, less troublesome and equally, if not vastly more, ef¬ 
fective and lasting when coupled with the recommendation of 
Major Alvord for the slaughter of all animals sick of tubercu¬ 
losis, than by the adoption of a compulsory tuberculin test. 
But I should like to ask, Mr. Editor, to whom are we in¬ 
debted for our knowledge of the existence of the bovine tuber¬ 
culosis, the diagnostic tuberculin, for sermn-theraphy and most 
of our bacteriological and theraupeutic knowledge but to our 
friends on the other side of the Atlantic whom we are invited to 
ignore? To all appearances these criticisms directed at that “High 
Official ” seem to indicate personal rather than scientific mo¬ 
tives. However, there is room for much discussion before rad¬ 
ical measures are taken to enforce “ Tuberculin Reform ” 
rather than that free-for-all “Sanitary and Hygienic Reform.” 
Very respectfully, 
Sam’l S. Buckley. 
SECTIONAL WORK IN THE U. S. V. M. A. 
Kansas City, Kansas, Nov. 20, 1896. 
Editors American Veterinary Review : 
Dear Sirs :—Your comments concerning the future work 
to be carried on by the U. S. V. M. A. in an editorial in the 
