American Veterinary Review, 
APRIL, 1892. 
EDITORIAL. 
Actinomycosis.— In anticipation of our expected inability 
to be piesent at the great Peoria trial, and anxious to lay be¬ 
fore our readers an accurate report of the proceedings, with the 
views and opinions of the professional witnesses, and the legal 
ending of the case, one of our co-editors was commissioned 
to prepare a general brief of the proceedings for publication 
in the Review. Dr. Williams accepted the task, and subse¬ 
quently furnished us the article which appeared in our Janu¬ 
ary issue. We have since then received from another of our 
colleagues on the editorial staff, Dr. Schwarzkopf, who was 
one of the witnesses in the case, a criticism upon the editorial 
of Di. Williams, and a long article on the subject of actino¬ 
mycosis besides, which will be found in another part of the 
present number ; and we here append the critique of Dr. S , 
thus laying both sides of the story before our readers. In 
the article on actinomycosis the author expresses, perhaps a 
little too confidently, the hope of a change in our views from 
those which were propounded in our letter to the Live-Stock 
Commissioner, but on this point we can only say that while 
Din examination of recent authorities on the subject may have 
somewhat modified our estimate of the force of certain objec¬ 
tions which we have conceived to be valid, we are not yet 
irmly convinced, and must wait for more weighty evidence 
)f the fallacy of our impressions before abandoning the posi- 
,ion which we have heretofore maintained. The first com- 
nunication of Dr. Schwarzkopf is in the following terms: 
