2 
EDITORIAL. 
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY. 
“Audiatur et altera par s'" is an ancient Roman judicial principle. The 
truth of this was never more apparent to me than when I read the report of the 
Peoria trial on actinomycosis, as given by Dr. W. L. Williams. It is a master¬ 
piece of misconception. While the expert witnesses of the plaintiff are pictured 
very much like fools, those of the defendants seemingly overflow with wisdom. 
But neither is correct, for certainly both sides have given valuable testimony on 
scientific points. 
Elsewhere in this volume will be found a synopsis of my views on the ques¬ 
tion of actinomycosis, which relieves me here of a reply on that part. But I 
cannot refrain, in consequence of Dr. Williams’ remarks, to give my impression 
of the representatives of the Illinois Live-Stock Commission—the bearing of 
some of them in court while I was there was decidedly objectionable and ungen¬ 
tlemanly. The*Secretary of the Board would constantly sneeze and laugh while 
I was on the stand; it was all fun with him ; he ostensibly knew all about actin¬ 
omycosis. The ill-feeling that was shown to men testifying on the other side of 
Board was notoriously offensive. They took the trial as a question of life and 
death with them, and not as a matter of scientific dispute. If such be the per¬ 
sonnel with which our State veterinarians are surrounded in their daily business, 
great reforms will be needed to free our colleagues from the ban of such injuri¬ 
ous political appendices. 
The violent attack of Dr. Williams upon Dr. Hickmann I leave the latter 
to take care of. However, should he not reply, I shall in a later issue of the 
Review take a stand against some of Dr. Williams’ erroneous utterances in re¬ 
gard to the effect which a moderate view of actinomycosis, as held by Dr. Hick¬ 
mann, might have on international meat inspection. 
Olof Schwarzkopf. 
Anti-Rabies Inoculations. —In the editorial department 
of our March number we gave expression to our views upon 
the prophylaxy of many contagious diseases of animals by 
this form of treatment, referring, as the ground of our argu¬ 
ment, to the results which had been obtained, or were claimed 
by various experimenters. Among them, we alluded to those 
which had been made by Dr. Billings, in the prophylaxy of 
hog cholera. A reference to our remarks on that occasion 
will remind our readers that we neither affirmed nor endorsed 
the results stated by the doctor, but characterized them, in 
the language of the author himself, as simply “ claims.” 
We have received from the worthy Chief of the Bureau of 
Animal Industry, Dr. E. Salmon, a communication in relation 
to the alleged success of Dr. Billings, with a request to find 
a place for it in the Review. Our columns are always open 
