558 
D. E. SALMON. 
Hog Cholera, mentioned by Dr. Peters in the quotations 
made above from his paper, occurs the following paragraph \ 
“ The greater part of the detailed study of the disease, the 
planning of the experiments, and the bacteriological investi¬ 
gations, have been carried out by Dr. Theobald Smith, while 
the conducting of the experiments, the care of the experi¬ 
mental animals and the general management of the experi¬ 
ment station have been under the direction of Dr. F. L. Kil- 
borne. I can only speak in the highest terms of the untiring 
industry and skill displayed by both of these gentlemen.” 
It is unnecessary for me to make further quotations to es¬ 
tablish the fact that Dr. Peters was guilty of the most inex¬ 
cusable misrepresentation and distortion of facts in what he 
said in reference to this matter. “ You will see,” he says, 
“ that Jeffries in his paper gives Smith the credit for the work 
he has done.” But why should he not have given him credit? 
Were not all the facts detailed with sufficient minuteness in 
the reports, as shown by the above quotations? Again, he 
says, “ It has been no secret to me for the last year and a half 
as to who was actually conducting these investigations in the 
Bureau of Animal Industry.” Why should it have been any 
secret to him or to any one else who consulted the reports of 
the Bureau as to the exact position and work of each one 
connected with the investigations ? 
There is one other paragraph in Dr. Peters’ paper which 1 
must quote and comment on in this connection. He says : “ If 
the Bureau of Animal Industry is to be a political organiza¬ 
tion, why not have its Chief simply write the letter of trans¬ 
missal of his annual report to the Secretary of Agriculture, 
and have a few true scientists in his employ to work unhampered 
and make their own reports upon the questions that they have 
been studying upon. This, at least, for the sake of making a 
more creditable appearance to other civilized nations, if we 
have no respect for ourselves.” 
This is very strong language, calculated and intended to 
discredit the Bureau and those connected with it, both at 
home and abroad. The reader will agree with me, I am sure, 
that it should not have been published broadcast without the 
