REPLY TO DR. AUSTIN PETERS 5 CRITICISM. 
563 
exist here ? In his position on each of these important ques¬ 
tions, Jeffries fully confirms the work of this Bureau, yet 
Peters has not a word to say to that effect! 
To show the superiority of the work of investigators out¬ 
side of the Bureau, Dr. Peters says : “ Dr. Billings boldly an¬ 
nounces that he found his germ of swine plague in July, 1886, 
among the first pigs that he examined in Nebraska which had 
died of the disease.” It should be remembered in this con¬ 
nection that Dr. Billings had the advantage of our report in 
which we had described the germ of hog cholera, how to ob¬ 
tain and cultivate it, and its effects when inoculated in the 
smaller animals. All he had to do was to follow the methods 
we described in order to obtain the germ from the first hog 
he examined which was affected with the disease. But Bil¬ 
lings has boldly announced a great many discoveries that 
have not fulfilled the expectations of himself or his friends. 
If he really discovered in July, 1886, the germ which he now 
produces as the cause of his swine plague, how does it happen 
that for two years afterwards he claimed that that germ had 
no existence ? How does it happen that he asserted so posi¬ 
tively the morphological and biological identity of the germ 
he then had with the schweine-seuche germ of Germany? How 
does it happen that the first germs he sent abroad were not 
the same as our hog cholera germ or his present swine plague 
germ (Dr. E. Bunzl-Federn, Archiv. f. Hygiene, XII., 1891, 
p. 198) ? If these questions were satisfactorily answered we 
would be more disposed to admit the plausibility of Dr. Bill¬ 
ings’ bold announcement. 
With the personalities and misrepresentations out of the 
way the only statements I find remaining in Dr. Peters’ 
paper in the nature of a serious criticism are contained in the 
following sentences: “ The so-called swine plague of the Bu¬ 
reau of Animal Industry is one of those septic diseases due to 
filth, and is seen chiefly where putrefying city swill is fed ; 
and farmers around Boston find that if the swill is boiled and 
then fed, before there is time for putrefactive process to com¬ 
mence again, they are not troubled with it. In this respect 
it resembles closely the German schweine-seuche. If this be a 
true swine, plague, make'the most of it.” 
