6o8 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
September 12 
ises fine fruit. Baldwin is the winter apple for this 
region. It is the heaviest and most constant yielder, 
and yields a larger per cent of marketable fruit. 
Rhode Island Greening will yield two-thirds as much, 
while King does not yield over one-fourth. Yellow 
Bellflower yields well, and is a fine apple, but too 
delicate to handle. 
Bears, which bloomed lightly, are yielding a fair 
crop of better fruit than usual. Corn promises fine, 
and a large acreage was planted. More silos are 
being built than ever before. 
We have a rat and fireproof grain bin which we like 
very much, and have material on hand to build an¬ 
other this fall. It is made of sheet iron which we buy 
in strips six, seven or eight feet long as desired, and 
about three feet wide. We set it on studs about 18 
inches apart, and lap the iron about two inches, using 
wire shingle nails. It costs 2% cents per square foot, 
so is not much more expensive than boards and far 
superior. 
We like to buy our winter’s supply of grain during 
the summer. It is then, usually, at its lowest price, 
and we buy as cheaply as the miller. We don’t have 
to run to the mill every few days, and we know where 
we are. Some of the creameries in this section are 
doing their patrons quite a service, and saving them 
considerable money by buying their grain. As soon 
as enough orders are in to warrant, one or more car¬ 
loads are ordered, and it is usually all sold before 
arrival. Drafts are met out of the creamery surplus, 
so no one man has to advance money. Fifty cents 
per ton added to the actual cost of grain, covers all 
expense. h. g. Manchester. 
Connecticut. 
IS THE TUBERCULIN TEST DANGEROUS ? 
THE VETERINARIANS GIVE THEIR SIDE. 
On page 548, The R. N.-Y. mentioned the case of a 
cow at the Wisconsin Experiment Station that was 
tested with tuberculin, but failed to respond. On 
killing her, it was found that a tubercle in her lung 
had become covered or encysted, so that it could not 
spread. In other words, Nature had healed the lung 
by covering up the tubercle. The New York Farmer, 
in commenting on this statement, said : 
It is a well-established fact that tuberculin injected 
into such an animal , converts the latent and harmless 
tubercle into an active, dangerous and contagious case. 
Suppose such a cow had been tested , and as the test 
proved (?) her free from disease, she had been sold into a 
new herd. She might easily have infected the whole herd 
before her case became known. 
This is a very important and interesting point, and 
we sent the Farmer’s statement to some of our lead¬ 
ing veterinarians, with the request that they tell us 
if, in their opinion, the obieetions are well founded. 
Dr. Salmon Says Tuberculin is Harmless. 
This Bureau, probably, has collected more records 
of tuberculin tests than any other institution in the 
world, and I am free to say that I have never seen 
any evidence that the use of tuberculin in cattle con¬ 
verts latent and harmless tubercles into active and 
dangerous ones ; neither have I seen any evidence 
that tuberculin increases the liability to the disease. 
&o far from this being the case, the tendency, as 
shown by the experiments which we have made, is 
for tuberculin to convert active tuberculosis into a 
chronic and latent form, and to give animals a certain 
immunity from tubercle infection. The objections 
which you mention to the use of tuberculin, are, I 
think, the most unreasonable and unjustified of any 
that have ever been put forth. d. e. salmon. 
Chief of U. S. Bureau of Animal Industry. 
The Tuberculin Test on Cattle. 
The objections are neither reasonable nor correct. 
Extended investigations have shown that the use of 
tuberculin does not excite or increase the liability to 
the disease in cattle. Opponents to the use of the 
tuberculin test still claim that the use of tuberculin 
will, frequently, produce tuberculosis, or excite into 
activity a latent case of the disease ; but their asser¬ 
tions are never accompanied by experiments or facts 
to support their claims. American, as well as Euro¬ 
pean, veterinarians and investigators are now almost 
unaminous in their opinion that tuberculin is a reliable 
and, practically, an infallible test, and that its use, 
as a diagnostic when applied to cattle, does not ag¬ 
gravate an existing mild or latent case of the disease, 
or have any injurious effect upon a healthy animal. 
During the earlier use of tuberculin upon man, in 
the treatment of tuberculosis, it was found that, in a 
large number of cases, the tubercular lesions were 
aggravated, and the disease hastened to a fatal termi¬ 
nation. From this fact (and in no case as a result of 
extended observation or experiment), a few writers 
reasoned that the use of tuberculin on cattle would 
have ’he same injurious effect. Investigations have 
shown, however, that the deduction was not correct. 
There is no experimental evidence that tuberculin 
aggravates or excites disease in cattle, while on the 
contrary, there are numerous experiments which 
show that the use of tuberculin had no such injurious 
effect upon diseased animals. 
At the International Veterinary Congress held at 
Berne, in September last, the following resolution on 
tuberculin was adopted : 
Resolution No. 1. Tuberculin is a very valuable diagnostic 
agent, and can yield the greatest assistance in combating tuber¬ 
culosis. There is no reason for objecting to its general applica¬ 
tion on the ground that it may aggravate preexisting tubercular 
lesions. 
The resolution was supported by all the veterinarians 
present, with two notable exceptions, that of Galle- 
beau and Hess, of Berne. It, therefore, represents 
the most recent opinion of the foremost veterinarians 
of Europe. 
The result of the investigations of American veteri¬ 
narians is very fully given in Bulletin No. 29, 1895, 
of the Iowa Agricultural College Experiment Station. 
In giving the conclusions drawn from their own tests 
made at the station, and from well-established facts 
on the subject of tuberculosis as determined by other 
investigators, it reads : “ The following may be said 
to cover a portion of the ground that has been prac¬ 
tically cleared from doubt: (1.) Tuberculosis of the 
lower animals is identical with human consumption. 
(2.) It is an infectious disease. (3.) The disease may 
be transmitted from man to the lower animals, and 
from the lower animals to man. (4.) Tuberculosis 
causes more deaths in the human family than any 
other disease. (5.) Cows are especially susceptible to 
the disease, and are extensivelv affected with it. ( 6 .) 
Milk from tuberculous cows may convey the disease 
to the consumers. (7.) Milk from tuberculous cows hav¬ 
ing non-affected udders, may convey the disease. ( 8 .) 
The flesh of tuberculous animals may convey the dis¬ 
ease. (9.) A large proportion of the cases cannot be 
recognized by clinical examination. (10 ) No other 
test yet discovered, than that afforded by tuberculin, 
can detect any considerable proportion of cases in the 
living subject, and this test is practically infallible. 
(11.) Injections of tuberculin cannot produce tuber¬ 
culosis, or are the results harmful. Any one of these 
assertions can be successfully defended by observa¬ 
tions made on the part of experimenters of unques¬ 
tioned credibility. Most of them have been verified 
by our own station work.” 
Dr. Leonard Pearson, State Veterinarian of Penn¬ 
sylvania, and one of the best authorities in this coun¬ 
try on the use of tuberculin, in a paper read before 
the section on Public Health of the New Y T ork 
Academy of Medicine, November 8 , 1895, states in his 
resum 6 , that “ Tuberculin is a reliable diagnostic 
agent. There need be no fear that tuberculin, prop¬ 
erly used, will cause generalization of preexisting 
disease. All tuberculous herds should be tested with 
tuberculin, and the tuberculous and healthy animals 
separated.” 
Dr. W. B. Niles, of the Veterinary Department of 
the Iowa State College, says : “ The fact that it has 
been assumed by some to hasten the course of the 
disease, causing a mild case to become acute, has 
been heard of by the objectors to the use of tuber¬ 
culin, and some are trying to make a good deal of 
capital out of the statement.” Like a drowning man, 
the objectors clutch at any straw within reach, no 
matter how weak. Dr. Niles further says, “ The 
results of the work here do not go to show that a 
mild case is made worse. In no case under observa¬ 
tion, has a rapid decline followed the use of the 
agent.” 
I might quote similar results from the bulletins of 
the experiment stations of Delaware, Maine, Massa¬ 
chusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wis¬ 
consin and the United States Bureau of Animal 
Industry. Tuberculin is not a reliable agent for 
incompetent or inexperienced men. The original 
investigations with tuberculin, during its experi¬ 
mental stage, showed from 10 to 15 per cent of fail¬ 
ures to diagnose correctly; but with improved methods 
and increased experiece, the proportion of failures in 
the hands of competent veterinarians, is now so 
small as to be almost disregarded, f. l kilborne. 
Dr. James Law Expresses An Opinion. 
It is quite true that “ tuberculin injected into such 
an animal” (a tuberculous one) “ converts the latent 
* * * tubercle into an active” one. But it is not 
true that the “latent” tubercle is, therefore, “ harm¬ 
less,” or that it requires this injection of tuberculin 
to render it “ dangerous and contagious”. The 
tubercle, however latent, harbors the bacillus, and 
where the bacillus is, there is the element of harm, 
danger and contagion. Had the writer said, more 
harmful, more active, more dangerous, and more con¬ 
tagious, his words would have been nearer the truth ; 
but as they stand, they were, evidently, intended to 
imply that there could be neither harm, danger nor 
contagion, until the tubercle had been roused into 
greater activity. This is based on the old doctrine 
that cases of a contagious disease which would not be 
necessarily fatal, should be preserved if possible, a 
doctrine which has cost the Old World its hundreds 
of millions, but which, to-day, for enlightened econo¬ 
mists, to say nothing of sanitarians, is no longer ten¬ 
able. It is quite true that we cannot quickly and 
absolutely stamp out tuberculosis in man, but that is 
no reason why we should not do so in animals, and 
keep doing so until man, also, could be finally freed 
from it. 
The supposition that “*a cow had been tested, and 
as the test proved (?) her free from the disease, she 
had been sold into a new herd, she might easily have 
infected the whole herd before her case became 
known,” is skillfully constructed to depreciate the 
tuberculin test; but it is based upon faulty pre¬ 
mises. The supposed basis is that the tuberculin must 
have stimulated the latent tubercle into “ dangerous 
activity,” which is precisely what the test showed it 
had not done. If the test failed to detect the pres¬ 
ence of the latent tubercle, it was because it had 
failed to bring about an excess of high temperature, 
and high temperature would, certainly, have been 
developed if the latent tubercle had been roused to 
activity. The same influence which produces the 
local activity in the tubercle, produces, simultane¬ 
ously, an abnormal activity in the heat-produciDg 
center, and, as a result, the febrile reaction. If, then, 
there was no reaction, it may be safely inferred that 
there was no stimulus given to the activity of the 
tubercle. The argument, therefore, that this cow was 
rendered more dangerous by the use of tuberculin, 
has no basis in fact or in science. 
In the case that does react, showing the febrile tem¬ 
perature, the argument would hold. The latent 
tubercle has been roused into greater activity, and an 
increased danger of infection has been brought about. 
But if tuberculin is to be used at all, the reacting 
cow should be promptly killed, and the possibility 
of infection from this source done away with. The 
stock owner who uses tuberculin as a test, and, there¬ 
fore, preserves in his herd a single animal that reacted 
under its influence, is doing his best to secure an ex¬ 
tension of the infection to his other animals, and the 
State that will compel the use of tuberculin, without 
paying for and promptly slaughtering all reacting 
animals, is guilty of a useless and unwarranted in¬ 
jury to private property. In sanitary work, the two 
things are inseparable—the tuberculin test and de¬ 
struction of reacting animals. 
Tuberculin must be used with great judgment, but, 
judiciously and intelligently used, it is the most valu¬ 
able agent known, for dealing with tuberculosis in 
animals. As to the question whether “tuberculin 
can increase the liability to the disease,” the answer 
must be qualified. Contagious diseases act on the 
animal system, or on the tissues through the poison¬ 
ous products which they form. These tend to lower 
the vitality, or to irritate or oth erwise to injure, the 
tissues attacked. If this injurious action is too power¬ 
ful, the resisting power of the tissues and of the sys¬ 
tem fails, and the part, or the animal is destroyed. 
If, however, the poison is less powerful, the defensive 
powers of the part attacked, of the white blood cells, 
and of the system, are successfully called into play, 
and the attacking germs are, sooner or later, de¬ 
stroyed and cast out. In such a case, in most con¬ 
tagious diseases, the system acquires increased power 
of defense in case of any attack by the same germ in 
the future, and is usually considered as proof against 
a second attack of that particular disease. In measles, 
scarlatina, lung plague, anthrax, etc., this acquired 
power of resistance is very effective, whereas, in 
tuberculosis, it is relatively very much less powerful. 
In systems, however, that are naturally resistant to 
tuberculosis, this increased resistance may be quite 
perceptible, and upon this somewhat unstable basis, 
was built the Koch system of treating the disease by 
injections of tuberculin. 
In a very susceptible animal, therefore, with a 
latent tubercle, or with the tubercle germ just enter¬ 
ing the tissues, and not having had time, as yet, to 
produce visible local disease, the tuberculin would, 
for the moment, lay the system open to a more active 
progress of the tuberculosis. In a comparatively in¬ 
susceptible animal, on the other hand, the education 
received through the presence, in limited amount, of 
the tuberculin, would train the white blood cells to 
produce an increased amount of the defensive proteids, 
and would, correspondingly, decrease the liability to 
the disease. 
It is unfortunate that this matter has not been dealt 
with from a scientific standpoint, and by the mind of 
the trained animal pathologist, for this attempt to 
popularize the subject by men who start out with a 
one-sided view and object, serves only to distort and 
misapply facts and truths in such a way as to make 
them essentially misleading. Ignorance and preju- 
dic e make a dangerous combination at any time, but 
