KOMCEOrATHY IN VETERINARY PRACTICE 
*37 
duced into a stable, with very few exceptions, it was always 
used. The following- statistics of one large stable had consid¬ 
erable weight with me in deciding to investigate homoeopathy : 
Years. 
No. of 
Horses . 
No. of 
Deaths. 
Per Cent, 
of Loss. 
Method of Treatment. 
1881 
90 
5 
5 12 
Veterinarian employed. 
1882 
92 
5 
5 4-io 
U U 
1883 
92 
None. 
u u 
1884 
104 
3 
2 8-10 
Both methods of treatment. 
1885 
106 
1 
9-10 
Homoeopathic treatment. 
1886 
112 
None. 
U 
1887 
112 
2 
1 7-10 
u a 
1888 
120 
2 
1 6-10 
u u 
1889 
120 
4 
3 2-10 
Two under allopathic treatment. 
1890 
120 
2 
1 6-10 
One broken back. 
1891 
120 
1 
8-10 
Treated allopathically. 
1892 
120 
None. 
Homoeopathic treatment. 
1893 
130 
1 
8-10 
< i U 
1894 
113 
None. 
The cases treated allopathically were taken away sick from 
the stable, and a veterinarian called. 
On examination of this table we find that the percentage of 
loss is greatly in favor of homoeopathy. The objection to this 
may be raised that there were only three years of statistics 
under allopathic treatment, while there are nine years of 
homoeopathic treatment. If we take the worst three years, 
1888, 1889 and 1890, two deaths under homoeopathic treatment 
for each year, we find that the percentage is still greatly in 
favor of homoeopathy, as there are but six deaths, to ten in the 
three years under allopathic treatment. Then, too, we must 
take into consideration that these animals were not treated 
homoeopathically by a professional man, but by the superintend¬ 
ent of the stable. 
Another large stable, averaging one hundred head of horses, 
have treated their own stock for the past ten years, but have not 
kept a record of their losses ; but the superintendent tells me 
that, from memory, they have lost one to where they lost eight 
allopathically, and they employed one of the best veterinarians 
