FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE. 
449 
these few it was impossible to secure replies. The tabulated 
facts concerning the remaining 183 persons show: 
1st. That none of the persons affected with the “ throat epi¬ 
demic” have since had scarlet fever, i. e. had not had it at the 
time they were questioned. 
2. That members of eight families who had previously had 
scarlet fever escaped the “ throat epidemicf while the remaining 
portion of the households developed the disease. 
3. That 16 persons affected with the “throat epidemic” had 
had scarlet fever. 
4th. That 4 of the 16 persons who had had scarlet fever had 
a mild form of the “ throat epidemic.” 
5. That of the affected individuals 2 had had scarlet fever 
when young. 
6th. That 10 of the cases were doubtful whether they had 
previously had scarlet fever. 
May it not, therefore, be possible: 
1st. That the affected persons have not since had scarlet 
fever because of the protective influence produced by the “throat 
epidemic.” 
2d. That the members of certain households who had had 
scarlet fever had thereby secured immunity from the “ throat epi¬ 
demic ,” as indicated by the fact that they escaped. 
3d. That in four of the instances in which scarlatina had 
antedated the “throat epidemic” there was a partial protection 
afforded, as indicated by the fact that four of these cases were 
mild. 
4tli. That in those instances in which scarlatina had occurred 
in early youth the protection had become exhausted. 
5th. That these two diseases may be for a time mutually 
protective. 
It is certainly a remarkable fact that, in twenty-four or more 
instances, the throat epidemic failed to attack those who had al¬ 
ready had scarlatina; also, that the few attacked with the throat 
epidemic who had had scarlatina, had, in one-fourth of the in¬ 
stances, a mild type of the epidemic disease, indicating, possibly, 
that the system had been so affected by the scarlatina contagium 
