THE RELATION OF THE VETERINARY PRACTITIONER TO 
MUNICIPAL FOOD INSPECTION.* 
By Geo. H. Glover, Fort Collins, Colo. 
A paper on sanitation might include many things. The sub¬ 
ject is so broad that to do it justice in all departments would be 
like issuing one stupendous volume of “universal knowledge”; 
I have thought it better, therefore, to deal specifically with 
two or three phases of the subject rather than to generalize, in a 
necessarily superficial way, on the entire subject of sanitation as 
applicable to veterinary science. 
Those of us who are in the latitude of the half century zone 
are fortunate indeed that we have been privileged to live so long, 
at a time cotemporaneous with the most marvelous progress in 
every department of human activity that the world has ever 
known. This period is especially conspicuous for the enlarged 
opportunities in education, for a more intimate acquaintance with 
the laws of nature, for a wider horizon, a greater optomism and 
we trust a more abiding faith. 
Commensurate with the most conspicuous of notable achieve¬ 
ments in the arts and sciences has been the evolution of the 
theories, facts and methods pertaining to the profession of veteri¬ 
nary medicine. The animal wealth has increased in this country 
many fold and this growth is marked, not by a numerical in¬ 
crease alone, but because of better breeds of animals, and has 
been fostered by a growing appreciation everywhere, that animal 
industry is the major part of agriculture. 
The subject that I wish to present for your consideration to¬ 
day is centered around the proposition that relatively too much 
of the work and too large a share of the interest of the veterina¬ 
rian is dedicated to conserving the 4,000,000,000 dollar live stock 
* Read before the Missouri Valley Veterinary Association, at Omaha, Neb., July 2, 
1912, as a part of the report of the Committee on Sanitation. 
567 
