REPORTS OF CASES. 
193 
these two maladies are one and the same disease differently 
manifested, there is no doubt. 
Other and more varied experiments were tried, and are 
still in progress, concerning other matters with reference to 
the possible nature of the malady in regard to immunity and 
length of incubation after natural exposure. The investiga¬ 
tion in these lines is not yet consummated, and much time 
and attentive work must be done ere the public receive any 
further statements. 
From the foregoing it will be seen that antiseptic meas¬ 
ures in the way of washes, etc., in treating mares that have 
aborted, are not sufficient, and perhaps of doubtful benefit, 
the germ causing the malady being in the system and not a 
local parasite; that strict sanitary measures are necessary ; 
that medicinal treatment, of whatever nature, will be of no 
benefit so far as removing the cause or preventing the acci¬ 
dent is concerned; that joint-ail and abortion are the same 
malady differently manifested ; that local application to um¬ 
bilicus of a recently born foal whose dam has been infected 
previous to foaling, will not prevent the occurrence of joint- 
ail in colts. 
The following facts may be determined by experimenta¬ 
tion : Whether one attack gives immunity to another the suc¬ 
ceeding year ; whether we will or will not be able to vaccin¬ 
ate against its appearance; what is the. length of time re¬ 
quired for incubation under natural or accidental exposure 
whether or not the germ is capable of producing abortion 
save at certain stages in its life ; and what is the length of 
time during which the germ remains in the animal economy. 
REPORTS OF CASES. 
“Careful observation makes a skillful practitioner, but his skill dies with him. 
By recording his observations he adds to the knowledge of his profession , and assists 
by his facts in building up the solid edifice of pathological science .''' 1 — Veterinary 
Record. - 
A CASE OP VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Reported by James A. Watjgh, V.S., Allegheny, Pa. 
The case of W. A. Hatfield versus J. E. Duncan, V.S., 
and J. H. O’Brien, M.D., V.S., was tried May 16th and 17th, 
1893, before Judge Magee in Common Pleas Court No. 2, of 
