why pasteur’s vaccine fails to prevent hog cholera. 181 
sh and American authors are almost literally the same. The 
•ports of those who have seen it in these various countries con- 
dn no essential differences in their accounts of the different 
ationalities of the different breeds. Notwithstanding this, how- 
rer, statements of the opposite opinion have been made public, 
t a number of instances, as of course there will always be many 
linds among many men. We who have seen it in both France 
id America, and some of our friends who have observed it in 
rennany and the United States also, are in no doubt respect- 
lg their similarity, and are so strong in our consideration that 
e cannot see any other way to recommend in the prophylaxy 
f this scourage of swine than inoculation.” 
Recognizing the fact that this paragraph is aimed at the writer, 
3 the onlv one who has denied the identity of the rouget of 
•/ 
ranee and the hog cholera of America, the challenge implied in 
lese lines is unhesitatingly accepted, and an attempt will be 
jade to show either that Dr. Liautard and the gentlemen who 
ii are his view are not well informed in regard to the recent 
luropean literature on this subject, or that they have been able 
d obtain information which is not accessible to the writer. Should 
hey decide that the latter alternative is the correct one we shall 
e happy to have them present their evidence. 
In the first place it is well to remember that French veterinar- 
ms have described two or more epizootic diseases as affecting 
ags, and a very slight examination of their literature shows that 
ven now there is the greatest confusion in regard to the whole 
ubject. Benion, who is the author of the only complete scien- 
ific treatise on hog diseases that has appeared in recent years in 
r rance, classes rouget and rougeole together and calls it a skin 
lisease; he also describes a different disease, which he calls char- 
>on, but as recent investigations seem to demonstrate that the 
log is not subject to charbon, this second disease is of an unde- 
ermined nature. Zundel, whose knowledge of this subject will 
lardly be questioned, treats of rouget under the heading of epi- 
iootic erysipelas of the pig, and says that rougeole is easily dis- 
inguished fi’om it; he also refers to still another disease which 
le calls charbon. Cornevin, in his work on rouget , finds it neces- 
I? 
