574 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
disease similar to schweineseuche , while the ulceration of the large 
intestine and the growth of his microbe on potato are equally 
strong indications of the other disease. The germ of schweine¬ 
seuche has no independent power of motion, while the germ of 
hog cholera is actively motile in liquid cultures. This is a very 
plain and essential difference, but the Doctor lias not yet told us 
whether his germ is motile or non-motile. I see no way to recon 
cile his different statements except on the theory that he has had 
a mixed virus containing both microbes. 
The apparent inconsistencies in my reports are due to the fact 
that I worked with two distinct diseases, which are caused by 
quite different micro-organisms. These two diseases have always 
been considered identical, and it is only recently that I have been 
able to secure a demonstration of their dissimilar nature, though 
I have suspected it for nearly two years. 
Finally, it is surprising to me that gentlemen who make such 
claims to erudition as Dr. Billings and Dr. Bowhill should in 
their first report describe a parasite so well known and easily 
recognized as the echinorynchus gigas under the name of “ ascaris 
suilla.” The latter does not attach itself to the small intestine 
and cause lesions such as they describe. 
D. E. Salmon. 
VETERINARY LEGISLATION. 
Paterson, N. J., Jan. 18th, 1887. 
Editor American Veterinary Review : 
Sir: —In the December number of the Review you kindly 
laid before your readers my article on veterinary legislation, and 
your January issue contained a letter written by the gentleman 
who drafted the veterinary bill which was passed by the New 
York Legislature last year. In this letter I was taken to task 
for taking the liberty of expressing my views on the New York 
State law. No doubt, Dr. Pendry framed the bill with the best 
of intentions, but, in my humble opinion, the bill as passed is 
injurious to the public, as well as to educated veterinarians, in 
