ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OF ENGLAND. 897 
idea of causative relation between the two events. While inquiring 
into the general health of the farm stock, 1 was informed that a cow, 
pastured with others in an adjoining meadow, became seriously ill on 
the 11th of September (eight days prior to my visit), and died the 
same evening. The carcase of this animal was opened in a yard close 
by the sheds, and afterwards buried. In reference to the cause of 
death, it was pointed out that, the day previously, she had gained 
access to a small shrubbery skirting the pasture, and partaken freely 
of deady nightshade. It was also noticed, in confirmation of this 
view of the matter, that others of the same herd had suffered from 
the effects of the plant at the same time, but in a less degree. I was 
particular to inquire as to the prevalence of human diphtheria in the 
neighbourhood of Abbott’s Hill, as it is somewhere recorded, on the 
authority of Dr. Sanderson, that pigs have contracted the malady by de¬ 
vouring the excrement of persons suffering from the disorder. In this 
connection, however, I was not able to gain any clue to the origin of the 
disease. In the circumstances of food and water there was nothing to 
explain the cause of the outbreak. The former consisted of “top¬ 
pings ” and wash from the house. It should be mentioned, in regard 
to the former, that the stock from which the supply was being drawn 
had been in use for two or three weeks. The water supply was obtained 
from a spring, and is said to be of good quality. It was used not 
only for pigs, but likewise for horses and cattle, and in some instances 
also for human consumption. Notwithstanding a most minute inquiry 
into all the circumstances and surroundings of this herd, I was unable 
to arrive at any conclusion as to the channel through which the disease 
had been introduced. No fresh stock had been brought on to the farm 
for any purpose whatever, nor had any of the pigs passed off the 
premises at any time. Whether the malady can arise de novo or not is 
a question most interesting to consider. But the peculiar habits of the 
pig render it altogether unfitted for such an inquiry. 
The symptoms of the malady were very characteristic of diphtheria— 
so much so, indeed, that Mrs. Peel, who had had some experience of 
that disease in man, at once recognised it. Illness was invariably 
ushered in by shivering. This was quickly followed by swelling of the 
throat. At first the enlargement was soft, and pitted on pressure, but 
soon became hard and resisting. The breathing was quick at first, and 
afterwards became embarrassed, and was with difficulty performed. 
Each act of respiration was accompanied with a wheezing sound, and 
the voice was thick and harsh. In this condition the mouth was opened 
and the tongue protruded. The gait was stiff and unsteady, and in the 
more advanced state of the malady dulness and stupor were more or 
less intense. The eyes and nostrils discharged a mucous or muco¬ 
purulent fluid, and the general indications of fever were strongly 
marked. The lesions observed 'post-mortem were essentially those of 
diphtheria, and consisted more especially of infiltration and swelling of 
the tissues of the neck, tumefaction of the tonsils, and the presence of a 
dirty-grey granular-looking false membrane on the internal surface of 
the throat. 
The treatment consisted in the administration of saline aperients, 
followed by antiseptic agents. A complete change of food was also 
ordered to be made, and the whole of the sties and their fittings to be 
thoroughly cleansed and disinfected. After my visit the animals all 
quickly recovered, and no further extension of the malady has since 
occurred. J, Wortley Axe, Professor. 
