640 
CENTRAL VETERINARY MEDICAL SOCIETY. 
animals suffering therefrom, and given no compensation. He attended 
the meeting that evening specially to bring this view before them. In 
the year 1873, before the Parliamentary Committee, Professor Brown 
gave evidence upon the subject of glanders and farcy, and he there (as 
did also Mr. Hunting) recommended the allowance of compensation for 
farcy ; they did so simply because it was a question whether some of the 
very mild cases were curable or not, and if curable it was hard to receive 
no recompense for the loss of an animal. In cases of pleuro-pneumonia 
compensation was given for animals slaughtered ; in other words, the 
animal is slaughtered in the public weal and the man compensated, but 
in glanders and farcy no compensation is allowed. The argument 
against allowing such would be—that farcy can by means of inoculation 
produce glanders, and that a man is having a good turn served him by 
the removal of such a disease. So long as uncertainty existed as to the 
curability of these diseases, human nature would continue to treat them. 
Many persons in London and the country treated farcy regularly. He 
did not know whether to blame them. If compensation was given to the 
extent of one half the value of an animal the incentive to treat cases 
would be taken away, and sources of contagion would not be kept upon 
men’s premises; the law should take notice of this, and try and hit 
upon some expedient to induce a man to get rid of all cases of farcy in 
the early stages; it was quite possible to stamp out the disease in this 
country just as much as the cattle plague. The Government should give 
compensation in all mild cases of farcy, and then we should get rid of 
farcy and glanders in about two years. 
As to disinfecting stables for glanders and farcy, he would venture to 
say he disbelieved in it as usually carried out. To properly disinfect 
requires about two and a half per cent, of carbolic acid to destroy the 
poison of glanders, and that strength is about four times as strong as 
most disinfectants used. To think that the atmosphere of a stable can 
be disinfected is litter nonsense, because the disinfectant, if used in suffi¬ 
cient strength to purify the air, rendered it destructive to animal life. 
The plan he adopted was to see that the stable was thoroughly washed 
first with boiling water and soda and then scraped down (the law 
requires powder), and he used a bit of limewash afterwards, but never 
permitted that to be done until it had been thoroughly washed with 
carbolic acid of two and a half degrees ; then one had true disinfection, 
but not otherwise. 
Mr. Shaw had tried some experiments in relation to the temperature of 
the discharge from the nostrils, and considered his own hand the best test, 
and observed it was either deathly cold or very warm indeed ; some practi¬ 
tioners differed and asserted that the discharge was always cold. He was 
aware diseased horses worked about London at night, and, in his opinion, 
many diseases were brought about by drinking troughs, particularly 
among horses belonging to market men. Several cases he knew of could 
be distinctly traced to this cause. In reference to disinfectants, before 
used the place should be thoroughly scrubbed and whitewashed; 
many stables were so old and filthy they were only fit to be pulled 
down and burnt. 
Mr. Sheather thought if compulsory slaughtering were introduced, fully 
one third of the cab stables would be pulled down. If to disinfect the 
air was a myth, as Mr. Hunting had observed, still an owner of a stable 
is justified in adopting means to preserve ventilation, if there is no 
draught; one should purify the air in some way or other. With the 
apparatus he had exhibited a spray consisting of steam and carbolic acid 
could be thrown out; it certainly was one method of keeping a stable 
