INFECTIOUS SWINE DISEASES IN THE UNITED STATES. 
815 
las, roiiget or peculiar to this species has not been 
found^ to be the cause of destructive outbreaks, although an 
organism closely related to, if not identical with, the bacillus of 
rouget has on at least three occasions * been isolated from swine. 
In each of these instances it was obtained from one animal only. 
Omitting, therefore, from this discussion this possible, but as yet 
in America unrecognized disease, we pass to the consideration 
of the two maladies first mentioned. 
The investigation into the nature and cause of infectious 
diseases among swine was undertaken by the U. S. Department 
of Agriculture more than twenty years ago. Among the reports 
of the earlier investigators is one by Prof. James Law,! in which 
we find the lesions carefully described and a list of seventeen 
names under which the then supposedly single disease existed. 
Among these are hog cholera, enteric fever, gastro-enteritis, and 
others suggestive of the external manifestations of the disease 
such as erysipelas, measles and scarlatina, but none to indicate 
pneumonia or lung lesions of any kind. In consulting the ear¬ 
lier literature on swine diseases in England, we find practically 
the same nomenclature. The descriptions of the morbid 
anatomy are likewise very similar, and writers in both countries, 
but more especially Dr. Budd of England, have pointed out the 
similarity of this disease to typhoid fever in man. Up to the 
time of the investigations about to be mentioned, howev^er, the 
seems to have been that there was but one infectious 
disease peculiar to swine in America. In i88^ the investigators 
in the U. S. Bureau of Animal Industry discovered and de¬ 
scribed ^ its specific organism. The disease was given the name 
* Smith Report of the Bureau of Animal Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture 
1085, p. 196. ^ ’ 
Ibid., 1895-96, p, 166. 
Moore, The Journal Compar. Medicine and Vet. Archives, 1892, p. 333 
t Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture for 1875. 
1 + ^i^st Annual Report of the Bureau of Animal Industry, U. S. Department of Agri¬ 
culture, 1885, p. 212. ^ ^ 
A summary of the results of the yearly investigations of the Bureau of Animal Indus- 
i?84-^i 893 Annual Reports of the U. S. Department of Agriculture for 
