6 
tion in color, some varieties being purple, some yellow, and 
others white.” 
From the Agricultural Report of 1886, page 75, the same 
description of symptoms are given, and Dr. Vasey again says: 
“We invite further information from those acquainted with 
the plant and its poisonous qualities. The plants sent were 
those of Astragalus lentiginosics , locally called 'rattle weed’ and 
‘loco.’ It belongs to the order Le^tiininosce, and is somewhat 
similar to lucern in appearance, and produces bladdery pods, 
in which the seeds rattle when ripe. Hence the name ‘ rattle 
weed.’ In Colorado and New Mexico the same disease 
among horses and cattle is produced by Astragalus Mollissiinus 
and other allied plants. The loss of stock from the eating 
of these plants has been very great.” The other accounts of 
the loco are mostly found in the Journals of Chemistry and 
Pharmacy . In The Druggists’ Circtdar and Chemical Gazette 
of October, 1888, there is an article by James Kennedy, read 
at the Austin meeting of the Texas Pharmaceutical Associa- 
tion on the loco weed— Astragahis Mollissimus. The chemi¬ 
cal analysis used in the method is described in detail. We 
have room but for his conclusion: “Our experiments were 
conducted upon the dog, because horses and cattle were not 
to us available subjects ; and we believe they have demon¬ 
strated conclusively the non-toxic or innocuous character of 
the drug. If death is produced by the plant at all, it is not de¬ 
pendent on any poisonous principle contained therein, but is 
perhaps due to the tough, fibrous and indigestible character 
of the plant acting as a foreign body, producing irritation and 
symptoms consequent thereupon, or else its action is identical 
with an overload of green food of any kind. As the observa¬ 
tions heretofore reported were all upon animals feeding in 
pastures, there seems to be no positive evidence that ‘loco’ 
has ever caused the death of any animal, and the immense 
destruction of stock with which it is charged may have been 
caused by some poisonous plant heretofore unsuspected. 
Our conclusions, therefore, are that the ‘loco’ {Astragalus 
Mollissimus) is non-poisonous and does not possess any of the 
properties ascribed to it by popular superstition.” 
In the Druggists Bulletin, May, 1889, page 145, in an article 
headed “ Loco Weed,” by Prof. L. E. Sayre, Department of 
Pharmacy, Kansas State University, he states his attention 
has been called to the loco weed since 1885. Cuts of the Oxy- 
tropis Lamberti, Astragahis Mollissirmts, and Astragahcs tridac- 
tylicus The chemical examination is described, and 
also his visits to Indian Territory, No-Man’s Land, the west¬ 
ern part of Kansas, Colorado, and New Mexico during the 
