4-40 
NEWS AND SUNDRIES. 
The December meeting of the Keystone Veterinary Medical Association, held 
at 1536 Race Street, Philadelphia, Pa., was called to order by the President, Dr. 
Hoskins, at 8 p.m. 
Members present; Drs. Glass, Goentner, Hoskins, Miller. Visitors: Drs. 
Raynor, J. B. Raynor and W. S. Kooker. 
Minutes of last meeting read and approved. 
Committee on Publication reported nothing had been done since last meet¬ 
ing. Dr. Rodgers’ manuscript on “Milk” was in the hands of Jenkins, of New 
York, but he did not know what he was going to do with it. Dr. Glass suggested 
the State Agricultural Society might use it in their report. Tne President in¬ 
structed the committee to correspond with the State Agricultural Society ; Liau- 
tard, of Review; Billings and Conklin, of Comparative Journal-, and Jenkins, 
veterinary publisher, and ascertain the best means of putting it in print. 
Committee on U. S. Veterinary Pharmacopia reported progress. They had 
communicated with every college in the United States, but as yet nothing had 
been done ; but thought something would be done during the coming month. 
Amendment No. Ill to By-Laws as reported last month was adopted. 
Dr. Zuill read a paper on “Spavins and Dislocations.” He referred to fetlock 
and dorso lumbar articulations, with a promise to continue the subject at a subse¬ 
quent meeting. 
Dr. Glass read a paper on “Counter-Irritants.” He rather condemned the 
promiscuous use, and thought they were abused in veterinary practice. He also 
condemned their use in diseases of the thorax, using poultices instead. A very 
spirited discussion followed, where adverse opinions were offered. 
Dr. Miller was appointed to open the discussion on counter-irritants at the 
next meeting by preparing an essay on that subject. 
Adjourned. 
Chas. T. Goentner, Secretary. 
NEWS AND SUNDRIES. 
Pasteur and Hydrophobia.— It is not difficult to find much 
to criticise in Pasteur’s experiments on hydrophobia so far as they 
have been reported. It should, however, be remembered that 
these experiments have not been published in detail, and it is not 
probable that many points of criticism which readily suggest them¬ 
selves have escaped so acute and accurate an observer as Pasteur. 
In fact the main support of Pasteur’s views lies in his established 
reputation as a cautious and far-seeing experimenter. As has 
been suggested in previous numbers of Science, it certainly seems 
a weak point that no micro organism or characteristic lesion has 
been discovered by which it can be positively demonstrated that 
