CORRESPONDENCE. 
261 
dinary disorders, that may be seen in the daily life of any average 
veterinarian, and therefore not worth reporting to a veterinary 
periodical. 
But do we not make a mistake right here, in more than one 
particular? Should not the contents of a veterinary journal be 
diversified? Must we not, to have a readable, interesting and 
valuable paper, present to our readers other than the writings of 
the most eminent scientists among us ? I do not mean that our 
pages should be filled with inferior matter. I do think, however, 
that after reading an article by Pasteur, Colin and many others, 
w T e should find reports of interesting cases—reports that embody 
the history, treatment and the results of the special treatment 
adopted in each particular instance. Again, are those diseases 
and their medication, which we call common, thoroughly under¬ 
stood by us ? Is there not in an enzootic of influenza, even, val¬ 
uable and useful matter to be learned in relation to existing con¬ 
ditions and surroundings, that may give us new light and serve to 
aid us in determining questions of etiology, infection, contagion, 
&c.? If such a disease exists, it is the duty of the veterinarian 
who may be called to recognize it, to ascertain not only what the 
disease is, but why it exists; why it should be confined to a cer¬ 
tain territory; what are the local causes or defects that are pro¬ 
ducing the disease. 
Besides all this, a veterinary journal, above all others, should 
be made acquainted with the history of existing diseases, whether 
“ common ” or otherwise. 
Let each member of the profession, and especially those who 
practice in agricultural districts, report the outbreaks of Texas 
fever, swine-plague, pleuro-pneumonia, glanders, etc., that may 
have come under their observation during the present summer, 
and thus allow the readers of the Review to judge as to the wis¬ 
dom of such a course. 
A. E. 
