TRANSLATIONS FROM FOREIGN PAPERS. 
369 
there was variable only the exanthematous appearance, sometimes 
none, sometimes reduced to a single pustule, now localized on 
the naso-labial region, and again disseminated all over the body. 
This manner of considering, however, I do not believe suffi- 
iently true to be accepted. I say so without hesitancy, as 1 am 
convinced M. Cliauveau will appreciate this as merely the desire 
to arrive at the truth. 
The re-vaccination he has performed, proved incontestably that 
the subjects which received the injection of vaccinate serosityq 
were all destituted of receptivity for the disease, but not that 
those in which the injection had produced no apparent effect, 
possessed really this receptivity at the first experiment. For, as 
he remarked himself, it is difficult to admit that the introduction 
of a virulent liquid in an organism, being a favorable ground for 
the evolution of the disease, may impressionate it in some peculiar 
manner without showing it by appreciable sign. And still he 
thinks that the injection of vaccine, which had produced no 
eruption on a certain number of animals, has destroyed in them 
the aptitude to contract the disease. I repeat, it is not proved 
that they possessed this aptitude at the first experiment; but what 
makes M. Cliauveau believe it is, that on all the animals which 
were not submitted first to the experiment and which he vaccin¬ 
ated comparatively by sub-epidermic insertion of the same virus, 
he has seen handsome pustules of vaccine; but this is not yet a 
sufficient proof. He may have been unfortunate in his experi¬ 
ments ; he may have had, in the series of animals vaccinated 
directly with the lancets only, subjects which to that time had 
remained rebels to the effects of the disease, or had been affected 
a long time back, likely then to take it again: and, on the con¬ 
trary, find in the other series where the experiments of injection, 
inspiration and sub-cutaneous or vascular injection were followed, 
a number of individuals already protected by an anterior attack 
(not of long previous epoch) of the disease. M. Cliauveau does 
not pretend that one inoculation of horse-pox must necessarily be 
followed with success. If he re vaccinated shortly after, the effect 
is none. I will add that it is the same, if he vaccinated when 
just cured of gourme. Not only the immunity resulting from a 
