FANCIERS’ JOURNAL AND POULTRY EXCHANGE. 
487 
matter had disappeared ; but the slit in the top of the mouth 
was full of mucus, a viscid discharge continued from the 
nostrils, and with much swelling the eyes were still com- 
pletely closed. I continued this treatment for twenty-one 
days; the daily application of the chlor. sod® being just 
sufficient to prevent the increase of the virulence of the dis- 
ease. For food I gave her one egg daily, introducing it into 
her crop through a funnel and rubber tube. Then, by neg- 
lecting her for a single day, the mucus hardened into a 
cheesy mass, the head became more swollen and feverish, 
and the breathing very difficult. I commenced the use of 
the solution three times daily, bathed the head with a diluted 
tincture of veratrum viride, and added a tonic to egg, used 
as a food. She was sound and well in two weeks, and she 
seems to have sustained no injury from my cruel experiment, 
as she is now strong and vigorous, with a brood of sixteen 
fine healthy chicks. Other experiments lead me to conclude 
that damp and draft are the greatest provocatives of roup, 
and that the use of Labarraque’s solution is an almost in- 
fallible remedy. Out of five Hamburgs (a “scrub” lot 
sent me by a dealer in New York State, whom I have been 
partially instrumental in driving out of business) which I 
made sick, I lost four. Perhaps I let the disease go too far, 
but I think Hamburgs a very unsatisfactory fowl for such 
experiments. 
It may be of interest to remark that in making the solu- 
tion of sod® chlor. I have found it unnecessary to use a filter, 
nor do I allow the mixtures of chloride of lime and of soda 
to stand separate, but pour the whole into one receptacle as 
soon as dissolved. Of course I first dissolve separately. I find 
it even better than the solution as prepared by Labarraque, 
and by keeping in a glass-stoppered bottle, and pouring off 
a small quantity of the supernatant fluid as needed, it does 
not lose its efficacy. In “ doctoring ” I use a saddle (as de- 
scribed in Wright’s Illustrated Book of Poultry , page 344). 
Standing on the right of the fowl, 1 place the forefinger of 
my left hand between its jaws on the left, and my thumb on 
the right side of its head. I can thus hold it firmly, and can 
easily examine the trachea by pushing it up with my right 
hand, and then holding it in position with the last two fin- 
gers of the left. I use a camel’s-hair pencil, which is soon 
worn to a “ stub ” by the action of the solution. By insert- 
ing this in the slit in the roof of the mouth I easily clear out 
the mucus. I prefer this to a syringe. 
To ascertain the effects of contagion I dropped a small 
portion of the mucus from a diseased fowl into water, and 
gave this to two healthy ones to drink. As long as I used 
the discharge from the nostrils of those affected merely with 
cold it produced no effect, but a very little of the cheesy mass 
from the mouth of one affected with roup diseased them in 
a few days. 
Canker or ulceration I found easily produced by filth. I 
placed cut straw in one pen, and after it had been trampled 
upon for several days, and become dirty, with more or less 
excrement mixed among it, I fed the fowls soft food thrown 
on the straw. I soon had several cases of severe canker. In 
another pen which I left unswept for three weeks, by throw- 
ing the soft food on the ground I soon had several cases. 
All were easily cured by touching the ulcers with Labar- 
raque’s solution ; and I found, by using it in one of two 
cases and not in the other, that a dose of oil hastened the 
cure. I also found alum-water very beneficial for both 
canker and roup, and I would now give two or three table- 
spoonfuls every time I “ doctored” a fowl. 
In my experiments I found some fowls attacked only on 
one side of the head, and to ascertain if local irritation might 
not produce a species of inflammation allied to roup, or so as 
to render the part more liable to be attacked, I inserted a 
small piece of half-rotten straw into one side, through the 
slit in the roof of the mouth, wedging it in. In a short time 
that side of the head was swollen, the eye closed, and viscid 
mucus exuding from the nostril, while the other side was in 
a perfectly normal condition. To try the effects of Labar- 
raque as a preventive in case one fowl should be found 
with canker, and it was feared the others in the same pen 
might be attacked, 1 placed one affected with some healthy 
ones, and each day touched their mouths with a feather 
dipped in the solution. Not one was affected. I took a 
Light Brahma cock, and touched the exterior of the rim of 
the glottis with a minute portion of the scrapings from an 
ulcer of another fowl. At the same time I washed the re- 
mainder of the throat and mouth with the solution. By the 
daily use of Labarraque I confined the ulcer to the rim of 
the glottis until it had grown quite large. By touching with 
the solution I reduced it until almost well, then allowed it 
to grow again, and finally cured it completely. I experi- 
mented with tincture of muriate of iron, but as I found the 
Labarraque never to fail I discontinued the other. 
The record of a tithe of what some might call my cruelties 
would be tedious, but I pursued the matter so far as I think 
to warrant the justness of my conclusions. Dampness or 
drafts in the roosting-house, or the same cause which would 
produce cold or catarrh in any animal, should be looked for 
when fowls are attacked with roup. Filth causes canker. 
I have ceased to feed soft food on the ground, or in a recep- 
tacle where the fowls can tread upon it, or foul it in any 
way. I find that, if supplied with lime and gravel, the neces- 
sary quantity of grinding matter will find its way to the 
gizzard as well as if the food were thrown upon the ground. 
Even on gravelly soil, with a space swept every time they 
are fed, I can see no advantage in placing the soft food on 
the ground, and certainly it is objectionable if the feeding 
devolves upon a hired attendant. Stagnant and foul water 
is the worst enemy of all, and I have found it to fully repay 
me to cover the water from the rays of the sun, and, where 
I have not running water, to provide it clean and fresh at 
least twice a day. M. Eyre, Jr. 
Napa, Cal., July 8th, 1874. 
Artificial Incubation. — A lady residing near 
the Sister’s Hospital, keeps a half dozen or more hens, and 
has been astonished at the strange manner in which a nest 
full of eggs was hatched. A quantity of manure had been 
thrown from the stable, and yesterday the children heard 
young chickens in this pile. They at once called the atten- 
tion of their mother to the fact, who, to solve the mystery, 
directed that the heap be pulled down. When this was 
done, a short distance from the surface, a cavity was dis- 
covered, in which were nine little chicks. The hen had 
managed to make her nest in a cavity in the heap, and after 
laying eleven eggs, the opening had been closed by the 
stable man piling on more of the cleanings from the stable. 
The warmth generated in the heap had incubated the eggs, 
and nine of the eleven hatched out. This may be a discov- 
ery which some one may turn to account . — Paterson Guar* 
1 dian. 
