254 ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS.

monary congestion. Rose-coloured lenticular spots were usually abundant. The facies were decidedly typhoid, with dry brown tongue, sordes, abdominal distension, and enlarged spleen. The less severe cases recovered in about a fortnight, but in the two first-fifths of the cases the minimum duration was four weeks. Convalescence was prolonged, and the emaciation considerable. In four instances relapses occurred. As in the epidemic at Andelfingen, the mortality was comparatively small. The post-mortem examinations demon­strated the usual typhoid lesions. At Kloten the calf was slaughtered in a moribund condition, due to umbilical phlebitis. At Wurenlos the calf was young, and was suffering from inflamed umbilicus with swollen legs. At Spreitenbach the cow was suffering from puerperal metritis and peritonitis, and the uterus contained a macerated fretus. The quantity of meat consumed did not seem to have been of much importance; indeed, it was not even necessary to have eaten of the particular meat at all, the infection extending to meat placed in its vicinity. It is evident from the symptoms that the effects were not those of a simple chemical poison. There had not been any typhoid at Wiirenlos for years before these epidemics. If the views held at present as to the specific nature of typhoid fever be correct, it is evident that, to confer typhoid fever, the animals must have been suffering from it, though the existence of any such disease in the bovine race is by no means generally admitted. Nevertheless in two of the calves, lesions suspiciously typhoid in character were observed, post-mortem. At Kloten the farmer who owned the calf had been suffering from suspicious diarrhrea, and he not unfrequently passed his motions in the stables where his cows were· confined. U nfortu­nately the observations were not conducted in a manner calculated to prevent criticism, and the question cannot therefore be considered as absolutely settled. Two alternatives present themselves, either that typhoid fever is not the spectjic disease that we are led to believe, or that bacilli other than the typhoid bacillus may give rise to symptoms simulating those of typhoid.­Sanitary Record, July 1888.

BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION.

Discussion on tIle Diseases of Animals Communicable to Man.

AT the Annual Meeting of the above Association held in Glasgow in August last, in the Section of Public Medicine, Professor Walley opened a discussion on the Diseases of Animals Communicable to Man. He said he thought all present would agree with him that it was always a great disadvantage to be called upon suddenly to open the discussion on an important subject; but he must claim their indulgence it~ under the circumstances, he failed to perform in a satisfactory manner the duty imposed upon him. The subject under consideration was, he held, one of the most important that at the present time claimed the attention of sanitarians, whether medical or veterinary, and it was one which ought to be considered conjointly by both branches of the profession of medicine. It might not be known to many present that, up to within a very few years, the only diseases that were scheduled as contagious diseases were pleuro-pneumonia, cattle plague, foot-and-mouth disease, and glanders. He, Professor Walley, had on several occasions urged that not only should swine fever and sheep scab be added to the list, but that those diseases known to be transmissible to man, namely, anthrax, rabies, and tuberculosis, should be scheduled als.o, and he had succeeded in obtaining the passing of a resolution to that effect several years ago at a large meeting of veterinary surgeons. Of the three diseases mentioned he might place anthrax, in some respects at least, in the fore-front

, ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS. 255

in point of virulence. Anthrax had been scheduled as a contagious disease, and so had ceased to occupy debatable ground, and the same might be said of rabies, though, unfortunately, the regulations applicable to this malady were to some extent nugatory, by virtue of their being of a partially permissive character, and not uniformly carried out throughout the whole of the king­dom. In 1881 a terrible outbreak of this disease occurred in Edinburgh, and he might observe that this was the first time he had seen rabies in Scot­land, though he had had to deal with it in Lancashire, Cheshire, and Derby­shire. During the outbreak alluded to, seventy cases in dogs and two in horses had come under his personal observation, and at the commencement of the epidemic he advised the magistrates to take immediate steps for its suppression; but, for reasons which he need not enter into, the advice was not followed until the disease had gained a firm footing, and not until two human lives had been sacrificed. In three months afterwards regulations were put in force. The outbreak was stamped out of existence, and he ventured to assert that if the same vigorous measures were adopted universally, the country would be clear of the malady in from six to twelve months. In reference to tuberculosis, it would be as well that he should explain his position in the matter. In 1872, he read a paper on the subject in that very city. In 1879, he wrote on the disease in a book entitled the Four BOlltne Scourges. Since that time he had, with other members of his profession, frequently drawn attention to the dangerous nature of the disease, and had urged that it should be dealt with as a contagious malady. He might say that up to the discovery of the tubercle bacilli by Koch the relative position of tuberculosis was not defined; but, personally, he had never, at least since he gave his attention to the subject, entertained the slightest doubt as to the nature of the malady, and before 1872 he had considered it as a specific disease. There was, in his opinion, no disease that claimed more earnest attention than this, as it was greatly on the increase, both in cattle and in poultry, and thousands upon thousands of the latter were yearly sacrificed to this fell malady, and what was rather remarkable was the rapidity with which, in view of their high tempera­ture, it ran its course in birds. A few weeks ago he had occasion to superin­tend the slaughter of nine cows from a byre in Edinburgh, in which pleuro­pneumonia had broken out, and out of the nine there were five affected with tuberculosis, two of them being as bad cases as he had ever seen; on a more recent occasion he had to slaughter another lot of dairy cows, and the result was, he said, proportionally the same. The disease was propagated in a variety of ways-by ingestion, by inhalation, and by inoculation-and there were good grounds for believing that it might be propagated by the medium of the eggs of poultry. Several years ago he had publicly directed attention to a ca,e in which the malady made its appearance in a poultry yard near Edinburgh, under such conditions as to point undoubtedly to its origin through the medium of eggs. Only a few weeks ago-and he might say, indeed, at the time he read a paper on the subject at a meeting of the Sani­tary Association in that city-several chickens were sent to him by Mr B. Freer, M.R.C. V.S., of Uppingham; these chickens were about three weeks old, and everyone of them presented the macroscopical characters of hepatic tuberculosis; but, in order to render his opinion more certain, he asked his colleague, Professor M'Fadyean, to make a microscopical examination of the organs, and the result was confirmatory of his own conclusions. On looking over the report of the Departmental Committee (only that very morning) he found a statement quoted there which was strongly confirmatory of the views he had expressed; the statement was to the effect that Baumgarten had found the bacilli' in the ovum of a rabbit, and that other observers had frequently seen the bacilli mingled with actIve spermatozoa. In reference to the communicabilIty of the disease from animals to man, while they did not

S

ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS.

possess such positive or direct proof as they would like, there was a vast amount of indirect proof available on the point. In 1871, when he (Professor Walley) first went to Edinburgh, he lOot a child from mesenteric tuberculosis, under such conditions as to point to the milk as the source of contamination; within the past few years, one of the officials of the Veterinary Department of the Privy Council had lost a child, also in a similar manner, and, had Dr Fleming been present, he would doubtless have related several similar instances to them. Probably they were all acquainted with the disease from which numbers of surgeons had suffered, and from which he himself suffered, known as pathologist's wart, a disease that was generally thought to be due to an irritant introduced into the tissues by accident in making post· mortem examinations. It was now generally understood that this disease was of a tuberculous nature, and in his own case the originating wound was pro­duced while in the act of dissecting the tuberculous mediastinal glands of a heifer; he supposed that a microscopical examination of the tissues would settle the matter one way or the other. The practical question which in his view should be considered by this and similar bodies was its legislative aspect; and he thought that before that meeting came to a close, some expression of opinion should be forthcoming on this point. As matters were at present, they were in this po,ition, that neither veterinary nor any other inspectors were empowered to deal with live animals manifestly suffering from the disease either in byres, fairs, or markets. There was absolutely no legislative power given to them; thev were helpless in the matter. Some time ago, Dr Little­john urged upon the magistrates of Edinburgh the advis:1bility of applying for an extension of the Nuisances Removal (England) Act Amendment to Scot­land, by which, he said, medical officers of health and inspectors of nuisances were empowered to seize diseased animals when exposed for sale. He (Pro­fessor Walley) ventured at the time to express a doubt in reference to the working of this clause; and he had found, by subsequent inquiry, that in some of the more important cities and towns of England the Act was never taken advantage of; and he would ask the gentlemen present jf they considered that medical officers of health and inspectors of nuisances were the proper persons to exercise such a function? (An emphatIC No! from the President and nearly all those present.) Again, their President had also stated that the Greenock authorities possessed the power, under a clause in a local Bill, to seize tuberculous animals. This assertion, he (Professor Walley) also ven­tured to dispute, on the ground that it was not likely that the Legislature would give such a power to a local body, when the Privy Council Itself did not exercise such a right, and seeing, also, that the disease was not scheduled as a contagious disease; he found, on inquiry, that he was justified in the position he had t:lken up, and that the Greenock authorities were as powerless as any other local hudy in reference to the matter. Tuberculosis, he thought, was one of the greatest pests of man, as it was of animals, and he had no hesitation in saying that more animals died from this malady than from all the other zymotic diseases put together, and, looking at the great danger that existed of its transmission to man, he thought that this and kindred bodies should do all in their power to strengthen the hands of the Legislature in initiating suppressive legislation. In the paper read by him at a meeting of the Medico-ChilUrgical Society in Edinburgh, in February last, he urged upon the meeting the advisahility of providing for a more thorough and scientific system of inspection at our slaughter-houses, of memorialising the Government to include the disease amongst the contagious diseases of animals, thus giving veterinary inspectors the power of seizing all tuberculous cows, or even sus­pected animals exposed in markets or fairs, or kept in byres for milking pur­poses; and also the consideration of the advisability or otherwise of condemn­ing the flesh of animals affected with tuberculosis. It was a matter of satis-

ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS. 257

faction to him to find that the Departmental Committee in their recent report had arrived at conclusions on these varying points identical with his expressed opinions, though he was not personally asked to give his views before the Commission. The President had just asked him to propose, if he approved of its terms, a resolution. He did approve of its terms, and had great pleasure in proposing it, and in doing so he would just observe that the magistrates of Edinburgh were, acting on his advice, probably the first public body to take charge of tuberculous cows exposed in open market, or kept in byres for milking purposes, of having them slaughtered and of granting com­pensation.

Dr FARQUHARSON. M. P., had much pleasure in seconding the resolution. After the recent lectures by Dr Sims Woodhead and the able speech of Principal Walley, it seemed certain that the bacillus of bovine and human tuberculosis were identical, that it could be transmitted through the milk from tuberculous udders, and that evidence went far to show the probability of its communicability to man. Under these alarming circumstances, he held that it was the duty of the Government to deal seriously with the subject, with a view of including tuberculosis among the diseases scheduled under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act. Mr Ritchie had recently assured him, in reply to a question, that this was now under the consideration of his Department, and the expression of opinion from such a representative meeting could not fail to strengthen the hands of the Local Government Board.

Professor EDGAR CROOKSHANK pointed out that it had been known from the earliest times that certain diseases of the lower animals were communicable to man. In later years it had been shown that certain diseases, such as tuberculosis, were communicable to the lower animals; but, with the exception of hydrophobia, insufficient attention had been paid to the dlseases common to man and animals. Jenner was the first to draw attention to the diseases of the cow's udder. In his inquiry on cow-pox, Jenner led the way to the study of these diseases. Professor Crookshank remarked that the diseases under discussion might be divided, in the present state of our knowledge, into three classes, In the first might be placed such diseases as cow-pox, foot-and-mouth disease, anthrax, and glanders, which never occurred in man independently of the disease in the lower animal. In the next class might be placed tubercu­losis and actinomycosis, which possibly were communicated from the cow. The discussion on these diseases wGts fully entered into, and Professor Crookshank referred to his papers read the day before in the Pathological Section. The third class included those cases-small-pox, scarlet fever, diphtheria-alleged to arise from the lower animal; but the evidence at present amounted almost to disproof. Professor Crookshank said he had heard it stated that the origin of the specific poison of human infectious fevers which had been brought forward in the now famous Hendon inquiry was a new and startling theory. It was startling, but by no means new. The Arabians believed that small-pox originated from a disease of the camel, while Jenner had advocated the theory that it arose from the grease; while his pupil, Henry Jenner, maintained that the cow-pox was the small-pox in its original unadul­terated state. These theories were abandoned for a time, until the theory arose of the origin of scarlatina from the horse. This had been shown to be erroneous, but recently the origin of scarlatina from the lower animals had been revived in the Reports of the Local Government Board. Professor Crookshank undertook to say that, if the facts which had been brought to light by the investigation of other observers, which would shortly be published, had been known to Mr Power and Dr Klein, the theory of scarlatina in the cow would not have been brought forward. Professor Crookshank insisted on the necess~ty for these investigations being approached in an impartial spirit. The conflicting opinions as to the relation of cow-pox to small-pox

AB6TRACTS AND REPORTS.

were also referred to, and the necessity for further research to settle the disputed points.

Dr J. B. BUIST (Edinburgh) said that Professor Crookshank had referred to the relation between cow-pox and small-pox. Dr .Fleming, who should have opened this discussion, had devoted great attention to the relations existing between human and animal variola! in a series of papers published in the Lancet in 1880, and he thought that they were specifically different, because small-pox virus could not communicate cow-pox to either the cow or the horse. He thought that the decision of this question of identity would be best settled by the study of the natural infective materials and their effects. If this was difficult in such cases as small-pox and cow-pox, where the infective materials have definite effects, it was much more difficult in cases such as scarlatina, where both the nature of the infective material and its effects were indefinite. Infective materials in any disease were of two kinds-natural and cultivated, and the effects of these were very different. While in cow-pox and variola the natural materials produced local as well as constitutional effects, cultivated materials produced no local effects but eruptions. This was seen in calves and monkeys, cultivated variola producing an eruption in the latter on the fifth day, or in half the time required by the natural material. The true bacteric form of the infective material in vaccinia and variola was, in his opinion, embryonic. Where the infective materials were composed of bacilli, as in anthrax and tubercle, it was comparatively easy to trace disease from animal to man; but, where their form was very minute and indefinite, it was much more difficult. In illustration of this, he referred to the opposing views of Dr Klein and Professor Crookshank with regard to the Hendon cow disease and the Wiltshire cow disease. He did not think that in either case was the source of the material used for pure cultivation free from objection, because the material was derived from the discharge and tissue of the ulcers, instead of from the early crusts, in which the infective material of both cow diseases would most certainly have been found. No definite conclusions could, there­fore, be come to as to the specific nature of the cultivated infective materials in either.

Dr EDWARD SEATON (St. Thomas's Hospital) said the previous speakers had been authorities on the pathological evidence respecting the connection of the diseases mentioned with the existence of disease of animals, but he would confine himself to the question of the direct evidence of the communicability of tuberculosis and scarlet fever by means of the milk of diseased animals. He agreed with Professor Crookshank that very little evidence was as yet forthcoming to connect the occurrence of tubercular disease among human beings with its presence in the system of the cow, though he believed there were some cases which showed that persons had been infected by milk of cows when udders were diseased. But though he agreed with Professor Crookshank thus far, he disagreed strongly with what fell from him with reference to scarlet fever He (the speaker) considered that there was a very important and increasing body of evidence which connected the presence of scarlet fever with the existence of a disease of the udder of the cow. In the f3mous case of the North London epidemic in 1885, the evidence showed most conclu­sively the ahsence of any source of human contamination of the milk-supply. This was the essential point. Mr Power's evidence was most clear and reliable upon this' oint. Dr James Cameron, the medical officer of health for the Hendon District, had furnished independent testimony to the same effect. The criticism of these reports had been of a flippant kind. Professor Axe had alleged. in a report published last year, that there were possible sources of infection which had been overlooked. He gave the case of some men who came to the farm from a distance, and who, he supposed, might have infected the milk, though there was no evidence of their being in an infectious state,

ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS.

beyond the fact that they came from a village where scarlet fever existed. But it would be remembered that in order to explain the occurrence of the epidemic in this way, it was necessary to assume not only that these men were in an infectious state, but also that they infected only a particular section of the milk-supply, namely, that of the diseased cows, and that continuously. Since Mr Power's report, there had been several scarlet fever milk epidemics which had been investigated by medical officers of health. These epidemics could be arranged in three groups. I. Cases in which, as in Newcastle, there was, in the opinion of the medical officers of health, a possible source of human infection. 2. Cases in which a reliable and skilful medical officer of health was wholly unable to find any source of human infection, and in which no inquiry was made into the condition of the cows. 3. Cases in which there was no discoverable source of human infection, but in which an inquiry was made into the health of the cows, and in which an affection of the udder was found. Dr Russell, the eminent medical officer of health for that city, had, a short while ago, a case of this latter kind under his notice, and his inde­pendent testimony would be regarded by all as of the greatest value.

Mr EDINGTON (Edinburgh) said he would like to allude to a matter to which reference was made by Dr Farquharson. He made mention of the fact that scarlet fever had been shown to be due to infection derived from animals. He (Mr Edington) did not believe that there was evidence, either pathological or from the public health point of view, sufficient to prove this. He himself some time ago made a pretty wide research into the nature of the contagium of scarlet fever, and he therein brought forward certain evidence to show that there was to be found another organism than Dr Klein's in connection with the disease in question. The Medico-Chirurgical Society of Edinburgh did him the honour to appoint a committee to inquire into his statements, and they showed that in their opinion another and casual organism described by him was identical with that described by Dr Klein, and he would simply say that if this were true, then he had found the same organism in variolous and vaccinious lymph; not .that he meant to assert that this organism had anything specifically to do with the latter disease, but probably occurring only as skin organisms growing in a condition suited for their growth. So much for evidence antagonistic to Dr Klein's organism, but he had also to show evidence in favour of his own. He might just refer them to a letter, previously published, from Professor Roshwell Park, of Buffalo, N.Y., and he would add to this corroborative evidence that of a letter from Dr Stickler, New Jersey, who had not only found his bacilli in scarlatina blood before the third day but had inoculated animals with the same result as himself. With regard to tuber­culous material he did not feel inclined to make any allusion, as he considered the evidence brought forward by his friend and co-lecturer, Dr Woodhead, to be almost conclusive.

Dr HENRY TOMKINS (Leicester) alluded to an outbreak of anthrax occurring near Leicester, from which several persons were infected-one fatally by handling the flesh, which had been prepared for meat for use as human food. From representations made to the Privy Council on this outbreak the disease was placed amongst the contagious diseases of animals, to be reported, etc. He pointed out that the two most important diseases which at the present time were supposed to be transmissible from animals to man (important so far as prevalence in the human subject was concerned) were scarlatina and tuber­culosis, but that on both these, strong as the presumptive evidence was, absolute proof was wanting and direct experimental investigation urgently required to settle the question. He expressed the opinion that the time had arrived when work of that character, affecting the health of the community at large, should be undertaken under the supreme health authority of the country, not left to individual and voluntary workers only.

260 ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS.

Dr ALFRED CARPENTER, with reference to communicable disea5ts, "ished to make two observations. First, as to the tuberculosis, it had been his duty to hear evidence brought before him when an application was made for the condemnation of certain tuberculous carcases, that if such meat was pro­hibited it would be impossible to feed such populations as London. This evidence was given by one of the principal inspectors of the largest meat market in London. This evidence was very staggering, for the inspector stated that sometimes as much as 80 per cent. of the meat exhibited for sale was so affected. The second point he wished to draw attention to was the difficulty of getting upon the real causes which led to the spread of scarla­tina. Dr Carpenter then detailed the particulars of an outbreak which he had investigated, in which those children only who attended a particular school became affected, although the school had been closed for several weeks. The disease did not spread to other children though living in the same house, unless those children had been to the school in question. This immunity was proved to have arisen from the fact that no house in that district had any direct connection with the sewer except the school-house, and those children only who had inhaled the air of the school-room were liable to take on the disease.

Professor M'FADYEAN (Edinburgh) said that the diseases of animals communicable to man might be roughly but conveniently divided into two groups: namely, (I) those caused by macro-parasites or animal parasites, and (2) those due to micro or vegetable organisms. The former class had in the discussion been put aside. Their knowledge of the life-history of the chief parasites that might in different stages be harboured in the bodies of men and animals was tolerably full, but he feared that neither medical men nor veterinary surgeons (not to speak of the general public) in all cases acted up to that knowledge. Passing to the second class, he said that while he agreed with Professor Walley that in one sense anthrax occupied the first place in the group, it was strange that cases of its transmission to man as a result of the ingestion of anthrax flesh appeared to be very rare. He had not him­self been able to learn of such a case, notwithstanding that very commonly animals dying from the disease were used for food before the cause of death was ascertained. He had recently ascertained the particulars of two outbreaks, in one of which a cow, and in the other a cow and a number of sheep, had been sold for food, and yet, as far as could be ascertained, no bad results followed. ·With reference to the scarlatina controversy, he strongly demurred to the statement of a previous speaker, that it must be taken as established that there was a disease of the cow capable of exciting scarlatina in human beings. They were not bound to admit that there could not have been a human source of contagion because a medical officer of admitted ability and integrity had failed to find it. For example, in the case of a recent epidemic in New­castle, Dr Armstrong (whose ability and integrity no one would deny) was unable to trace a connection between the milk and a source of human con­tamination, and he found that the cows themselves were above suspicion. Now, if in that case there was not a source of human contamination of the milk (which Dr Armstrong could not trace), they were forced to conclude either that there was a spontaneous generation of scarlatina, or that cows could suffer from scarlatina and yet exhibit no trace of disturbed health. With reference to tubercle, he considered it had been proved that the human and the bovine disease, were caused by the same bacillus. His own experi­ence enabled him to affirm that bovine tuberculosis was very common, though he did not believe that the proportion was anything approaching SO per cent., as some of the previous speakers had said. But, admitting these points, it still remained to inquire whether human tuberculosis was often excited· by the ingestion of tubercular flesh. He thought that only a very small propor-

ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS. 26r

tion of cases had that origin, for he believed that abdominal tuberculosis was comparatively rare in human adults, and yet in feeding experiments on the lower animals, the abdominal viscera were almost invariably affected in some degree.

Dr M'VAIL wished to refer to one point regarding the criticisms to which the report of Drs Power and Klein had been subjected. It had been insisted on, over and over again, that at Hendon there might have been a human source of infection of the milk. But in adopting this view, it was necessary to assume that this human infection had been a continuous infection, extend­ing over four or five weeks. Now it was difficult to suppose that an infective cause, acting over so long a period, should not have been discovered. The report by Professors Brown and Axe had its value very much interfered with by the fact that Professor Axe's observations of the Hendon disease must have been made several months after the vesicular stage of the disease, when only scars, or possibly some remnant of crusts, could remain for examination. Looking to the various eruptions to which the teats and udders of cows were admittedly subject, and to the difficulty there was in differentiating some of these eruptions even in their most distinctive stages, it seemed that, so far as the report in question depended on these observations, it was unsafe to attach great importance to it.

In winding up the discussion, Principal WALLEY claimed the privilege of making one or two observations. He said it appeared to him that a wrong conclusion had been drawn from the statements he had made as to the number of cases of tuberculosis occurring in two lots of slaughtered cattle. The animals to which he had referred were mostly old cows, and had been in the byres for some time; he could take them to the abattoir at any time and show them hundreds of carcases in which no traces of tubercle could be found, and on the contrary, he might take them there to-morrow and show them four or five tuberculous carcases in one booth. He protested against the statements that so high a percentage as 80, or even 50, per cent. was ever met with. He further 5aid that, in his opinion, there should be no question as to the compulsory notification of disease existing in cows in a byre-the duty of so reporting should be laid on every owner of cows. As to the trans­missibility of scarlet fever from animals to man, he asked tho:;e present if they had ever succeeded in transmitting it from man to the cow; if they had not, it was little less than nonsense to argue the other way, and so far as he was personally concerned, he had only to say that in all his experience he had met with no disease in the cow which was at all analogous to the scarlet fever of man.

Professor M'CALL (Glasgow) expressed his agreement generally with Pro­fessor Walley, but said the only point upon which he was not so clear, was that tuberculosis might be propagated in the egg; in other words, he doubted if the organism was contained in the egg_ In his own practice he had never seen any reason to corroborate that statement, but it did not follow that he was perfectly correct. Professor Walley had led them to understand that unless the udder of the cow was locally affected tuberculosis would not be transmitted. He (the speaker) differed very much from that view. Experi­ments had shown that the milk of an animal infected with tuberculosis, and whose udder was perfectly healthy, had transmitted the disease. That had been seen in more than one instance. Instead of 80 or 50 per cent., he thought 25 would be the utmost percentage of animals infected. He believed that cattle that were hrought into cities and put into ill-ventilated byres were most liable to be affected. Where cattle were pastured or kept in well­ventilated byres the outbreaks of tuberculosis were few and far between. But when these same animals were hrought into the city and tied up in byres with very imperfect ventilation the disease was very soon transmitted. Tubercu·

262 ABSTRACTS AND REPORTS.

losis was a more infectious disease in cattle than consumption was in the human subject. Professor M'Call mentioned some experiments he had con­ducted in conjunction with Dr Carmichael of Glasgow, and, proceeding, said, that in his opinion scarlatina might be propagated by milk; but whether the organism which produced the disease was received from the cow, or was of human source, he was not prepared to say.

It was proposed by Principal WALLEY (Edinburgh), seconded by Dr FARQUHARSON, M.P., and carried unanimously:-

"That the Public Health Section of the British Medical Association approves of the action of the Government in inquiry by Commission into the relationships of bovine and human tuberculusis, and urges that, as soon as possible, such measures be taken as the Report of the Commission may show to be advisable. That copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Prime Minister and the President of the Local Government Board, the Secretary for Scotland, and the Lord Advocate."

CONGRESS FOR THE STUDY OF TUBERCULOSIS IN MAN AND ANIMALS.

THIS Congress, in several respects one of the most notable of its kind, held its first session in Paris, from the 25th to 31st July 1888. The credit of having taken the initiative in organising the Congress belongs to M. Butel, veterinary surgeon at Meaux, in France, a gentleman whose name is widely known from the active and honourable part that he has taken for a number of years in connection with the subject of tuberculosis in its bearing upon public health. It occurred to M. Bute! that a great impetus might be given to the study of this question, and that existing knowledge regarding it might be brought to a practical bearing if medical men and veterinary surgeons specially interested could meet together and discuss the subject under its various aspects. He therefore addressed himself to M. Verneuil as representing the medical profession, and was fortunate enough to receive his hearty co-opera­tion. A provisional committee was at once _ formed, comprising MM. Chauveau, N ocard, Leblanc, and Rossignol to represent the veterinary profession, and MM. Villemin, Cornil, Grancher, and Lannelongue on the side of the medical fraternity. Steps were forthwith taken to bring the project under the notice of the principal medical and veterinary societies and corpora­tions throughout the civilised world, requesting their support and co-operation, and in the great majority of cases the responses to this appeal were favourable. Briefly, it may be said that the success which has attended the Congress has been worthy of its aims.

The Congress he!d its first meeting on the 25th July. M. Chauveau was elected president, and MM. Villemin and Verneuil were elected vice-presidents. M. Petit, who acted as secretary to the provisional committee, was appointed general secretary of the Congress.

The work of the Congress was opened by the president, who in a most eloquent address reviewed the history of Tuberculosis, and sketched the principal aspects of the subject to which the deliberations of the members were to be directed.

M. CHAUVEAU said that the Congress in which they were assembled was in one respect unique; for whereas it was not unusual for the various departments of medicine to meet to discuss surgery, hygiene, ophthalmology, or other special branches, the members of such congresses did not tie themselves