View report page

31
Two milch cows in good health inoculated subcutaneously at their shoulders with broth subcultures
of diphtheria bacilli derived from a human subject showed a swelling at the place of inoculation,
beginning on the third day, increasing in size during the first week, and then becoming smaller.
One of these cows, in the course of the second week, and the other in the course of the fourth week,
became seriously ill, being until then in seemingly good health and yielding abundant milk; one
died on the 15th day, the other was killed on the 25th day. Besides serious changes in the organs,
observed post-mortem, the tumours at each spot of inoculation were examined, and material was taken
from them for microscopic and pathological study.—The bacilli of diphtheria were found to have
multiplied abundantly at the spot of inoculation, and these, transplanted into nutrient media,
were able to form there colonies of the bacillus diphtheriæ free from other forms of bacteria. It remains
to tell the phenomena of the milk apparatus and of the milk in the two inoculated cows.
On the fourth day in one cow, and about the same day in the other, where the cows were to an
ordinary observer well and giving plenty of milk, small vesicles made their appearance on the cow's
udders, and these rapidly passed into pustules and crusted ulcers. Afterwards similar vesicles running the
same course were found on one or more teats of each cow. Dr. Klein gives good reason, first, for believing
that these sores were not the result of any accident, nor of the process of milking; and, secondly, for
regarding the sores as really being local manifestations of a constitutional disease induced by the
diphtheria inoculation—He then examines the lymph of the induced vesicles and pustules; and here "the
bacillus diphtheriæ could be demonstrated unmistakeably both in cover-glass specimens and by culture."
Next, with matters taken from the udder vesicles and pustules, on the day after the eruption had
appeared on one of the inoculated cows, Dr. Klein proceeded to the inoculation of two calves. The
calves showed at the spots of inoculation vesicles and pustules similar to those of the cows themselves;
the calves fell ill, were killed on the 25th day, and exhibited post-mortem appearances like those found
in the cows.
Now, as to the milk of the inoculated cows:—On the fifth day, from a healthy teat, carefully guarded
against the introduction of accidental matter from the surface, milk was drawn into a sterilized beaker,
and a drop (taken with all befitting precautions) was spread on the surface of nutrient gelatine. In three
out of four tubes of this gelatine, bacterial colonies formed after the expected interval. There were eight
colonies in all. All of these eight, Dr. Klein reports, were "unmistakeably colonies of the bacillus
diphtheriæ." There were no other organisms present.
Finally, Dr. Klein records an outbreak of his cat-diphtheria, beginning with two cats that had been
supplied with milk from one (or both) of the inoculated cows. This incident was not ordained beforehand,
and was the consequence of violation of orders; it therefore lacks the precision wanted in an
intentional experiment.
Further, Professor Brown, the professional officer of the Veterinary Department of the Board of
Agriculture, in a special report in 1888 on the eruptive diseases of the teats and udders of cows expressed
the opinion that "the slightest sign of udder disease or other disease should be accepted as a sufficient
reason for excluding the animal's milk from the common stock" on account of the impurities, which
would thus find their way into the milk.
Section 34 of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, under which the Dairies, Cowsheds and
Milkshops Order, 1885, had been made was repealed so far as that Act was concerned, and had been
incorporated in the Public Health (London) Act, of which it became the 23th section.
The prohibition therefore contained in the Order that the milk of a diseased cow shall not be sold
or used for human food, would, if the Order were reissued under the latter Act, be released from the
limitation imposed upon its application by the interpretation of the word "disease" in the Contagious
Diseases (Animals) Act.
The Joint Committee had before it, however, the consideration that such knowledge as existed of
eruptive diseases of the cow was possessed only by the few, and that more general knowledge was
required before it would be made a basis of administration. As a first step in this direction the Council
was advised to request the Board of Agriculture to cause eruptive diseases of the teats and udder of the
cow to be notified, together with tuberculous disease. In the meantime the Committee thought that
effort should be made to employ the provisions of the Public Health (London) Act relating to unsound
food in any case in which such maladies should be found to exist in any cows.
Offensive Trades.
During the year 1892, 5,942 visits were paid by the inspectors of the Council's Public Health
Department to premises where offensive trades were carried on, and steps were taken to bring premises
occupied by slaughterers of cattle into compliance with the by-laws of the Council, which had come into
operation during the previous year.
In 14 cases prosecution for breaches of the Council's by-laws were instituted, and in 13 cases
penalties imposed amounting in the aggregate to £83 1s.
The sanction of the Council was given to the establishment anew of the business of a slaughterer
of cattle in two instances and of a fellmonger in one instance. In 1892 the Council as a licensing
authority received 539 applications for renewal of licences for the carrying on the business of a
slaughterer of cattle, and two applications in respect of premises not previously occupied. Licences
were granted in 534 cases of renewal, and in the two cases relating to premises not previously licensed.
The number of licences granted in 1891 was 651, the reduction in the number of licences granted in
1892 being in the main due to the inability or the unwillingness of slaughterers of cattle bring to their
premises into compliance with the Council's by-laws.
In the case of knackers' yards 7 existing licences were renewed.
During the year I endeavoured to ascertain the average number of animals killed per week
during summer and winter in slaughterhouses licensed by the Council. For this purpose inquiry
was made of the several licensees by the inspectors, and the following results were obtained—

These figures must of course only be considered as giving an approximation to the number of
animals actually killed, but to this extent they may I believe be accepted.
Fancy soap manufacture—In the spring of 1892 an enquiry was made into the business of fancy