Post-pharyngeal lymphatic glands of vaccinated bull No. 45066. One is bisected.
Normal in size and texture.

ETIOLOGY OF SHOE BOIL.'

By G. J. GOU BEAUD, D.V.S.
BROOKLYN, N. Y.

ABOUT two years ago I read an original paper before the New York County Veterinary Medical Association, treating upon etiology of shoe boils, or, as more properly termed, ulnar fibroma. It was prepared after several years of study, thought, investigation, and experiment. Not being easily discouraged by adverse criticism, I have continued investigating up to the present time.

It is with the earnest desire of, as it were, forcing the issue, that I lay this, to me, interesting subject before this association, a society composed of the foremost thinkers and advanced veterinarians of the country. The evening I read the paper before the New York County Veterinary Medical Association I did not possess as much as one friend or one who believed in my

assertions.

In the discussion that followed I was plied with more questions than ten quick thinkers and rapid talkers could answer. Every

1 Read before the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the New York State Veterinary Medical Association, at Brooklyn, September 9 and 10, 1902.

one opposed me, and I left that meeting more determined than ever that I was right, because no one advanced a common-sense argument, made a reasonable assertion, or presented a rational view to upset my opinion. But since then I have received expressions of opinion which are in accordance with those which I hold. I lay this subject before the members of this Association to get an expression of opinion.

First, I wish to know if I am right. And if so, then I have added my mite in advancing the interests of veterinary science; and if wrong, then I have simply been mistaken. I know that it is with no little difficulty some of us cast aside fixed ideas, cherished traditions, the teachings which we received, ideas formed, and the impressions conveyed to us in our college days. It is with a certain amount of timidity that I present this paper, and I hope to have your indulgence. It is not the intention of the essayist to enter minutely into the pathology of this affection, or describe the various lesions which the injury can produce (for such it primarily is), or the complications which may arise; nor its therapy. Aside from prevention the etiology alone will be considered.

The text-books, veterinary authorities, professional and lay writers, and those with whom I have conversed, claim that the shoe or the hoof is the offending agent. The larger number claim that the shoe causes this affection.

We will first take up the shoe as the first cause. The shoe causes shoe boil, or it does not. The animal is either improperly shod, the heels of the shoe are too long, or they are purposely made long in order to correct some abnormal condition of the foot or irregularity of the animal's gait.

The animal while in the recumbent position rests the elbow upon the heels of the shoe, thus injuring the skin and structure beneath, resulting in the characteristic tumor, or it drops heavily upon the ground while assuming the recumbent position. The heels of the shoe come in violent contact with the elbow, and in this manner the tumor is developed.

Now as a rational conclusion, a result can exist not produced by a cause. How can a result take place which is produced by a cause that does not exist, and has no existence, or, in other words, how can a shoe cause shoe boil when the horse did not wear shoes at the time of the development of the tumor? I have seen colts that never had a shoe upon their feet have these tumors, and I have seen horses without shoes turned loose in a box-stall, and