=Lesions.= In simple strictures the lesions are confined to the development in the depths of the mucous membrane and in the muscular layers of inflammatory tissue, which becomes denser with lapse of time. This alters the character of the walls and the structure of the tissues, and causes them to lose their elasticity. After extensive ulceration the tissue of the cicatrix contracts and hardens to a very varying degree. =Symptoms.= The apparent symptoms are very clearly marked; the appetite is good, and the animal masticates as usual, but in the act of deglutition is seen to extend the head on the neck, and to make efforts to swallow, which prove unavailing when the contraction is too marked. A reflex antiperistaltic movement often causes the substances ingested to be at once rejected. These violent efforts, however, in time provoke dilatation above the stricture. A quantity of food accumulates in this dilatation, and the symptom so characteristic of œsophageal stricture then appears—viz., regular regurgitation. The second constant symptom associated with compression or obstruction of the œsophagus is tympanites after feeding, however trifling may be the amount swallowed. Rumination is suspended, and even eructation of gas is difficult. Finally, the characteristic sign of stricture is noted on passing the probang, which reveals the existence of the condition, indicates its position, and suggests its degree of development. [Illustration: $1] =Diagnosis.= Strictures only develop progressively and slowly, a fact which enables them to be differentiated from œsophagitis. It is more difficult to differentiate them from dilatations, because the stricture always ends by becoming complicated with dilatation; but this distinction is of little practical importance, the consequences being identical. =Prognosis.= The prognosis is very grave, and there is no economic reason for attempting treatment except in special cases; the indications are in the direction of slaughter. From the economic standpoint there is no treatment. Basing their actions on human practice, the Germans have recommended progressive dilatation of the lumen of the œsophagus by passing a series of catheters of gradually increasing size. What, however, is justifiable in human medicine, where the only object is to keep the patient alive at any cost, may be highly objectionable in veterinary practice; and in the present instance this is the case. Except in very rare instances, which the practitioner alone can appreciate, dilatation is contra-indicated, and the owner’s interest lies in slaughtering the animal before it has lost much condition. DILATATION OF THE ŒSOPHAGUS.