The reaction naturally suggests the stage of gray hepatization as we so well appreciate it in ordinary pneumococcus-pneumonia and from the standpoint of its color and the greater solidification of the lung tissue we might speak of it as such. Here, however, it must be clearly distinguished from the gray hepatization of ordinary pneumonia. This secondary lesion of influenza-pneumonia has but little in common other than its color and the development of a consolidation with true lobar pneumonia. It is never as clear cut as we see it in the latter and the degree of the “gray hepatization” is not uniformly distributed through the involved lobe. One portion of the lobe will show a diffuse gray hue while in other parts more decided lobular or patchy areas are picked out in the advanced reaction. There is not the uniformity of lobar involvement nor is the distribution as regular as one obtains it in broncho-pneumonia. Furthermore, the character of the consolidation differs very decidedly in showing such a variety of hues in reds and grays and the cut surface is not the picture of the dry granular consolidation of our endemic disease. The gray areas are in all states of wetness and ooze a slimy fluid on the cut surface. In the later stages this exudate is most profuse resembling a sticky pus. In its appearance we were reminded of the character seen in unresolved pneumonia as well as in the pneumonias produced by the pneumococcus mucosus, and the B. mucosus capsulatus. We would, therefore, avoid the use of the term gray hepatization and in place of it, as the evidence with the microscope confirms, use the term _purulent pneumonia_.