707 
have greater claim to the distinction of a separate species than is the 
case with many other ones of Anophelina. 
Were it not that we have in the finding of the parasite in the blood 
a method of diagnosing estivo-autumnal fever which rarely fails one 
who has experience, the multiplicity of varying manifestations of this 
type of malaria, as it is discussed in the chapter on perniciousness, 
would cause one forever to despair of diagnosing pernicious malaria from 
an endless number of other more or less serious conditions. The article 
is of value because it shows the possibilities of pernicious malaria, but 
it certainly is confusing. Again, were quinine given hypodermically 
immediately after the microscopical diagnosis is made, it is believed that 
these pernicious types would lose in importance. 
In carefully reading over the portion of the book treating of in- 
fluenza, it is impossible for one familiar with dengue not to be constantly 
asking himself whether by any possibility these two diseases may not be 
identical. It is an easy matter in the comparatively mild cases of dengue, 
where the eruption is abundant and after a typical differential count 
of the white blood corpuscles, to feel reasonably sure that we are dealing 
with a separate disease, but when we have in mind those cases, usually 
considered as dengue, where the nervous manifestations are most pro- 
nounced—particularly the intense depression—and where the eruption 
and the count of the leucocytes have little which is characteristic, it 
would seem to be only a distinction in name between this form of dengue 
and influenza. Consequently, viewed in this light, the three-page table 
of epidemiological and clinical differences between influenza and dengue 
would appear to be superfluous. 
a, ae: 
