270 THE LIFE OF PASTEUR 



teridia were reabsorbed by the blood, and the hen recovered 

 completely. 



This was, indeed, a most suggestive experiment, proving 

 that the mere fall of temperature from 42° C. (the tempera- 

 ture of hens) to 38° C. was sufficient to cause a receptive con- 

 dition; the hen, brought down by immersion to the tempera- 

 ture of rabbits or guinea-pigs, became a victim like them. 



Between Sedillot's enthusiasm and Colin 's perpetual contra- 

 diction, many attentive surgeons and physicians were taking 

 a middle course, watching for Pasteur's results and ultimately 

 accepting them with admiration. Such was the state of mind 

 of M. Lereboullet, an editor of the Weekly Gazette of Medi- 

 cine and Surgery, who wrote in an account of the Academic de 

 Medecine meeting that ''those facts throw a new light on the 

 theory of the genesis and development of the bacillus anthracis. 

 They will be ascertained and verified by other experimentalists, 

 and it seems very probable that M. Pasteur, who never brings 

 an}^ premature or conjectural assertion to the academic tribune, 

 will deduce from them conclusions of the greatest interest con- 

 cerning the etiology of virulent diseases.'* 



But even to those who admired Pasteur as much as did M. 

 Lereboullet, it did not seem that such an important part should 

 immediately be attributed to microbes. Towards the end of 

 his report (dated March 22, 1878) he reminded his readers that 

 a discussion was open at the Academic de Medecine, and that 

 the surgeon, Leon Le Fort, did not admit the germ theory in 

 its entirety. M. Le Fort recognized ''all the services rendered 

 to surgery by laboratory studies, chiefly by calling attention to 

 certain accidents of wounds and sores, and by provoking new 

 researches with a view to improving methods of dressing and 

 bandaging." "Like all his colleagues at the Academy, and 

 like our eminent master, M. Sedillot," added M. Lereboullet, 

 "M. Le Fort renders homage to the work of M. Pasteur; but 

 he remains within his rights as a practitioner and reserves his 

 opinion as to its general application to surgery." 



This was a mild way of putting it; M. Le Fort's words were, 

 "That theory, in its applications to clinical surgery, is abso- 

 lutely inacceptable." For him, the original purulent infection, 

 though coming from the wound, was born under the influence 

 of general and local phenomena within the patient, and not 

 outside him. He believed that the economy had the power, 

 under various influences, to produce purulent infection. A 



