Prhparatory to Ri;si;ARf:n Carffr 61 



a student of each subject from beginning to end. Often the " mile- 

 stone" or " liighlight '■ interested him most. His point of view 

 was that one could not know plant pathology thoroughly "with- 

 out paying some attention to the diseases of animals and of man, 

 for," said he,"'* " the subject is really one subject with the same 

 general principles of procedure in research and the same under- 

 lying laws. Moreover," he believed, " plant pathology is tremend- 

 ously indebted to animal pathology in many ways." 



The fact, therefore, that a bacillus of leprosy had been found 

 outv^-eighed in importance the fact that Armauer Hansen dis- 

 covered it, that Hansen was a Norwegian, or the exact time when 

 the real discovery took place. On one occasion Smith gave the 

 year of discovery as 1880."° Friedrich Fehleisen published in 

 1883 on the etiology of erysipelas,^-" and showed by pure cultures, 

 as a result of many years of study, that the disease is caused by 

 streptococci. On this subject he had written before,'-^ but this 

 evidently was to Smith the paper of final importance. About the 

 same time Friedliinder discovered the pneumococcus,^" and to this 

 Smith later in writings referred. 



It would be some years after Nicolaier's find of the tetanus 

 bacillus before Von Behring and Kitasato would discover an anti- 

 toxin for tetanus. It would be more than half a decade before 

 Von Behring's valuable antitoxin for diphtheria would be either 

 discovered or made available. Before 1884 Edwin Klebs had 

 seen the bacillus of diphtheria, but not until this year did 

 Loffler remove doubt as to the organism's causal relation to the 

 disease. Since Loffler secured pure cultures. Smith must have 

 believed his demonstration tantamount to an original discovery. ^-^ 



Prior to 1884, half a dozen or more years were required to 



^'■^ Fifty years of pathology, op. cit., 14. 



^^"Idem, 18. 



^-° Die Aetiologie des Er^'sipels, Verlag von T. Fischer, Berlin, 1883. 



*" F. H. Garrison, huro. to the Hist, of Med., op. cit., 858. 



'"" Fifty years of pathology, op. cit., 18; The life of Sir William Osier, op. cit., 

 1; 216 (to effect Frlinkcl in 1884 described the pneumococcus but its relation to 

 the disease was not generally accepted). See also, C. Friedlandcr, Ueber Pneu- 

 monie-Micrococcen, Fortsch. d. Med. 3: 91-93, 1885. 



'"* Fifty years of pathology, op. cit., 19; F. Loffler, Untersuchungen iiber die 

 Bedeutung der Mikroorganismen fiir die Entstehung der Diptherie beim Menschen, 

 bei der Taube und beim Kalbe, Mitteil a. d. K. Gesundheitsamte, 2: 421-499, 1884; 

 Intro, to hist, of med., op. cit., 858-859, also p. 5S1; Justina Hill, Germs and the 

 man, 95, 210, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1940. 



