196 KEPORT OF THE COMMISSIONER OF FISHERIES. 



Medical officers of London report that about 8 per cent of the cases 

 occurring in London in 1902 were due to shellfish. 



In 1895, stimulated by the interest awakened by the epidemic of 

 typhoid fever at Weslej^an University, which Doctor Conn had shown 

 to be due to infected oysters, Doctor Foote, of Yale, 1)rouo-ht out the 

 results of some bacteriological experiments on 03'stcrs. Though the 

 aim of this work was to find out the length of time the t3'phoid bacilhis 

 could live in experimentally infected oysters, he states, with reference 

 to the bacteriological content of oysters from presumabl}' (?) uncon- 

 taminated sources, that no typhoid-like organisms were found in these 

 specimens; the bacteria present in the juice were nearly all anaerobic 

 micrococci. In another series of experiments he found B. Jluorescens 

 liquefaciens frequently in plates made from the juice, and in one 

 instance B. (jasoformvus. lie tested the stomach content of 9 oysters, 

 and found that 8 were sterile. He isolated in these tests more than 10 

 varieties of bacteria, manj^ of which were not identified, but none gave 

 the reactions of the colon bacillus. 



Doctor Giaxa states, however, thjit " it is a curious fact that in spite 

 of the man}^ varieties of bacteria found in the surrounding water, only 

 two varieties (although in large numbers) could be detected in the 

 oysters examined." 



Chantemesse reports the presence of B. coli in main' oysters from 

 sewage-contaminated sources; also that oysters placed in water pre- 

 viousl}" infected with typhoid .stools for twenty hours contained these 

 " typhoid organisms and B. coll in great numbers." 



Dr. Cartwright Wood, in his work on the bacteriology of the oyster, 

 did not succeed in finding pathogenic forms in shellfish taken from 

 unpolluted sources. He also states that "all species of bacteria found 

 in the juice are identical with the water bacteria found in the water in 

 which the oysters live." 



Sabatier, Duchanj^, and Petit isolated the following organisms from 

 oysters: Micrococcus fervidosus, M. jlavus liquefaciens^ 3f. radiatus, 

 Bacillus jluorescens liquefaciens^ B. mesenterlcus vulgatus, Strepto- 

 thrlx fcersterl^ and M. luteus. On the other hand, no colon or typhoid 

 bacilli were found by these observers in oysters "laid down" experi- 

 mentally within a few feet of the outfall of a large sewer. 



Herdman and Boj^ce, in England, were the next to direct their atten- 

 tion to the problem of oyster infection by sewage. They have shown 

 that the presence of B. coll in 03^sters sold in the markets is by no 

 meai]s an unusual occurrence. In one series of experiments 18 batches 

 of oysters were taken haphazard from the various fish markets of Lon- 

 don. From "one-third to one-half of these specimens were found to 

 contain B. coll,^^ which was also found in a number of mussels, cockles, 

 and periwinkles examined by them. B. enterltidis sporogenes was also 

 found in oysters, mussels, and periwinkles. These observers are of 



