~< 
/ THE MICROSCOPE. 13 
number that may be wished; there are ‘chaplets’ and ‘rosaries’ in 
great numbers, and straight strings of beads by the-hundred; there 
are ‘dumb-bells,’ ‘clubs,’ and ‘rods;’ there are ‘straight rods,’ some- 
times (often) of considerable length, which break up by transverse 
sub-division into separate cells; there are ‘threads,’ and threads 
fetted into swarms;’ there are ‘spirals’, single and double, triple and 
even quadruple; there are chains with short and close, and with 
open and long links; there are stocks with lashes on them much 
like whips, and also ‘shepherd’s crooks;’ there are ‘tails’ and ‘spikes,’ 
and still other forms; and all consisting of healthy blood which had 
been organized by standing first into, etc.” , 
Dr. Gregg does not employ staining agents, such as the aniline 
dyes, which are so readily absorbed by the protoplasm of what are 
called bacteria (organisms by the way, which Dr. Gregg admits do 
exist), and which action in connection with proper treatment subse- 
quently distinguishes these forms from fibrine threads, as the color 
absorbed by the latter is discharged by washing in water, alcohol or 
nitric acid, but not so from bacteria. Nor does he attempt to culti- 
vate, after either of the approved methods of Pasteur or Koch, the 
objects he says are fibrine threads and granules simulating bacteria 
so closely as to have deceived the very elect. 
So it will beseen that the doctor disregards all methods of iden- 
tifying these minute objects but one, viz.: Appearances in a dry 
film of albuminous matter, seen under circumstances about as 
trustworthy as taking the typography of a country from a balloon 
through a fog. By such means he seeks to prove that fibrine forms 
are identical with the bacteria of disease or putrefaction and tries 
to overturn the work of masters! 
Turning now from his methods of work with the microscope 
let us make a brief analysis of the paper. 
Dr. Gregg states that, “I have controverted the theory of the 
bacterists for years, and contended that all their so-called bacteria 
of disease were nothing more or less than so many different forms 
of fibrine. Now forthe proof of the correctness of my position. 
= * *) * -* * It occurred ‘to me to boiland. also’ to;rot seme 
blood and see what the effects of both would be upon the fibrine it 
contained. * * * * * * My idea was to first partially and 
then wholly destroy that cohesive power that exists between the 
molecules of fibrine and watch the results. Behold what a revela- 
