87 



lication was heralded ; the mouse may be per se a highly 

 respectable and by no means ridiculous animal, though 

 its advent as the result of herculean efforts at parturition 

 is said to be very absurd. This entire matter can hardly 

 fail to teach far more effectually than lectures, that trust- 

 worthy investigations on this subject demand not only 

 skill and experience in pathology, which Dr. Schmidt 

 undoubtedly possesses, but also acquaintance with the 

 special methods involved. 



A paper called " The Bacillus Tuberculosis," by Dr. 

 H. F. Formad, of Philadelphia (Philadelphia Medical 

 Times, November 18, 1882, reprint), opens with the an- 

 nouncement that the author " will bring forward some 

 points from researches of my own, which will check the 

 acceptance of the doctrine of the parasitic origin of tuber- 

 culosis ;" " my anatomical researches will also surely 

 throw grave doubts upon the correctness of Koch's views 

 on the etiology of tuberculosis " (p. 2). The author fails 

 to discriminate between the bacillus and the infectious- 

 ness of tuberculosis, which is in this article, however, a 

 matter of little consequence, except as an index to the 

 general accuracy of the publication. 



The original researches which are to destroy the 

 "parasitic theory" consist, curiously enough, in the time- 

 honored demonstration that tuberculosis often occurs in 

 certain animals (notably the rabbit and guinea-pig) after 

 simple wounds, the irritation caused by glass, etc. ; 

 especially if the animals be carefully confined in a patho- 

 logical laboratory where many others have died of this 

 disease. As Dr. Formad has seen " more than one hun- 

 dred rabbits, out of five or six hundred operated upon," 

 die of tuberculosis, we may infer that in his laboratory 

 there was no lack of tuberculous material for infection. 



There is, however, one original feature in this work as 

 reported by Dr. Formad. Actuated doubtless by a com- 

 mendable high- tariff spirit of protection for American 

 industry, while quoting copiously his own students, he 

 resolutely ignores the work of Burdon-Sanderson, Cohn- 

 heim, and a dozen others who have, during the last 



