1901) MiCROSCOPICAL JOURNAL. 9 
Henri de Mondeville in 1306 went even further than Theo- 
doric, whom he followed, and taught the necessity of 
bringing the edges of a wound together, covered it with 
an exclusive plaster compounded of turpentine, resin and 
wax, and then applied the hot wine fomentation. In 1671 
Kircher wrote a book in which he expressed the opinion 
that puerperal purpura, measles and various other fevers 
were the result of a putrefaction caused by worms or 
animalcule. His opinions were thought by his contem- 
poraries to be founded upon too little evidence, and were 
not received. 
Plencig of Vienna became convinced that there was an 
undoubted connection between microscopicanimalcules ex- 
hibited by the microscope and the origin of disease, and 
advanced this opinion as early as 1782. 
Unfortunately, the opinions of Plencig seem not to 
have been accepted by others, and were soon forgotten. 
In 1704 John Colboch described “a new and secret meth- 
od of treating wounds by which healing took place quick- 
ly, without inflammation or suppuration.” Boehm suc- 
‘ceeded in 1838 in demonstrating the occurrence of yeast 
plants in the stools of cholera, and conjectured that the © 
process of fermentation was concerned in the causation of 
that disease. 
In 1840, Henle determined that the cause of infectious 
diseases was to be sought for in minute living organisms 
or fungi. He may be looked upon as the real propounder 
of the Germ Theory of Disease, for he not only collected 
facts and expressed opinions, but also investigated the 
‘subject ably. The requirements which he formulated in 
order that the theory might be proved were so severe that 
he was never able to attain to them with the crude meth- 
ods at his disposal. They were so ably elaborated, how- 
ever, that in after years they were again postulated by 
Koch, and it is only by strict conformity with them that 
the definite relationship between bacteria and disease has 
