NATURE 
[AprIL 18, 1907 
faced by an account of maiotic phenomena generally 
and a detailed comparison of those phenomena with 
the changes observed in cancer-cells. 
It will be remembered that the authors of the com- 
munication referred to drew a comparison between 
the nuclear phenomena in cancer-cells and those char- 
acterising the process of maturation in the cells of 
reproductive glands. The degree of similarity be- 
tween the two processes was found to be such as to 
suggest the inference that the type of cell-prolifera- 
tion in the two cases was identical; and to those 
possessing a sense of the morphological significance 
of nuclear form this conclusion appeared to be war- 
ranted. 
Deviations from the normal mitotic process were, 
however, already well recognised in cancer-cells, and 
had been interpreted as being purely pathological 
phenomena. Upon this view the resemblance between 
the nuclear forms met with in cancer-cells and those 
encountered in reproductive tissue would be regarded 
as accidental, and, in particular, the approximate 
halving of the number of chromosomes in individual 
cells of a group exhibiting extensive numerical vari- 
ations both above and below that number would be 
looked upon as a merely chance occurrence. 
Before this interpretation could be considered to 
have been satisfactorily displaced, it was, therefore, 
necessary to demonstrate that the definite halving of 
the chromosomes occupies a dominant position in the 
cancerous process, and to trace in every detail the 
points of similarity between that process and the 
maiotic process of reproductive tissue. Further re- 
search in these directions has tended to strengthen the 
original contention. By constructing the frequency- 
curve of the numerical variations of chromosomes in 
cancer-cells, the important position occupied by the 
definite halving of the number of chromosomes has 
been exhibited in a convincing manner; and the 
parallelism between the normal maiotic and the can- 
cerous modes of cell-division has been traced in such 
detail as, apparently, to leave few points for further 
comparison. 
It may, then, be confidently affirmed that the can- 
cerous process has now been definitely and accurately 
referred to its physiological type, and, although the 
process may deviate from its type in certain parti- 
culars, marked rather by degree than kind, such as 
the number of post-maiotic divisions, the validity of 
the assertion is not thereby affected, since the different 
circumstances in which the two processes arise must 
inevitably find expression in corresponding modifi- 
cations in the processes themselves. 
A caution is given on p. 25 against a too hasty 
assumption that all gametoid tumours are malignant. 
It is well known that the malignancy of cancerous 
growths varies in degree in different cases, and that, 
as regards histological characters, every stage of 
transition may, in the case of certain organs more 
especially, be traced in different tumours between 
structures bearing the distinctive marks of malig- 
nancy and such as are undistinguishable from benign 
growths. It is conceivable that at the limit of such 
a series of transitional forms, tumours may exist 
which, whilst possessing the features of gametoid 
growths, are devoid of the properties which denote 
malignancy. The point is one of great theoretical 
interest, although in practice it is probable that such 
tumours would be treated as malignant in view of 
their close relationship to definitely 
growths. The authors, however, barely touch upon 
this aspect of the subject, but suggestions are thrown 
out which appear to indicate further research into the 
nature of malignancy and a prospect of substantial 
results. 
NO. 1955, VOL 75] 
malignant 
NOTES. 
APPARENTLY, the British Government is indifferent to 
any increase of facilities for the advancement of know- 
ledge, for it makes no attempt to show active interest in 
organisations and institutions concerned with science and 
higher education. The Carnegie Institute at Pittsburg was 
dedicated last week in the presence of a large and dis- 
tinguished company, but neither the British Ambassador 
nor any member of the British Embassy was present at 
the ceremony, though invitations were sent. On the other 
hand, the German Emperor was represented by a special 
commission of six members of the highest rank; France 
and Italy were also represented, and there were 
present numerous representatives of other Embassies and 
Legations. It is unfortunate that England should have 
been without a political representative upon such an 
occasion, but the omission is only another instance of the 
failure of British statesmen to understand the significance 
of anything relating to science or progressive learning. The 
Times correspondent states that the absence of British 
representatives and the consequent tone of the whole pro- 
ceedings left a regrettable impression among’ the British 
and Canadians, who formed a large majority of the foreign 
guests. He remarks :—‘‘ By Germany an opportunity has 
been cleverly and quite legitimately seized; by England it 
has been, by sheer stupidity, carelessly neglected.’’ These 
words could be applied to so many similar instances that 
they may be considered as describing the characteristic 
attitude shown by the two countries to scientific work. 
We hope to give an account of the opening of the institute 
in an early issue., 
Pror. Ross contributes a second letter to the Times of 
April 13 on the subject of Mr. Haffkine’s prophylactic and 
the Mulkowal disaster. We are not so much concerned 
with the details of the case as with the broad questions 
suggested by recent occurrences in connection with the 
steps taken to prevent the spread of plague. Prof. Ross 
maintains that the whole story affords another signal 
instance of the disregard for science so frequently dis- 
played in British administration, and the evidence he offers 
establishes his position. He states that in the nine years 
up to the end of 1905 more than 4,000,000 deaths from 
plague were recorded in India alone, and Prof. Simpson 
says that 20,000 deaths are still occurring there every 
week. Though plague had been raging in Hong-kong for 
two years before the outbreak in Bombay, the authorities 
appear to have organised mo system of sanitary intelli- 
gence, to have investigated few of the cases, and to have 
had no bacteriological department at hand. The result 
was that when plague appeared all was confusion. ‘‘ No 
one seemed to understand,’’ says Prof. Ross, ‘‘ that such 
epidemics can be successfully combated only by the 
methods which succeed in the case of a military invasion. 
There was no scientifie head of the defensive organisation, 
which was not even centralised until March, 1907. 
Generals and civilians were made dictators in a matter of 
which they had no knowledge, and occupied themselves 
with burning sulphur at street corners, and so on; and 
then, when these tactics failed, laid the blame on their 
subordinates, the doctors, whose advice they had fre- 
quently ignored, and whose science they had habitually 
despised. Everywhere, instead of the knowledge, organisa- 
tion, and discipline which are essential in such emergencies, 
we saw only nescience, confusion, and vacillation. .. . 
History shows that plague, if taken in time, can be quickly 
eradicated ; and in my opinion the blame for this terrible 
visitation must be laid largely on those who governed the 
5 
