March 16, 1871 | 
NATURE 
39! 


THE SUPPOSED FUNGOID ORIGIN OF 
CHOLERA * 
‘pas report contains a first instalment of the scientific 
portion of the Cholera inquiry now proceeding in 
India, the instructions for which were drawn up by the 
Army Sanitary Commission. Itis limited to facts bearing 
on the Cholera theories of Hallier and Pettenkoffer. Inthe 
pursuit of these facts Dr. Lewis has been able to clear the 
ground for future progress, while at the same time he has 
added considerably to our knowledge on some obscure 
points of microscopical science. The report is fully illus- 
trated with engravings of microscopic slides, executed with 
remarkable beauty and correctness in the office of the 
Surveyor General of India. Indeed whether we look at 
the engravings or the typography, we cannot help feeling 
that our own artists have something to learn from their 
brethren in India in these matters. 
The subjects of examination are divided by Dr. Lewis 
into three classes, Cysts, Spores, and Micrococcus, the 
three elements of Hallier’s theory ; and the examinations 
have been conducted partly by direct observations of im- 
mediate choleraic discharges, in comparison with observa- 
tions on other media, partly by the use of reagents, time 
and temperature, and partly by cultivation experiments. 
In this way, although the microscopic pathology of cholera 
has still to be inquired into, Dr. Lewis has been enabled 
to give a satisfactory account of a number of objects which 
have formed the bases of preceding theories. He has 
shown what these objects ave zof, and he has shown what 
many of them ave; and this he has done with so much 
scientific caution that we cannot help feeling that this 
most important inquiry has fallen into proper hands. 
In the year 1866 Hallier discovered in cholera dis- 
charges, yellowish-coloured cysts of spherical or oval 
form, enclosing yellowish shining spores varying in size, 
also groups of swollen spores surrounded by minute 
molecular matter (so-called »tcrococcus) proceeding 
apparently from the rupture or breaking up of spores. 
These minute molecules were seen to adhere to various 
objects in the fluid, on which they appeared to feed ; they 
exhibited signs of germination, groupings, filamentary 
arrangements, and, finally, branching filaments with ma- 
croconidia and cysts, the relations of which to each other 
were considered as established by cultivation experiments. 
The resulting fungus, a folycystus, was considered by 
Hallier to resemble the rye fungus in Europe, and probably 
to be present in diseased rice in India; and he held that 
this fungus introduced into the intestinal canal and there 
passing through the various stages of its existence, caused 
the phenomena of cholera by its action on the intestinal 
epithelium. 
This brief sketch is sufficient to show how much solid 
fact was necessary to fill up the slight frame-work of 
Hallier’s hypothesis. Here Dr. Lewis’s work begins, and 
every step in it is illustrated by engraved slides. 
We have first an examination into the nature of the so- 
called “ cholera cells” discovered by Drs. Swayne, Brittan, 
and Budd, in 1849. These objects appear to have been 
of various kinds; some certainly not of fungoid origin. 
Selecting the most marked of the objects of which en- 
gravings are given, Dr. Lewis shows that objects, as nearly 
as possible similar to those figured by the Bristol observers, 
are found in discharges in India, and that they are ova of 
acart and of intestinal worms (¢richocephalus). 
As regards Hallier’s cys/s Dr. Lewis states that he has 
never met with any in fresh cholera discharges, but that 
he had repeatedly developed them. The other cyst-like 
bodies proved to be either fragments of tissues or ova, 
none being peculiar to cholera. Cultivation experiments 
with cholera discharge centaining cyst-like bodies yielded 
* A Reporton the Microscopic Objects found in Cholera Evacuations,&c. By 
T. R. Lewis, M.B., Assistant Surgeon H.M, British Forces. 




branching fungi with »acroconidia, which gave place to 
aspergillus; in other cultivations, however, the only 
products were fenzcillium and aspergillus. Dr. Lewis 
admits that cysts distinctly resembling those of Hallier 
may be developed by cultivation from cholera discharges, 
but that he had found them only three times in more than 
a hundred cultivations. 
Their development is therefore not a constant phe- 
nomenon, and Dr. Lewis further shows that cysts of the 
same character can be developed in discharges not cho- 
leraic. Bodies resembling “‘ sfores” are very common in 
cholera discharges, and Dr. Lewis bestows much pains in 
demonstrating their true nature. He illustrates every 
step of the inquiry by slides, and classifies the bodies 
under the four following heads :—(1) Globules, of a fatty 
nature ; (2) altered blood cells ; (3) corpuscles, embedded 
in a tenacious substance ; (4) globular condition of certain 
infusoria. The corpuscles in Class 3 are amceboid in 
character, and are probably due to effused blood 
plasma. There is no evidence of the presence of spores 
of fungi. 
The last subject inquired into was the so-called micro- 
coccus, the supposed “ germ” of cholera, which in Hallier’s 
view might pass into the human body in water or air, and 
then give rise to cholera by developing itself at the ex- 
pense of nitrogenous material, especially intestinal 
epithelium. 
Dr. Lewis shows that minutely divided matter is not 
more prevalent in choleraic than in other discharges, in- 
deed less so, but that attempts to produce “‘ mcrococcus” 
by cultivation had entirely failed, possibly on account of 
the many sources of fallacy in such experiments. 
He gives the results of a number of observations made 
with infusions and decoctions of animal matter, including 
cultivations with cholera discharge, and shows that in 
spite of every care in the manipulations, very different 
forms of life will make their appearance in substances 
derived from the same source, and under apparently 
identical conditions. His general conclusions on this 
first stage of the inquiry are :— 
1. That no cysts exist in choleraic discharges which are 
not found under other conditions. 2. That cysts or 
“ sporangia ” of fungi are very rarely found under any cir- 
cumstances in alvine discharges. 3. That no special 
fungus has been developed in cholera discharges, the 
fungus described by Hallier being certainly not confined 
to such. 4. That there are no animalcular developments, 
either as to nature or proportionate amount peculiar to 
cholera, and that the same organisms may be developed 
in nitrogenous material even outside the body. Lastly, 
that the supposed dvérzs of intestinal epithelium is not of 
this origin, but appears to result from effused blood plasma. 
Unless these conclusions are materially modified on 
subsequent inquiry, they must be considered as disposing 
of Hallier’s theory of cholera. Should, however, Dr. 
Lewis’s further investigations prove that Hallier’s fungus 
is present in choleraic discharges and in diseased rice 
as a constant, we should still require scientific proof that 
cholera was caused by the action of this fungus and by 
nothing else. 
Pettenkoffer’s theory of cholera connects the prevalence 
of the disease with certain conditions of damp subsoil 
and subsoil water besides the presence of a “germ,” 
favourable meteorological conditions and personal pre- 
disposition. Little has been done as yet in this portion 
of the cholera inquiry. What has been done is very 
interesting, although it does not support the theory. Ob- 
servations regarding it have been made at Allahabad, 
Cawnpore, Lucknow, Fyzabad, Agra, Morar, Meerut, and 
Peshawur. The subsoil water experiments do not appear 
to sustain Pettenkoffer’s views, but the examination ot 
soils has yielded several important scientific facts of 
general interest. The amount of air in specimens of soil 
| taken at different stations varies from 33 to 66 per cent. 
