268 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. X. No. 252 



on the subject from the Royal Society of Edinburgh. This was intal<er or somebody informed me." Then the culprit is brought be- 



February, 1877. No special reason was assigned, but the terms 

 of the letter indicate clearly that Sir Wyville dreaded some injury 

 to the scientific reputation of the body of naturalists of whom he 

 was the chief, and for whom, as connected with the ' Challenger ' 

 expedition, he was in some degree responsible. He had not him- 

 self at that time, I believe, fully accepted the new doctrine. But 

 that would have been no sufficient reason for discouraging free dis- 

 cussion, if it were indeed as free as it ought to be. In my article I 

 understated the delay which was thus occasioned. Three years, 

 not two, elapsed before Mr. Murray was at perfect liberty to advo- 

 cate his views in the proper place, before a scientific body. 



But the challenge of Professor Huxley has brought to my knowl- 

 edge a new bit of circumstantial evidence to the same effect, which 

 is highly significant. Among the investigators of the Pacific corals, 

 no man has done better work than Dr. Guppy, surgeon of H.M.S. 

 ' Lark.' Since my article was written, his volumes on the Solomon 

 Group of islands have been published. The geological volume is 

 an admirable memoir. It is the record of observations as patient, 

 detailed, and conscientious as have ever been made on the great 

 geological problem which is at issue. After his return home, he 

 was advised by Mr. Murray to offer a paper on his researches to the 

 Geological Society of London. He did so in the spring of 1885. 

 But his paper was refused, much to Dr. Guppy's disappointment. 

 It was not orthodox. His facts effectually removed some difficul- 

 ties in the way of Mr. Murray's theory, — facts which in more than 

 a corresponding degree were adverse to the theory of Darwin. As 

 a consequence the Royal Society of Edinburgh has had the honor 

 of receiving and publishing Dr. Guppy's most interesting memoir. 

 As a Scotchman, I am proud of this contrast. I make no accusa- 

 tion of wilful unfairness against the authorities of the Geological 

 Society of London, of which my critic Professor Bonney was, I be- 

 lieve, at that time the president. They did not consciously dis- 

 courage truth. On the contrary, they probably smelt heresy. But 

 if their minds had been free from this prepossession, — if they had 

 been alive to the breadth and sweep of the questions at issue, and 

 open to receive with welcome the crucial evidence bearing upon 

 them which is contained in Dr. Guppy's paper, — the rejection of it 

 would have been impossible. 



As regards Darwin's own state of mind upon the subject, I can 

 only say that my information was as good as that in the possession 

 of Professor Huxley. I am not struck by the perfect candor of his 

 reference to Darwin's letter to Professor Semper in October, 1879. 

 If he had quoted the very next sentence to that which he does 

 quote, a very different impression would have been left on the 

 reader's mind. But I attach no importance to this point. I prefer 

 to believe that Darwin's mind was open to conviction, and to hope 

 that others will follow his example. ARGYLL. 



THE AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION.' 



Dr. Carl Horsch of Dover, N.H., read a paper entitled ' The 

 Necessity of Burial-Permits and Inspection of Bodies of Deceased 

 Persons.' He based this necessity on the following grounds, (i) 

 It is the best safeguard against the possibility of premature burial, 

 and also that the apparently dead may not be placed in cold rooms 

 or on ice, and frozen to death. (2) Cases of concealed contagious 

 and infectious diseases will be detected, and an epidemic may be 

 averted. (3) Murder and suicide may be detected ; and if crema- 

 tion, the surest method for the destruction of disease-germs, is gen- 

 erally established, there will be also less danger that the body of a 

 murdered person will be cremated, and the crime concealed. (4) 

 Life-insurance frauds maybe prevented. (5) Where the fear exists 

 of being buried alive , the family physician can overcome that fear 

 by that examination, and his assurance that the loved one is dead. 

 (6) In order to sign a certificate for a burial-permit legally, that in- 

 spection gives the most important evidence. If a physician gives 

 his signature to such a certificate without seeing the body, he may 

 be brought in the following unpleasant position : he is called into 

 court, the certificate is laid before him, the questions asked, " Did 

 you sign that certificate ? " Answer, " Yes." " Did you know that 

 the person was dead ? " The only answer could be, " The under- 



^ Continued from Science of Nov. 25. 



fore him, and the fact revealed that he indirectly aided a criminal. 



Dr. Rohe, secretary of the committee on disinfectants, presented 

 the report of that committee. The following conclusions were- 

 drawn from their work : — 



1. The temperature required to destroy the vitality of pathogenic 

 organisms varies with the different organisms. 



2. In the absence of spores the limits of variation are about lo'^ 

 C. (18° F.) 



3. A temperature of 56° C. (132.8° F.) is fatal to the bacillus of 

 anthrax, the bacillus of typhoid-fever, the bacillus of glanders, the 

 spirillum of Asiatic cholera, the erysipelas coccus, the virus of vac- 

 cinia, of rinderpest, of sheep-pox, and probably of several other 

 infectious diseases. 



4. A temperature of 62° C. (143.6° F.) is fatal to all of the patho- 

 genic and non-pathogenic organisms tested, in the absence of 

 spores (with the single exception of sarcina lutea, which in one 

 experiment grew after exposure to this temperature). 



5. A temperature of 100° C. (212° F.), maintained for five min- 

 utes, destroys the spores of all pathogenic organisms which have 

 been tested. 



6. It is probable that some of the bacilli which are destroyed by 

 a temperature of 60'' C. form endogenous spores, which are alsO' 

 destroyed at this temperature. 



Dr. John S. Billings, U.S.A., read a paper on some forms of 

 tables of vital statistics, with special reference to the needs of the 

 health-officer. 



A resolution was adopted to appoint a committee, with Dr.. 

 Sternberg as its chairman, to study experimentally the methods and 

 effects of protective inoculation against infectious diseases. 



Dr. Horsch presented a paper entitled ' Inspection of Animals 

 required for Food,' in which he recommended the inspection of ani- 

 mals by competent persons before they are slaughtered, and a 

 thorough examination of their viscera afterwards. 



Dr. Azel Ames, jun., of thicago presented a paper on the meat- 

 food supply of the nation, and its future. In it he gave statistics of 

 the resources of the country with reference to its animal food, and 

 showed, that, as the population increased and the grazing country- 

 diminished, these resources were proportionately declining. He- 

 criticised adversely the policy of the general government in dealing 

 with the public lands. Legislation was asked of Congress for the 

 suppression of pleuro-pneumonia, and for the taking of a thorough' 

 census of the cattle of the country and their products. Dr. Ames 

 denounced the tax imposed by the oleomargarine act as being un- 

 just to the poor, and wrong in principle, and demanded its repeal. 



A paper by Dr. J. H. Rauch, secretary of the State Board of 

 Health of Illinois, dealing with the subject of cholera and quaran- 

 tine, excited great interest. Dr. Rauch described the defects of the 

 quarantine at the port of New York, and said that in the West its 

 results were looked upon with distrust. He asked that the entire 

 quarantine system of the United States should be placed under 

 national control. In the discussion which followed. Dr. A. N. Bell 

 criticised most severely the arrangements of the New York quaran- 

 tine, but expressed the opinion that the measures which had been 

 applied by the health-officer in the management of the passengers- 

 of the steamers ' Alesia ' and ' Britannia ' had been successful. 



The paper of Dr. Dickinson was discussed by a number of the 

 members of the society. Dr. Eliza M. Mosher remarked that the- 

 point of greatest interest in connection with the subject was whether 

 the loose corset injured the health of the wearer, and, if so, what 

 could be offered as a substitute. Most girls, according to her experi- 

 ence, wore them sufficiently tight to limit respiratory movements. It 

 was difficult to measure the injui-y done, since the chest was already 

 crippled, and its expansion was below its possibilities. In addition 

 to the thinning of the abdominal wall described by Dr. Dickinson, 

 there was atrophy of the entire surface covered by the corset, with 

 lack of development of muscular tissues due to restricted move- 

 ment. This was apparent by the often-repeated remark of ladies 

 that they could not sit up straight without their corsets. It was 

 often observed how useless were the arms of most young ladies for 

 any manual labor, even though their lower extremities were capable 

 of long-continued muscular movement. A well-developed nipple 

 was almost an unknown thing with a woman or girl who had worn. 



