Correspondence, Notes, etc.



47



the conclusions he advertises, when called upon to do so, he nevertheless

retires at once on my first challenge. In doing so he says that if Nocard,

Villemin, and Hewlett fail to convince me that “Avian Tuberculosis does

exist amongst birds ” (sic), I must excuse him from trying to do so.


Well, my statement, published more than two years ago and repeated

in this letter, shews how much I want convincing on the mere point of

its existence.


In Mr. Janies G. Mylan's July letter of results,—the one ushered in

by his trumpet blast in Cage Birds— he deliberately quotes Nocard as

follows—words and punctuation marks and all. “ Tuberculosis is a common

“ disease among birds: the bacilli are a little longer than those met with in

“ Tuberculosis Mammalia, otherwise they have the same characteristics,

“react in the same way to the same stains, and flourish on the same

“ culture media, but the}' are more vigorous and grow more quickly and

“ abundantly.”


It is hardly to be expected that any of your readers have taken the

trouble to buy Nocard’s book, but if they have, they will be astonished.

Nocard never wrote that sentence. It is one mamifachired by Mr. James G.

Mylan himself out of fragments (and garbled ones at that) of four different

sentences on two different pages of Nocard’s book ! Nocord never said

“Tuberculosis is a common disease among birds ” : This is what he says,

and I italicize the essential words left out by Mr. Mylan in his gallant

attempt on behalf of his party. “Tuberculosis is a common disease among


the birds of the poultiy yard, .” Then in the next sentence he


goes on to say “It attacks poultry, pigeons, turkeys, peafowl, guinea fowl,

etc. ; and even the small biids take it experimentally .” So we see that after

all it is Mr. James G. Mylan who requires convincing by Professor Nocard,

because in order to make use of him as a support for himself in his attitude

of bluff and conceit he is obliged to falsify him. When I challenge this

fellow medical man of mine to demonstrate tuberculosis in a cage bird not

specially inoculated for the purpose, it will be seen that although

incidentally I may yet be found to differ with Nocard in some directions, I

am entirely in accord with him in this one; and that to insinuate the

contrary in the manner he has is simple dishonesty on Mr. Mylan’s part.

After this exhibition of Mr. Mylan's method of conducting a scientific

discussion we need not feel surprised to find further on in his manufactured

“quotation” that Nocard’s words “generally seem” are boldly altered

into “are.” This is done, not once, but twice in this “quotation” of Nocard,

in which he is made to say that which he never said and never meant to say,

in order to bolster up my opponent in his presumption and ignorance of

the subject.


It is now of course a work of supererogation on my part,—more than

that—it is an act of condescension for me to challenge Mr. Mylan again ;

but still I do so for the third and last time. If he elects to give the



