298 SELLARDS, 



that these amoebae are also distinguishable from each other upon a mor- 

 phologic basis. 



Examination of the sera of amoebic dysentery patients failed to de- 

 monstrate any production of immune bodies for amoebae during the course 

 of the disease. However, the method which was employed was not satis- 

 factory when applied directly to amoebae occurring in bloody mucus stools. 

 Consequently, the results do not represent any reaction upon amoebae 

 which are known to be pathogenic. Tests upon cultures of amoebae did 

 not give any definite evidence of the presence of either cytolisins or 

 agglutinins in the patient's serum. 



Unfortunately these results do not lead to any definite conclusion but 

 merely indicate that either immune bodies were not produced or that the 

 cultures under consideration do not bear any aetiologic relationship to 

 amoebic dysentery. Certainly there is no evidence of pathogenicity; 

 however, on the other hand, there is nothing but negative evidence in- 

 dicating their harmlessness. 



EEFEEENCES. 



(1) Baebeb. Univ. Kansas Sci. Bull. (1907), 4, 3 and Journ. Infect. Dis. 



(1908), 5, 379. 



(2) Williams. Proc. 8oc. Eoap. Biol. Med. (1911), 8, 56. 



(3) MouTON. Ann. Inst. Pasteur (1902), 16, 457. 



(4) Beyeeinck. GentralU. f. Bakt. etc. Orig. (1896), 19, 257. 



(5) MuSGEAVE and Clegg. Bur. Qov. Labs. Manila (1904), No. 18. 



(6) Williams and Gxjkley. Collected Studies, Research Lab. Dept. Health, 



City of New York, (1908-9), 4, 237. 



(7) ZaubITzee. Arch. f. Eyg. (1901), 40, 103. 



(8) Knox, Moss, and Beown. Journ. Exp. Med. (1910), 12, 562. 



(9) Rossle. Arch. f. Eyg. (1905), 54, 1. 



(10) Laveean and Mesnil. Ann. Inst. Pasteur (1901), 15, 673. 



(11) Hamilton. Jovrn. Inf. Dis. (1908), 5, 570. 



