PUTEEFACTION AND INFECTION. 125 



regarding the evidential force of the experiments. To 

 Professor Huxley, moreover, I am indebted for under- 

 taking the examination of a number of the hermetically- 

 sealed tubes. Thirty of them were placed in his hands, 

 none of them being regarded as defective. A close 

 examination, however, disclosed in one of them a myce- 

 liiim. No faultiness could for a time be discovered in 

 the tube ; the sealing appeared to be quite as perfect as 

 that of its sterile fellows. Once, however, on shaking it 

 a minute drop of liquid struck my friend's face ; and he 

 soon discovered that an orifice of almost microscopic 

 minuteness had been left open in the nozzle of the tube. 

 Through this the common air had been sucked in as 

 the liquid cooled, and hence the contamination. It was 

 the only defective tube of the group of thirty, and it 

 alone showed signs of Hfe. 



The statement of this fact before the Eoyal Society, 

 by Professor Huxley, brought to my mind a somewhat 

 similar experience of my own. One morning in Novem- 

 ber I lifted one of the hermetically-sealed tubes from 

 the wire on which it was suspended, and, holding it up 

 against the light, discovered, to my astonishment, a 

 beautiful mycelium at the bottom. Before restoring 

 the tube to its place I touched its fused end and 

 fouTid it cutting sharp. Close inspection showed that 

 the nozzle had been broken off; the common air had 

 entered, and the seed of the mycelium had been sown. 

 Two other instances, one like that observed by Professor 

 Huxley, have since come to light. In one of them a 

 minute orifice remained after the supposed sealing of the 

 tube. The other case was noticed when the tubes were 

 returned from the Turkish bath. One of them contained 

 a luxuriant mycelium. It was noticed that the liquid 

 in this tube had singularly diminished in quantity, and 

 on turning the tube up it was found cracked at the 

 bottom. 



