216 BACTERIA IN MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS 



hibited in London, some of it was clandestinely distributed amongst 

 the poor of Hendon. Amongst those served, half a dozen families 

 were invaded by scarlatina at a time when the disease had ceased to 

 exert its influence in the London districts. The intermission which 

 had occurred in the scarlatina in Hampstead and St Pancras during 

 the ten days referred to above, was at the time when the infective 

 cows had been moved into a shed sending milk only to Marylebone. 

 A few days later they were again moved into a shed from which 

 milk was distributed to the two former districts. 



Thus the investigation showed the Hendon farm to be the main 

 source, and, as far as could be judged, the cows referred to, the 

 particular source, of the implicated milk, for the disease followed the 

 distribution of their milk. The further inquiry was with regard to 

 the nature of the disease or influence appertaining to these cows.* 



Sir G-eorge Buchanan summarised for the Local Government 

 Board his interpretation of the facts, and concluded that the Hendon 

 disease was "a form occurring of the very disease that we call 

 scarlatina when it occurs in the human subject.''^ His views found 

 acceptance with a large number of persons, but most veterinarians 

 and certain pathologists were not prepared to accept the matter as 

 proved. In consequence, further investigations and inquiries were 

 instituted, and a controversy arose. Sir G-eorge Brown, then head of 

 the Privy Council's Agricultural Department, held (1) that the 

 Hendon disease was not confined to the Hendon farm from which the 

 implicated milk was derived, but occurred elsewhere, and was followed 

 by no scarlet fever; (2) that the probable source of infection at 

 Hendon was human ; and (3) that the alleged bovine scarlet fever 

 was cowpox.\ 



As a matter of fact, the exact origin of the London epidemic at 

 that time has not yet been, and now probably never will be, demon- 

 strated. Even at the present time the specific micro-organism which 

 is the causal agent of human scarlet fever is not established or 

 proved. That is to say, no micro-organism has yet been isolated in 

 human scarlet fever wlxich fulfils the postulates of Koch. Much less 

 was this the case sixteen years ago, when bacteriological methods 

 were less perfect than they are even to-day. From this it follows 

 that the vera causa was obscure, and yet without this link it was 

 impossible to complete the chain of evidence by which it could be 

 definitely known that any disease of the cow was responsible for the 

 epidemic. The probabilities might be strong or weak, but proof was 



* Local Government Board Report, 1885, pp. 73-111 (W. H. Power). 



f Seventeenth Annual Report of the Local Government Board, 1887-88 (Medical 

 Officer's Supplement), pp. 13, 14. 



J For a discussion of the whole subject, see Bacteriology of Milk (Swithinbank 

 and Newman), 1903, pp. 279-304. 



