42 SHELLFISH CONTAMINATION FROM SEWAGE-POLLUTED WATERS. 
report was absolutely false and the death certificate gave the cause 
as ‘‘cerebrospinal fever.” Further inquiry by the food inspector 
into these cases showed that the victims had not eaten oysters at all. 
Such reports as these, containing not the least foundation of truth, 
undoubtedly inflict an undeserved hardship upon an industry of 
much importance, and every precaution should be taken to substan- 
tiate such statements before they are made public. 
PRESENCE OF BACILLUS COLI AND BACILLUS TYPHOSUS IN OYSTERS. 
The present investigations disclose no reason, biological, anatom- 
ical, or otherwise, why oysters and other shellfish can not become 
contaminated when exposed to sewage-polluted waters, and the 
following references upheld the conclusion that this occurs. 
Klein * reports: ‘‘ Bacillus coli (typical) was found in 5 out of 8 
-cockles.’’ Houston * concludes his report on the bacteriological 
examination of deep-sea oysters by saying: ‘“‘The results show that 
in deep-sea oysters derived from deep-sea water, remote from sewage 
pollution, B. coli and coli-like microbes and also the spores of B. 
enteritidis sporogenes are either absent or, at all events, seldom 
detectable. The same is true of surface water over such oysters.” 
Smith ® found B. coli, B. enteritidis sporogenes, and streptococci in 
fluid from shellfish grown on grounds suspected to be poiluted, but 
failed to find these germs from areas free from sewage. 
Hewlett *° says: ‘‘From my observations I have no hesitation, 
therefore, in concluding that oysters from water uncontaminated with 
sewage do not normally contain the colon or allied bacilli or the 
Bacillus enteritidis sporogenes.”’ He examined 32 oysters from dif- 
ferent sources, and, with the exception of 2, not one of them con- 
tained B. coli or B. enteritidis sporogenes. 
In making an examination of Charles River clams, Dr. Hill® says: 
These clams contain within their intestines at least three species of bacteria char- 
acteristic of sewage. These organisms were not found in the intestines of clams or 
oysters from less contaminated or uncontaminated waters. The general proposition 
is accepted, therefore, that food which may be eaten raw should never be exposed 
to untreated sewage containing the typhoid bacillus nor to uninfected sewage unless 
the food is of such a character that it can be thoroughly cleansed before it is eaten. 
Beale? in his work on clams says: 
The results of this examination proved that the clams were grossly polluted with 
sewage, inasmuch as the B. coli communis could be detected in =}; and the B. enteri- 
tidis sporogenes in 34, part of the clam. It is especially noteworthy that even after 
boiling 15 minutes the Bacillus communis could be recovered from the bodies of the 
clams. : 
Ewart !® concludes that mussels can be obtained free from all evi- 
dence of sewage pollution, and states further— 
That the number of Bacillus coli found in the mussels corresponds closely to the 
environment, hence the mussel can not be regarded as a filter accumulating harmful 
organisms. * * * 
