26 HISTORICAL NOTES ON BEE DISEASES. 
mary of his work on foul brood which appeared for the most part in 
the papers by him which we have already reviewed. In addition to 
the work contained in his former papers he reports the results of his 
experimental inoculation of healthy larve with cultures of Bacillus 
alvet. 
On page 24 of this bulletin it will be noted that Cheshire outlined 
briefly the manner in which the inoculations would be made, and 
stated furthermore that he could foresee the results. After obtaining 
the results of his experimental inoculation, he writes as follows: 
It is needful before passing to the second head to anticipate one or two points to 
which Mr. Watson Cheyne will especially refer. After very many cultivations con- 
ducted in series by that gentleman, a small quantity of sterilized milk was inoculated 
from the last tube. It behaved characteristically, as Mr. Cheyne will describe, the 
flask emitting upon the drawing of the plug the unmistakable odour so distinctive of 
the disease in the hive. Some of this milk I diffused through water and sprayed from 
an atomizer over a healthy comb of larve, part of which was protected by a cardboard 
sheet into which four lozenge shapes had been cut. The larve protected matured 
in health; those exposed to the spray in many cases were removed by the bees, while 
the rest died, their bodies filled with Bacillus alveit. This last experiment seems to 
complete the chain of evidence in favour of “‘foul brood” not being accidentally asso- 
ciated with this bacillus, but actually its result. 
If positive results can be obtained by experimental inoculation of 
course such results furnish evidence which is of the greatest value in 
the determination of the cause of the disease. Cheshire’s experi- 
ment, however, did not furnish such evidence. It will be noted that 
Cheshire states that some of the larve died with their bodies filled 
with Bacillus alver, and while he does not say positively that the 
larve died of foul brood, this idea is likely to be inferred by the next 
statement that is made. While these statements by Cheshire are 
made with some degree of conservatism, they evidently have been 
interpreted by many to mean that the disease was produced, and 
this conception has led to a great deal of confusion in the minds of 
bee keepers concerning the cause of foul brood. Cheshire states that 
Cheyne will especially refer to the experimental inoculation of healthy 
brood which he only anticipates in his part of the paper. In con- 
sidering Cheyne’s contribution it will be seen in what way he disposes 
of this very important phase of the investigation. 
This completes the consideration of the papers by Cheshire as far 
as we purpose to deal with them at present. Before taking up the 
investigations of Cheyne on Bacillus alvei it may be well to summarize 
Cheshire’s papers on foul brood. 
1. Having accepted an invitation from the British Bee Keepers’ 
Association to give an address upon foul brood, Cheshire began to 
study the disease about the last of May, 1884, although he mentions 
having examined, microscopically, larve dead of the disease some 
years before. 
