No. 424.] NOTES AND LITERATURE. 341 
of thoroughness on the ground of respect for the memory of the 
author and for fear of disturbing the form or framework of the 
book. Changes have been made only * wo sich eine absolut zwin- 
gende Notwendigkeit ergab." De Bary, who loved thoroughness 
so well, would never himself have consented to such a thing. It 
is safe to say that the book will not please either the reviser or 
the readers. It is at least questionable whether it is ever wise 
to revise a book after an author's death, especially when very 
extensive changes will be necessary to bring it up to date, and in 
this case it is quite certain that Dr. Migula would have done much 
better to have written an altogether new book. The first edition 
of de Bary's Vorlesungen uber Bakterien, published in 1885, con- 
tained 18 woodcuts.and 146 pages of text. The new edition con- 
tains 41 figures and 186 pages of text. Three new chapters are 
added dealing with sulphur bacteria, nitrogen bacteria, and the 
question of immunity, toxins, antitoxins, toxalbumins, etc. The 
book is about the size of Fischer's Vorlesungen and will find a 
place beside it on the library shelf. It compares very favorably 
with Fischer’s book, but, as in the case of the latter work, the least 
well-made part of the compilation is that relating to plant diseases. 
Four diseases only are noticed, and no contribution more modern 
than Kramer's wet rot of the potato, published in 1892, finds men- 
tion. In case of Wakker's hyacinth disease, de Bary's statement 
that “succéssful infections and an exact following of the life history 
of the bacterium are still wanting" is repeated. Under “pear 
blight,” the long exploded statement that the organism produces 
carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and butyric acid is once more repeated. 
Under Kramer's “wet rot of the potato," it is thought to be safe 
to hint that there may possibly be other bacteria capable of pro- 
ducing similar phenomena. Of general statements, the following 
sufficiently indicate the value of this résumé : ** The firm cell mem- 
brane of the plant cell is an almost insurmountable obstacle to the 
bacteria, especially as the very great majority of the bacteria are 
not able to attack cellulose. It is true that in recent years espe- 
cially there have been described very many so-called “ bacterioses,” 
that is, diseases in plants caused by bacteria, but only a few will 
stand searching criticism. . . . In the great majority, bacteria are 
certainly not the cause. . . . Considering the uncertainty and inad- 
missibility of most of the accounts relative to bacterioses, there is 
no necessity of inquiring further about diseases which presumably 
will sooner or later be stricken out of the list of the bacterioses.” 
