110 
Haemoflagellates, ete. 
have been carried out under such imperfect and varied conditions; for 
instance it is not certain in each case whether T. gambiense was the 
trypanosome under observation. Bagshawe (1909) has recently sum¬ 
marised the objections which apply to some or all of these experiments ; 
we cannot do better than quote his remarks : 
“ (1) All were carried out with wild flies, and similar experiments at 
the same time and the same place showed that a certain number of 
such flies were infective when brought to the laboratory. 
(2) The flies were in most cases fed on a healthy animal before 
being placed on the infected one with a view to their purging themselves 
of any trypanosomes they contained. But there is reason to suppose 
that such feeding might not have the effect desired; as Minchin points 
out, in Bruce’s fresh fly experiments the flies were caught on healthy 
animals which it must be assumed they bit, and yet infection of the 
healthy experimental animal resulted. 
(3) There is evidence that fresh flies retain the infection for more 
than a few hours. Cazalbou infected a cat with T. dimorphon after the 
flies had been starved for three and a half days. 
(4) In some of the experiments attempts to transmit by fresh flies 
and by flies supposed to be infected in the laboratory were being 
carried on at one and the same time; this has been already pointed 
out.” 
There is however no doubt whatever that G. jmlpalis is capable of 
transmitting T. gambiense to man and it appears to be able to do so 
up to 22 days after it has sucked in the parasite. T. brucei also lives 
in the alimentary tract of G. palpalis and produces an infection after at 
least twelve days ; in G. morsitans and G. pallidipes it can probably 
live longer than five days. 
Schaudinns work on the Haematozoa of the little owl. 
We would hesitate to criticise Schaudinns (1904) memorable work, 
but, owing to the fact that it is again inserted in an authoritative text¬ 
book, we feel bound to do so. In criticising it however we do not wish 
to throw any discredit on Schaudinn’s work, we have the greatest 
admiration for it; it is not so much Schaudinn’s mistakes we wish to 
draw attention to, but rather to emphasize the fact that too great weight 
has been attached to his conclusions. After all, Schaudinn’s paper on 
the parasites of Athene noctua was only a preliminary report, and we 
feel sure that had he been spared he would have considerably modified 
