REMARKS ON THE FOREGOING NOTE BY 
DR ANDREW BALFOUR. 
By GEORGE H. F. NUTTALL, F.R.S. 
Dr Balfour’s note raises the question whether Spirochaeta bovis 
caffris is a blood parasite or an organism derived from the alimentary 
canal owing to the entry of intestinal contents into the blood or blood 
stream consequent upon the effects of gunshot wounds. I must confess 
that this source of error did not occur to me in this case. 
On again looking very carefully through the blood-films, I have 
succeeded in detecting a few small bacilli which indicate that the blood 
may well have become contaminated either whilst in the circulation or 
after the films were prepared. Mr W. F. Cooper obtained the blood as 
it welled from a stab in the heart of a buffalo (No. 1) which he had 
shot, the bullet having passed a little in front of the heart and broken 
the animal’s leg. He felt “sure that there was practically no chance 
whatever of organisms from the intestines getting into the blood 
circulation.” On the other hand, it must be noted that the films may 
have become contaminated after they were taken owing to accelerated 
manipulations consequent upon another buffalo (No. 2) showing a 
desire to charge Mr Cooper whilst he was engaged in preparing the 
films. I may add that the blood of buffalo (No. 2) contained no spiro- 
chaetes. 
Whether the organism is or is not a haematozoon can only be 
decided by further observations. I am not aware that such forms have 
been described as occurring in the intestines of animals; they certainty 
differ very considerably from the typical spirochaetes which various 
observers have found in the intestine. 
A Correction. 
I would take occasion to note that, through an oversight, the 
magnification x 3600 is given in the legends to Plates X and XI, this 
being the enlargement used when drawing the parasites. The drawings 
were reduced by ^ for the purpose of reproduction, consequently the 
magnification should read x 3000 in the legends. 
