EDITORIAL. 
336 
cannot be differentiated from it under the microscope. I have found it in an ab¬ 
solutely pure condition in the blood, bile and tissues of organs of cattle that have 
died from the disease. In fact I have proved its specific nature in every way. 
1. Its presence in the tissues of cattle diseased with Texas fever, killed a few 
hours before death. 
2. By pure cultivations from those same tissues. 
3. Its pathogenetic action on ground squirrels, which it kills in forty-eight 
hours. 
4. By inducing Texas fever in cattle, and the demonstration of the same 
germs again in their tissues, and by cultures from the same. 
I have said that it cannot be distinguished from the germ of hog cholera 
under the microscope, nor by its growth on agar-agar, or in boullion, but on pota¬ 
toes it at once differentiates itself, being of a delicate straw color, while that of 
hog cholera grows with a sort of coffee-drab color—a friend suggests the term of 
‘'boarding-house coffee” as the most descriptive. In gelatine I cannot yet test 
it, as my rooms are still too warm. 
That this is the first discovery of this germ is shown by a glance at the litera¬ 
ture. Detmers has found a bacillus. See Report of Department of Agriculture, 
1884, p. 431, and that of 1880-81, p. 296, w plate. 
Salmon describes a “ diplococcus ,”—see report of 1883 —that it has a “figure 
8 form" and “ without any power of movement f p. 35. 
This germ is not a “diplococcus;” it has not a “figure 8 form,” and it has 
independ mt movement , as has that of hog cholera. A fuller description of this germ 
will follow in due time. 
I remain, sir, yours very truly, 
Frank S. Billings, 
Director Patho-Biological Laboratory, State University, Lincoln, Neb. 
While we take great pleasure in publicly acknowledging our 
appreciation both of our correspondent’s work and that of his 
antagonist, we cannot help profoundly regretting the hostile dis¬ 
position which has been generated in the course of their investi¬ 
gations, and especially that this antagonism should have gone so 
far as to have culminated in public challenges, issued through the 
daily press, by which public discussions are called for, in which 
the confirmation of their opposing views is to be sought for from 
a tribunal composed of men who know nothing of the subject. 
We are sure that this is a wrong way to discover truth, and one 
that can result in no profit either to the common welfare or to the 
subject in question. And an exchange brings us information of 
another emeute, in which the alleged discovery of a vaccine is 
placed in doubt and a public demonstration asked for. All this 
may be well in a sense, and no doubt it devolves on Dr. Billings 
