716 
JOHN J. REPP. 
as proof of a nontransmissibility from the animal to the human 
being. On the contrary, Smith’s experiments do not indicate 
this, nor does Smith claim that they do. This author says, 
after announcing his experiments, without any reference to these 
experiments, “ It seems to me that, accepting the clinical evi¬ 
dence on hand, bovine tuberculosis may be transmitted to child¬ 
ren when the body is overpowered by large numbers of bacilli^ 
as in udder tuberculosis, or where certain unknown favorable 
conditions exist.” Smith concludes his article by saying, 77 
“ if in this brief summary I have presented nothing but prob¬ 
lems to be solved and doubts to be entertained, I feel quite, 
etc.,” thus indicating that he has proved nothing, but that he 
has only pointed the way toward the proper field of investiga¬ 
tion, something he has certainly done. Dinwiddie does not 
touch upon these points. 
The work of Smith and Dinwiddie, already referred to, 
which points to the conclusion that the bovine tubercle bacilli 
are more virulent 78 fora number of species than the human 
tubercle bacilli and equally virulent 79 for others, certainly war¬ 
rants us, if we draw any conclusion at all with reference to man, 
that the bovine tubercle bacilli are more virulent for man also. 
The extreme susceptibility of man to tuberculosis, indicated by 
the large percentage of the human race suffering from the dis¬ 
ease, would further point to the soundness of such a conclusion. 
Manifestly the opposite conclusion would be eminently unfair. 
It has been intimated by Conn 8 0 that u if the human bacillus is 
only slightly pathogenic for cattle it is at least likely that the 
bovine variety may not be very dangerous to man.” It would 
be as reasonable to say that, inasmuch as the American soldiers 
who at one time during the Philippine War were armed with 
Springfield rifles which were of short range were not dangerous 
to the Filipinos,-neither were the Filipinos at that time armed 
with long range Mauser rifles, dangerous for the American sol¬ 
diers. 
I consider that there is another point worthy of notice. It 
is this : In the comparisons of the virulence of bovine and hu- 
