FOREST AND STREAM 
243 
Sir Trout and His Alleged Goitre 
' h -— 
FAVORS HIGH VELOCITY RIFLE. 
Troupsburg, N. Y., Jan. 30, 1914. 
Editor Forest and Stream : 
I have been reading much in your magazine 
against the use of the high power gun. I would 
like to give a few reasons why I think the high 
power gun the best and safest gun to use. In the 
first place there will be less deer shot that can¬ 
not be tracked and found, when shot with a rifle 
of high velocity. The high power gun using a 
soft pointed bullet is safer when shot in the tim¬ 
ber, as the bullets never glance; they either pene¬ 
trate whatever they come in contact with, or fly 
in pieces. I do not think there is a man living 
who ever shot a gun with a common lead bullet 
but what has heard it go humming through the 
air after it had hit something and then glanced. 
I think any gun that has power enough to kill a 
deer is just as dangerous when fired in the air 
as a high velocity one, and I don’t think it would 
make any difference to the man shot whether the 
gun was fired one or two miles away. 
CASS GRIGGS. 
AN INQUIRY ABOUT WEASELS. 
Editor Forest and Stream: 
It is well known that throughout Canada, and 
in the northern parts of the United States, the 
weasels become white in winter, whereas in the 
southern, warmer parts of the country they do 
not do so, but remain brown. I am anxious to 
trace the southern boundary of the region in 
which these animals make this change—become 
white. I should be grateful, therefore, if any 
naturalist, trapper, or other reader of this 
journal, who believes he lives near this sought- 
for southern boundary, would send me word 
upon a post-card, or by letter, whether the 
weasels in his locality turn completely white, or 
only partly so, or whether some turn and other* 
do not; and also whether the change appears to 
him to depend upon the coming of snow—that is, 
does its time vary with the comparative earliness 
or lateness of a season? 
ERNEST INGERSOLL. 
NO GUNS FOR ALIENS. 
A bill was introduced recently in the New 
Jersey legislature, which, if it becomes a law, will 
make it illegal for any unnaturalized foreign-born 
person to hunt, capture or kill any wild bird or 
animal, except in defense of personal property, 
and will make it unlawful for any such person 
either to own or possess a shotgun or rifle. 
Another bill will make it unlawful, if it passes, 
for the state to issue gunners’ licenses to unnatu¬ 
ralized foreign-born persons. 
The legislation was introduced in New Jersey 
after a similar law had been declared constitu¬ 
tional in Pennsylvania. The majority of game- 
law breakers are said to be foreigners who either 
are ignorant of the laws or else indifferent to 
them, and it is thought that the new measures to 
check offenders against the game laws will have 
the hearty endorsement of legitimate sportsmen 
in the state. - 
AGAINST CITY WARDENS. 
Neuse, N. C., Feb. 10, 1914. 
Editor Forest and Stream: I wish there were 
game wardens with assistants (where necessary) 
to visit the country frequently and prevent hunt¬ 
ing out of season. When the warden lives in a 
city and depends on information sent him, there 
is nothing done to protect game. People will not 
be willing to incur the ill will of those who are 
continually shooting game, those who ought to 
set a better example, too. 
Please agitate this matter. Your influence 
Will be far-reaching and a change may be brought 
about. 
LAW ENFORCEMENT. 
New York, Feb. 5. 
Editor Forest and Stream: The recent out¬ 
break against the brook trout, as a possible trans¬ 
mitter of infectious maladies, like goitre, leads 
every angler at all acquainted with the nature 
and habits of that aristocrat of our Adirondack 
spring-fed brooks to take up the cudgel in his 
defense, and use every available means to make 
his assailants, whoever they may be, prove the 
absolute correctness of their statements, by sci¬ 
entific microscopic tests, .before creating any 
further prejudice against the propagation, rear¬ 
ing and maintenance of this splendid game fish. 
Now comes Dr. H. R. Gaylord, of Buffalo, 
director of the New York State Institute for the 
Study of Malignant Diseases, who says that such 
maladies “have been successfully transmitted to 
dogs and rats,” and, therefore, hastens to the 
conclusion that “susceptible human beings, drink¬ 
ing water coming from fish hatcheries, which un¬ 
doubtedly contain the infected agents would ac¬ 
quire goitre.” The doctor also states that sev¬ 
eral towns and cities in this state get water from 
streams along which there are fish hatcheries, 
and, further, that “It has taken six years of care¬ 
ful work to determine the scope of this disease 
in connection with fish hatcheries,” and, therefore, 
somewhat hastily decides that unless research be 
immediately instituted to determine how fish cul¬ 
ture may be carried on without the communica¬ 
tion of this disease the artificial propagation of 
trout will have to be abandoned. 
A careful reading of the doctor’s statement 
will show that it deals very largely in generalities 
and is extremely deficient in details. He states 
that three examples of this malady have been 
found in wild fish. One occurring in a brook 
trout “which may have been planted from a 
hatchery;” another in a whitefish from Lake 
Keuka, and a third in a land-locked salmon from 
Lake Sebago, Maine. But the doctor does not 
say whether he personally examined these three 
specimens or not, although he says that six 
years have been required to “put over” anything 
against a single brook trout, and that possibly 
a hatchery fish. “It occurs,” says this authority, 
“in ponds and troughs, of whatever construction, 
in which fish are reared and fed the ordinary 
foods of fish culture like raw liver and other 
meats.” 
The widespread Issuance of the foregoing dic¬ 
tum is very much regretted by several eminent 
chemists and pathologists of this city, who have 
freely discussed the matter with the writer and 
at considerable length. One of these experts 
said yesterday: “These statements in the news¬ 
papers made on the authority of Dr. Gaylord are 
very misleading and likely to cause much needless 
worry and trouble. The doctor is evidently one 
of the now extremely limited class of pathologists 
whose views as to the actual excitants of goitre 
involve the assumption of some form of living 
micro-organism , capable, under suitable condi¬ 
tions of inciting the body cells to their prolifera¬ 
tive capacities, which are the chief characteristic 
of cancer. 
Dr. Gaylord and those who hold this view re¬ 
gard the processes of cancer formation as 
analogous with those involved in all infective 
diseases, those of parasitical origin. Now, near¬ 
ly all modern pathologsts and chemists, and in 
fact, all with whom I now come in contact pro¬ 
fessionally, hold an entirely different view re¬ 
garding these excitants, and do not believe that 
goitre or similar affections of any kind, even the 
most malignant, are induced or perpetuated by 
processes similar to those involved and observed 
in infectious disease. 
While to the non-professional journal or news¬ 
paper reader this explanation may contain a few 
long or unusual words and phrases, he must 
know that they are made necessary by the ex¬ 
tremely technical and unusual character of the 
important subject matter involved. 
Well, then, in the first place, we most em¬ 
phatically deny that goitre of any kind observed 
in any fish or animal tissue even the most viru¬ 
lent examples, as I said before, is induced or 
perpetuated by processes analogous with those 
involved in infection, but do hold that the ex¬ 
citants to these formations are to be sought 
in the inherited and inherent potencies of the 
body cells themselves, set free from their normal 
physiological restraints, under a variety of ex¬ 
ternal conditions. This is termed the theory of 
the biological origin of tumors, or the theory of 
their intrinsic excitants. 
MICRO-ORGANISMS AS EXCITANTS.-—BACTERIA. 
It is not at all surprising that micro-organisms 
should have been thought of as possibly direct 
excitants of goitre in fishes, especially in view of 
a certain crude analogy between some phases of 
this growth and metastasis, and some forms of 
infection with metastasis. 
Now, bacteria of many kinds have, in fact been 
frequently found in tumors of many sorts; but 
there is no conclusive reason at hand for the be¬ 
lief that they are ever of any direct significance, 
save as chance contaminations of vulnerable tis¬ 
sues, or as incitants of secondary and complicated 
lesions. 
That being the case, why could not the adult 
brook trout reared artificially in ponds and fed 
upon beef liver or other slaughter house products, 
and thus deprived of the splendid and varied liv¬ 
ing prey captured in its cool, mountain haunts, 
such as larvae bugs, worms, flies and craw-fish, 
and all taken after the most active exertions, ac¬ 
tually bring upon himself formations caused by 
these so-called “inherited and inherent potencies” 
of its own body cells, set free from normal re¬ 
straints by reason of the strange and probably 
unhealthful external conditions surrounding it, 
during such confinement and unusual feeding? 
“A great deal has been written lately,” added 
my bacteriologist friend, “about certain struc¬ 
tures which are frequently found in or between 
the goitre cells, which have hastily been assumed 
to be parasites and supposed to be protozoa. 
These ‘cell inclusions’ are mostly shown by the 
microscope to be larger or smaller rounded bodies, 
with or without nuclei; sometimes with double 
contours. They are usually sharply outlined 
against the cell protoplasm in which they lie; 
often crowding the nucleous to one side; often 
(Continued on page 259.) 
