Louis Pasteur, by Rene
Vallery-Radot
PREFACE.
In the _salon_ of a
distinguished man, or of a great writer, there is often to be found a person
who, without being either a fellow-worker or a disciple, without even
possessing the scientific or literary qualities which might explain his
habitual presence, lives nevertheless in complete familiarity with the man
whom all around him call 'dear master.' Whence comes this intimate one? who
is he? what is his business? He is only known as a friend of the house. He
has no other title, and he is almost proud of having no other. Stripped of
his own personality, he speaks only of the labours and the success of his
illustrious friend, in the radiance of whose glory he moves
with delight.
The author of this work is a person of this description.
Intimately connected with the life of M. Pasteur, and a constant inmate of
his laboratory, he has passed happy years near this great investigator,
who has discovered a new world--the world of the infinitely little.
Since the first studies of M. Pasteur on molecular dissymmetry, down to
his most recent investigations on hydrophobia, on virulent diseases, and
on the artificial cultures of living contagia, which have been
converted by such cultures into veritable vaccines--passing by the
intermediate celebrated experiments on spontaneous generation, fermentation,
the diseases of wine, the manufacture of beer and vinegar, and the
diseases of silkworms--the author of these pages has been able, if not
to witness all, at least to follow in its principal developments
this uninterrupted series of scientific conquests.
'What a beautiful
book,' he remarked one day to M. Pasteur, 'might be written about all
this!'
'But it is all in the Comptes-rendus of the Academy of
Sciences.'
'It is not for the readers of the Comptes-rendus that such a
book needs to be written, but for the great public, who know that you have
done great things, but who know it only vaguely, by the records of
journals, or by fragments of biography. The persons are few who know the
history of your discoveries. What was your point of departure? How have
you arrived at such and such principles, and at the consequences
which flow from these principles? What is the connection and rigorous
bond of your method? These are the things which it would be interesting
to put together in a book which would have some chance of enduring as
an historic document.'
'I could not waste my time in going back upon
things already accomplished.'
'No; but my desire is that someone else
should consecrate his time to the work. And listen,' added this friend, with
audacious frankness--'do you know by whom, in my opinion, this book ought to
be written? By a man who, without having been in any way trained to follow in
your footsteps, is animated by the most lively desire to understand
the course which you have pursued; who, while living at your side, has
been each day impregnated with your method and your ideas; who, having
had the happiness of comprehending your life and its achievements, does
not wish to confine the pleasure thus derived to himself
alone.'
'Where, then,' interrupted Pasteur with a kindly smile, not
without a tinge of irony, 'is this man, at once so happy, and so impatient
to share his happiness with others?'
'He is now pleading his cause
before you. Yes, I would gladly attempt such a work. I have seen your efforts
and observed your success. The experiments which I have not witnessed you
have always freely explained to me, with that gift of clearness which
Vauvenargues called the "polish" of masters.[1] Initiated by affection, I
would make myself initiator by admiration. It would be the history of a
learned man by an ignorant one. My ignorance would save me from dwelling too
strictly or too long on technical details. With the exposition of your
doctrine I would mingle some fragments of your biography. I would pass from
a discovery to an anecdote, and so arrange matters as to give the book not
only the character of a familiar scientific conversation, which would hardly
be more than the echo of what I have learnt while near you, but also to make
it a reflex of your life.'
'You should postpone that until I am no longer
here.'
'Why so? Why, before assigning to them their places, should we
wait till those whose names will endure have disappeared from the
scene? No; it is you, living, that I wish to paint--you, in full work, in
the midst of your laboratory. And, in addition to all other
considerations, I would add, that your presence in the flesh will be the
guarantee of my exactitude.'
_July
1883._
FOOTNOTE:
[1] 'Vernis des
maitres.'
CONTENTS.
PAGE
INTRODUCTION, BY PROFESSOR TYNDALL
xi
RECOLLECTIONS OF CHILDHOOD AND
YOUTH--FIRST
DISCOVERIES 1
FERMENTATION
40
ACETIC FERMENTATION-- THE
MANUFACTURE OF VINEGAR 66
THE QUESTION OF
SPONTANEOUS GENERATION 89
STUDIES ON
WINE 112
THE
SILKWORM-DISEASE 127
DECISIVE
EXPERIMENTS 164
STUDIES ON
BEER 168
VIRULENT
DISEASES--SPLENIC
FEVER, SEPTICÆMIA 176
FOWL
CHOLERA 212
ATTENUATED
VIRUS, OR VACCINATION-- THE FOWL CHOLERA
VACCINE 220
THE VACCINE OF SPLENIC
FEVER 231
THE RETURN TO
VIRULENCE 246
ETIOLOGY OF SPLENIC
FEVER 250
METHOD OF DISCUSSION AND
CONTRADICTIONS 262
THE LABORATORY OF THE ECOLE
NORMALE-- VARIOUS
STUDIES--HYDROPHOBIA 271
INTRODUCTION.
In the early part of the present year the French
original of this work was sent to me from Paris by its author. It was
accompanied by a letter from M. Pasteur, expressing his desire to have the
work translated and published in England. Responding to this desire, I placed
the book in the hands of the Messrs. Longman, who, in the exercise of their
own judgment, decided on publication. The translation was confided, at
my suggestion, to Lady Claud Hamilton.
The translator's task was not
always an easy one, but it has, I think, been well executed. A few slight
abbreviations, for which I am responsible, have been introduced, but in no
case do they affect the sense. It was, moreover, found difficult to render
into suitable English the title of the original: '_M. Pasteur, Histoire d'un
Savant par un Ignorant_.' A less piquant and antithetical English title
was, therefore, substituted for the French one.
This filial tribute,
for such it is, was written, under the immediate supervision of M. Pasteur,
by his devoted and admiring son-in-law, M. Valery Radot. It is the record of
a life of extraordinary scientific ardour and success, the picture of a mind
on which facts fall like germs upon a nutritive soil, and, like germs so
favoured, undergo rapid increase and multiplication. One hardly knows which
to admire most--the intuitive vision which discerns in advance the new issues
to which existing data point, or the skill in device, the adaptation of
means to ends, whereby the intuition is brought to the test and ordeal
of experiment.
In the investigation of microscopic organisms--the
'infinitely little,' as Pouchet loved to call them--and their doings in this
our world, M. Pasteur has found his true vocation. In this broad field it
has been his good fortune to alight upon a crowd of connected problems of
the highest public and scientific interest, ripe for solution, and requiring
for their successful treatment the precise culture and capacities which he
has brought to bear upon them. He may regret his abandonment of molecular
physics; he may look fondly back upon the hopes with which his researches on
the tartrates and paratartrates inspired him; he may think that great things
awaited him had he continued to labour in this line. I do not doubt it. But
this does not shake my conviction that he yielded to the natural affinities
of his intellect, that he obeyed its truest impulses, and reaped its
richest rewards, in pursuing the line that he has chosen, and in which
his labours have rendered him one of the most conspicuous
scientific figures of this age.
With regard to the earliest labours of
M. Pasteur, a few remarks supplementary to those of M. Radot may be
introduced here. The days when angels whispered into the hearkening human
ear, secrets which had no root in man's previous knowledge or experience, are
gone for ever. The only revelation--and surely it deserves the name--now open
to the wise arises from 'intending the mind' on acquired knowledge.
When, therefore, M. Radot, following M. Pasteur, speaks with such
emphasis about 'preconceived ideas,' he does not mean ideas without
antecedents. Preconceived ideas, if out of deference to M. Pasteur the term
be admitted, are the vintage of garnered facts. We in England
should rather call them inductions, which, as M. Pasteur truly says,
inspire the mind, and shape its course, in the subsequent work of deduction
and verification.
At the time when M. Pasteur undertook his
investigation of the diseases of silkworms, which led to such admirable
results, he had never seen a silkworm; but, so far from this being considered
a disqualification, M. Dumas regarded his freedom from preconceived ideas a
positive advantage. His first care was to make himself acquainted with
what others had done. To their observations he added his own, and
then, surveying all, came to the conclusion that the origin of the
disease was to be sought, not in the worms, not in the eggs, but in the
moths which laid the eggs. I am not sure that this conclusion is
happily described as 'a preconceived idea.' Every whipster may have
his preconceived ideas; but the divine power, so largely shared by
M. Pasteur, of distilling from facts their essences--of extracting
from them the principles from which they flow--is given only to a
few.
* * * * *
With
regard to the discovery of crystalline facets in the tartrates, which has
been dwelt upon by M. Radot, a brief reference to antecedent labours may be
here allowed. It had been discovered by Arago, in 1811, and by Biot, in 1812
and 1818, that a plate of rock-crystal, cut perpendicular to the axis of the
prism, possessed the power of rotating the plane of polarisation through an
angle, dependent on the thickness of the plate and the refrangibility of the
light. It had, moreover, been proved by Biot that there existed two species
of rock-crystal, one of which turned the plane of polarisation to the right,
and the other to the left. They were called, respectively, right-handed
and left-handed crystals. No external difference of crystalline form
was at first noticed which could furnish a clue to this difference
of action. But closer scrutiny revealed upon the crystals minute
facets, which, in the one class, were ranged along a right-handed, and,
in the other, along a left-handed spiral. The symmetry of the
hexagonal prism, and of the two terminal pyramids of the crystal, was
disturbed by the introduction of these spirally-arranged facets. They
constituted the outward and visible sign of that inward and invisible
molecular structure which produced the observed action, and difference of
action, on polarised light.
When, therefore, the celebrated
Mitscherlich brought forward his tartrates and paratartrates of ammonia and
soda, and affirmed them to possess the same atoms, the same internal
arrangement of atoms, and the same outward crystalline form, one of them,
nevertheless, causing the plane of polarisation to rotate, while the other
did not, Pasteur, remembering, no doubt, the observations just described,
instituted a search for facets like those discovered in rock-crystal, and
which, without altering chemical constitution, destroyed crystalline
identity. He first found such facets in the tartrates, while he
subsequently proved the neutrality of the paratartrate to be due to the
equal admixture of right-handed and left-handed crystals, one of which,
when the paratartrate was dissolved, exactly neutralised the
other.
Prior to Pasteur the left-handed tartrate was unknown. Its
discovery, moreover, was supplemented by a series of beautiful researches on
the compounds of right-handed and left-handed tartaric acid; he
having previously extracted from the two tartrates, acids which, in
regard to polarised light, behaved like themselves. Such was the
worthy opening of M. Pasteur's scientific career, which has been dwelt upon
so frequently and emphatically by M. Radot. The wonder, however, is,
not that a searcher of such penetration as Pasteur should have
discovered the facets of the tartrates, but that an investigator so powerful
and experienced as Mitscherlich should have missed them.
The idea of
molecular dissymmetry, introduced by Biot, was forced upon Biot's mind by the
discovery of a number of liquids, and of some vapours, which possessed the
rotatory power. Some, moreover, turned the plane of polarisation to the
right, others to the left. Crystalline structure being here out of the
question, the notion of dissymmetry, derived from the crystal, was
transferred to the molecule. 'To produce any such phenomena,' says Sir John
Herschel, 'the individual molecule must be conceived as unsymmetrically
constituted.' The illustrations employed by M. Pasteur to elucidate this
subject, though well calculated to give a general idea of dissymmetry, will,
I fear, render but little aid to the reader in his attempts to realise
_molecular_ dissymmetry. Should difficulty be encountered here at the
threshold of this work, I would recommend the reader not to be daunted by
it, or prevented by it from going further. He may comfort himself by
the assurance that the conception of a dissymmetric molecule is not a
very precise one, even in the mind of M. Pasteur.
One word more with
regard to the parentage of preconceived ideas. M. Radot informs us that at
Strasburg M. Pasteur invoked the aid of helices and magnets, with a view to
rendering crystals dissymmetrical at the moment of their formation. There
can, I think, be but little doubt that such experiments were suggested by the
pregnant discovery of Faraday published in 1845. By both helices and magnets
Faraday caused the plane of polarisation in perfectly neutral liquids and
solids to rotate. If the turning of the plane of polarisation be a
demonstration of molecular dissymmetry, then, in the twinkling of an eye,
Faraday was able to displace symmetry by dissymmetry, and to confer upon
bodies, which in their ordinary state were inert and dead, this power
of rotation which M. Pasteur considers to be the exclusive attribute
of life.
The conclusion of M. Pasteur here referred to, which M. Radot
justly describes as 'worthy of the most serious consideration,' is sure to
arrest the attention of a large class of people, who, dreading 'materialism,'
are ready to welcome any generalisation which differentiates the living world
from the dead. M. Pasteur considers that his researches point to an
irrefragable physical barrier between organic and inorganic nature. Never, he
says, have you been able to produce in the laboratory, by the ordinary
processes of chemistry, a dissymmetric molecule--in other words, a substance
which, in a state of solution, where molecular forces are paramount, has the
power of causing a polarised beam to rotate. This power belongs exclusively
to derivatives from the living world. Dissymmetric _forces_,
different from those of the laboratory, are, in Pasteur's mind, the agents
of vitality; it is they that build up dissymmetric molecules which
baffle the chemist when he attempts to reproduce them. Such molecules
trace their ancestry to life alone. 'Pourrait-on indiquer une separation
plus profonde entre les produits de la nature vivante, et ceux de la
nature minerale, que cette dissymmetrie chez les uns, et son absence chez
les autres?' It may be worth calling to mind that molecular dissymmetry is
the _idea_, or _inference_, the observed rotation of the plane
of polarisation, by masses of sensible magnitude, being the _fact_
on which the inference is based.
That the molecule, or unit brick, of
an organism should be different from the molecule of a mineral is only to be
expected, for otherwise the profound distinction between them would
disappear. And that one of the differences between the two classes of
molecules should be the possession, by the one, of this power of rotation,
and its non-possession by the other, would be a fact, interesting no doubt,
but not surprising. The critical point here has reference to the power and
range of chemical processes, apart from the play of vitality. Beginning with
the elements themselves, can they not be so combined as to produce organic
compounds? Not to speak of the antecedent labours of Wohler and others in
Germany, it is well known that various French investigators, among whom are
some of M. Pasteur's illustrious colleagues of the Academy, have succeeded in
forming substances which were once universally regarded as capable of being
elaborated by plants and animals alone. Even with regard to the rotation of
the plane of polarisation, M. Jungfleisch, an extremely able pupil of the
celebrated Berthelot, affirms that the barrier erected by M. Pasteur has
been broken down; and though M. Pasteur questions this affirmation, it is
at least hazardous, where so many supposed distinctions between
organic and inorganic have been swept away, to erect a new one. For my part,
I frankly confess my disbelief in its permanence.
Without waiting for
new facts, those already in our possession tend, I think, to render the
association which M. Pasteur seeks to establish between dissymmetry and life
insecure. Quartz, as a crystal, exerts a very powerful twist on the plane of
polarisation. Quartz dissolved exerts no power at all. The molecules of
quartz, then, do not belong to the same category as the crystal of which they
are the constituents; the former are symmetrical, the latter is
dissymmetrical. This, in my opinion, is a very significant fact. By the act
of crystallisation, and without the intervention of life, the forces of
molecules, possessing planes of symmetry, are so compounded as to build up
crystals which have no planes of symmetry. Thus, in passing from the
symmetrical to the dissymmetrical, we are not compelled to interpolate new
forces; the forces extant in mineral nature suffice. The reasoning which
applies to the dissymmetric crystal applies to the dissymmetric molecule.
The dissymmetry of the latter, however pronounced and complicated,
arises from the composition of atomic forces which, when reduced to
their most elementary action, are exerted along straight lines. In 1865
I ventured, in reference to this subject, to define the position which
I am still inclined to maintain. 'It is the compounding, in the
organic world, of forces belonging equally to the inorganic that
constitutes the mystery and the miracle of vitality.'[2]
Add to these
considerations the discovery of Faraday already adverted to. An electric
current is not an organism, nor does a magnet possess life; still, by their
action, Faraday, in his first essay, converted over one hundred and fifty
symmetric and inert aqueous solutions into dissymmetric and active
ones.[3]
Theory, however, may change, and inference may fade away,
but scientific experiment endures for ever. Such durability belongs,
in the domain of molecular physics, to the experimental researches of
M. Pasteur.
* * * *
*
The weightiest events of life sometimes turn upon small hinges;
and we now come to the incident which caused M. Pasteur to quit a line of
research the abandonment of which he still regrets. A German manufacturer of
chemicals had noticed that the impure commercial tartrate of lime, sullied
with organic matters of various kinds, fermented on being dissolved in water
and exposed to summer heat. Thus prompted, Pasteur prepared some pure,
right-handed tartrate of ammonia, mixed with it albuminous matter, and found
that the mixture fermented. His solution, limpid at first, became turbid, and
the turbidity he found to be due to the multiplication of a microscopic
organism, which found in the liquid its proper aliment. Pasteur recognised in
this little organism a _living ferment_. This bold conclusion was
doubtless strengthened, if not prompted, by the previous discovery of
the yeast-plant--the alcoholic ferment--by Cagniard-Latour and
Schwann.
Pasteur next permitted his little organism to take the
carbon necessary for its growth from the pure paratartrate of ammonia.
Owing to the opposition of its two classes of crystals, a solution of
this salt, it will be remembered, does not turn the plane of
polarised light either to the right or to the left. Soon after
fermentation had set in, a rotation to the left was noticed, proving that
the equilibrium previously existing between the two classes of
crystals had ceased. The rotation reached a maximum, after which it was
found that all the right-handed tartrate had disappeared from the
liquid. The organism thus proved itself competent to select its own food.
It found, as it were, one of the tartrates more digestible than the
other, and appropriated it, to the neglect of the other. No difference
of chemical constitution determined its choice; for the elements, and
the proportions of the elements, in the two tartrates were identical.
But the peculiarity of structure which enabled the substance to rotate
the plane of polarisation to the right, also rendered it a fit aliment
for the organism. This most remarkable experiment was successfully
made with the seeds of our common mould, _Penicillium glaucam_.
Here
we find Pasteur unexpectedly landed amid the phenomena of fermentation. With
true scientific instinct he closed with the conception that ferments are, in
all cases, living things, and that the substances formerly regarded as
ferments are, in reality, the food of the ferments. Touched by this wand,
difficulties fell rapidly before him. He proved the ferment of lactic acid to
be an organism of a certain kind. The ferment of butyric acid he proved to be
an organism of a different kind. He was soon led to the fundamental
conclusion that the capacity of an organism to act as a ferment depended on
its power to live, without air. The fermentation of beer was sufficient
to suggest this idea. The yeast-plant, like many others, can live
either with or without free air. It flourishes best in contact with
free air, for it is then spared the labour of wresting from the malt
the oxygen required for its sustenance. Supplied with free air,
however, it practically ceases to be a ferment; while in the brewing vat,
where the work of fermentation is active, the budding _torula_ is
completely cut off by the sides of the vessel, and by a deep layer of
carbonic acid gas, from all contact with air. The butyric ferment not only
lives without air, but Pasteur showed that air is fatal to it. He
finally divided microscopic organisms into two great classes, which he
named respectively _ærobies_ and _anærobies_, the former requiring
free oxygen to maintain life, the latter capable of living without
free oxygen, but able to wrest this element from its combinations with
other elements. This destruction of pre-existing compounds and formation
of new ones, caused by the increase and multiplication of the
organism, constitute the process of fermentation.
Under this head are
also rightly ranked the phenomena of putrefaction. As M. Radot well expresses
it, the fermentation of sugar may be described as the putrefaction of sugar.
In this particular field M. Pasteur, whose contributions to the subject are
of the highest value, was preceded by Schwann, a man of great merit, of whom
the world has heard too little.[4] Schwann placed decoctions of meat
in flasks, sterilised the decoctions by boiling, and then supplied
them with calcined air, the power of which to support life he showed to be
unimpaired. Under these circumstances putrefaction never set in. Hence the
conclusion of Schwann, that putrefaction was not due to the contact of air,
as affirmed by Gay-Lussac, but to something suspended in the air which heat
was able to destroy. This something consists of living organisms which
nourish themselves at the expense of the organic substance, and cause its
putrefaction.
* * * *
*
The grasp of Pasteur on this class of subjects was embracing.
He studied acetic fermentation, and found it to be the work of a
minute fungus, the _mycoderma aceti_, which, requiring free oxygen for
its nutrition, overspreads the surface of the fermenting liquid. By
the alcoholic ferment the sugar of the grape-juice is transformed
into carbonic acid gas and alcohol, the former exhaling, the
latter remaining in the wine. By the _mycoderma aceti_ the wine is, in
its turn, converted into vinegar. Of the experiments made in
connection with this subject one deserves especial mention. It is that
in which Pasteur suppressed all albuminous matters, and carried on the
fermentation with purely crystallisable substances. He studied the
deterioration of vinegar, revealed its cause, and the means of preventing it.
He defined the part played by the little eel-like organisms which sometimes
swarm in vinegar casks, and ended by introducing important ameliorations and
improvements in the manufacture of vinegar. The discussion with Liebig and
other minor discussions of a similar nature, which M. Radot has somewhat
strongly emphasized, I will not here dwell upon.
* * * * *
It was impossible for an inquirer like
Pasteur to evade the question--Whence come these minute organisms which are
demonstrably capable of producing effects on which vast industries are built
and on which whole populations depend for occupation and sustenance? He
thus found himself face to face with the question of spontaneous
generation, to which the researches of Pouchet had just given fresh
interest. Trained as Pasteur was in the experimental sciences, he had an
immense advantage over Pouchet, whose culture was derived from the sciences
of observation. One by one the statements and experiments of Pouchet
were explained or overthrown, and the doctrine of spontaneous
generation remained discredited until it was revived with ardour, ability,
and, for a time, with success, by Dr. Bastian.
A remark of M. Radot's
on page 103 needs some qualification. 'The great interest of Pasteur's method
consists,' he says, 'in its proving unanswerably that the origin of life in
infusions which have been heated to the boiling point is solely due to the
solid particles suspended in the air.' This means that living germs cannot
exist _in the liquid_ when once raised to a temperature of 212° Fahr. No
doubt a great number of organisms collapse at this temperature; some
indeed, as M. Pasteur has shown, are destroyed at a temperature 90°
below the boiling point. But this is by no means universally the case.
The spores of the hay-bacillus, for example, have, in numerous
instances, successfully resisted the boiling temperature for one, two, three,
four hours; while in one instance _eight hours'_ continuous boiling
failed to sterilise an infusion of desiccated hay. The knowledge of this
fact caused me a little anxiety some years ago when a meeting was
projected between M. Pasteur and Dr. Bastian. For though, in regard to the
main question, I knew that the upholder of spontaneous generation could
not win, on the particular issue touching the death temperature he
might have come off victor.
The manufacture and maladies of wine next
occupied Pasteur's attention. He had, in fact, got the key to this whole
series of problems, and he knew how to use it. Each of the disorders of wine
was traced to its specific organism, which, acting as a ferment, produced
substances the reverse of agreeable to the palate. By the simplest of
devices, Pasteur, at a stroke, abolished the causes of wine disease.
Fortunately the foreign organisms which, if unchecked, destroy the best
red wines are extremely sensitive to heat. A temperature of 50°
Cent. (122° Fahr.) suffices to kill them. Bottled wines once raised
to this temperature, for a single minute, are secured from
subsequent deterioration. The wines suffer in no degree from exposure to
this temperature. The manner in which Pasteur proved this, by invoking the
judgment of the wine-tasters of Paris, is as amusing as it
is interesting.
* * * *
*
Moved by the entreaty of his master, the illustrious Dumas,
Pasteur took up the investigation of the diseases of silkworms at a
time when the silk-husbandry of France was in a state of ruin. In doing so
he did not, as might appear, entirely forsake his former line of research.
Previous investigators had got so far as to discover vibratory corpuscles in
the blood of the diseased worms, and with such corpuscles Pasteur had already
made himself intimately acquainted. He was therefore to some extent at home
in this new investigation. The calamity was appalling, all the efforts made
to stay the plague having proved futile. In June 1865 Pasteur betook himself
to the scene of the epidemic, and at once commenced his observations. On the
evening of his arrival he had already discovered the corpuscles, and shown
them to others. Acquainted as he was with the work of living ferments,
his mind was prepared to see in the corpuscles the cause of the
epidemic. He followed them through all the phases of the insect's
life--through the eggs, through the worm, through the chrysalis, through the
moth. He proved that the germ of the malady might be present in the
eggs and escape detection. In the worm also it might elude
microscopic examination. But in the moth it reached a development so distinct
as to render its recognition immediate. From healthy moths healthy eggs
were sure to spring; from healthy eggs healthy worms; from healthy
worms fine cocoons: so that the problem of the restoration to France of
its silk-husbandry reduced itself to the separation of the healthy
from the unhealthy moths, the rejection of the latter, and the
exclusive employment of the eggs of the former. M. Radot describes how this
is now done on the largest scale, with the most satisfactory
results.
The bearing of this investigation on the parasitic theory
of communicable diseases was thus illustrated: Worms were infected by
permitting them to feed for a single meal on leaves over which corpusculous
matter had been spread; they were infected by inoculation, and it was shown
how they infected each other by the wounds and scratches of their own claws.
By the association of healthy with diseased worms, the infection was
communicated to the former. Infection at a distance was also produced by the
wafting of the corpuscles through the air. The various modes in which
communicable diseases are diffused among human populations were illustrated
by Pasteur's treatment of the silkworms. 'It was no hypothetical,
infected medium--no problematical pythogenic gas--that killed the worms.
It was a definite organism.'[5] The disease thus far described is
that called _pebrine_, which was the principal scourge at the time.
Another formidable malady was also prevalent, called _flacherie_, the
cause of which, and the mode of dealing with it, were also pointed out
by Pasteur.
Overstrained by years of labour in this field, Pasteur was
smitten with paralysis in October 1868. But this calamity did not prevent him
from making a journey to Alais in January 1869, for the express purpose of
combating the criticisms to which his labours had been subjected. Pasteur is
combustible, and contradiction readily stirs him into flame. No scientific
man now living has fought so many battles as he. To enable him to render his
experiments decisive, the French Emperor placed a villa at his disposal near
Trieste, where silkworm culture had been carried on for some time at a loss.
The success here is described as marvellous; the sale of cocoons giving to
the villa a net profit of twenty-six millions of francs.[6] From the Imperial
villa M. Pasteur addressed to me a letter, a portion of which I have already
published. It may perhaps prove usefully suggestive to our Indian or
Colonial authorities if I reproduce it here:--
'Permettez-moi de
terminer ces quelques lignes que je dois dicter, vaincu que je suis par la
maladie, en vous faisant observer que vous rendriez service aux Colonies de
la Grande-Bretagne en repandant la connaissance de ce livre, et des principes
que j'etablis touchant la maladie des vers a soie. Beaucoup de ces colonies
pourraient cultiver le murier avec succes, et, en jetant les yeux sur mon
ouvrage, vous vous convaincrez aisement qu'il est facile aujourd'hui,
non-seulement d'eloigner la maladie regnante, mais en outre de donner aux
recoltes de la soie une prosperite qu'elles n'ont jamais
eue.'
* * * * *
The
studies on wine prepare us for the 'Studies on Beer,' which followed the
investigation of silkworm diseases. The sourness, putridity, and other
maladies of beer Pasteur traced to special 'ferments of disease,' of a
totally different form, and therefore easily distinguished from the true
_torula_ or yeast-plant. Many mysteries of our breweries were cleared up by
this inquiry. Without knowing the cause, the brewer not unfrequently incurred
heavy losses through the use of bad yeast. Five minutes' examination with
the microscope would have revealed to him the cause of the badness,
and prevented him from using the yeast. He would have seen the
true _torula_ overpowered by foreign intruders. The microscope is,
I believe, now everywhere in use. At Burton-on-Trent its aid was very soon
invoked. At the conclusion of his studies on beer M. Pasteur came to London,
where I had the pleasure of conversing with him. Crippled by paralysis, bowed
down by the sufferings of France, and anxious about his family at a troubled
and an uncertain time, he appeared low in health and depressed in spirits.
His robust appearance when he visited London, on the occasion of the
Edinburgh Anniversary, was in marked and pleasing contrast with my memory of
his aspect at the time to which I have referred.
* * * * *
While these researches were going on,
the Germ Theory of infectious disease was noised abroad. The researches of
Pasteur were frequently referred to as bearing upon the subject, though
Pasteur himself kept clear for a long time of this special field of inquiry.
He was not a physician, and he did not feel called upon to trench upon
the physician's domain. And now I would beg of him to correct me if,
at this point of the Introduction, I should be betrayed into any
statement that is not strictly correct.
In 1876 the eminent
microscopist, Professor Cohn of Breslau, was in London, and he then handed me
a number of his 'Beitrage,' containing a memoir by Dr. Koch on Splenic Fever
(_Milzbrand_, _Charbon_, Malignant Pustule), which seemed to me to mark an
epoch in the history of this formidable disease. With admirable patience,
skill, and penetration, Koch followed up the life history of _bacillus
anthracis_, the contagium of this fever. At the time here referred to he was
a young physician holding a small appointment in the neighbourhood of
Breslau, and it was easy to predict, as I predicted at the time, that he
would soon find himself in a higher position. When I next heard of him
he was head of the Imperial Sanitary Institute of Berlin. Koch's
recent history is pretty well known in England, while his appreciation by
the German Government is shown by the rewards and honours lately
conferred upon him.
Koch was not the discoverer of the parasite of
splenic fever. Davaine and Rayer, in 1850, had observed the little
microscopic rods in the blood of animals which had died of splenic fever. But
they were quite unconscious of the significance of their observation, and
for thirteen years, as M. Radot informs us, strangely let the matter
drop. In 1863 Davaine's attention was again directed to the subject by
the researches of Pasteur, and he then pronounced the parasite to be
the cause of the fever. He was opposed by some of his
fellow-countrymen; long discussions followed, and a second period of thirteen
years, ending with the publication of Koch's paper, elapsed, before M.
Pasteur took up the question. I always, indeed, assumed that from the
paper of the learned German came the impulse towards a line of inquiry
in which M. Pasteur has achieved such splendid results. Things
presenting themselves thus to my mind, M. Radot will, I trust, forgive me if
I say that it was with very great regret that I perused the
disparaging references to Dr. Koch which occur in the chapter on splenic
fever.
After Koch's investigation, no doubt could be entertained of
the parasitic origin of this disease. It completely cleared up
the perplexity previously existing as to the two forms--the one
fugitive, the other permanent--in which the contagium presented itself. I
may say that it was on the conversion of the permanent hardy form into the
fugitive and sensitive one, in the case of _bacillus subtilis_ and other
organisms, that the method of sterilising by 'discontinuous heating'
introduced by me in February 1877 was founded. The difference between an
organism and its spores, in point of durability, had not escaped the
penetration of Pasteur. This difference Koch showed to be of paramount
importance in splenic fever. He, moreover, proved that while mice and
guinea-pigs were infallibly killed by the parasite, birds were able to defy
it.
And here we come upon what may be called a hand-specimen of the
genius of Pasteur, which strikingly illustrates its quality. Why should
birds enjoy the immunity established by the experiments of Koch? Here is
the answer. The temperature which prohibits the multiplication of
_bacillus anthracis_ in infusions is 44° Cent. (111° Fahr.). The temperature
of the blood of birds is from 41° to 42°. It is therefore close to
the prohibitory temperature. But then the blood globules of a living
fowl are sure to offer a certain resistance to any attempt to deprive
them of their oxygen--a resistance not experienced in an infusion. May
not this resistance, added to the high temperature of the fowl, suffice to
place it beyond the power of the parasite? Experiment alone could answer this
question, and Pasteur made the experiment. By placing its feet in cold water
he lowered the temperature of a fowl to 37° or 38°. He inoculated the fowl,
thus chilled, with the splenic fever parasite, and in twenty-four hours it
was dead. The argument was clinched by inoculating a chilled fowl, permitting
the fever to come to a head, and then removing the fowl, wrapped in
cotton-wool, to a chamber with a temperature of 35°. The strength of the
patient returned as the career of the parasite was brought to an end, and in
a few hours health was restored. The sharpness of the reasoning here is only
equalled by the conclusiveness of the experiment, which is full of
suggestiveness as regards the treatment of fevers in
man.
* * * * *
Pasteur
had little difficulty in establishing the parasitic origin of fowl cholera;
indeed, the parasite had been observed by others before him. But by his
successive cultivations, he rendered the solution sure. His next step will
remain for ever memorable in the history of medicine. I allude to what he
calls 'virus attenuation.' And here it may be well to throw out a few remarks
in advance. When a tree, or a bundle of wheat or barley straw, is burnt, a
certain amount of mineral matter remains in the ashes--extremely small in
comparison with the bulk of the tree or of the straw, but absolutely
essential to its growth. In a soil lacking, or exhausted of, the necessary
mineral constituents, the tree cannot live, the crop cannot grow. Now
contagia are living things, which demand certain elements of life just
as inexorably as trees, or wheat, or barley; and it is not difficult
to see that a crop of a given parasite may so far use up a
constituent existing in small quantities in the body, but essential to the
growth of the parasite, as to render the body unfit for the production of
a second crop. The soil is exhausted, and, until the lost constituent
is restored, the body is protected from any further attack of the
same disorder. Such an explanation of non-recurrent diseases
naturally presents itself to a thorough believer in the germ theory, and
such was the solution which, in reply to a question, I ventured to
offer nearly fifteen years ago to an eminent London physician. To
exhaust a soil, however, a parasite less vigorous and destructive than
the really virulent one may suffice; and if, after having by means of
a feebler organism exhausted the soil, without fatal result, the
most highly virulent parasite be introduced into the system, it will
prove powerless. This, in the language of the germ theory, is the
whole secret of vaccination.
The general problem, of which Jenner's
discovery was a particular case, has been grasped by Pasteur, in a manner,
and with results, which five short years ago were simply unimaginable. How
much 'accident' had to do with shaping the course of his enquiries I know
not. A mind like his resembles a photographic plate, which is ready to accept
and develop luminous impressions, sought and unsought. In the chapter on
fowl cholera is described how Pasteur first obtained his attenuated
virus. By successive cultivations of the parasite he showed, that after
it had been a hundred times reproduced, it continued to be as virulent as
at first. One necessary condition was, however, to be observed. It was
essential that the cultures should rapidly succeed each other--that the
organism, before its transference to a fresh cultivating liquid, should not
be left long in contact with air. When exposed to air for a considerable time
the virus becomes so enfeebled that when fowls are inoculated with it, though
they sicken for a time, they do not die. But this 'attenuated' virus, which
M. Radot justly calls 'benign,' constitutes a sure protection against the
virulent virus. It so exhausts the soil that the really fatal contagium fails
to find there the elements necessary to its reproduction and
multiplication.
Pasteur affirms that it is the oxygen of the air which,
by lengthened contact, weakens the virus and converts it into a true vaccine.
He has also weakened it by transmission through various animals. It was
this form of attenuation that was brought into play in the case of
Jenner.
The secret of attenuation had thus become an open one to Pasteur.
He laid hold of the murderous virus of splenic fever, and succeeded
in rendering it, not only harmless to life, but a sure protection
against the virus in its most concentrated form. No man, in my opinion,
can work at these subjects so rapidly as Pasteur without falling
into errors of detail. But this may occur while his main position
remains impregnable. Such a result, for example, as that obtained in
presence of so many witnesses at Melun must surely remain an
ever-memorable conquest of science. Having prepared his attenuated virus, and
proved, by laboratory experiments, its efficacy as a protective
vaccine, Pasteur accepted an invitation from the President of the Society
of Agriculture at Melun, to make a public experiment on what might
be called an agricultural scale. This act of Pasteur's is, perhaps,
the boldest thing recorded in this book. It naturally caused anxiety
among his colleagues of the Academy, who feared that he had been rash
in closing with the proposal of the President.
But the experiment was
made. A flock of sheep was divided into two groups, the members of one group
being all vaccinated with the attenuated virus, while those of the other
group were left unvaccinated. A number of cows were also subjected to a
precisely similar treatment. Fourteen days afterwards, all the sheep and
all the cows, vaccinated and unvaccinated, were inoculated with a
very virulent virus; and three days subsequently more than two
hundred persons assembled to witness the result. The 'shout of
admiration,' mentioned by M. Radot, was a natural outburst under the
circumstances. Of twenty-five sheep which had not been protected by
vaccination, twenty-one were already dead, and the remaining ones were dying.
The twenty-five vaccinated sheep, on the contrary, were 'in full health
and gaiety.' In the unvaccinated cows intense fever was produced,
while the prostration was so great that they were unable to eat.
Tumours were also formed at the points of inoculation. In the vaccinated
cows no tumours were formed; they exhibited no fever, nor even an
elevation of temperature, while their power of feeding was unimpaired.
No wonder that 'breeders of cattle overwhelmed Pasteur with
applications for vaccine.' At the end of 1881 close upon 34,000 animals had
been vaccinated, while the number rose in 1883 to nearly
500,000.
* * * * *
M.
Pasteur is now exactly sixty-two years of age; but his energy is unabated. At
the end of this volume we are informed that he has already taken up and
examined with success, as far as his experiments have reached, the terrible
and mysterious disease of rabies or hydrophobia. Those who hold all
communicable diseases to be of parasitic origin, include, of course, rabies
among the number of those produced and propagated by a living contagium. From
his first contact with the disease Pasteur showed his accustomed penetration.
If we see a man mad, we at once refer his madness to the state of his brain.
It is somewhat singular that in the face of this fact the virus of a mad dog
should be referred to the animal's saliva. The saliva is, no doubt,
infected, but Pasteur soon proved the real seat and empire of the disorder to
be the nervous system.
The parasite of rabies had not been securely
isolated when M. Radot finished his task. But last May, at the instance of M.
Pasteur, a commission was appointed by the Minister of Public Instruction
in France, to examine and report upon the results which he had up to that
time obtained. A preliminary report, issued to appease public impatience,
reached me before I quitted Switzerland this year. It inspires the sure and
certain hope that, as regards the attenuation of the rabic virus, and the
rendering of an animal, by inoculation, proof against attack, the success of
M. Pasteur is assured. The commission, though hitherto extremely active, is
far from the end of its labours; but the results obtained so far may be thus
summed up:--
Of six dogs unprotected by vaccination, three succumbed to
the bites of a dog in a furious state of madness.
Of eight
unvaccinated dogs, six succumbed to the intravenous inoculation of rabic matter. |
|
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기