In the formation of vinegar in contact with air the alcohol
disappears, and is replaced by acetic acid. The air has thus given up
something to the wine. Atmospheric air every one knows to be a mixture of
nitrogen and oxygen, the nitrogen in the proportion of four-fifths of the
total volume, and the oxygen of one-fifth. Well, in the transformation
of wine into vinegar the nitrogen remains inactive. It is the oxygen
alone which enters into combination with the alcohol. You ask for the
proof of this? Take a bottle of wine turned sour, a bottle which at the
same time is stopped hermetically; if the oxygen of the air contained in
the bottle has combined with the alcohol, then, instead of air, there
will be nothing in the bottle but nitrogen gas. Turn the bottle upside
down and open it in a basin of water. The water of the basin will rush
into the bottle to fill the partial vacuum created by the disappearance
of the oxygen. The volume of water which enters the bottle is
precisely equal to a fifth part of the total original volume of the air which
the bottle contained at the time when it was closed. Moreover, it is
easy to show that the gas which remains in the bottle has the properties
of nitrogen gas. A lighted match is extinguished in it as if plunged
into water, and a bird dies immediately in it of asphyxia.
If we
confine our knowledge to what has gone before, it would seem that alcohol
diluted with water and exposed to the air ought to furnish acetic acid. It is
not so, however. Pure water alcoholised to the degree of ordinary wines may
remain for whole years in contact with the air, without the least
acetification. In this difference between natural wine and pure water
alcoholised, and exposed to contact with air, we touch upon a vital point in
the phenomena of fermentation. The celebrated theory of Liebig, which Pasteur
was destined to overthrow, might be thus summed up:--If pure alcoholised
water cannot become sour in contact with air, as is the case with wine, it is
because the pure alcoholised water lacks the albuminoid substance which
exists in the wine in a state of chemical alteration, and which is a ferment
capable of causing the oxygen of the air to combine with the alcohol. And
the proof, according to Liebig, that things act rigorously thus is, that
if you add to the mixture of water and alcohol a little flour, or a
little meat-juice, or even a minute quantity of any vegetable juice,
the acetic fermentation arises, as if by compulsion. In other words, by
the addition of a small quantity of any nitrogenised substance in
process of alteration, you cause the union of the oxygen of the air with
the alcohol.
There is doubtless always in the wine, when it turns
sour, a necessary intermediary, producing the fixation of the oxygen of the
air; since in no circumstances can pure alcohol, diluted to any degree
whatever with pure water, transform itself into vinegar. But this
necessary intermediary is not, as the German theory would have it, a
dead albuminoid substance; it is a plant, and of all plants one of
the simplest and most minute, which has been known from time
immemorial under the name of flower of vinegar. This little fungus is
invariably present on the surface of a wine which is being transformed
into vinegar. Liebig was not ignorant of this, but he regarded it as
a simple coincidence. Do we not know, said he, that whenever an
infusion of organic matter is exposed to the air it becomes covered with
a cryptogamic vegetation, or is invaded by a crowd of animalculæ? Is
not vinegar a vegetable infusion? Vinegar affords a refuge to the flower
of vinegar, just as it gives refuge to what are called the little eels
of vinegar.
We can appreciate here the uncertainties of pure
observation. The great art--and no one practised it better than
Pasteur--consists in instituting decisive experiments which leave no room for
an inexact interpretation of facts. These decisive proofs of the true
part played by the little microscopic fungus, by this flower of
vinegar, this mycoderma aceti, are thus formulated by Pasteur. It is
but another example of the method which he used in alcoholic, lactic,
and tartaric fermentations. The theories of Berzelius, of
Mitscherlich, and of Liebig were destined again to receive the rudest shocks
by the demonstration of these rigorous facts.
Let us place a little
wine in a bottle, then hermetically seal it, and leave it to itself. In these
conditions the wine becomes sour. But if we take the precaution of putting
the bottle into hot water, so that the wine and the air in the bottle may be
heated for some instants to a temperature of 60° Centigrade, and if, after
cooling, we leave the bottle to itself, the wine in these conditions will
never become transformed into vinegar. The heating, however, must have
left intact the albuminoid or nitrogenous substances contained in
the wine. These, then, cannot constitute the ferment of the vinegar.
Can it be maintained that by heating the wine to 60° we have altered
the albuminoid matter, which is, on this account, no longer able to act
as a ferment, or, in other words, no longer able to determine the union of
the oxygen of the air with the alcohol? This hypothesis falls to pieces
before the following experiment. Open the bottle, blow into it with bellows,
so that the once heated wine shall come into contact with ordinary air, and
the acetification of the wine will take place.
But the master experiment
is the following. We have seen that pure alcoholised water never turns sour
unless some albuminoid matter is introduced into it. Pasteur saw that this
albuminoid matter might be completely suppressed and replaced by saline
crystallisable substances, alkaline and earthy phosphates, to which has been
added a little phosphate of ammonia. In these conditions, especially if
the alcoholised water be acidulated by small quantities of pure
acetic acid, one actually sees the mycoderm developing, and the
alcohol transforming itself into acetic acid. It is not possible to
demonstrate in a more convincing manner that the albuminoid matters of the
wine are not in this case the acetic ferment. These albuminoid matters,
however, contribute to the acetic fermentation, but only as being an aliment
to the mycoderma aceti, and notably a nitrogenous aliment. The true
and only ferment of vinegar is the little fungus; it is the great agent
of the phenomenon; it, indeed, accomplishes all.
Is there not a great
charm in seeing an obscure subject clearly illuminated by facts well
understood and well interpreted? If in a bottle containing wine and air and
raised to a temperature of 50° or 60° the wine never turns sour, it is
because the germs of the mycoderma aceti, which the wine and the air hold in
suspension, are deprived of all vitality by the heat. Placed, however, in
contact with ordinary air, this once-heated wine can turn sour; because,
though the germs of the mycoderma aceti contained at first in the wine are
killed, this is not the case with those derived from the surrounding air.
Pure alcoholised water never turns sour, even in contact with ordinary
air, and with whatever germs this air may carry, or that may be found in
the dust of the vessels which receive it. The reason is that these
germs cannot become fertile because of the absence of their
indispensable food. Wine in bottles well filled and laid flat do not acetify;
this is because the mycoderm cannot multiply for lack of oxygen. Without
doubt the air constantly penetrates through the pores of the cork, but
always in such feeble quantities that the colouring matters of the wine,
and other more or less oxydisable constituents, take possession of
it without leaving the smallest quantity for the germs of the
mycoderm which are generally suspended in the wine. When the bottle is
upright the conditions are quite altered. The desiccation of the cork
renders it much more permeable to the air, and the germs of the mycoderm on
the surface of the liquid, if any exist there, are enveloped by
air.
Thus, to recapitulate in a few words the principles which have
just been established; it is easy to see that the formation of vinegar
is always preceded by the development, on the surface of the wine, of
a little plant formed of strangulated particles, of an extreme
tenuity, and the accumulation of which sometimes takes the form of a
hardly visible veil, sometimes of a wrinkled film of very slight
thickness, and greasy to the touch, because of the various fatty matters
which the plant contains.
This cryptogam has the singular property of
condensing considerable quantities of oxygen and of provoking the _fixation_
of this gas upon the alcohol, which is thereby transformed into acetic acid.
The little mycoderm is not less exacting than larger vegetables. It must
have its appropriate aliments. Wine offers them in abundance:
nitrogenous matters, the phosphates of magnesia and of potash. The
mycoderm thrives, moreover, in warm climates. To cultivate it in
temperate regions like ours it is well to warm artificially the places where
it is cultivated. But if wine contains within itself all the
elements necessary to the life of the little mycoderm, this life is
further promoted by rendering the wine more acid through the addition of
acetic acid.
What, then, can be more simple than to produce vinegar
from wine--a manufacture which justly makes the reputation of the town of
Orleans? Take some wine, and after having mixed with it one-fourth or
one-third of its volume of vinegar already formed, sow on its surface the
little plant which does the work of acetification. It is only necessary
to skim off, by means of a wooden spatula, a little of the mycodermic
film from a liquid covered with it, and to transfer it to the liquid to
be acetified. The fatty matters which it contains render the wetting of it
difficult. Thus, when we plunge into the liquid the spatula covered with the
film, the latter detaches itself and spreads out over the surface instead of
falling to the bottom. When we operate in summer, or in a room heated to 15°
or 25° Centigrade in winter, in twenty-four or forty-eight hours at most, the
mycoderm covers the whole liquid, so easy and rapid is its development. After
some days all the wine has become vinegar.
On one occasion, in a
discussion which he was holding at the Academy of Sciences, Pasteur, wishing
to affirm the prodigious activity of the life and multiplication of this
little organism, expressed himself thus:--
'I would undertake in the
space of twenty-four hours to cover with mycoderma aceti a surface of vinous
liquid as large as the hall in which we are here assembled. I should only
have to sow in it the day before almost invisible particles of newly-formed
mycoderma aceti.'
Let the reader try to imagine the millions upon
millions of little mycoderma particles which would come to life in that one
day.
But how is the mycoderm seed to be obtained in the first
instance? Nothing more simple. The mycoderma aceti is one of those
little so-called 'spontaneous' productions which are sure to appear
of themselves on the surface of liquids or infusions suitable to
their development. In wine, in vinegar, or suspended in air,
everywhere around us, in our towns, in our houses, there exist germs of
this little plant. If we wish to procure some fresh mycoderm it is
only necessary to put a mixture of wine and vinegar into a warm place. In
a few days, generally, if not always, there appear here and there
little greyish patches scattering the light instead of regularly
reflecting it, as does the surrounding liquid. These specks go on
increasing progressively and rapidly. This is the mycoderma aceti raised
from the seeds which the wine or the added vinegar contained, or which
the air deposited; just as we see a field covered with divers weeds
by seeds naturally distributed in the earth, or which have been brought to
it by the wind or by animals. Even in this last circumstance the comparison
holds good, for after you have put wine or vinegar in a warm place there soon
appear, whence we know not, little reddish flies, so commonly seen in vinegar
manufactories, and in all places where vegetable matter is turning sour. With
their feet, or with their probosces, these flies transport the
seed.
* * * * *
At
Orleans the process for the manufacture of vinegar is very simple. Barrels
ranged over each other have on each of their vertically-placed bottoms a
circular opening some centimeters in diameter, and a smaller hole adjacent,
called _fausset_, for the air to pass in and out when the large opening is
closed, either by the funnel, through which the wine is introduced, or by the
syphon, which is used for drawing off the vinegar. These barrels, of which
the capacity is 230 litres, are half filled. The manual labour consists in
keeping up a suitable temperature in the vessel, and in drawing from it every
eight days about eight or ten litres of vinegar, which are replaced by eight
or ten litres of wine.
A barrel in which this give-and-take of wine
and vinegar goes on is technically called a 'mother.' The starting of a
'mother' is not a rapid process. We begin by introducing into the barrel 100
litres of very good and very limpid vinegar; then two litres only of wine
are added. Eight days after, three litres of wine are added, a week
later four or five, until the barrel contains about 180 to 200 litres.
Then for the first time vinegar is drawn off in sufficient quantity to
bring back the volume of the liquid to about 100 litres. At this moment
the labours of the 'mother' begin. Henceforward ten litres of vinegar
may be drawn off every eight days, to be replaced by ten litres of
wine. This is the maximum that a cask can yield in a week. When the
casks work badly, as is often the case, it is necessary to diminish
their production.
This Orleans system has many drawbacks. It requires
three or four months to prepare what is called a 'mother,' which must be
nourished with wine _very_ regularly once a week under penalty of seeing
it lose all its power. Then it is necessary to continue the manufacture at
all times, whether the vinegar be required or not. To reconstitute a
'mother,' one must begin from the very beginning, a process which involves a
loss of three or four months' time. Lastly--a condition which is at times
very inconvenient--a 'mother' cannot be transported from one place to
another, or even from one part of the same locality to another. The 'mother,'
in fact, must rest immovable.
Pasteur advised the suppression of the
'mothers.' He recommended an apparatus, which is simply a vat, placed in a
chamber the temperature of which can be raised to 20° or 25° Centigrade. In
these vats vinegar already formed is mixed with wine. On the surface is sown
the little plant which converts the wine into vinegar. The mode of sowing it
has been already explained. The acetification begins with the
development of the plant.
A great merchant of Orleans, who had from
the first adopted Pasteur's process, and who had won the prize offered by the
'Society for the Encouragement of National Industry' for a manufactory
perfected after these principles, has stated that at the end of nine or ten
days, sometimes even in eight, all the acetified wine is converted
into vinegar. From a hundred litres of wine he drew off ninety-five
litres of vinegar. After the great rise of temperature observed at the
moment of the formation of the vinegar, and which is caused by the
chemical union of the alcohol and the oxygen of the air, the vinegar is
allowed to cool. It may then be drawn from the vat, introduced into
barrels, refined, and straightway delivered, fit for consumption. When the
vat is quite emptied, and well cleaned, a new mixture is made of
vinegar and wine, the little plant is sown as before, and the same facts
are reproduced in the second as in the first
operation.
* * * * *
In
the vessels where vinegar is preserved, whether in the manufactories, in
private houses, or in grocers' shops, it often happens that the liquid
becomes turbid, and impoverished in an extraordinary manner; it even ends in
putrefaction, if a remedy be not promptly applied. Pasteur has pointed out
the cause of these phenomena. After the alcohol has become acetic acid by the
combustive action of the mycoderm, the question remains, what becomes of
the mycoderm? Most frequently it falls to the bottom of the vessel, having
no more work to accomplish. This is a phase of the manufacture which must be
watched with care. It is shown by the experiments of Pasteur that the
mycoderma aceti can live on vinegar already formed, maintaining its power of
fixing the oxygen on certain constituents of the liquid. In this case the
acetic acid itself is the seat of the chemical action--in other words, the
oxygen unites with the carbon of the acetic acid, and transforms it into
carbonic acid, and as the acetic acid has a composition which can be
represented by carbon and water, it follows that if the combustion is allowed
to take its course, instead of vinegar we have eventually nothing but water
mixed with a small proportion of nitrogenous and mineral matters, and the
remains of the mycoderm. We have thus an ordinary organic infusion
exempt from all acidity, and one which could not be better fitted to
become the prey of the vibrios of putrefaction or of the aerobic mucors.
By these mucors, moreover, which form a film on the surface of the
liquid after the mycoderm has fallen, the anaerobic vibrios, protected
from the action of the air, can come into active existence. Here we
find ourselves in presence of one of those double phenomena, of
putrefaction in the deeper parts of the liquid, and of combustion at the
surface which is in contact with the air. Nothing is more prejudicial to
the quality of the vinegar than the setting in of this combustion
after the vinegar has been formed, and when it contains no more alcohol.
The first materials of the vinegar upon which the oxygen transmitted by
the mycoderm fixes are, in fact, the ethereal and aromatic
constituents which give to vinegar its chief value.
Another cause of
the deterioration of the quality of vinegar, which is sometimes very annoying
to the manufacturer, consists in the frequent presence of little eel-like
organisms, very curious when viewed with a strong magnifier. Their bodies are
so transparent that their internal organs can be easily distinguished. These
eel-like creatures multiply with extraordinary rapidity. Certainly there is
not a single barrel of vinegar manufactured by the Orleans system which does
not contain them in alarming numbers. Prior to Pasteur's investigations,
the ignorance regarding these organisms was such that they were
actually considered necessary to the production of the vinegar; whereas
they are, on the contrary, most inimical to it, and must, if possible,
be got rid of. This is, moreover, rendered desirable by the
repugnance which is naturally felt to using a liquid defiled by the presence
of such animalcules--a repugnance which becomes almost insurmountable
to anyone who has once seen through a microscope the swarms contained in a
drop of vinegar. The mischief wrought by these little beings in the
manufacture of vinegar results from the fact that they require air to live.
The effect can easily be perceived by filling to the brim a bottle of
vinegar, corking it, and then comparing it with a similar bottle half filled
with the same vinegar, and left uncorked in contact with the air. In the
first bottle, the motions of the eel-like creatures become gradually slower,
until after a few days they cease to multiply and fall lifeless to the bottom
of the vessel. In the second bottle, on the contrary, they continue to swarm
and move about. This need of oxygen is further demonstrated by the fact that,
if the vinegar reaches a certain depth in the bottle, life is suspended in
the lower parts, and the little eel-like organisms, in order to breathe
more freely, form a crawling zone in the upper layers of the
liquid.
Connecting these observations with the other fact that the
vinegar is formed by the action of the mycodermic film on its surface, we
can understand at once that the mycoderm and the little eels
continually carry on a struggle for existence, since both of these
living things--the one animal the other vegetable--imperiously demand the
same aliment, oxygen. They live, moreover, in the same superficial layers,
a circumstance which gives rise to very curious phenomena. When, for
one reason or another, the film of mycoderm is not formed, or when
there is any delay in its production, the little eels invade in such
great numbers the upper layers of the liquid that they absorb all the
oxygen. The little plant has in consequence great difficulty in
developing itself or even in beginning its life. Reciprocally, when the work
of acetification is active, and when the mycoderm has occupied the
upper layers, it gradually drives away the eels, which take refuge, not
deep down, where they would perish, but against the moist sides of
the barrel or the vat. There they form a thick whitish scum all in
motion. It is a very curious spectacle. Here their enemy, the mycoderm, can
no longer injure them to the same extent, since they are surrounded
with air; and here they wait with impatience for the moment when they
can again take their place in the liquid, and, in their turn, fight
against the mycoderm. In Pasteur's process, where the vats are very
often cleansed, it is easy to keep them free from these little
animalcules; they have not time to multiply to a hurtful extent. Indeed, if
the operation be well conducted, they do not make their appearance at
all.
* * * * *
Nearly
all Pasteur's publications have had from the moment of their appearance to
undergo the severest criticism. Their novelty caused them to clash with the
prejudices and errors current in science. His researches on fermentation
provoked lively opposition. Liebig did not accept without recrimination a
series of researches which concurred in upsetting the theory he had
enunciated and defended in all his works. After having kept silence for ten
years, he published, at Munich, where he was professor, a long memoir
entirely directed against Pasteur's results. In 1870, on the eve of the war,
Pasteur, who was at that time returning from a scientific journey into
Austria, determined to pass by Munich, with the view of attempting to
convince his distinguished adversary. Liebig received him with great
courtesy, but, hardly recovered from an illness, he alleged his convalescence
as a reason for declining all discussion.
Then followed the
Franco-German war. Hardly was it terminated when Pasteur brought before the
Academy of Sciences at Paris a defence of what he had published, as a sort of
challenge to his illustrious opponent. The memoir of Liebig was filled with
the most skilful arguments.
'I pondered it for nearly ten years before
producing it,' he wrote. Pasteur, putting aside all subtleties of argument,
went straight to the two objections of the German chemist which lay at the
root of the discussion.
It may be remembered that one of the most
decisive proofs by which Pasteur overthrew Liebig's theory resulted from the
experiments in which by the aid of mineral bodies and fermentable matter he
produced a special living ferment for each definite fermentation. By
removing all nitrogenous organic matter, which in Liebig's theory
constitutes the ferment, Pasteur established, at one and the same time, the
life of the ferment and the absence of all action of albuminoid matter
in process of alteration. Liebig here formally contested the fact
that Pasteur had been able to produce yeast and alcoholic fermentation in
a sweetened mineral medium by sowing therein an infinitesimal quantity
of yeast. It is certain that, ten years previously, when Pasteur
announced the production of yeast life and alcoholic fermentation under
such conditions, his experiment was one so difficult to perform that
it sometimes happened to Pasteur himself to be unable to reproduce it.
The cells of yeast sown in the sweetened mineral medium found
themselves often associated with other microscopic organisms, which
were singularly hurtful to the life of the yeast. Pasteur was at this
period far from being familiarised with the delicacy which such
experiments require, and he did not yet know all the precautions indicated
later on, which were indispensable to success. Though in his original
memoir of 1860 Pasteur had pointed out the difficulties of his
experiment, these difficulties existed nevertheless. Liebig took hold of
them with skill, exaggerated them; saw, so to speak, nothing but them;
and declared that the results announced never could have been obtained.
But in 1871 the fundamental experiment of Pasteur, on the life of yeast in
a sweetened mineral medium, had become a trifle for him. He knew exactly how
to form media deprived of all foreign germs, how to prepare pure yeast, and
how to prevent the introduction of new germs, which could develop in the
liquids and hinder the life of the yeast.
'Choose,' said he to Liebig,
'from the members of the Academy one or several, and ask them to decide
between you and me. I am ready to prepare before you and before them, in a
sweetened mineral medium, as much yeast as you can reasonably ask for, and
with substances provided by yourself.'
Liebig's second objection had
reference to acetic fermentation. The process of acetification known as that
of 'beech shavings' is widely practised in Germany and even in France. It
consists in causing alcohol diluted with water and with the addition of some
_milliemes_ of acetic acid to trickle slowly into barrels or vats filled with
shavings of beech, either massed together without order or disposed in
layers after having been rolled up like the spring of a watch.
Openings formed in the sides of the barrel, and in a double bottom upon
which the shavings rest, permit the access of the air, which rises into
the barrel as it would in a chimney, and yields all or part of its
oxygen to the alcohol to convert it into acetic acid. All writers prior
to Pasteur, and Liebig in particular, maintained that the shavings
acted like porous bodies in the same manner as finely divided platinum.
The acetic acid, they said, was formed by a direct oxidation, without
any other influence than the porosity of the wood. This view of the
subject was rendered plausible by the fact that in many manufactories
the alcohol employed is that of distillation, which contains no
albuminoid substances. Moreover, the duration of the shavings is in a
sense indefinite.
According to Pasteur, the shavings perform only a
passive part in the manufacture. They promote the division of the liquid and
cause a considerable augmentation of the surface exposed to the air.
They moreover serve as a support for the ferment, which is still,
according to him, the mycoderma aceti, under the mucous form proper to it
when submerged.
Certainly appearances were far from being favourable
to this view. When the shavings of a barrel which has been in work for
several months or even for several years are examined, they are found to
be extraordinarily clean. It might be said that they had just
been carefully washed. Pasteur has shown that this is but a
deceptive appearance, and that in reality these shavings are partly or
wholly covered with a mucous film of mycoderma aceti of excessive
tenuity. It is necessary to scrape the surface of the wood with a scalpel
and examine the scrapings with the microscope to be assured of the
presence of this pellicle.
Liebig, who somewhere speaks, not without a
certain contempt, of the microscope, denied formally the exactitude of these
assertions.
'With diluted alcohol, which is used for the rapid
manufacture of vinegar,' he wrote, 'the elements of nutrition of the mycoderm
are excluded, and the vinegar is made without its intervention.'
He asserted also in his memoir of 1869 that he had consulted the head
of one of the principal manufactories of vinegar in Germany, that in
this manufactory the diluted alcohol did not receive during the whole
course of its transformation any foreign addition, and that beyond the air
and the surfaces of wood and charcoal--for charcoal is sometimes
associated with the beech shavings--nothing can act upon the alcohol. Liebig
added that the director of the manufactory did not believe at all in
the presence of the mycoderm, and that finally he, Liebig, in examining
the shavings which had been used for twenty-five years in the
manufactory, saw no trace of mycoderm on their surface.
The argument
appeared conclusive. How, in fact, could we understand the production of a
plant containing within itself nitrogen and mineral elements which was
nevertheless to be nourished by water and alcohol.
'You do not take into
account,' replied Pasteur, 'the nature of the water which serves to dilute
your alcohol. This water, like all ordinary waters, even the purest, contains
salts of ammonia and mineral matters which are capable of nourishing the
plant. Finally, you have not rightly examined with the microscope the surface
of the shavings, otherwise you would have seen the little particles of the
mycoderma aceti united, in some cases, to a thin film which can even be
lifted up. I propose to you, moreover, to send to the Academic
Commission charged with the decision of the debate, some shavings that you
have obtained yourself in the manufactory at Munich, and in the
presence of its director. I will undertake to prove before the members
of the commission the presence of the mycoderm on the surface of
these shavings.'
Liebig did not accept this challenge. To-day the
question is decided.
_THE QUESTION OF
SPONTANEOUS GENERATION._
'All dry bodies,' said Aristotle, 'which
become damp, and all damp bodies which are dried, engender animal life.'
Bees, according to Virgil, are produced from the corrupted entrails of a
young bull. At the time of Louis XIV. we were hardly more advanced. A
celebrated alchemist doctor, Van Helmont, wrote: 'The smells which rise from
the bottom of morasses produce frogs, slugs, leeches, grasses, and
other things.' But most extraordinary of all was the true recipe given by
Van Helmont for producing a pot of mice. It suffices to press a dirty
shirt into the orifice of a vessel containing a little corn. After
about twenty-one days, the ferment proceeding from the dirty shirt
modified by the odour of the corn effects the transmutation of the wheat
into mice. Van Helmont, who asserted that he had witnessed the fact,
added with assurance:
'The mice are born full grown; there are both
males and females. To reproduce the species it suffices to pair
them.'
'Scoop out a hole,' said he again, 'in a brick, put into it some
sweet basil, crushed, lay a second brick upon the first so that the hole
may be perfectly covered. Expose the two bricks to the sun, and at the end
of a few days the smell of the sweet basil, acting as a ferment, will change
the herb into real scorpions. An Italian naturalist, Redi, was the first to
subject this question of spontaneous generation to a more attentive
examination. He showed that maggots in meat are not spontaneously generated,
but that they are the larvæ of flies' eggs. To prevent the production of
maggots, Redi showed that it was only necessary to surround the meat with
fine gauze before exposing it to the air. As no flies could alight upon meat
thus protected, there were no eggs deposited, and consequently neither larvæ
nor maggots. But at the moment when the doctrine of spontaneous generation
began to lose ground by the limitation of its domain, the discovery of the
microscope brought to this doctrine new and formidable support. In presence
of the world of animalculæ, the partisans of spontaneous generation raised
a note of triumph. 'We may have been mistaken,' they said, 'as to the origin
of mice and maggots, but is it possible to believe that microscopic organisms
are not the outcome of spontaneous generation? How can we otherwise explain
their presence and rapid multiplication in all dead animal or vegetable
matter in process of decomposition?'
Buffon lent the authority of his
name to the doctrine of spontaneous generation. He even devised a system to
explain this hypothesis. In 1745 two ecclesiastics entered upon an eager
controversy for and against this question. While the English Catholic priest
Needham adopted the theory of spontaneous generation, the Italian
priest Spallanzani energetically opposed it; but while in the eyes of
the public the Italian remained master of the dispute, his success was
more apparent than real, more in word than in deed.
The problem was
again brought forward in a more emphatic manner in 1858. M. Pouchet, director
of the Museum of Natural History at Rouen, in addressing the Academy of
Sciences, declared that he had succeeded in demonstrating in a manner
absolutely certain the existence of microscopic living organisms, which had
come into the world without germs, and consequently without parents similar
to themselves.
How came Pasteur to throw himself into this discussion, at
first sight so far removed from his other occupations? The results of
his researches on fermentation led him to it as a sort of duty. He
was carried on by a series of logical deductions. Let us recall to
mind, for example, the experiment in which Pasteur exposed to the heat of
the sun water sweetened with sugar and mixed with phosphates of potash and
magnesia, a little sulphate of ammonia, and some carbonate of lime. In these
conditions the lactic fermentation was often seen to develop itself--that is
to say, the sugar became lactic acid, which combined with the lime of the
carbonate to form lactate of lime. This salt crystallises in long needles,
and ends sometimes by filling the whole vase, while a little organised living
thing is at the same time produced and multiplied. If the experiment is
carried on further, another fermentation generally succeeds to this one.
Moving vibrios make their appearance and multiply, the lactate of lime
disappears, the fluidity returns to the mass, and the lactate finds itself
replaced by butyrate of lime. What a succession of strange phenomena! How
did life appear in this sweetened medium, composed originally of
such simple elements, and apparently so far removed from all production
of life? This lactic ferment, these butyric vibrios, whence do they
come? Are they formed of themselves? or are they produced by germs? If
the latter, whence do the germs come? The appearance of living
organised ferments had become for Pasteur the all-important question, since
in all fermentations he had observed a correlation between the
chemical action set up and the presence of microscopic organisms. Prior to
the establishment of the facts already mentioned, these difficulties
did not exist. The theory of Liebig was universally accepted.
Thus the
question as to the origin of microscopic organisms and the part played by
them in fermentation was imposed as a necessity on Pasteur. He could not
proceed further in his researches without having solved this
question.
In the month of October, 1857, Pasteur was called to Paris.
After having been made dean at an incredibly early age, he was now, at
the age of thirty-five, entrusted with the scientific studies at the
Ecole Normale Superieure. But if the position was flattering, it did
not give to Pasteur what he most desired. As he had no Professor's
chair, he had no laboratory. In those days science, and the higher
education in science, were at a discount. It was the period when Claude
Bernard lived in a small damp laboratory, when M. Berthelot, though
known through his great labours, was still nothing more than an assistant
in the College de France.
At the time here referred to, the Minister
of Public Instruction said to Pasteur, 'There is no clause in the budget to
grant you 1,500 francs a year to defray the expense of experiments.' Pasteur
did not hesitate to establish a laboratory at his own expense in one of
the garrets of the Ecole Normale. We can readily imagine the modesty
of such an establishment in such a place. Dividing his time between
his professional duties and his laboratory experiments, Pasteur never
went out but to talk over his daily researches with M. Biot, M. Dumas, M.
de Senarmont, and M. Balard. M. Biot especially was his habitual confidant.
The day when M. Biot learned that Pasteur proposed to study the obscure
question of spontaneous generation, he strongly dissuaded him from entangling
himself in this labyrinth. 'You will never escape from it,' said he, 'you
will only lose your time;' and when Pasteur attempted some timid observations
with the view of showing that in the order of his studies it was
indispensable for him to attack this problem, M. Biot grew angry. Although
endowed, as Sainte-Beuve has said, with all the qualities of curiosity, of
subtlety, of penetration, of ingenious exactitude, of method, and of
perspicuity, with all the qualities, in short, essential and secondary, M.
Biot treated the project of Pasteur as a presumptuous
adventure.
Bolder than M. Biot, but with a circumspection always alive,
M. Dumas declared to Pasteur, without, however, further insisting upon
the point, that he would not advise anyone to occupy himself too long
with such a subject. M. de Senarmont alone took the part of Pasteur,
and said to M. Biot:
'Let Pasteur alone. If there is nothing to be
found in the path which he has entered upon, do not be alarmed, he will not
continue in it. But,' added he, 'I should be surprised if he found nothing in
it.'
M. Pouchet had previously stated the problem with
precision:
'The opponents of spontaneous generation assert that the germs
of microscopic organisms exist in the air, which transports them to
a distance. What, then, will these opponents say if I succeed in
inducing the generation of living organisms, while substituting artificial
air for that of the atmosphere?'
Pouchet then devised this ingenious
experiment. He filled a bottle with boiling water, hermetically sealed it
with the greatest care, and plunged it upside down into a basin of mercury.
When the water was quite cold he uncorked the bottle under the metal, and
introduced into it half a litre of pure oxygen gas, which is as necessary to
the life of the smallest microscopic organism as it is to that of the
larger animals and vegetables. Up to this time there was nothing in the
vessel but pure water and oxygen. Pouchet then introduced a minute bunch
of hay which had been enclosed in a corked bottle, and exposed in a
stove for a long time to a temperature of more than 100 degrees. At the
end of eight days a mouldiness was developed in this infusion of
hay. 'Where does this come from?' cried M. Pouchet triumphantly.
Certainly not from the oxygen, which had been prepared from a chemical
compound at the temperature of incandescence. The water had been
equally deprived of germs, since at the boiling temperature all germs
would have been destroyed. The hay also could not have contained them, for
it had been taken from a stove heated to 100 degrees. As it was
urged, however, that certain organisms could resist this temperature,
M. Pouchet heated the hay from 200 to 300 degrees, or to any
temperature that might be desired.
Pasteur came to disturb the triumph
of M. Pouchet.
In a lecture which he gave at the Sorbonne in 1864, before
a large assembly composed of savants, philosophers, ladies, priests,
and novelists--Alexandre Dumas was in the first row--all showing
eager interest in the problems to be dealt with in the lecture,
Pasteur thus criticised the experiment of Pouchet: 'This experiment
is irreproachable, but irreproachable only on those points which
have attracted the attention of its author. I will demonstrate before
you that there is a cause of error which M. Pouchet has not
perceived, which he has not in the least suspected, which no one before
him suspected, but which renders his experiment as completely illusory
as that of Van Helmont's pot of dirty linen. I will show you where
the mice got in. I will prove to you, in short, that it is the
mercury which carries the germs into the vessels, or, rather, not to go
beyond the demonstrated fact, the dust which is suspended in the
air.'
To render visible this floating dust, Pasteur caused the hall
to be darkened, and pierced the obscurity by a beam of light. There then
appeared, dancing and twirling in the beam, thousands of little particles of
dust.
'If we had time to examine them well,' continued Pasteur, 'we
should see them, though agitated with various movements, falling
downwards more or less quickly. It is thus that all objects become covered
with dust--the furniture, the table, the mercury in this basin. Since
this mercury was taken from the mine, how much dust must have fallen
upon it, to say nothing of all that has been intimately mixed up with
it during the numerous manipulations to which it has been subjected in
the laboratory? It is not possible to touch this mercury, to place the
hand in it, or a bottle, without introducing into the interior of the
basin the dust which lies on its surface. You will now see what takes
place.'
Projecting, in the darkness, the beam of light upon the basin
of mercury, the liquid metal shone forth with its usual
brilliancy. Pasteur then sprinkled some dust upon the mercury, and, plunging
a glass rod into it, the dust was seen to travel towards the spot
where the rod entered the mercury, and to penetrate into the space
between the glass and the metal.
'Yes,' exclaimed Pasteur with a voice
which gave evidence of the sincerity of his conviction, 'yes, M. Pouchet had
removed the germs from the water and from the hay, but he had neglected to
remove the dust from the surface of the mercury. This is the cause of his
error; this is what has vitiated his whole arrangement.'
Pasteur then
instituted experiments exactly similar to those of Pouchet, but taking care
to remove every cause of error which had escaped the latter. He employed a
glass bulb with a long neck, which he bent, and connected with a tube of
platinum placed in a furnace, so that it could be heated nearly to redness.
In the bulb he placed some very putrescible liquids--urine for example. When
the furnace which surrounded the platinum tube was in action, Pasteur boiled
the liquid for some minutes, then he allowed it to cool, keeping the fire
around the platinum tube still active. During the cooling of the bulb
the external air was introduced, after having first travelled through
the red-hot platinum tube. The liquid was thus placed in contact with
air whose suspended germs were all burnt up.
In an experiment thus
carried out, the urine remains unchanged--it undergoes only a very slight
oxidation, which darkens its colour a little--but it exhibits no kind of
putrefaction. If it be desired to repeat this experiment with alkaline
liquids, such as milk, the temperature must be raised a little above the
boiling point--a condition easily realised with the apparatus just described.
It is only necessary to connect with the free extremity of the
platinum tube a glass tube bent at right angles, and to plunge the
latter to a depth of some centimeters into a basin of mercury. In
these circumstances ebullition goes on under a pressure greater than that
of the atmosphere, consequently at a temperature higher than 100
degrees Centigrade.
It remained, however, to be proved that the
floating dust of the air embraces the germs of the lower organisms. Through a
tube stopped with cotton wool, Pasteur, by means of an aspirator, drew
ordinary air. In passing through the wool it was filtered, depositing therein
all its dust. Taking a watch-glass, Pasteur placed on it a drop of
water in which he steeped the cotton wool stopper and squeezed out of
it, upon a glass slide, a drop of water which contained a portion of
the intercepted dust. He repeated this process until he had extracted
from the cotton nearly all the intercepted dust. The operation is
simple and easily executed. Placing the glass slide with a little of
the soiled liquid under a microscope, we can distinguish particles of
soot, fragments of silk, scraps of wool, or of cotton. But, in the midst
of this inanimate dust, living particles make their appearance--that is to
say, organisms belonging to the animal or vegetable kingdom, eggs of
infusoria, and spores of cryptogams. Germs, animalculæ, flakes of mildew,
float in the atmosphere, ready to fall into any appropriate medium, and to
develop themselves at a prodigious rate.
But are these apparently
organised particles which are found thus associated with amorphous dust
indeed the germs of microscopic living beings? Granting the experiment
devised by Pasteur to verify that of Pouchet to be irreproachable, is
Pasteur's interpretation of it rigorously true? In presence of the problem of
the origin of life, all hypotheses are possible as long as the truth has not
been clearly revealed. Truly, it might be argued, if fermentation be caused
by germs, then the air which has passed through a red-hot platinum
tube cannot provoke fermentation, or putrefaction, or the formation
of organisms, because the germs of these last, which were suspended in
the air, have lost all vitality. But what right have you to speak of
germs? How do you know that the previous existence of germs is necessary
to the appearance and development of microscopic organisms? May not
the prime mover of the life of microscopic organisms be some
appropriate medium started into activity by magnetism, electricity, or even
ozone? Now, by the passing of the air through your red-hot platinum tube
these active powers are destroyed, and the sterility of your bulb of
urine has nothing surprising in it.
The partisans of spontaneous
generation had often employed this apparently formidable reasoning, and
Pasteur thought it necessary to strengthen the proof that the cotton wool
through which his air had filtered was really charged with germs.
By
an ingenious method he sowed the contents of the cotton wool in the same
liquids that had been rendered sterile by boiling. The liquids became
fertile, even more fertile than if they had been exposed to the free contact
of atmospheric air. Now, what was there in the dust contained in the cotton
wool? Only amorphous particles of silk, cotton, starch; and, along with
these, minute bodies which, by their transparency and their structure, were
not to be distinguished from the germs of microscopic organisms. The presence
of imponderable fluids could not here be pleaded.
Nevertheless,
fearing that determined scepticism might still attribute to the cotton wool
an influence of some sort on account of its being an organised substance,
Pasteur substituted for the stoppers of cotton wool stoppers of asbestos
previously heated to redness. The result was the
same.
* * * * *
Wishing
still further to dispose of the hypothesis that, in ordinary air, an unknown
something existed which, independent of germs, might be the cause of the
observed microscopic life, Pasteur began a new series of experiments as
simple as they were demonstrative. Having placed a very putrescible
infusion--in other words, one very appropriate to the appearance of
microscopic organisms--in a glass bulb with a long neck, by means of the
blowpipe, he drew out this neck to a very small diameter, at the same time
bending the soft glass to and fro, so as to form a sinuous tube. The
extremity of this narrow tube remained open. He then boiled his liquid for
some minutes until the vapour of the water came out in abundance through the
narrow open tube. In these conditions the liquid in the bulb, however
putrescible, is preserved indefinitely without the least alteration. One may
handle it, transport it from place to place, expose it to every variety of
climate, place it in a stove with a temperature of thirty or forty degrees,
the liquid remains as clear as it was at first. A slight oxidation of
the constituents of the liquid, is barely perceptible. In this
experiment the ordinary air, entering suddenly at the first moment, finds in
the bulb a liquid very near the boiling temperature; and when the
liquid is so far cooled that it can no longer destroy the vitality of
the germs, the entrance of the air is correspondingly retarded, so that
the germs capable of acting upon the liquid, and of producing in it
living organisms, are deposited in the bends of the still moist tube,
not coming into contact with the liquid at all.
If, after remaining
for weeks, months, or even years, in a heated chamber, the sinuous neck of
the bulb is snipped off by a file in the vertical part of the stem, after
twenty-four or forty-eight hours there begin to appear mildew, mucors,
bacteria, infusoria, exactly as in the case of infusions recently exposed to
the contact of ordinary air.
The same experiments may be repeated with
slightly alkaline liquids, such as milk, the precaution being taken of
raising them to a temperature higher than that of 100 degrees
Centigrade.
The great interest of Pasteur's method consists 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. Of gas, electricity, magnetism, ozone,
things known or unknown, there is nothing in ordinary atmospheric air which,
apart from these solid particles, can cause the fermentation or putrefaction of
the infusions. |
|
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기