Mr. Lawson Tait and the Germ 
Theory of Disease. 
BY 
WILLIAM R. PRYOR, M. D. 
REPRINTED PROM THE 
Nsto York IHeBfcal journal 
for December 22, 1894. Reprinted from the New York Medical Journal 
for December 22, 189Jf. 
MR. LAWSON TAIT 
AND THE GERM THEORY OF DISEASE. 
By WILLIAM R. D. 
In the December number of the Buffalo Medical and 
Surgical Journal is a communication from Mr. Lawson 
Tait, entitled A Criticism of the Germ Theory of Disease, 
based on the Baconian Method. My first conception of 
the paper was that it was intended as a huge joke, a trav- 
esty of the arguments of those with pre-antiseptic training. 
But a consideration of the eminence of the essayist con- 
vinces me that he is very much in earnest. Mr. Lawson 
Tait is serious. In my answer to him I shall pass over all 
that he says about the completeness of his work on the 
navel-string, about the book of Leviticus, hair parasites, 
Euclid, laceration of the perinteum, and other entirely ir- 
relevant matters. That my readers may follow me as well 
as fully appreciate Mr. Tait's remarkable effort, I will quote 
from him. " Let me remind you of the essence of induc- 
tive reasoning in Bacon's own words-a rule which has 
never been successfully evaded : ' The form which is sought 
can be detected only by a process of exclusion, by which 
Copyright, 1894, by D. Appleton and Company. 2 
MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
we find a phenomenon constantly present when the effect is 
present, absent whenever the effect is absent, and varying 
in degree with the effect. Such a phenomenon would be 
the form in question, the cause of the given effect or attri- 
bute.' According to this salient definition, is the causa 
causans of decomposition the microbe ? Most certainly not. 
Therefore we can have no microbe theory of decomposi- 
tion. But if we proceed on true Baconian lines we find 
that not only are the phenomena of decomposition not those 
of disease, but there is absolutely no analogy between 
them. Some appearances of analogy there are, but they 
are easily destroyed by careful examination. 
" Take ten thousand human bodies all perfectly alike, 
as far as we can see, and drop your germs of typhus about 
and see what will happen. The first remarkable fact to be 
found is that if the bodies are in Birmingham there will 
probably be no effect at all. If they are in Edinburgh, no 
effect, or very little, will be seen in the new town; whereas 
in the old town some commotion will result, and there will 
be about a hundred cases of typhus. These will be distrib- 
uted in various centers with mathematical proportion, and 
probably no two cases will be exactly alike. Clearly, then, 
according to Bacon, the provocative cause lies not in the 
germs." 
Mr. Tait's views of the causation of disease are well 
shown in the following quotation: " It is probably the 
germ of some very ordinary fungus, sporting with deadly 
growth from the pabulum afforded by the crowd-a sugges- 
tion made to me by the late Charles Darwin. At any rate, 
in this case the fulfillment of Bacon's canon is complete. 
The phenomenon, a population above a certain density, is 
always present when the effect, typhus fever, is present. It 
is universally absent when typhus fever is absent; and the 
effect, typhus, varies in degree with the degree of over- MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
3 
crowding. The phenomenon overcrowding is, therefore, 
the form in question, ' the cause of the given fact or attri- 
bute.' Littlejohn's facts and figures prove the law of the 
appearance and existence of typhus, the law of its variation, 
and they have established the fact of its extinction. You 
may as well establish a germ theory for this awful disease 
as for a leg of cold mutton. Not only is the argument 
from aetiology one of the most complete and perfect kind, 
but it is supported to a most remarkable degree by many 
clinical facts. Thus Russell, Murchison, Christison, and 
Wilson all agree upon certain facts (and no one has even 
disputed them) that typhus arises de novo upon appropriate 
provocation. Its germ is, therefore, certain to be a sport, 
forced by the conditions so well described by Howard, and 
we should expect that the conditions of sport being re- 
moved it would speedily lose its temporary malignity and 
return to its ordinary and probably quite harmless form. 
This is entirely supported by the fact insisted upon by all 
authors, that the contagion of typhus does not carry far, 
and is completely and speedily killed by cleanliness and an 
abundant air supply. Murchison lays special stress on the 
small risk to attendants on the fever-stricken if these con- 
ditions are fulfilled. All these facts are wholly contradic- 
tory of a 'germ theory '; for even if a 'germ theory ' were 
accepted in this case we should immediately point out that 
the germ was only a temporary existence, and that we have 
an already well ascertained cause of its existence. It, there- 
fore, must disappear from the argument, save as a mere 
stage of a process." 
" The phenomenon, a population above a certain den- 
sity," is not "always present when the effect, typhus fever, 
is present." Undoubtedly density of population increases 
the possibility of spreading the disease, and in direct ratio 
with the number of individuals exposed. But typhus oc- 4 
MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY 
curs from single exposures and in rural districts; therefore 
the phenomenon Mr. Tait insists upon is not necessarily 
present. Furthermore, density of population exists without 
the presence of his "effect, typhus fever," and with all the 
elements necessary to a "de novo'1'1 origin. Yet it is never 
found so to arise. That something can not spring from 
nothing, we accept as the simplest truism. That the germs 
we see now typical of certain diseases once had a beginning 
in some other form, we must believe. Microscopic life, as 
well as that of the vertebrata, obeys the inevitable law of 
evolution. When we seek the very first incentive to life 
we approach the unknowable, and discuss infinity, which 
finite minds can not grasp. To accept the de novo theory 
of the origin of disease is merely to believe that germs 
cause themselves. Whatever springs from something else 
does not arise de novo. 
Finally, the degree of the " effect typhus " does not 
vary with the " degree of overcrowding," but rather is in in- 
verse ratio to the germicidal (cleansing) methods adopted 
to stamp it out. 
When the effect is present the alleged cause is not al- 
ways present; when the alleged cause is present the effect 
is not always present. Ergo, overcrowding is not the cause 
of typhus, and the question still remains, Wbat is the cause 
of typhus fever ? 
The improvement lies in our ability to keep erysipelas 
and other pathogenic germs from the wounds we make, 
and we accomplish this even in the presence of overcrowd- 
ing. The phenomenon overcrowding is present and the effect 
erysipelas absent. To say that overcrowding produces it 
is to affirm nothing. The question remains, What is the 
agent in overcrowding which produces it ? 
He speaks of Lister's discovery in these terms: 
" lie filled a big hole in a man's heel with protected MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
5 
blood-clot; be kept out the common or garden germs 
and that blood-clot got organized and filled up the hole. 
Of course, it must not be forgotten that all these phe- 
nomena were known in domestic science for centuries 
before, but their surgical importance was not recognized, 
and certainly Lister's discovery was new in so far that 
it referred to blood clot not covered by skin or other 
living tissue, but directly exposed to air - air altered 
and deprived of its dangerous elements. Then comes 
Hamilton, who showed that material actually dead - 
dead beyond all question-could be so prepared as to 
adapt itself to the tissue of the feeblest kind, granu- 
lation cells, could be used by them as a temporary endo- 
skeletal arrangement and removed by them by the com- 
mon process of absorption when they were no longer in 
need of it." 
One more quotation, for it bears directly upon his view 
of the causation of disease : "As I look back at my early 
experience of surgery my wonder is that I ever stuck to it. 
In Edinburgh, during my pupilage from 1861 to 1866, I 
saw some thirty ovarian and other abdominal tumors re- 
moved without one single recovery, and 1 left the land of 
my birth with one fully made resolution, that I would 
never open an abdomen. In Edinburgh, if I saw an ampu- 
tation of the thigh in the Old Infirmary on a Wednesday, 
there was a strong probability that in the following week I 
would see the bared bone sticking up through the anterior 
flap. Erysipelas, indeed, was rampant. I have never 
seen a case of erysipelas in my own practice, not one. In 
what lies the improvement ? The answer is simple : It 
lies in separation of patients; plenty of cubic space and 
fresh air." 
He ends his address in the following characteriza- 
tion of the germ theory: " A theory which is no theory 6 
MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
at all, but a phantasm, a system which has been proved an 
inconstancy and a broken reed-a thing which yields at 
every blast either to scholastic logic or eclectic experi- 
ment." 
Before proceeding further let me disclaim any inten- 
tion of appearing as the champion of the germ theory. I 
am combating as an individual who has accepted that theory 
and whose work is governed by it the arguments set forth 
by Mr. Tait. Applied to our science, the Baconian method 
demands that we must take a certain germ from a disease 
and produce the same disease with it in a healthy individ- 
ual. If the control experiment has accomplished this with 
but one germ so acquired, the experimental method is ap- 
plied so far as that one particular germ is concerned. And, 
although morbid states may be observed in which we have 
as yet been unable to isolate the identical pathogenic germs 
which cause them, if the control method is observed with 
them by taking the morbid product of the diseases and 
producing identical conditions in other healthy individuals 
never in contact with those from whom the products were 
procured, we may justly infer that there are unknown germs 
which bring about the result. And if one by one these in- 
ferences regarding different diseases are replaced by the 
positively demonstrated germ obtained from each disease 
and isolated and alone producing the same disease in a 
healthy individual, not only is the case again proved, but 
the inferences regarding all other diseased states are 
strengthened. 
It is not essential to the proper application of the in- 
ductive method that it be possible always to find the germ 
or that the effect be in proportion to the amount of germ 
life present. Such a method of reasoning might hold good 
with the association of inanimate chemical agents, but not MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. ' 
7 
with living germs and living tissues. The grosser clinical 
features of disease upon which Mr. Tait so much relies in 
his refutation of the germ theory are still more variable. 
And it would be as reasonable to expect the invariable pres- 
ence of a typical germ as to seek the invariable presence 
of any one symptom or aetiological factor, such as over- 
crowding. To deny the existence of a disease because 
we can not find that germ which has been isolated at 
other times from the same condition, admits of our re- 
jecting the presence of a disease whenever a common 
symptom of it is absent. Variation in bacterial life must 
be accepted as well as in the phenomena which diseases 
present. 
Take the gonococcus, for instance. Pus taken from 
the urethra of a gonorrhceic is stained and found to con- 
tain the gonococcus. Furthermore, cultures are made of 
the coccus, and these pure cultures placed upon the healthy 
urethra have produced a gonorrhoeal discharge containing 
the gonococcus identical with that first obtained and with 
that bred by cultivation. The causa causans of gonorrhoea 
is thus seen to be the gonococcus. Does it weaken our 
position to find that pus from a gonorrhoeal pyosalpinx is 
sterile, or that the gonococcus fails to cause gonorrhoea in 
B.'s urethra while it succeeds with A.'s ? Pathogenic 
germs, as well as the gross bodies of men, die. That the 
contents of a pus tube are sterile simply means that the 
causative cocci are dead or so modified that our usual 
methods fail to find them. That B.'s urethra is not in- 
flamed by the presence of the gonococci we believe to be 
owing to the local tissue resistance ; the gonococci die and 
do not multiply, just as they do under any other unpro- 
pitious circumstances. The common clinical fact is doubt- 
less known to Mr. Tait that a number of men will cohabit 8 
MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
with an infected prostitute and several escape infection. 
Their immunity does not prove that those who have clap 
have not got it, or that the infected woman did not cause 
it. Accepting Mr. Tait's suggestion to apply the Baconian 
method, let us enumerate some of the germs to which it 
has been successfully applied : Anthrax, tuberculosis, 
glanders, Asiatic cholera. But why multiply examples ? 
Certain it is that the inductive method has been carried 
out with many of the pyogenic cocci other than the gono- 
coccus. Current literature as well as clinical experience 
furnishes us with irrefutable evidence regarding many of 
them. 
]n what he says about decomposition I do not agree 
with Mr. Tait, except that it is irrelevant. Then what has 
all that he says about decomposition to do with the geim 
theory of disease ? That we have in many instances found 
germs, which isolated germs will cause diseases identical 
with those from which they were procured, and that the 
diseases are absent when the germs are absent, is beyond 
question. In all these diseases we must admit that we do 
not invariably find the particular germs causing them, but 
we find no other germs constantly present which can cause 
these diseases. Still, the germ is always to be procured in 
some, and in others it is so constant an accompaniment 
that the failures to find it may be ascribed to some defect 
of observation. We have, then, certain diseases in which 
certain germs are always found and will always produce 
the diseases in another, such as anthrax. There is another 
group in which the germ is so constantly present and will 
so rarely fail to cause the disease that we are forced to 
accept it as the causative germ of that disease, such as 
gonorrhoea. In a third class of diseases we have found no 
typical and constant germ, but in these we can multiply MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
9 
the diseases by subjecting the healthy to material obtained 
from the sick and applied at some distance-such as the 
contents of the pustules from variola. Even in this latter 
class we apply a control experiment in a crude way, but 
one which meets the requirements of the experimental 
method. We enjoy for a certain time immunity against 
certain diseases recently recovered from. 
More than this, we can artificially produce in an animal 
a diseased condition by inoculating it with a certain germ 
known to cause a certain disease, and thus confer upon 
the animal immunity from further attacks of this germ. 
And fluids taken from this immune animal used upon man 
will prevent his contracting that disease characterized by 
the presence of those germs which were injected into the 
animal. The practical result of all this science at which 
Mr. Tait scoffs is that we are enabled to take these fluids 
from the immune animal and by them successfully expel 
from the human system the identical germs which were 
originally used upon the animal and which were procured 
from a human being infected by them. 
Were not the "form sought" what we deem it to be, 
such a result could never be brought about. If the diph- 
theria germ is found in diphtheria, if with it we inocu- 
late an animal, if with this immune animal's serum we 
expel from a child's system the diphtheria germs which 
infect it, surely the case is proved, and by a test far more 
crucial than that demanded by the Baconian method of 
reasoning. 
Mr. Tait contrasts with his own the ill results of men 
who are extreme in the use of antiseptics. He challenges 
Lister to compare results with him, and criticises his clinic 
for abandoning antiseptic methods " for the adoption of 
' aseptic surgery,' the perfect cleanliness which I have been 
preaching for years." 10 
MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
The few quotations I have made from this paper suffice 
to show the state of the author's mind. The battles which 
have been fought in the march from the old empiricism to 
the modern asepsis furnish him with much material for his 
scornful argument. In the evolution of our science he finds 
amusement. 1 he men who have given us our precious 
facts, proved even by the Baconian method, are to him but 
misguided or ignorant. 
Surgery, unlike astronomy, is not yet a fixed science. 
As our premises change, so must our conclusions. This 
but attends all advancement. And, although Joseph Lis 
ter's first work is now abandoned, yet must we consider it 
as the dawn of our new surgery. Lucky indeed will Mr. 
Tait be if his life's work gains the plaudits of his fellows 
as Lister's has. 
Whereas there may be much in which we have been 
mistaken, and many our mistakes, certainly the germ theory 
of disease has been proved beyond a doubt in all the essen- 
tials to proper conclusions. We have not discovered the 
germs of all diseases, but we have found some. The facts 
discovered in our experiments with these have given us the 
perfect cleanliness we employ, and have taught us how to 
treat diseased conditions and at the same time conserve 
natural forces. Antiseptics we have largely abandoned, 
not because Mr. Tait told us to do so, but because we have 
learned the art of protection. I unhesitatingly tell Mr. 
Tait that the improvement lies not in the separation of pa- 
tients, but in the making of clean wounds and protecting 
them from germs and chemical irritants. That we know 
how to do this is the direct result of the work of Lister. 
The germ theory of disease has not " proved an inconstancy 
and a broken reed-a thing which yields at every blast either 
of scholastic logic or eclectic experiment " ; but it is a theory MR. LAWSON TAIT AND THE GERM THEORY. 
11 
which is logically proved, which gains strength with every 
fresh experiment, and the very failures of which but prove 
some law already accepted. The opponents of the germ 
theory could not have found a bolder, abler, more aggres- 
sive champion than Mr. Lawson Tait. Truly has the last 
great gun against our advance been fired, and burst in the 
discharge! The New York Medical Journal. 
A WEEKLY REVIEW OF MEDICINE. 
EDITED BY 
FRANK P. FOSTER, M.D. 
THE PHYSICIAN who would keep abreast with the advances in 
medical science must read a live weekly medical journal, in which 
scientific facts are presented in a clear manner; one for which the 
articles are written by men of learning, and by those who are good and 
accurate observers ; a journal that is stripped of every feature irrelevant 
to medical science, and gives evidence of being carefully and conscien- 
tiously edited ; one that bears upon every page the stamp of desire to 
elevate the standard of the profession of medicine. Such a journal 
fulfills its mission-that of educator-to the highest degree, for not 
only does it inform its readers of all that is new in theory and practice, 
but, by means of its correct editing, instructs them in the very important 
yet much-neglected art of expressing their thoughts and ideas in a clear 
and correct manner. Too much stress can not be laid upon this feature, 
so utterly ignored by the " average " medical periodical. 
Without making invidious comparisons, it can be truthfully stated 
that no medical journal in this country occupies the place, in these par- 
ticulars, that is held by The New York Medical Journal. No 
other journal is edited with the care that is bestowed on this; none 
contains articles of such high scientific value, coming as they do from 
the pens of the brightest and most learned medical men of America. A 
glance at the list of contributors to any volume, or an examination of 
any issue of the Journal, will attest the truth of these statements. It 
is a journal for the masses of the profession, for the country as well as 
for the city practitioner; it covers the entire range of medicine and 
surgery. A very important feature of the Journal is the number and 
character of its illustrations, which are unequaled by those of any other 
journal in the world. They appear in frequent issues, whenever called 
for by the article which they accompany, and no expense is spared to 
make them of superior excellence. 
Subscription price, $5.00 per annum. Volumes begin in 
January and July. 
PUBLISHED BY 
D. APPLETON & CO., 72 Fifth Avenue, New York.