(3 of 4)
Harry's father tried to protect him in his will, knowing he was not normal (as all his brothers and sisters also knew). His mother could not bear to realize the fact and broke the will to give him his money and freedom from restraint. With what consequences! His marriage with Evelyn Nesbit was a sacrilege. While —How, When, Where and by Whom that child was conceived and born—No one knows! He— the boy—is an able and clever aviator. And why he wants to keep the name seems incomprehensible. Ten million dollars divided among ten children and a widow 45 years ago may sound like a lot of money, but no amount even if the Thaw family had it would ever buy off a woman of Evelyn Nesbit's calibre. You admit in this article that the Press keeps pandering the subject—for a price—to an evil-minded Public.
Among other reforms of the "New Deal" (if there is anything in it) don't you think we who Have to live with this thing and live it down might be considered at least in the non-Hearst-controlled publications?
K. M. EDWARDS
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Germs v. Toxin
Sirs:
. . . On p. 51 of TIME for June 25, in speaking of the Shwartzman antitoxin, you give him credit for a new discovery and make the utterly erroneous statement that the standard method of preparing diphtheria antitoxin is to put "whole diphtheria germs" into a horse's blood, etc. Where you obtained such an absolutely incorrect idea is more than I can understand. Of all diseases, the manufacture of antitoxin against diphtheria was the worst possible example you could have picked, as it is one of the two typical toxic diseases—tetanus being the other. Roux and Yersin, of the Pasteur Institute, demonstrated the toxin in 1888, and von Behring, in 1890, demonstrated that an antitoxin could be made which was curative and protective. Roux produced an antitoxin about the same time, and both read papers on the subject at a congress in Budapest some two years later. Both von Behring and Roux used the toxin and not the germs, and this has continued to be the practice down to the present day. If Dr. Shwartzman has made any great and new discovery, it is certainly not shown in your report of the meeting. . . . MAZÝCK P. RAVENEL, M.D.
Editor in Chief
American Journal of Public Health and the
Nation's Health
The American Public Health Ass'n.
Columbia, Mo.
Dr. Shwartzman's contribution was the demonstration that from certain bacteria (notably typhoid) can be obtained filterable toxins such as were already known to exist in relation to other bacteria. His discovery made possible the manufacture of antitoxic sera for typhoid, cerebro-spinal meningitis, et al., by the toxic filtrate method, which has long been used (as Dr. Ravenel points out) for diphtheria, tetanus, scarlet fever.—ED.
Kudos
Sirs:
. . . Under "Kudos" (p. 39, June 25) you mention two recipients at the University of Pennsylvania. More or less accurate newspapers mention seven others. .
M. H. GANSER
Norristown, Pa.
Sirs:
PAGE 39 TIME JUNE 25 LISTS UNDER KUDOS HONORARY DEGREES CONFERRED AT DARTMOUTH THIS YEAR BUT OMITS JOSÉ PADIN . . . PUERTO RICO'S COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION.
R. ARRILLAGA TORRENS