[1]. Amer. Journ. Cut. Dis., vol. xxi, 1903, p. 315.
[2]. Vide X. Delore, Lyon Médicale, July 16th, 1899, p. 376; J. Sabrazès and A. Laubée, Arch. Gén. de Méd., Paris, November, 1899, p. 515; R. von Baracz, Wien. klin. Wochenschr., 1901, No. 14; G. Carrière and G. Potel, Presse Médicale, Paris, May 17th, 1902, p. 471; and L. Legroux, “La Botryomycose,” Thèse de Paris, 1904. The botryomyces appears to have owed its supposed existence to a mistaken interpretation of microscopic appearances. H. Bichat (Arch. Gén. de Méd., February 2nd, 1904, p. 281) thinks there is nothing specific in the growths, but V. Ball (Arch. Gén. de Méd., August 2nd, 1904, p. 1921) concludes that that botryomycosis, though it owes its name to an error, is nevertheless a pathological entity and is a special staphylococcal affection. Dr. Weber possesses a microscopic section of one of these little growths, which was removed from the finger (close to the nail) of a woman in 1890, when he was a house-surgeon at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital for Sir William Savory. It was a typical strawberry-like “botryomycoma” with quite a narrow pedicle. Dr. J. M. H. MacLeod, who has kindly examined the section in question, tells us he regards such growths as “septic granulomata,” septic organisms producing very various effects according to their degree of virulence and naturally according to the nature of the living soil on which they grow.
[3]. British Journal of Dermatology, June, 1901, p. 201.
[4]. Diseases of the Skin, third edition, 1903, p. 963.
[5]. British Medical Journal, June 4th, 1890. Amongst foreign accounts vide Radaeli’s report of five cases in Lo Sperimentale, December, 1904, p. 1023.
[6]. Archives of Surgery, vol. v, p. 237, and vol. vi. p. 132. See also Mr. Hutchinson’s Smaller Atlas of Clinical Surgery, Plate 61, where he refers to the case figured by Hebra and Kaposi as “Sarcoma melanodes”; also his remarks on “Sarcoma melanodes” in the British Medical Journal, January 7th, 1905, and the case shown by him at the Polyclinic in December, 1904, which was also shown by Dr. Ormerod at the Dermatological Society of London, July 8th, 1903.
[7]. British Journal of Dermatology, 1903, p. 210.
Transcriber’s Notes:
Missing or obscured punctuation was corrected.