sink; where there was none, or it was insufficient, the numbers either rose or remained almost stationary. We will once more compare Nordmoere with Soendfjord. In Nordmoere, in 1856-60, 81 new cases, 14 sent to the asylum; 1861-65, 88 new cases. In Soendfjord, 1856-60, 214 new cases, 211 sent into asylums; 1861-65, 146 new cases. We consider it superfluous to point out further how the isolation of the patients has caused the decrease of Leprosy in Norway. It is not possible to explain the action of isolation by the elimination of heredity; the time is too short for that. The only one possible solution is that which we have given, and therefore we regard this decrease of Leprosy in Norway following on isolation as the best proof of the contagiousness of Leprosy. Leprosy is, then, according to our view, a contagious disease, and only contagious, not hereditary. How Leprosy is “caught,” we do not know, but we think it is probably by inoculation; and the nodular form must be more dangerous than the maculo-anæsthetic. This last statement seems to be confirmed by the fact, that in Sogn, where 56.6 per cent. of the cases are nodular and 43.4 per cent. maculo-anæsthetic, the increase varies between 8. and 10.8 per cent., while in Soendfjord, with 72.6 per cent. nodular, and 27.4 per cent. maculo-anæsthetic, it is between 14.4 per cent. and 19.5 per cent. In the nodular form there are incomparably more bacilli than in the maculo-anæsthetic, and in the latter there is no discharge containing bacilli, which in the former is almost always present. It is not improbable that Leprosy may be conveyed by the clothes. We know of one case in which a young man became affected one year after he had worn a pair of old drawers given him by a leper. The same thing happened to another young man who wore several pairs of his leprous father’s stockings. Although we are not acquainted with the spores of the Lepra bacillus, it is quite conceivable that the bacilli are spore bearing. Unfortunately, we know of no method of determining whether the bacilli are alive or dead, and therefore Arning’s observation of the bacilli in the fæces does not decide the question as to whether the bacilli can live for any time outside the body, even admitting that the bacilli which Arning found were actually Lepra bacilli.