Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-07-08

remnant Of European nobility.
ALI Of these interests, more or
less affected by the spread Of the
disease, have banded together in
the Defense Association Against
Myxomatosis. Up to this point.
their efforts have been directed
at the problem Of fixing re-
sponsibility and demanding re-
lief for the calamity that has be-
fallen them. And the finger of
accusation inevitably points at
DR.. Armand Delille.
The doctor, be 1t said, Is not
without his defenders. A good
many learned articles have ap-
peared citing the destructive
ness of the wild rabbit. It has
been pointed out that nine rab-
bits, between them. eat as much
in year as two sheep and show
a preference for the more. val
liable kinds of vegetation such
as tender green vegetables and
plants. Unquestionably, SO far
as the majority Of gardeners.
farmers and foresters are con-
cerned, the disappearance Of the
wild rabbit represents a note
worthy achievement, despite the
fact that the balance Of nature"
has been upset and that other
predatory animals such as foxes
now show q regrettable ten
dency to concentrate their at
tention on chickens.
The state, furthermore, had
made a careful search Of the
law books and had come up with
the conclusion that the doctor
was guilty of no crime. There
was no specific statute against
killing rabbits with disease. The
small package of virus from the
Swiss laboratory was not sub
ject to duty, the law against
transporting harmful drugs
doesn't cover drugs harmful to
rabbits only. Laws against the
destruction Of useful domestic
animals omit all mention Of rab-
bits. classed as "vermin" in rs
of the country's SO departments.
A law passed in 1874 against the
use of poison to exterminate
game animals was inapplicable,
since a one-year statute Of lin
itations had long since run.
Tried in Press.
Still, even reduced to the level
of a civil suit. with purely SYM
bolic damages involved, the
"myxomatoSis case" has reused
intense public interest. Like
most French court actions, the
suit against DR.. Delille was
thoroughly tried in the press be-
fore the trial opened at Dreux.
Most of the reports were
weighted heavily on the side of
the rabbits. The Communist |
organ "Humanite" pulled out |
all the stops in venting its indig-
nation against this latest mani
festation Of germ warfare. |
shedding bitter tears over the
fate OF Peter Rabbit and posing |
the weighty question whether
game is an individual or coll
lective property"
In its earlier sessions. the |
trial itself has not lacked for
Two Of Frances most |
redoubtable attorneys = Rene
Floriot for the compliments |
and Maurice Garcon for the de-
Tense = have measured up to |
the historic implications of the /.
case. In the course Of it. DR..
Delille has been described as
everything from a modern st. |
Patrick (who saved Ireland |
from the snakes) to a "Sor-
cerer's Apprentice" who believed |
in "using q hydrogen bomb to
knock down a brace Of par.
tridges."
Whatever the result Of the |
trial may be. the rabbit popula- |
ton in Europe shows signs Of |
renaissance. Recently-and pos |
sibly to the chagrin Of the
owner-wild rabbits have been
seen again on DR.. Delille's own
estate where the disease got its |
start. The experience In Aus
tra1ia is recalled: After a time,
rabbits develop an immunity to |
the disease. Today in Australia,
only about so per cent Of |
infested rabbits die compared to |
80 per cent In France. And |
together with the growing re-
sistance. another statistic brings |
hope or despair - for the
future: In three years, they
say. q pair Of rabbits can pro-
duce $4,000 descendants. At this
rate. IL would seem to be only
q matter Of time before things
are back to normal again.