living cholera bacteria, and the vial is stolen shortly after the man's departure. The bacteriologist goes on a panicked search when he realizes his houseguest is actually an anarchist who plans to infect London's water supply with cholera.

As the bacteriologist pursues his target, he is in turn pursued by his wife, who thinks he has lost his mind since he ran out of the house without being properly dressed. The bacteriologist finally catches up with the anarchist, who breaks the vial in an attempt to escape. In a desperate effort to bring his menacing plan to fruition, the man drinks the remains of the vial's contents and begins his effort to infect the city with cholera on his own.

As the story comes to a close, the bacteriologist informs his perplexed wife that what was in the vial was not actually cholera. Suspicious of the guest's intentions, the scientist showed him a vial that contained a new microbe that would turn an animal's skin blue. After revealing this twist, he grudgingly returns home with his wife to begin working on a new culture of the strange microbe.

In summary, this story uses irony to tell the tale of a clever scientist and an impulsive anarchist who become involved in a horse-drawn cab chase over a substance that is not at all what it seems. Wells uses this work to discuss the potential role science plays in the facilitation of bioterrorism.

When the story opens, we are in the home lab of a bacteriologist. The bacteriologist has a visitor, a “pale-faced man” with “lank black hair and deep grey eyes…[a] haggard expression and nervous manner.” The bacteriologist is showing his visitor a slide of dead cholera bacteria, and the man shows such a keen interest that the scientist shows him a vial of the living bacteria. The scientist begins to wax apocalyptic about the effects of even a single drop of the vial finding its way into London’s water supply, and at this tale of devastation his visitor’s eyes gleam with a poorly-veiled desire. At this moment the bacteriologist’s wife calls him into the hall for a quick word, and when he returns his visitor takes his leave.

It is only after the visitor has departed that the bacteriologist realizes the tube of cholera bacteria is missing. After frantically searching and patting his pockets, he comes to the conclusion that his visitor must have taken it—and he flies out the door in pursuit, still wearing his dressing robe and his house slippers, one of which he loses along the way.  His visitor spies him coming just as the former is getting into a cab (horse-drawn, in this era), and with a word to the cabbie he gallops down the street. The bacteriologist himself catches a cab and gives chase. Minnie, his wife, having witnessed this whole episode from the window of their home, thinks her husband mad for leaving without a proper hat, coat, or shoes, and catches her own cab to take them to him. We have a Victorian three-cab chase on our hands.

During this chase we learn that the pale-faced man is in fact an anarchist intent on wreaking havoc throughout London with the stolen cholera (he expresses disbelief at the beginning of the story that anarchists would resort to bombs when they had access to this sort of physical devastation). In the midst of a bumpy ride, the man accidentally shatters the vial in his hand, and faced with the failure of his plan he drinks the few drops left, stops the cab, and climbs out.  Spying the bacteriologist pull up behind him, he cries, "'Vive l'Anarchie! You are too late, my friend, I have drunk it. The cholera is abroad!’" and retreats to single-handedly infect the city.

The bacteriologist watches contemplatively as his guest jostles and coughs all over pedestrians, finding the scene more curious than concerning. When his wife catches up, he thanks her for bringing his things and tells her that what the man has drunk is not actually cholera—the scientist, noting the man’s interest in the dead strain of the disease, decided to add a bit of intrigue to the tour, telling his guest that what was actually a disease that turned monkeys blue was cholera. A harmless but unsightly disease. The results of the ordeal the scientist can only guess, but in any case the anarchist will be sorely disappointed.

This story is a brilliant exercise in irony; we have a man who is not who he seems, and a disease that is not at all what it seems. And as the story unfolds we have a situation that could morph into a devastating comedy before our eyes.

H.G. Wells's "The Stolen Bacillus" is a satirical short story about the potential role of science and scientists in facilitating bio-terrorism.  This is done by having a very intelligent bacteriologist being ignorant about the consequences of his work.  I often think that some scientists are so involved with whether or not they can do something that they do not bother considering whether or not they should do something. Wells is making that exact point with the bacteriologist in the story.  The character is obviously intelligent when it comes to his field.  He is capable of working with these dangerous biologicals, and he understands how easily they could wipe out a population, but he doesn't consider that someone might actually do it.  He's ignorant about motivations of people like the anarchist. 

The anarchist steals a vial of bacteria and runs out.  The bacteriologist runs after the man. His wife is appalled at his appearance and runs after her husband with his shoes, coat, and hat.  The anarchist breaks and ingests the bacteria, and the scientist lets him go.  

It turns out the bacteria is not a population killing machine.  The only reason the bacteriologist gave chase was because he didn't want to have to start his work over again. The final few paragraphs really drive home the satire of the story, because Wells does a great job of portraying the bacteriologist as an absent minded professor.  He's unaware of his clothing appearance.  He is bothered by the "trouble and expense of preparing some more" bacteria.  He is not at all concerned about the possibility that the anarchist very well could have gotten a hold of some very deadly disease.  Wells really makes his reader consider the fact that it is possible that there are scientists working all over the place with a variety of deadly concoctions with no consideration for security or the potential consequences of their work. 

"The Stolen Bacillus" belongs to the genre of science fiction and, to understand why, it is useful to look at a relevant definition. According to the University of California, for example, a science fiction story is one which presents an "alternative world" (see the reference link provided). In "The Stolen Bacillus," the setting is London but it is a very different London to the one which Wells' readers were accustomed to. In Wells' London, for instance, the city is at risk from anarchists who use deception to wage biological warfare by poisoning the water supply. 

In addition, science fiction stories have very distinctive character types, like "the scientist" and "the action hero" (see the reference link provided) and "The Stolen Bacillus" is no exception. Wells conforms to these character types by creating "the Anarchist" and "the Bacteriologist," two typical yet contrasting character types who also create the story's central conflict.

In "The Stolen Bacillus" by H.G. Wells there is humor because of the dramatic irony that occurs at various points in the story. Dramatic irony occurs when the audience has more insight about the true nature of a situation than a character has. In this story there are three main examples of it.

The first example has to do with the Bacteriologist running out the door without hat, coat, or shoes. Thinking that "that horrid science of his" has driven him mad, his wife chases him with the outdoor apparel so that he will not be seen in public in his socks. She does not understand the real reason he left so hastily, and thinks he is merely eccentric. But the reader knows that the Bacteriologist had to leave so urgently in order to try to catch the Anarchist who stole one of his vials.

The second example is during the cab chase. As the Bacteriologist chases the Anarchist and Minnie chases the Bacteriologist, they are observed by a small group of other cab drivers who find their chase entertaining but have no idea about either the Bacteriologist's urgent mission or Minnie's errand. They see that the drivers are using whips and then place bets and cheer for them as though it is a race. The reader knows the true purposes of all three cabs' haste.

The third example is at the end of the story after Minnie has caught up to her husband. He reveals to her that the stolen vial does not in fact contain any cholera but instead a bacterium that turns living creatures blue. The Anarchist has just exposed himself to its contents and then gone off down the street believing that he is going to poison everyone with cholera. But the Bacteriologist suggests that the Anarchist will actually turn blue rather than die or contaminate anybody with cholera. What could have been a serious outbreak of a deadly disease will result instead in nothing more than the Anarchist (and perhaps everyone else he managed to infect) looking ridiculous.

Satire is a technique used by writers to criticize/ridicule mankind and/or his institutions.  Satire specifically uses humor in order to perform the ridicule and point out flaws or faults.  The intention of satire is to point out the faults of something in order to bring about reform and improvement.  "The Stolen Bacillus" is definitely a satire about science and scientists; however, the humor doesn't appear until the final third of the story.  Before specifically discussing the satire, I will go through the story's use of tension and fear.  

Tension, fear, and worry are all initiated in the very first sentence of the story.  

“This again,” said the Bacteriologist, slipping a glass slide under the microscope, “is a preparation of the celebrated Bacillus of cholera—the cholera germ.”

The Bacteriologist is working with an incredibly dangerous bacteria.  Wells could have had the scientist working with the bacteria that causes strep throat (or something similar).  It's worrisome, but ultimately it isn't likely life threatening.  Cholera, on the other hand, can be deadly within hours.  I'd say that Wells does a nice job of establishing a high degree of tension by simply choosing the right bacteria. 

The tense atmosphere is increased by the presence of an unknown visitor to the lab.  It's one thing to have a trained scientist working with dangerous cultures. It's an entirely different matter to have a pale faced visitor get a "gleam of satisfaction" by being so close to dangerous biologicals.  

The Bacteriologist watched the morbid pleasure in his visitor’s expression.

The unknown visitor just sounds like bad news because he's so excited by something so deadly.  

The Bacteriologist notices his visitor's keen interest in the deadly test tubes, so the Bacteriologist takes the opportunity to really drive home the seriousness of the tube in his hand.  He goes into an extended monologue that focuses on the death that would result if the tube were to break. 

"Only break such a little tube as this into a supply of drinking-water, say to these minute particles of life that one must needs stain and examine with the highest powers of the microscope even to see, and that one can neither smell nor taste — say to them, 'Go forth, increase and multiply, and replenish the cisterns,' and death — mysterious, untraceable death, death swift and terrible, death full of pain and indignity — would be released upon this city, and go hither and thither seeking his victims."

Notice the repetition of the word "death."  Holding something so dangerous in a fragile glass tube is ominous enough, but the repetition of the death that it will bring feels like repeated hammer blows to a reader.  This scientist is casually holding something that all of mankind should fear.  The mood is definitely tense at this point.  

The fearful and tense atmosphere reaches a peak once the reader realizes that the unknown visitor has stolen a vial from the lab.  We know exactly how deadly this bacteria could be.  It's a city killer. 

"Once start him [the bacterium] at the water supply, and before we could ring him in, and catch him again, he would have decimated the metropolis.”

It's at this point in the story that the text turns toward satire.  The entire chase scene is just ridiculous.  Cab drivers even pause to cheer on the silly "race."  

“Go it, George!” “It’s a race!” “You’ll ketch ’em!” “Whip up!”

Wells does a wonderful job of portraying the Bacteriologist as an absent-minded professor.  He runs out of his lab half dressed and completely unaware of that fact.  He's also more troubled at the fact that he has to prepare more samples than he is at the fact that the anarchist could have actually gotten away with cholera.  It's cute and funny to see the professor this way . . . until you think about the message.  Real scientists in real life might have the very same attitude about their work.  They are so involved with what they can do that they aren't thinking about what they should be doing and the security around it. 

One distinct theme of this story is that things are not always as they appear.  At the beginning of the story we are introduced to our two main characters:  a bacteriologist working in a lab in London, and his visitor, a man who has displayed some vague interest in the lab’s proceedings and been invited to come see the lab for himself.  This man is intensely fascinated by the dead strains of cholera shown him by the bacteriologist, and his eyes gleam with a strange fervor when the scientist produces a tube of live bacteria.

The bacteriologist finds his visitor harmless, despite his ” lank black hair and deep grey eyes, the haggard expression and nervous manner, the fitful yet keen interest” in the subject at hand.  And the scientist, who “had been told rhetoric was his weakness,” after describing in great detail the absolute destruction of the city should even the smallest drop of live cholera bacteria infect the water supply, notices his guest completely transfixed by the concept.  Soon after, we discover that this apparently harmless man is in fact an anarchist, intent on ravaging the city and bringing its people to ruins – with a strain of stolen bacteria.

And yet that bacteria itself is not what it appears – even though the bacteriologist begins a harrowing chase for the anarchist through the streets of London to retrieve his stolen test tube, and facing defeat the pale villain drinks the contents of the tube himself, to personally infect the people of London, it is revealed at the end that all his efforts were in vain.  The bacteriologist, whether to impress the man or just as a joke, we don’t know, misled him into believing the bacteria was actually cholera; it turns out it was actually a newly-discovered bacteria that, by all intents and purposes appears to turn its host blue.

So here we have a man who was not what he seemed – a harmless guest who turns out to be a psychopathic anarchist; and a bacteria that is not what it seemed – a deadly disease that is in fact merely the cause of a very embarrassing discoloration.  And, to delve deeper into the moral of the story, we can say that it seldom works to our advantage to deceive others, however nefarious or harmless the motive may be.