392 PROCEEDINGS OF THE ACADEMY OF 



Exp. 70. 2.12, injected one drop of conia into the peritoneum of 

 a mouse. 2.15J, the paralysis is complete, but the respiratory 

 movements continue until 2.20. 



The following experiments show that the paralysis of the spinal 

 cord and the cessation of respiratory movements occur at the same 

 time, rendering it very probable that the latter is an effect of the 

 former. 



Exp. 71. Tied the abdominal aorta of a frog. 10.36, injected 

 one-hundredth of a drop of conia into the abdomen. 10.39f , the 

 paralysis is complete anteriorly ; respiration still continues, and 

 galvanization of the spinal cord causes movements in the ligatured 

 limbs. 10.41, respiration ceased ; galvanization of the cord pro- 

 duces no movements. 



Exp. 72. On a medium-sized cat. 1.00, injected three drops of 

 conia into the peritoneum after t3 T ing the left femoral artery. 1.08, 

 parabysis, but respiration continues. 1.30, respiration ceased, and 

 galvanization of the cord causes no response. 



Exp. 73. Tied the abdominal aorta of a mouse. 2.02, injected 

 one drop of conia into the peritoneum. 2.10, respirations ceased ; 

 galvanization of the cord causes no response. 



G astro- Intestinal Action. 



In ordinary medicinal doses no gastro-intestinal symptoms 

 occur in man ; in experiments upon myself grain doses were un- 

 able to produce attempts at vomiting, or even anorexia. Out of 

 one hundred and forty-eight conia experiments made by the 

 writer, but three cases of vomiting occurred, and these were in 

 dogs, who, as is well known, vomit very readily. 



Exp. 74. On a young dog. 8.10, gave him one-half grain of 

 conia by the mouth ; in three minutes he vomited. On the follow- 

 ing day an injection of one-half grain into the peritoneum caused 

 vomiting in a very short time. 



Exps. 75 and 76. Vomiting occurred when conia was injected 

 into the femoral vein. 



In these experiments vomiting took place when conia was intro- 

 duced through other channels than by the mouth and stomach, 

 and they, therefore, prove that the gastro-intestinal irritation is 

 not due to any local action on the alimentary canal, as is claimed 



