666 ANATOMY OF THE MUZZLE OF OliSmiOnHYNCUUS, 



cells are not actually connected by continuity with nerve filires, 

 and yet we fancy that no one would deny to the hair-cells the 

 name of "terminal organs" of the auditory sense-apparatus. 



If, however, it be admitted, as seems to l)e the case, that the 

 filaments of the push-rod are, as we have described and figured 

 them, structurally continuous, without bi-eak or interruption, 

 with the axis-cylinders which terminate in them, then it is 

 (iifiicult for us to follow Mr. Poulton in his emphatic objection to 

 regarding the former as nervous in character. He says they 

 must be looked upon as "a new and interesting form of nerve 

 terminal organ probably epithelial in character," but where, we 

 ask, is there the slightest evidence for their (non-nervous) epithe- 

 lial character apart from their situation in the epidermis 1 and of 

 course tliis alone is no proof whatever that they are non-nervous. 

 They are utterly unlike any other epithelial structure of which 

 we are aware, and their nervous continuity is really very strong 

 evidence against their being modified epithelial cells, for all 

 recent investigations by Kolliker, Ramon y Cajal, v. Lenhossek 

 and others* have shown that nowhere do sensory axis-cylinders 

 end by actual continuity with non-nervous epithelial structures, 

 but on the contrary by fine fibrillar often varicose end branchings 

 in close proximity to, and contact with, epithelial cells which may 

 or may not be specially modified. Later on we hope to give 

 convincing proof that the fibrils under dispute are neither more 

 nor less than just such intra-epidermic end-branchings of axis- 

 cylinders. 



Careful pei'usal of Mr. Poulton's statements in this connection 

 will show that his single argument in support of his very 

 positive opinion against the nervous character of the fibrils is 

 the appearance they present in sections, as clear and somewhat 

 highly refracting elements. He quotes Professor Schafer as 

 an authority for the view that this appearance is opposed 

 to the theory that they are terminal nerve-fibrils. To support 

 this argument from appearance Mr. Poulton has recourse to two 



* Cf. Kolliker. in Verhandl. il. Anat. Gesellsch.; Ramon y Cajal, tr:u)s. 

 in Arch. f. Anat. u. Physiol. 



