A STUDY IX MORCrn AND XOHMAL PHYSIOLOGY. 75 



The expcrim(-iits of Bnick and Giinter do not prove then wliat has been claimed 

 for them. On the other hand, in tlie numerous experiments wliich I have made 

 I have very rarely seen any symptom of irritation other than the rise of tempera- 

 ture produced by the section. On the other hand, I have seen tlie rise of tempera- 

 ture occur when the shock to the respiratory centres lias been so great as to paralvze 

 them and suspend breathing. How could the section under these circumstances 

 stimulate the vaso-motor centres which lie so close to the respiratory centre. Ao-ain, 

 I have seen the rise of temperature persist for more than twenty-four hours, and 

 have never seen it, when once established, subside so long as the animal survived, 

 unless by the formation of a clot the vaso-motor centre of the medulla was paralyzed. 

 Such is not the history of irritation. I have so often seen this persistent rise of 

 temperature with no signs of irritation, with no apparent disturbance of the circu- 

 lation or respiration, that I am strongly inclined to believe it to be paralytic in its 

 origin, due to the removal of some force. 



Reasoning from rise of temperature in the present case is, for obvious reasons, 

 uncertain in its results, but an examination of the calorimetrical experiments will I 

 believe disprove the correctness of the irritation theory. Taking up the experiments 

 of the last scries seriatim, it will be seen that in Experiment 56, so far as can be judged 

 from the blood pressure, no vaso-motor spasm existed, the pressure was not high, 

 and galvanization of a nerve increased it nearly one-third by inducing a vaso-motor 

 spasm. Such a rise could hardly have occurred if great vaso-motor irritation, with 

 genuine vaso-motor spasm, had existed before the galvanization of the sciatic. In 

 Experiment 57 there was nothing especially bearing upon the subject under dis- 

 cussion. The same may be said of Experiment 58. Experiment 59, however, 

 furnishes very conclusive evidence. Irritation produced by a section must be 

 greatest immediately after section, and would be expected to disappear in a few 

 hours. Yet in this case the eftcct upon heat production steadily increased for some 

 hours, and was much more decided iicarli/ hcenfij-four hours after section than it was 

 in the hour immediately folloir/uxj section. Thus before the operation, the hourly 

 yield was 41.2484; after the operation, the first hour it was 101.9245; the third 

 hour it was 120.995(3; the seventh hour it was 157.1249; and the twenty-third 

 hour, although the dog had been without food and was much exhausted, it was 

 155.0677. This one experiment is itself sufficient to throw grave doubt upon the 

 irritation theory. As I have in this paper given all the experiments as they were 

 performed, I here append the following, which at first seemed contradictory in its 

 results to those previously performed, but in which the autopsy proved that the 

 medulla was not severed. The chief value of the experiment is in showing that 

 wounds of the cerebellum have little efi'ect on the thermic functions of the body. 



