2 ANDREWS. 



which, however they may read, here and there, under such con- 

 straint as hypothesis and argument, are but summarized facts. 



The work, at time of its doing, embodied an appeal to the 

 normal, living substance, as against " preserved " and tortured 

 states, in which the prevailing standpoint delighted, and from 

 which even workers of physiological bias had not freed them- 

 selves. 



As pioneer work it then ran sufficiently counter to prevail- 

 ing enthusiasms to be in danger of harsh dealing ; to-day it 

 may hope for some scattered sympathy. A direct, independent 

 appeal to protoplasm, per se, which I have been led to call in 

 terms of my results, the living substance, as such; it was unham- 

 pered by theory or predilection, except what may be described 

 as a belief in life-genii more complex and more potent than 

 even surface tension and osmosis. 



The work was carried on partly at the Marine Laboratory at 

 Wood's Holl, partly at the University of Pennsylvania, and fin- 

 ished in the spring of 1894. It was assisted by constant study, 

 during the preceding ten years, of many of the forms then 

 used for specialized research. The very full memoranda made 

 always at the moment have since been confirmed by frequent 

 and iterated observations on the same, or closely allied, mate- 

 rial. A few new facts gained in the course of these are omitted 

 here, since they are in the nature of confirmation purely, and 

 the mass of facts was already too great to be used in toto. 



All controversial references, except a few to Biitschli's epoch- 

 making work on protoplasm, to which I owe much, and which 

 gave the point of departure for these researches, have been 

 omitted, both because the work, save for this, was wholly inde- 

 pendent, and because such reference would have increased the 

 paper to a size unsuitable even for book form.^ 



And a controversial tone is wholly unnecessary, since the 

 facts harmonize rather than clash with all other well-authenti- 

 cated facts known to me. 



^ As an understanding of Biitschli's views is advisable for perfect comprehen- 

 sion of this paper, it is recommended to those who have not opportunity to read 

 his whole work, to read a review of it by Dr. E. A. Andrews which appeared in 

 Science, N.s., vol. II, Dec. 27, 1895. ^"^ Biitschli's magnificent work the existing 

 theories are reviewed. 



