144 KIYOYASU MARUI 



situation more clearly; but his interpretation seems to be wrong 

 in so far as he wanted to explain these figures as his 'nervous 

 pericellular terminal net,' which according to his opinion lies 

 alternating with the Golgi net on the surface of the nerve cell. 

 I shall come back to the argument on this point later. As men- 

 tioned, Held (18) denied Bethe's opinion concerning the direct 

 transition of the neurites into the Golgi net; also Economo (15) 

 figured such a picture (table 3, fig. 25), but he remained in agree- 

 ment with Held. I have already remarked that my prepara- 

 tions (figs. 5, 6, and 11) showed indisputably the close relation 

 between the Golgi net and the neurites; I could even demonstrate 

 pretty often delicate deep brown impregnated nerve fibers in the 

 beams of the Golgi net, as shown in figures 3, 6, and 11, which 

 arrive at the surface of the ceil. Bethe (7) enumerated five points 

 in his paper which according to him speak in favor of the con- 

 nection of neurites with the Golgi net and in favor of the nerv- 

 ous nature of the Golgi net. With regard to his second argu- 

 ment, that the Golgi net is always dense and fine in places of the 

 central nervous system where numerous axis-cylinders ramify, I 

 would mention that in the axone cap of Mauthner's cell, where 

 abundant axone-fibers form a dense plexus, the Golgi net struc- 

 ture offers a very thick conglomeration. As far as Bethe's third 

 argument goes, concerning the probability of demonstrating the 

 neurofibrils in Golgi net beams, I can explicitly assert that I 

 could without doubt find the nerve fibers in the latter, as I 

 stated already. I believe I have settled this point, on which 

 Bethe (7) was not sure himself. At the same time I must em- 

 phasize that I could not confirm Bethe's statement, that the 

 neurofibrils form a net-work in the net beams ; as I shall discuss 

 in the following chapter, I do not find any net-work of the nerve 

 fibers in the synapse of Mauthner's cell. Although these argu- 

 ments of Bethe, as Held (18) declared with good reasons, give 

 merely indirect proofs for the nervous nature of the Golgi net, 

 I think they indicate at least that the neurites have something 

 to do with the Golgi net. I do not mean by that, however, at 

 all, that the Golgi net is a nervous structure. Now one might 



