Ixxiv Journal of Comparative Neurology. 



spots to temperature spots is discussed in the third communication. 

 The termini swellings ( endkolben ) described by Krause and Dogiel are 

 regarded as cold termini. The nerve skeins {Nervtnknaeuel) of Tomsa 

 and Krause and Rufifini's termini are regarded as warm termini. Meiss- 

 ner's corpuscles are the tactile termini. 



To our mind the introduction of so much purely hypothetical mor- 

 phology does not promote confidence in either the physiological results 

 or the conclusions deduced from them. 



c. J. H. 



Pain Nerves. 



In the September Psychological Review Herbert Nichols severely 

 criticises Dr. Strong's article in the July number because of its state- 

 ment " that the evidence seems on the whole to indicate that pain im- 

 pulses are exaggerations of tactile, heat and cold impulses, and are 

 conducted by the same nerves." Mr. Nichols admits that there is not 

 a particle of anatomical evidence for separate "pain fibres" but we 

 think betrays ignorance of modern histology when he summarizes the 

 objections to the Wundt theory as follows: "First the numerous 

 cases, normal and pathological, of pain without accompanying sensa- 

 tions of touch, heat or cold. Next, its demand for a much more 

 comphcated and duplex arrangement of our sensory nervous systems — 

 cranial as well as cord — than present anatomy gives any suggestion of." 

 It is much to be questioned whether, as Mr. Nichols farther claims, the 

 phenomena are " more reasonably explained by the very simple theory 

 of pain nerves." If the recent remarkable advances in our knowledge 

 of the cord have shown anything it would seem to be that the paths by 

 which a stimulus may ascend from the dorsal roots are extremely com- 

 plicated. There is abundant reason to assume that super-potent stimuli 

 may find their way ( a trifle more slowly ) through multineuritic paths 

 and reach other termini than normal sensory stimuli. There is a curi- 

 ous obscurity in the idea that an exaggerated stimulus will necessarily 

 produce a sensation of the same kind as normal one. This implies a 

 " specific energy " theory with decided Hmitations. We do not con- 

 sider the phraseology of Dr. Strong's paper happy but it is certainly as 

 easy to reconcile our present anatomical and physiological knowledge 

 with a " shunt theory " as it is to find any opportunity for purely hypo- 

 thetical pain nerves. The psychological bearing of the former has 

 been already discussed by the writer in this Journal. 



c. L. H. 



