45 



In the frog and newt, however, he has demonstrated the 

 ganglia, and traced from them the nerves which he has traced 

 to their ultimate distribution around the tubes and capillary- 

 vessels of the kidney.^ 



These nerves and ganglia, mainly derived from the sym- 

 pathetic, in connection with those referred to as described 

 by Dr. Beale in the secreting portion of the kidney, also from 

 the same source, are believed by the latter physiologist to be 

 a part of a system of afferent and efferent nerves, distributed 

 to the capillaries and tubules of the kidney, by means of 

 which so-called nervous influences, as emotions, and it might 

 be added also, in some instances at least, remedies, produce 

 their effect upon the secretion of this organ. The ganglia 

 are considered as bearing the same relation to the kidney 

 that the ganglia, believed by many to be in connection with 

 the cardiac nerves, bear to the heart. The nerves distri- 

 buted to the walls of the uriniferous tubes, are believed to be 

 afferent or sensory, conveying to the centres an impression, 

 the response to which is conveyed by the efferent nerves, or 

 those distributed to the capillaries, whereby the latter dilate 

 or contract their calibre. Thus, these nerves regulate the 

 supply of blood to the secreting structure of the kidney, 

 producing on the one hand an abundant and rapid supply, 

 accompanied by a distended vessel and proportionate secre- 

 tion of watery urine ; on the other, a diminished and slower 

 current, and corresponding secretions of urine, probably 

 containing a larger amount of solid ingredients. 



If these views are correct, and they certainly involve no 

 dislocation of the principles of deductive and analogical rea- 

 soning, in connection with the recent accepted views of the 

 function of the sympathetic, they become most important 

 not only in explaining physiological and pathological pheno- 

 mena of the kidney, but also in their relation to therapeutics, 

 while they account most satisfactorily for certain recognized 

 phenomena in the secretion of urine. It would seem that 

 their correctness must rest entirely upon that of the observa- 

 tions. If the facts be correctly observed, it would appear to 

 me that the view is at least a legitimate conclusion, though, 

 in the uncertainty of our science, it may not be the only one. 



If, then, so much depends upon the accuracy of observa- 

 tion, it is exceedingly important that other observers should 

 go over them, to confirm if possible, or to deny if need be. 

 To this end, it is hoped, these efforts contribute. 



It can scarcely be objected to the conclusions drawn that 

 the facts have not all been demonstrated in a single species i 

 ' Ibid., p. 16. 



