30 



GRRHANS ') absolutely disproves its existence. He sajs: "Es besitzt 

 der Z<']Jlinufen ^) den man Tastkörper nennt, nicht einmal eine 

 eigene uinschliessende Membran. Ueberal stossen die perjpheren 

 Zeilen direct an das umgebende Bindegewebe, nnd nur nacli langerer 

 Einwirkung eines Reagenzes kann es vorkommen, dasz das starre 

 Aussehen der Bindegewebsscliichten eine eigene Menibran vortausclit". 



Likewise Rouget, Tafani, Izquerdo, Hoggan, Leontowitch absolu- 

 tely deny the existence of a capsule. Meissner, Renaut, Krause, 

 Wolfe, Kolt-man and Lefebure consider it as a single endothelial 

 membrane. Lefebure*): "una simple lume conjoncture doublée sur 

 une face profonde par un feuillet endothelial". From all this it 

 follows that the hypothesis brought forward by Dogiel, Ruffini, 

 Thomsa and Koi.i,iker that the corpuscles are provided with a true 

 lamella-capsule, is hardly tenable. The very gradations (and they 

 are many) between Meissner's corpuscles and the free endings go 

 far to substantiate a jiriori the opinion of Langerhans, who appears 

 to have studied the organs under consideration thoroughly. They 

 also support Botezat's view when he puts Meissner's corpuscles on 

 a level with the complicate, non-capsuled Merkel's corpuscles. In 

 virtue of my personal inquiry 1 incline to Langerhans's view, as 

 will appear lower down. 



Finally let us bestow consideration upon the |)roblem of the 

 genetic connections between the free endings and the tactile bodies 

 with the subpapillary network. 



If we confine ourselves to the more modern authors, we mention 

 the names of Bethk, Prentiss, Botezat, Leontowitch, Sfameni and 

 Dogiel "), who have, all of them, discussed more or less minutely 

 the subepithelial network and its connections with the nerve-endorgans. 



Botezat differs fi-om the other investigators in that he considers 

 the network to be independent of tactile corpu.scles. This follows 

 from his opinion that the rete amielinica, is built up of fibers of the 

 so-called 2^' sort '"). But for the rest, he sides with the Italian School, 



1) Arch. f. Micr. Anal. IX J 873. 

 -) The italics are mine. 

 ^) Revue gen. d'histol. 1909. 



•*) Bethe. AlJgemeine Anat. und Phys. des Nervensystems. Leipzig 1903 

 Prentiss. Journ. of Gomp. neur. XIV 1904. 

 Botezat I.e. 



Leontowitch Int. Men. XVIII 1901. 

 Sfameni, Dogiel I.e. 



») Medullated fibers losing their myefin already in the nerve-trunk. It seems 

 doubtful whether these fibers are still to be considered as a separate group. 



