< 4 THe MIcROSCOPE. ~ 
a section from the costal cartilage of an old individual, stain 
in hematoxylin and mount. The cells will be found somewhat 
shrunken and granular, the capsule much thickened, and the form- 
erly homogeneous intercellular substance transformed largely into 
fibrous tissue. This latter change begins quite early, in fact nearly 
all specimens of costal cartilage will show the beginning of fibrilla- 
tion of the ground substance. Calcification is a common degenera- 
tion of cartilage. It generally begins in the neighborhood of the 
cells, and extends from them into the intercellular substance. The 
deposit, composed of the salts of lime, is easily recognized as a gran- 
ular opaque substance. Cartilage obtained from frogs often shows 
this deposit. 
It may be mentioned here that the so-called tarsal cartilages 
found in the eyelids are not cartilaginous, but are composed of 
fibrous tissue. 
ED4AT ORVAL 4 
AN INTERNATIONAL EPISODE. 
T the last meeting of the A. 8S. M., at Columbus, Prof. A. J, 
Detmers read a paper detailing the conclusion at which he 
arrived, after a careful examination and comparison of certain foreign 
with American objectives. A report of Dr. Detmers’ remarks ap- 
peared in several journals, and, as a result, there bids fair to be 
opened up another international controversy, which, however, will 
consist principally in explanations. 
Dr. Roderick Zeiss, son of the famous maker of microscopes, 
Carl Zeiss and Dr. Van Heurck, well known for his diatom photo- 
micrographs, etc, in the Journal de Micrographie, have 
taken up the cudgels, and if there were cause, there might be 
waged a mighty war of words. To our’ question regarding this 
matter, however, Dr. Detmers replies that the reports of his remarks 
do him, as well as Dr. Zeiss, great injustice, but that he does not 
hold himself responsible for any newspaper or journal article that 
does not bear his signature. ‘‘ What I did say,” writes Dr. Det- 
mers, ‘‘ has never yet been published, but will appear in the pro- 
ceedings of the meeting of the American Society of Microscopists, 
now in print, over my own signature. * * * TI have no quarrel 
with Dr. Roderick Zeiss, nor with any other optician. On the con- 
trary, I highly esteem Dr. Zeiss and the excellent work which he has 
turned out.” 
