120 Alison on the Theori/ ascribing Secretion 



through its nerves from the brain and spinal marrow, can only 

 have intercepted a small portion of that galvanism, it is surely 

 reasonable to suspect, that the effect is to be explained on other 

 principles than the interception of galvanism or of any other in- 

 fluence essential to secretion derived from the nerves. 



is likewise particularly worthy of notice, that the secretion 



urine, although it was found to be destroyed, in Mr. Brodie's 

 experiments, by division of the spinal marrow at its upper part, 

 was not affected in these experiments of Dr. Philip, by the 

 destruction of the lower half of that organ, I believe it will be 

 allowed, that the kidneys have at least as much communication 

 with the spinal marrow by their nerves as the stomach has : and 

 therefore, when we find the secretion of the stomach suppressed 

 by an injury of that organ, which does not aflfect the secretion at 

 the kidneys, it seems fair to presume, that it is not by inter- 

 cepting an influence essential to secretion that the injury pro- 

 duces the former effect. 



2. This suspicion must become much stronger when these 

 cases of suppression of the secretion of the stomach, from the 

 destruction of part of the spinal marrow, are contrasted with 

 the cases, of which there are many on record, of destruction of 

 large portions of the brain, which is supposed in this theory to 

 be the main source of nervous influence, without any affection 

 of the functions of secretion and nutrition. For an enumeration 

 of cases of this kind I refer to the review of Sir Everard Home's 

 late paper on the functions of the brain in Vol. XXIV of the 

 Edinburgh Review. When we find the secretions of the sto- 

 mach nearly destroyed by sudden destruction of a part of the 

 spinal marrow, and not at all affected by gradual destruction of 

 nearly the whole brain, we surely cannot consider the former 

 cause to operate merely by cutting off a supply of nervous in- 

 fluence coming from the brain and spinal marrow, but must re- 

 gard it as more probably on the same footing, with regard to 

 secretion, as the destruction of the spinal marrow in Le Gallois's 

 experiments, with regard to circulation, on which Dr. Philip 

 himself has so judiciously commented ; that is, as exemplifying, 

 not a continual and essential agency of changes in the nervous 



