﻿312 
  AlSTNtJAL 
  REPORT 
  SMITHSONIAN" 
  INSTITUTION, 
  192 
  9 
  

  

  lives 
  and 
  acts 
  by 
  virtue 
  of 
  this. 
  The 
  cells 
  of 
  a 
  human 
  brain 
  continue 
  

   to 
  act 
  because 
  the 
  blood 
  stream 
  brings 
  to 
  them 
  chemical 
  free 
  energy 
  

   in 
  the 
  form 
  of 
  sugar 
  and 
  oxygen. 
  Stop 
  the 
  stream 
  for 
  a 
  second 
  and 
  

   consciousness 
  vanishes. 
  Without 
  that 
  sugar 
  and 
  oxygen 
  there 
  could 
  

   be 
  no 
  thought, 
  no 
  sweet 
  sonnets 
  of 
  a 
  Shakespeare, 
  no 
  joy, 
  and 
  no 
  

   sorrow. 
  

  

  To 
  say, 
  however, 
  that 
  the 
  tide 
  of 
  life 
  ebbs 
  and 
  flows 
  within 
  the 
  limits 
  

   fixed 
  by 
  the 
  laws 
  of 
  energy, 
  and 
  that 
  living 
  beings 
  are 
  in 
  this 
  respect 
  no 
  

   higher 
  and 
  no 
  lower 
  than 
  the 
  dead 
  things 
  around 
  us 
  is 
  not 
  to 
  resolve 
  

   the 
  mystery. 
  Consider 
  for 
  a 
  moment 
  a 
  few 
  of 
  the 
  phenomena 
  exhib- 
  

   ited 
  by 
  living 
  things. 
  The 
  fertilization 
  of 
  the 
  ovum, 
  the 
  growth 
  of 
  the 
  

   embryo, 
  the 
  growth 
  of 
  the 
  complete 
  individual, 
  the 
  harmonious 
  organ- 
  

   ization 
  of 
  the 
  individual, 
  the 
  phenomena 
  of 
  inheritance, 
  of 
  memory, 
  

   of 
  adaptation, 
  of 
  evolution. 
  Viewing 
  these 
  phenomena 
  in 
  the 
  light 
  of 
  

   the 
  facts 
  known 
  to 
  physics 
  and 
  chemistry, 
  it 
  is 
  little 
  wonder 
  that 
  some 
  

   modern 
  philosophers 
  have 
  followed 
  in 
  the 
  steps 
  of 
  certain 
  older 
  ones 
  

   and 
  seen 
  in 
  the 
  phenomena 
  of 
  life 
  the 
  operation 
  of 
  some 
  strange 
  and 
  

   unknown 
  vital 
  force, 
  some 
  "entelechy," 
  some 
  expanding 
  vital 
  impulse; 
  

   or 
  at 
  least 
  some 
  new 
  and 
  undiscovered 
  form 
  of 
  "bio 
  tic" 
  or 
  "nervous" 
  

   energy. 
  It 
  is 
  difficult 
  to 
  resist 
  the 
  comparison 
  of 
  the 
  developing 
  

   embryo 
  with 
  the 
  building 
  of 
  a 
  house 
  to 
  the 
  plans 
  of 
  an 
  invisible 
  archi- 
  

   tect. 
  Growth 
  and 
  development 
  seem 
  to 
  proceed 
  on 
  a 
  definite 
  plan 
  

   and 
  apparently 
  purposeful 
  adaptation 
  confronts 
  us 
  at 
  many 
  stages 
  of 
  

   life. 
  How 
  can 
  the 
  differential 
  equations 
  of 
  physics 
  or 
  the 
  laws 
  of 
  

   physical 
  chemistry 
  attempt 
  to 
  explain 
  or 
  describe 
  such 
  strange 
  and 
  

   apparently 
  marvelous 
  phenomena? 
  The 
  answer 
  to 
  this 
  question 
  was 
  

   given 
  more 
  than 
  50 
  years 
  ago 
  by 
  the 
  great 
  French 
  physiologist, 
  Claude 
  

   Bernard. 
  We 
  must 
  patiently 
  proceed, 
  he 
  said, 
  by 
  the 
  method 
  of 
  gen- 
  

   eral 
  physiology. 
  This 
  is 
  the 
  fundamental 
  biological 
  science 
  toward 
  

   which 
  all 
  others 
  converge. 
  Its 
  method 
  consists 
  in 
  determining 
  the 
  

   elementary 
  condition 
  of 
  the 
  phenomena 
  of 
  life. 
  We 
  must 
  decompose 
  

   or 
  analyze 
  the 
  great 
  mass 
  phenomena 
  of 
  life 
  into 
  their 
  elementary 
  unit 
  

   or 
  constituent 
  phenomena. 
  That 
  was 
  the 
  great 
  answer 
  given 
  by 
  

   Claude 
  Bernard. 
  It 
  is 
  worthy 
  of 
  a 
  Newton 
  or 
  an 
  Einstein. 
  It 
  

   sounded 
  the 
  clarion 
  note 
  of 
  a 
  new 
  era 
  of 
  biological 
  science. 
  To-day 
  

   general 
  physiology 
  in 
  its 
  application 
  of 
  physics, 
  chemistry, 
  and 
  physical 
  

   chemistry 
  to 
  the 
  operations 
  of 
  the 
  living 
  cell 
  is 
  the 
  fundamental 
  science 
  

   of 
  life. 
  Patiently 
  pursued, 
  and 
  step 
  by 
  step, 
  it 
  is 
  unraveling 
  the 
  mys- 
  

   tery. 
  The 
  late 
  Professor 
  Bayliss 
  was 
  one 
  of 
  the 
  greatest 
  of 
  the 
  pioneer 
  

   successors 
  of 
  Claude 
  Bernard 
  in 
  England. 
  Another 
  of 
  the 
  greatest 
  

   ones 
  was 
  Jacques 
  Loeb 
  in 
  America, 
  whose 
  death 
  we 
  all 
  so 
  deeply 
  de- 
  

   plore. 
  Although 
  it 
  is 
  always 
  invidious 
  to 
  mention 
  the 
  names 
  of 
  living 
  

   men, 
  it 
  is 
  good 
  to 
  think 
  that 
  in 
  England 
  to-day 
  we 
  possess 
  three 
  of 
  the 
  

   greatest 
  living 
  exponents 
  of 
  general 
  physiology, 
  namely, 
  Barcroft, 
  Hill, 
  

   and 
  Hopkins, 
  while 
  in 
  America 
  the 
  great 
  work 
  of 
  Jacques 
  Loeb 
  is 
  

  

  