PROTEOLYTIC FERMENTS 87 



ments, the proteolytic leucocytic enzymes, and their relation 

 to suppuration. The way the tissues break down in these 

 latter processes and the "eating" influence of the pus upon 

 the surrounding tissues, striking even for non-medical peo- 

 ple, is sure to suggest the idea of an association of fermenta- 

 tive changes. As a matter of fact, in a suppurative process 

 the digestive ferments of the leucocytes, of the bacteria, of 

 the blood plasma, and, too, those of the disintegrating 

 tissues, may all take part. 36 The importance of each par- 

 ticular factor is naturally difficult of definition. Some would 

 have it that the greater tendency of a staphylococcus infec- 

 tion (in comparison with a streptococcus infection) to 

 produce suppuration is due to a lower proteolytic power on 

 the part of the latter microorganisms. 37 It is probably quite 

 correct to ascribe to the white blood corpuscles an especially 

 marked digestive power. It is thought that in this respect 

 the polynuclear leucocytes are more important than the 

 mononuclears ; and that the lymphocytes develop scarcely 

 any proteolytic power. 38 According to Jochmann and 

 others the proportion of proteolytic enzymes in tissues and 

 essential body fluids depends very largely upon the number 

 of leucocytes present in them. By placing the tissues of 

 either the lymph glands, spleen, bone-marow or the blood of 

 myeloid leuksemic cases, or material from tuberculous lymph 

 nodes with mixed infection, or staphylococcus pus in the 

 incubator for a time on a Loeffler's plate, their diges- 

 tive power is shown by delle-erosion in the medium. In 

 contrast the tissue of normal lymphatic glands and, too, of 

 those in lymphatic leukaemia, and unmixed tuberculous 



88 H. G. Wells, Chemical Pathology, p. 93, 1907. 



87 Knapp, Zeitschr. f. Heilk. (Chirurgie), 23, 236, 1902. 



88 Literature upon Leucoproteases and Antileucoproteases : C. Oppen- 

 heimer, Die Fermente, 3d ed., pp. 216-221, 1910; cf. especially the works of 

 Opie and Barker, Jochmann and Muller and their associates (Ziegler, Locke- 

 mann, Kantarowitsch, Kolaczek), and also M. Fiessinger and P. L. Marie, 

 Journ. de Physiol., 11, 613, 1909. 



