CHYMIFICATION. 593 



bit, which, in its natural state, refuses animal food, should so completely 

 digest the stomach, as not to leave a trace of the parts acted upon. 

 Dr. Philip remarks, that he has never seen the stomach eaten through 

 except at the larger end; but, in other parts, the external membrane 

 has been injured. Mr. A. Burns, 1 however, affirms, that in several 

 instances he found the forepart of the stomach perforated, about an 

 inch from the pylorus, and midway between the smaller and larger 

 curvatures. 



From all these facts, then, we are justified in concluding, that the 

 food in the stomach is subjected to the action of a secretion, which alters 

 its properties, and is the principal agent in converting it into chyme. 



But many physiologists, whilst they admit, that the change effected 

 in the stomach is of a chemical character, contend, that the nature of 

 the action is unlike what takes place in any other chemical process, 

 and is, therefore, necessarily organic and vital, and appertaining to 

 vital chemistry. Such are the sentiments of Messrs. Fordyce, 2 Brous- 

 sais, 3 Chaussier, and Adelon, 4 and others. Dr. Prout suggests, that 

 the stomach must have, within certain limits, the power of organizing 

 and vitalizing the different alimentary substances; so as to render 

 them fit for being brought into more intimate union with a living body, 

 than the crude aliments can be supposed to be. It is impossible, he 

 conceives, to imagine, that this organizing agency of the stomach can 

 be chemical. It is vital, and its nature completely unknown. The 

 physiologist should not, however, have recourse to this explanation, 

 until every other has failed him. It is, in truth, another method of 

 expressing his ignorance, when he affirms, that any function is executed 

 in an organic or vital manner ; nor is this mode of explaining the con- 

 version of the aliment into chyme necessary ; the secretion of the mat- 

 ters that are the great agents of chymification is doubtless vital ; but 

 when once secreted, the changes, effected upon the food, are probably 

 unmodified by any vital interference, except what occurs from tempera- 

 ture, agitation, &c., which can only be regarded as auxiliaries in the 

 function. It is in this way, that digestion is influenced by the nervous 

 system. 



The effect of the different emotions on the digestive function is often 

 evinced, and has already been alluded to ; but the importance of the 

 nervous influence to it has been elucidated, in an interesting manner to 

 the physiologist, of late years chiefly. Baglivi, 5 having tied the nerves 

 of the eighth pair in dogs, found that they were affected with nausea 

 and vomiting, and obstinately refused food. Since Baglivi's time, the 

 same results have been obtained by many physiologists. M. De Blain- 

 ville, having repeated the operation on pigeons, found the vetch in their 

 crops entirely unchanged, and chymification totally prevented. Messrs. 

 Legallois, 6 Brodie, 7 Philip, 8 Dupuy, Clarke Abel, Hastings, 9 and others 



1 Edinb. Med. and Surg. Journal, vi. 132. 2 On the Digestion of Food, 2d edit., Lond., 1791. 



3 Traite de Physiologic, &c., translated by Drs. Bell and La Roche, p. 323. 



4 Diet, des Sciences Medicates, ix. 



5 Opera Omnia, Lugd. Bat., 1745. Sur le Principe de la Vie, p. 214, Paris, 1842. 

 7 Phil. Trans, for 1814. 8 Experimental Inquiry, &c., Lond., 1817. 



9 Journal of Science and Arts., vii. ix. x. xi. and xii. 



VOL. i.- 38 



