220 The Physiology of Digestion [lect. 



"stomach which converts the aliment into a fluid resembling 

 " the blood." He adds, " It is probable that every species of 

 "animal has its peculiar gastric liquor capable of dissolving 

 " certain substances only." The conclusions are almost identical 

 with those of Spallanzani, but did not attract so much attention 

 as did those of the Italian philosopher. 



About the time that Spallanzani was conducting his re- 

 searches on digestion, the great English Surgeon John Hunter 

 was also turning his attention to the same subject. In 1772 

 he published in the Philosophical Transactions a paper 

 " On the Digestion of the Stomach after Death " ; and his 

 " Observations on Certain Parts of the Animal Economy," 

 the first edition of which appeared in 1786, contains a memoir 

 entitled M Observations on Digestion." In the latter publication 

 Hunter went out of his way not only to say that a statement 

 by Reaumur which he quotes "is to be set down as a piece 

 " of anatomical ignorance," but also to criticise severely several 

 particular experiments of Spallanzani as well as his general 

 method of inquiry. He complained of Spallanzani as being 

 deficient in anatomical knowledge, and in that " like all mere 

 " experiment-makers, he is not satisfied even with those which 

 " are clear and decisive, but multiplies them most unnecessarily." 

 He explained how in his view experiments ought to be con- 

 ducted and adds that "if Spallanzani had employed half his 

 " time in this way * * * he had employed his time much 

 " better than in making experiments without end." This rude 

 and disdainful criticism Spallanzani answered and adequately 

 rebuked in a dignified manner in a letter published in 1788. 

 One cannot help suspecting that the tone of Hunter's remarks 

 was in part at least due to a want of sympathy between 

 Spallanzani's general views and his own. For Spallanzani 

 was eminently free from all vitalistic tendencies. On the other 

 hand, to understand Hunter's views it must be borne in mind 

 that he distinctly belonged to the school of Stahl though he 

 replaced the phrase ' sensitive soul ' by that of ' vital principle.' 



"An animal substance," says he, "when joined with the 

 " living principle, cannot undergo any change in its properties 

 " but as an animal ; this principle always acting and preserving 



