426 



SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT. 



chemist puts together these substances in the laboratory 

 are rarely the methods adopted by nature in the 

 living organism, and in many cases the product itself, 

 though apparently the same, is yet essentially different.^ 



^ This touches on a very im- 

 portant point, which is much 

 emphasised in all the best modern 

 treatises on the subject. Claude 

 Bernard in all his writings insisted 

 on the fundamental difference be- 

 tween the processes going on in the 

 organism and those that go on in 

 the laboratory of the organic chem- 

 ist, though the two produce fre- 

 quently the same apparent result. 

 " Si les forces que I'ctre vivaut met 

 en jeu dans ses manifestations vitales 

 ne lui appartiennent pas et rentrent 

 toutes dans les lois de la physico- 

 chimie generale, les instruments et 

 les procedes h I'aide desquels il les 

 fait apparaitre lui sont certainement 

 speciaux. En effet, I'organisme 

 manifeste ses phenomcnes pliysico- 

 chimiques ou mecaniques a I'aide 

 des elements histologiques cellu- 

 laires, epitheliaux, musculaires, ner- 

 veux, &c. II emploie done de pro- 

 c(5des, c"est-k-dire des outils organ- 

 iques qui n'appartiennent qu'a lui. 

 C'est pourquoi le cliimiste, qui peut 

 refaire, dans son laboratoire, les 

 produits de la nature vivante, ue 

 saurait jamais imiter ses procedes, 

 parce qui il ne peut pas creer les in- 

 struments organiques elementaires 

 qui les executent. Cela revient a 

 dire que tons les appareils des etres 

 organises out une morphologie qui 

 leur est pro pre " ('Rapport,' &c., 

 1867, p. 135). Quite recently 

 Bunge [loc. cit., p. 313) has said, 

 " All our artificial sj'ntheses can 

 only be achieved by the application 

 of forces and agents which can never 

 play a part in vital processes, such 

 as extreme pressure, high tempera- 

 ture, concentrated mineral acids, 

 free chlorine — factors which are 

 immediately fatal to the living 



cell. ... It follows that the animal 

 body has command of ways and 

 means of a totally different char- 

 acter, by which the same object is 

 gained." A very interesting specu- 

 lation, referring specially to this 

 point, was put forward by the 

 eminent physiologist, Prof. E. 

 Pfliiger of Bonn, in the year 1875. 

 It is fully discussed in Verworn's 

 frequently quoted work on General 

 Physiology (pp. 304, 311, 482). 

 The theory is based upon the le- 

 markable part which the compound 

 radicle cyanogen seems to play in 

 the organism. Pfliiger starts from 

 the fundamental characteristics of 

 the substance called proteid, with 

 which life is inseparably con- 

 nected. Proteid is known to exist 

 in a stable form in food-stuffs, for 

 instance in egg albumen. But this 

 is not the same as the proteid con- 

 tained in living matter. In the 

 latter it is not stable, but is being 

 continually decomposed. The de- 

 composition was found to be due 

 to the ox J' gen that occurs in the 

 living proteid molecule. This oxy- 

 gen, which is intramolecular, being 

 continually received from outside 

 by respiration, transforms the more 

 stable molecule into an unstable 

 labile molecule. In further follow- 

 ing the clue afforded by this pro- 

 perty, and comparing the decom- 

 position products of living proteid 

 with those obtained by artificial 

 oxidation of dead proteid, Pfliiger 

 is led to the conclusion that the 

 presence of the radicle cyanogen in 

 the living proteid will explain the 

 difference. " In the formation of 

 cell-substance — i.e., of living proteid 

 — out of food proteid, a change of 

 the latter takes place, the atoms of 



