AS REGARDS PROTOPLASM, ETC. 31 



to the inside of the lips as a seat for them, they bear to the red 

 corpuscles only the proportion of 1 to 450. This disproportion, 

 however, is no bar to Mr Huxley's derivation of the latter from 

 the former. But the fact is questioned. The Germans, gener- 

 ally, for their part, describe the colourless, or vagrant, blood- 

 corpuscles as probably media of conjugation or reparation, but 

 acknowledge their function to be as yet quite unknown ; while 

 Rindfleisch, characterising the spleen as the grave of the red, 

 and the womb of the white, corpuscles, evidently refers the 

 latter to the former. This, indeed, is a matter of direct asser- 

 tion with Preyer, who has " shown that pieces of red blood- 

 corpuscles may be eaten by the amoeboid cells of the frog," and 

 holds that the latter (the white corpuscles) proceed directly from 

 the former (the red corpuscles) ; so that it seems to be deter- 

 mined in the meantime that there is no proof of the reverse 

 being the fact). 



In function, then, to resume, some protoplasm is vagrant, 

 and of unknown use. Some again produces pepsine, and some 

 fat. Some at least contains pigment. Then there is nerve- 

 protoplasm, brain-protoplasm, bone-protoplasm, muscle-proto- 

 plasm, and protoplasm of all the other tissues, no one of which 

 but produces only its own kind, and is uninterchangeable with 

 the rest. Lastly, on this head, we have to point to the over- 

 whelming fact that there is the infinitely different protoplasm 

 of the various infinitely different plants and animals, in each of 

 which its own protoplasm, as in the case of that of the various 

 tissues, but produces its own kind, and is uninterchangeable 

 with that of the rest. 



It may be objected, indeed, that these latter are examples of 

 modified protoplasm. The objection of modification, as said, we 

 have to see by itself later ; but, in the meantime, it may be 

 asked, Where are we to begin, not to have modified protoplasm? 

 We have the example of Mr Huxley himself, who, 'in the nettle- 

 sting, begins already with modified protoplasm ; and we have 

 the authority of Rindfleisch for asserting that " in every differ- 

 ent tissue we must look for a different initial term of the 

 productive series." This, evidently, is a very strong light on 

 the original multiplicity of protoplasm, which the consideration, 

 as we have seen, of the various plants and animals, has made, 

 further, infinite. This is enough ; but there is no wish to evade 

 beginning with the very beginning with absolutely pure 

 initial protoplasm, if it can but be given us in any reference. 

 The simple egg that, probably, is the beginning that, pro- 

 bably, is the original identity ; yet even there we find already 

 distribution of the identity into infinite difference. This, certainly, 

 with reference to the various organisms, but with reference also 

 to the various tissues. That we regard the egg as the begin- 



