594 report— 1878. 



Claude Bernard, in truth, left his mark deeply on every aspect of physiology on 

 which he touched. His discoveries, however, as regards the functions of the pan- 

 creas, of the liver, and concerning the vasomotor system of nerves, are those on 

 which his fame will ever chiefly rest. 



It is not too much to say, that, prior to the communications made by Bernard 

 to the Soci6te de Biologie, little or nothing definite was known of the normal 

 action of the pancreatic fluid. Even a popular audience can form a judgment as 

 to the practical value of Bernard's researches in this direction. Before the pub- 

 lication of his memoir the fluid secreted by the pancreas was regarded as something 

 destined to dilute the bile and render it less acrid — its true action as a liquid taking 

 a special and active part in. the digestion of particular kinds of food was, we may 

 say, unknown. Bernard was the first physiologist who obtained pure, healthy 

 pancreatic fluid from a living animal. It was he who showed its reaction. He 

 demonstrated its extraordinary digestive power, not only over fats, but over other 

 alimentary matters. He proved it to be the only one of the digestive liquids which 

 at once forms a complete and permanent emulsion with fats. It is true Dr. Richard 

 Bright had before (in 1832) observed fatty diarrhoea as existing in cases of organic 

 disease of the pancreas, but, in fact, his observations were barren, and did not 

 serve to direct attention to the action of the pancreatic fluid in digestion until 

 after Bernard's discoveries threw additional light on the question. Bernard's 

 researches on this subject have been so thorough and complete that he has left 

 little to be learned. Yet there are many excellent physicians, who in their daily 

 practice profit by his discoveries, who know little of the steps by which these dis- 

 coveries were made. They prescribe pepsine and pancreatine in one form or 

 another, but oftentimes they know as little of the discoverers of these agents as the 

 cheesemonger does about the secretion or coagulation of the milk from which the 

 cheese is made which he sells over his counter. It is hardly honest in such per- 

 sons to form and express a dogmatic opinion upon what experimental physiology 

 has done for practice without conscientiously endeavouring to inform themselves 

 on this subject. 



As regards the work accomplished by the liver in the animal economy, Bernard 

 did nearly as much as he did for the pancreas. As every one knows, the liver is a 

 large organ ; it performs duties the importance of which to the health and happi- 

 ness of mankind can hardly be overrated. Yet up to the year 1857 medical men 

 were in absolute ignorance of one half of what the liver does. They knew that it 

 secreted bile ; it was reserved for Bernard to discover another and no less impor- 

 tant function hitherto unknown. The majority of those engaged in practice even 

 still, I believe, look upon the liver as if the principal duty of this gland were 

 nothing else than the secretion of bile. It is certain, however, that it does other 

 work, little, if at all, inferior in importance to the formation of biliary matters, and 

 quite as necessary to the maintenance of health. Its power of making and storing 

 up for a time within its cells, a material resembling starch, constitutes, without 

 doubt, one of its most important functions. This no person will for a moment 

 doubt who takes the trouble of ascertaining by experiment the immense increase 

 or diminution in bulk which the liver may be made to undergo in the space of a 

 few days by such changes of diet as increase or diminish the amount of this starch- 

 like material in its tissue. 



It was in March 1857, that Bernard announced the important discovery of a 

 material formed by the liver closely resembling starch or rather dextrine of vege- 

 table origin, and, like it, readily changing into sugar in the presence of ferments. 

 Some of those present are aware that I have ventured to differ from my illustrious 

 teacher as to the ultimate destination of this substance in the animal economy. I 

 prefer, therefore, to designate it by another name than that which he gave to it. 

 He called it sugar-forming substance (glycogenic substance or glycogene). This 

 name involves the supposition that it is destined for the formation of sugar. It is 

 not quite fair in science to give names which point directly to one's own theory.' 

 As some of those who, like Dr. Pavy and myself, have investigated this subject 

 with a good deal of care, have still reason to doubt the sugar-forming theory as 

 regards this substance, we naturally prefer a name which does not involve this 

 supposition. We wish it to be called animal starch or dextrine (amyloid substance 



