112 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXVI. No. 656 



in the interior of the spleen is impossible.' 

 Even though Stohr can not see the lobules, or 

 structural units of the spleen, they are there, 

 and it is interesting to note that after tlie 

 publication of Mall's article there appeared 

 in the German edition of Stohr a diagram 

 which was constructed in accord with Mall's 

 description. If memory serves the writer cor- 

 rectly the lobule of the liver was doubted for 

 many a year. 



The development of the alimentary tract in 

 man has been worked out carefully by Mall 

 and his illustrations are very complete, but no 

 reference is made to it. Bensley has also 

 done work of high character on the stomach; 

 this is also ignored. 



The work of Mall on the liver came out 

 too late for the present edition, but it is to be 

 hoped that in a future edition it will receive 

 due recognition. The work of Hendrickson 

 on the bile capillaries and on the musculature 

 of the bile duets should not, however, have 

 been passed by. No use has been made of 

 the work of Opie on the pancreas and the 

 work of De Witt ia too recent to be incor- 

 porated in the text. 



In his statement on page 242 that " atria 

 are not recognized by German writers," Lewis 

 shows a lamentable ignorance of the German 

 literature on the subject. If he will but 

 glance through the volume by Oppel on the 

 organs of respiration or look into Spalteholtz's 

 atlas he will find abundant evidence to the 

 contrary. As was the case with the diagram 

 which Stohr gives of the lobule of the spleen, 

 so with his diagram of the lobule of the lung; 

 it is constructed after Miller's description, and 

 appeared first after his publication. The fact 

 that a German says a thing is so does not 

 make it " so and the converse is true. The 

 writer has a strong admiration for the German 

 worker and what is stated above in no way 

 reflects on his integrity; it only calls attention 

 to the narrowness of many American minds 

 in that they are not capable of judging work 

 on its own merits but must wait and " see 

 what the Germans say." 



The vascular supply of the ovary has been 

 followed out from the embryo to the adult 



by Clark and his diagrams are very helpful to 

 the student; but one looks in vain for any of 

 them. 



Flint's work on the adrenal and on the sub- 

 maxillary gland are apparently unknown to 

 Lewis. 



Miss Sabin's work on the medulla is surely 

 worthy of notice in an American edition of 

 any text-book on histology or anatomy, but 

 it, too, is ignored. 



There are many other Americans, who have 

 done work which is even recognized by the 

 Germans, who fail to find a place in this 

 American edition of Stohr. 



The book, however, is not without its merits. 

 Lewis has preserved the simple style of illus- 

 trations so successfully used in the German 

 editions and, in general, his selection of new 

 illustrations is good. The lettering of figure 

 147 is incorrect and one wonders just what 

 figure 228 B is intended by the author to 

 represent; but these are inconsequential; 

 probably they, as well as other inaccuracies, 

 have already been noted by the author himself, 

 as he has used the book in his laboratory. 



The use of the B. N. A. nomenclature is to 

 be commended. 



Lewis deserves much credit for showing us 

 the possibilities of an histology based on em- 

 bryology. The ideal histology is yet to be 

 written. There is much to be said in favor of 

 a modern book along the lines of Strieker's 

 ' Lehre von den Geweben,' each topic being 

 written by some one who has given special 

 attention to it. The only trouble with this 

 is that it would make too cumbersome a hock. 

 for the laboratory. Probably a book like 

 Howell's ' Physiology ' would be better. 



Whatever form the future histology may 

 take, it is to be hoped that more attention will 

 be paid to human tissues than in the past. In 

 the dissecting room the pig and dog have been 

 replaced with the human cadaver. Rabbit, 

 cat or frog histology is not human histology; 

 if, for any reason, it seems best to use these 

 tissues in the laboratory the student should be 

 informed from what animal the tissue is taken 

 and how it differs from the human. 



