CELL THEORIES. 119 
were never used except when it was meant to 
predicate the existence of a cell-wall. 
For some years past I have, in teaching, been 
particular in this matter of nomenclature, believing 
that misleading names do generate confused ideas, 
and that no conventional compact can make it 
judicious to designate a solid mass by a word 
which indicates a hollow vesicle, or advisable to 
use a common word in a sense at variance with its 
usual meaning. It is as if we were to invest the 
tongs with the scientific name of poker. “There 
is nothing, I can assure you, gentlemen,” said 
Goodsir, “which has more retarded science and 
philosophy, and the kindred subjects on which 
human reason has been employed, than the intro- 
duction of terms with conventional meanings.” 
But I admit that it is difficult to escape from an 
accustomed groove, and that for a time one must 
be content, under protest, to speak occasionally of 
secreting cells, nerve-cells, hepatic cells, and so 
forth ; were it for no other reason than to be in 
harmony with the language of text-books, in speak- 
ing to students. 
The changes in the anatomical conception of the 
living corpuscle have not been without their influ- 
ence on the physiological conception. In the days 
when the cell-wall was paramount, it seemed an 
