134 
FIFTEENTH REPORT. 
It lias not yet been determined just what relation surface tension 
has to the mass of data on antagonism. Perhaps with our present 
knowledge this relation is immeasurable, but it is true that surface 
tension plays a fundamental role in osmosis if we are to accept the 
work of B. Moore. 17 Recently, surface tension phenomena have 
been used to explain the coagulation of colloids. Since it is 
also true that the surface tension changes with the electrical 
potential, the application of Lillie, of certain relations of elec- 
trical charge to permeability in which he assumed that the contact 
of an ion of a given charge changed the nature of the charge in the 
membrane and the assumption that the anaesthetics played their role in 
antagonism by restricting the effects of this change of potential, may be 
extended and the whole phenomenon may be viewed from the stand- 
point of the effect of this contact on surface tension. There are those 
also who view the plasma membrane as a direct reaction to the surface 
tension of the bathing fluid. Hence the importance of the interpre- 
tation of this class of phenomena in the light of the views on surface 
tension. But in view of our present knowledge of surface tension, we 
can not as yet formulate a definite hypothesis dealing with the relation 
of surface tension to antagonism. 
Thirdly, the effect may come about through changes in the cell itself. 
Here we enter a comparatively new field. It is easier to conceive that 
the effects of antagonism are brought about by producing profound 
changes in metabolism, such as the formation of compounds with the 
proteins, 18 precipitation even of these bodies or by effects on oxidation, 19 
enzymatic action 20 and the like, it is easier, I repeat, to conceive of such 
action than it is to eliminate other factors and prove the case. Finally 
we may be dealing with a combination of any of these general groups. 
With this mass of theories and this outline of possible causes of 
antagonistic action, little can be concluded to apply to the case in point. 
1 have not believed the action in the case of chloral hydrate and copper 
sulphate to come to any great extent under the head of reactions within 
the solution. Tt is true that in dilute solutions certain reactions occur 
which are not apparent in concentrated solution. Moreover, I have made 
no attempt to conclude anything about the effect on different ions, al- 
lhough from previous work in this line and a knowledge of the reactions 
of chloral and chloral hydrate such conclusions might be permitted. It 
is now believed that the dissociation of copper sulphate does not in- 
clude the formation of complex hydroxides, since recent work on copper 
sulphate and other common copper compounds in a great variety of 
solutions have failed to bring to light these mythical compounds. The 
formation of complex “hydrates'’ in water by copper and the lessening of 
such effects by such substances as chloral hydrate has not as yet assumed 
tangible form. 
Xor have I seen fit to interpret my results as refuting or confirming 
the Overton theory, although Lillie draws conclusions from his experi- 
ments to substantiate this theory, and Loeb and Osterhout use their 
experiments in the opposite direction. We must remember that 
>7 Phil. Mag. 1894, (5) 38:279. 
is Moore and Roaf. Proc. Roy. Soc. London, 1904, B. 73:382. 
19 Loeb. J., Amer. Jour. Phys. 1911, 28, 213. 
" B. Moore in Recent Advances in Physiology and Biochemistry, 1906, by L. Hill, London, Pub- 
lisher, E. Arnold. 
