536 
David H. Dollev 
the prochromatiii granules. This now enlarged nucleus he would corrc- 
lat.c as a functional growth in Hertwig’s sense. AVithout criticising the 
objective finding of a new nuclear membrane by itself, the interpretation 
of it as a part of fnnctional growth seems to me far-fetched. Where eise 
has functional growth of the nnclens, to say nothing from the view of 
the present findings on nerve cells, beeil found to take place by dropping 
the old and acquiring a new membrane, like the crayfish itself changes 
its Shell? It may take place but it woiüd be most peculiar and restricted 
as an example of niiclear growth and needing to connect cytoplasmic 
chroniatin with trne nuclear growth by any such gross physical methods 
invalidates the assnmption of the dhection of this chromatin. Chromatin 
new building in the nucleus must most remotely depend to say the least 
on bodily incorporating it from the cell body. 
The only other evidence offered in proof of Ins contention that this 
extra-niiclear chroniatin is passiiig toward the nucleus is in the fact that 
dose to the membrane it is finely divided, farther away in greater masses 
and balls, which is so interpreted because the finest didsion favors the 
passage through the nuclear membrane. As Nissl granules in their last 
analysis, which was first pointed out by Held (1895), are most finely 
granulated, yet anywhere in the cell may be aggregated into clumps and 
masses of varying size, this does not of itself prove one direction of transit 
more than the other. It seems more likely instead of being formed in 
large masses to break down again to go in that, passing out in small par- 
ticles, they naturally aggregate into lai’ger clumps if not immediately con- 
sumed. In denying the nuclear origin of chroniatin which he admits as 
present in the plasnia, he offers only meagre and not unassailable eddence 
of its passage in the reverse direction. 
The Connection of the nucleus with the process as proved by its size 
relations and varying aniount of substance perniit a word which tends 
toward harmonizing of opinion regarding the question of chromatin 
Synthesis in the cytoplasm with or without the passage of the product 
to the nucleus as analyzed by v. Ke:mxitz. As stated, the visualization 
of the chroniatin does not occur within the nuclear membrane in the 
cells of Camlams nor in the major part of the process in the Purkinje 
cell. It is only in sufficient niimber of stages in the latter ceU to give 
the morphological eine to its origin that it is precipitated just within or 
just without that membrane. That it is being formed continiiously there 
can be no doubt. The nuclear substance then destined for the synthesis 
must itself pass out and the synthesis occurs actually in the plasma, 
probably, from the more general massing about the nucleus, in its imme- 
