( 566 ) 
cation experiments have proved in the most striking manner, that 
this proposition is untenable. He found that water still ascended to 
the highest tops of the poisoned trees, up to a height of 22 metres. 
The attempts of Godlf.wski’s supporters to maintain their proposition 
in spite of this fact give a very unsatisfactory impression. Strasburger 
is attacked in vague terms 34 ); he is accused of a want of critical 
insight, he is reproached for not making any attempt at explanation: 
the fact itself remains. 
The following argument appears to be somewhat more weighty. 
It is said 37 ): “with the help of a Jamin chain atmospheric pressure 
may be imagined to force water up to 13—14 metres”; but four¬ 
teen is not twenty-two and moreover a Jamin chain can by no 
way explain anything in this case. It might perhaps be applied to 
this purpose with some chance of success, if the vessels ran through 
continuously from the root to the leaf, but certainly not in a system 
of vesicles like the wood, where the bubbles cannot pass the par¬ 
titions, dividing up the conducting tracts, to say nothing of the 
multitude of other clinching objections. 
It is further adduced against Strasburger, that continuous liquid 
threads are formed when the trunk, having been sawn off, is placed 
in water* 7 ), but in the first place it is not clear what objection is 
really meant by this and in the second place it is difficult to imagine 
how these threads are supposed to originate. The water which is 
sucked up cannot remove the air present, for the air is enclosed; 
it is moreover saturated with air, and is more likely to give off 
bubbles than to absorb them, as soon as it is exposed to a lower 
pressure at a certain height. Sawing off the tree will hardly affect 
its air-content except to increase it; the air which enters does not, 
however, endanger the cohesion, as it cannot ascend. 
Point 3. Ursprung’s experiments 17 ) with branches, which had 
been killed by steam over part of their length, in consequence of 
which the leaves faded, do not prove much for Godlewski either. 
The steam not only kills the living elements, but also induces other 
changes. 
For some time the vessels must conduct a decoction of wood 
instead of water and a blocking of the membranes or even of the . 
lumina of the vessels may be the consequence, so that the resistance 
increases. The cells of the leaves are further more or less poisoned 
by this liquid, so that it is very doubtful whether the death of the 
leaves may be attributed to a want of water 18 ). 
These experiments are therefore not of much importance in decid¬ 
ing the question under consideration. 
