power as to animal flesh at the temperature of the body, but superior to that of a solution of pepsine without acid. At a high temperature-150° or 200°F.-it is well known that the action of the dilute acid becomes much more decided, but it is also well established that the solution thus effected is by no means the equivalent of that resulting from the action of the natural gastric juice, or its artificial representative, the substances dissolved not being brought into the same condition in the former case as in the latter, for want of the peculiar transforming influence which pepsine exerts when conjoined with an acid.

Experiment 4. One drachm of Boudault's pepsine, in powder, was mixed with two ounces of water.

Experiment 5. One drachm of Hawley's American pepsine, in powder, to same quantity of water.

Experiment 6. One ounce of Boudault's wine of pepsine was diluted with one ounce of water.

Experiment 7. One ounce of Hawley's liquid pepsine was in like manner diluted with an equal measure of

water.

No acid was added to any of these mixtures, but roastbeef was added, in the same amount and form, as in the first three experiments, and the conditions as to temperature, stirring, etc., were precisely the same.

Result. The effect upon the meat in these several trials was almost null, except in the case of the American liquid pepsine, which, as I have already stated, is perceptibly acid to the taste and evidently contains hydrochloric acid. In this there was a manifest, but not very considerable, softening of the pieces of meat, which, however, retained their form, and were but little, if at all, broken down. The result was much more decided than in the case of the solution of pepsine (or infusion of mucous membrane) without acid, employed in the second experiment, but vastly less so than in the case of the artificial gastric

fluid employed in experiment 1, and prepared with fresh mucous membrane and hydrochloric acid. As to the wine of pepsine, and the two forms of pepsine in powder, the effect of the solutions prepared with them seemed hardly more decided than would have been produced by the action of tepid water. There was, perhaps, a slight softening of the meat, but the effect was altogether inconsiderable. The wine appeared to be the feeblest preparation of all, in accordance with its inferior degree of acidity.

I should here state that in the experiments with the powdered pepsine, there remained in each case a considerable amount of the powder undissolved by the water, this residue consisting of the starch which is added to the pepsine in the process of manufacture to facilitate the drying and pulverization. It was deemed unnecessary to filter off this residue, as it could not interfere with the action of the pepsine nor be itself affected by it.

The necessary inference from the results of the foregoing comparative experiments is, that the preparations of pepsine offered to us by the pharmaceutist for medicinal use do not truly represent the digestive powers of the gastric juice, owing to the want of a due proportion of an essential ingredient, and that, in order to give them the activity which is claimed for them, we must supply the deficiency, by prescribing them in conjunction with a certain proportion of hydrochloric acid or lactic acid. I say hydrochloric or lactic acid, for it is still a matter of dispute among physiologists whether the acidity of the natural gastric juice be due to the one or the other of these acids, or both together; and experiments upon ar. tificial digestion show that either, in conjunction with pepsine, will make an efficient digestive fluid. The hydrochloric, however, in such experiments, appears to be the more active of the two, and on this account, as well

as because of its well-marked tonic properties, it ought perhaps, to be generally preferred to the lactic.

If we could feel certain, in any case, that there existed. a due proportion of acid in the secretion of the stomach and that the pepsine alone was deficient, it would be rational practice to prescribe pepsine by itself; but how can we be certain of this? Ought we not rather to infer that if one constituent of the scretion be deficient, the other is equally so?

Having reached the conclusion just now enunciated by the negative way, by observing the failure of pepsine unaided by acid, I next sought to test it affirmatively, to ascertain whether the same pepsine, with the addition of a due proportion of acid, would exhibit more satisfactory digestive powers. After the conclusion of the experiments just detailed, I placed the mixtures prepared with the different samples of medicinal pepsine in a room where the temperature was too low for any further digestive action, as well as for the occurrence of putrefaction. On examination, after the lapse of nearly two days, (the earliest moment at which I could find leisure for further experiment,) I found matters in statu quo. No further perceptible change had taken place in the meat, nor was there any trace of decomposition. I now added to the contents of each glass twenty-six drops of hydrochloric acid, the same quantity employed in experiment 1, except that to the mixture made with the American. liquid pepsine I added only twenty drops, because the acid already existing in it seemed to require a less addition to render it as strongly acid as the others. The temperature was then raised to 100°F. and so maintained for three hours.

At the end of this time, a decided and unmistakable digestive action was manifest in each instance, the meat being softened and more or less disintegrated.

The

American liquid pepsine still held the front rank, indisputably. The two preparations in powder seemed so nearly equal in effect, that it was impossible to say that either was superior to the other. The wine of pepsine was still found wanting in the comparison, its inferiority to the other preparations in digestive effect being apparent on the slightest examination. Perhaps it would be wrong to infer that the vinous infusion is always and of necessity a feeble preparation. The particular sample submitted for trial may have been carelessly prepared.

It is proper, however, that I should add that in none of these experiments with artificial pepsine was the result by any means equal to that obtained with the digestive fluid employed in experiment 1, nor was there any near approximation to it, except in the case of the American liquid pepsine. Perhaps the powers of the pepsine are impaired in the processes of preparation, or lost to some extent by keeping. Like nitrogenized animal substances generally, pepsine is readily susceptible of change, and there is no doubt that, as freshly extracted from the stomach, it will be found superior in remedial action to that which has been kept for months or years in the shops.

With regard to the addition of acid in prescribing it, I may further remark that the gastric juice of the carnivorous animal is much more acid than that of the herbivora, and as pepsine is administered with a special view to promoting the digestion of animal food, the indications of comparative physiology are here in accord with the results of experiment.

In conclusion, I would suggest the inquiry whether the stomach of the calf or sheep is the proper source from which to obtain pepsine for medicinal use? Pepsine is not a principle of such fixed and definite chemical characters but that it may be subject to some modifications, as

furnished by the stomachs of different animals; modifications affecting in a material degree its action upon different classes of aliments; and, when we employ it as an aid to human digestion, is it advisable to extract it from the stomach of an animal into whose food animal flesh never enters? Ought we not rather to obtain it from an animal which is omnivorous, like ourselves, namely the hog? The manufacture of "pepsina porci" offers a fair field for the enterprise and skill of the pharmaceutists of our Western cities.

ART. II. NECROPSY OF A CASE OF APHASIA. Reported and Analyzed by PROFS. S. M. BEMISS, M.D., and P. E. CHAILLÉ, New Orleans, La.

*The post mortem examination was made on July 1st, about fifteen hours after death and was limited to the encephalon. The corpse had laid on an inclined plane, with the head elevated. The reputed husband demanded the body and with his friends solicited it for burial before the examination was terminated, which was, therefore, completed with unscientific dispatch. However, careful and repeated examinations, during life, gave evidence of no sympathy nor signs to cause suspicion, that any other part than the brain was affected with organic lesions.

The removed calvarium was considerably thickened, but otherwise normal. The membranes beneath were deficient in vascularity, whilst, at the same time, there was marked absence of cerebro-spinal fluid in the cranial cavity. None was visible, until the cord being cut below the med. obl. and the whole encephalon removed, it flowed freely from the spinal cavity.

The clinical, pathological and physiologicai details of this case have been published in the January and February issues of this Journal,— [ED.