SOME FALLACIES OF THE BlOPLASSON THEORY. 
A EE PLY TO DR. M KIT/M A N N. 
BY LESTER CURTIS, M.D., CHICAGO. 
[.REPRINTED FROM THE “DENTAL COSMOS” FOR AUGUST, 1882.] SOME FALLACIES OF THE BIOI'LASSOX.lHEOliY. 
A REPLY TO DR. HEITZMANN. 
BV LESTER CT'RTIS. M.D., CHICAGO. 
In the June number of the Dental Cosmos is an article written 
by Dr. C. Heitzmann, of New York, on “The Minute Anatomy of 
the Teeth in the Light of the Bioplasson Theory.” It is chiefly an 
explanation of his peculiar views of cell-structure. The views may 
be summarized as follows: Every living organism contains in its 
interior “ a delicate reticulum pervading the whole mass.” This retic- 
ulum has no break anywhere, but is continuous throughout the whole 
body. It is the machine for the production of all motions, and is 
the only living part of the organism. There are no such things 
as cells. The appearances which have been called cells are only 
condensations of the net-work. 
In the course of his article Dr. Heitzmann refers to a recent paper 
of mine. This paper was a review of his theory so far as relates to 
the red and white blood-corpuscles and the pus-corpuscle. I will 
recapitulate some of the chief points of the paper, in order that those 
who have not read it may the better appreciate Dr. Heitzmann’s 
criticisms. 
About three years ago, before I began to study the net-work,,I 
wrote to Dr. Heitzmann and asked him the best method of seeing 
the structure and the kind and quality of glass necessary to show it. 
His recommendations were as follows : 
“Take a drop of pus, fresh, without adding anything, and you will 
see the wonderful structure in each pus-corpuscle with great ease. 
“ Prick your skin on the palmar surface of your thumb, transport 
the drop on a slide, and cover right away with a thin covering-glass, 
the edges of which have been oiled, so as to prevent evaporation ol 
the fluid. In the perfectly fresh blood you will see the structure in 
each colorless blood-corpuscle. 
“ Add to a drop of fresh blood a small drop of a forty per-cent, 
solution of bichromate of potash. This will within one hour extract 
the hemoglobin, and you must succeed in seeing the reticular struc- 
ture in each red blood-corpuscle.” 
The glasses recommended for showing this structure with such 
ease were “ a first-class y immersion—such as I use—of Verick’s, 2 
Hartnack’s, Grunow’s, and Tolles’s manufacture.” The list of names, 
though containing good ones, is slightly miscellaneous, and nothing 
is said about the need of anything more than ordinary water immer- 
sion-glasses. Indeed, some of these makers had not then, and have 
not yet, so far as I know", made any of the most modern homoge- 
neous immersion objectives. Nothing is said about the need of 
any special appliances for illumination. It is probable, therefore, 
that my microscope, with a Powell & Lealand dry condenser, and 
especially my Powell & Lealand water immersion yL, is fully equal 
to the task of seeing the structure. With these appliances 1 have 
done the most of my work on this subject, though I have also used 
some of the very finest homogeneous glasses, including Zeis’s, Tolles’s, 
Powell & Lealand’s new formula J. and others. 
Proceeding according to his directions, I added a forty per-cent, 
solution of bichromate of potash to a drop of blood, and studied the 
red corpuscles. Many of them lost their color, indeed; but with this 
loss of color they underwent some other remarkable changes. They 
became reduced in diameter fronj one-third to one-half, and their 
surfaces presented so many wrinkles and distortions that they were 
almost unrecognizable as blood-corpuscles. I saw no net-work in 
them, but, even if I had seen something that looked like a net-work, 
I should have placed little reliance upon it as an indication of actual 
structure, when seen among so many unnatural appearances. 1 
therefore turned from the red to the white corpuscles, following in 
my study the directions laid down by Dr. Heitzmann. 
It so happened that when 1 began to study the white corpuscle I had 
been using the objective, with which I wished to study the corpuscle, 
in the examination of an object protected by a very thick cover. In 
preparing the specimen of blood I used for a cover a film of mica. 
The cover-adjustment had been left as it was arranged for this thick 
cover, and was, of course, wrong for the mica. When I had found 
a white corpuscle with a lower power, I put on the high power and 
brought the corpuscle into vie w. 1 could not refrain from an exclama- 
tion of surprise. There stood the net-work before me as plain as 
could be, and for an instant I thought that Dr. Heitzmann was 
right; but the body was blurred at the edges, and the red corpuscles 
in the field had a fuzzy, indistinct outline. It then occurred to me 
that 1 had not arranged the cover-adjustment. I began to turn the 
adjustment; as I turned, the field of view became clearer, but the 
net-work grew fainter. Finally, when the field came out bright and 
clear, and the outlines of the red corpuscles were well defined and 
sharp, the net-work was gone. In place of it the corpuscle was 
covered with little rounded eminences, varying in size and in distance 
from one another. 3 
These eminences were always seen when the cover-adjustment 
was right. I had in my possession for some time a very fine homo- 
geneous immersion 1 made by Gundlach. This glass had no cover- 
adjustment; it always showed the eminences, and never the net-work. 
The eminences appear to be minute granules, of which the corpuscle 
is composed. They are seen with great distinctness in the large 
granular white corpuscles that are so abundant in amende persons. 
Women after prolonged lactation are excellent subjects in which to 
study them. In some of these cases the nodules are so distinct as 
to strikingly remind one of the zoogleea masses of bacteria spores 
that one may see at any time in urine beginning to decompose. In 
some cases the granules are scarcely less distinct than in the zoogleea 
mass. I have often seen the vacuoles, which so frequently form in 
the corpuscles, come so near the edge as to leave only one row of 
granules between the vacuoles and the edge of the corpuscle. Some- 
times this thin rim breaks and leaves the granules projecting in a 
point. 1 have even seen some of the granules become detached and 
float away from the corpuscle. In some instances the granules leave 
the body in great numbers, and a shadowy, ghost-like structure 
remains, with here and there a granule sticking to it. 
By keeping the slide with the blood upon it for ten or twelve hours, 
taking care that the edge of the cover is well oiled, the corpuscles 
change in appearance. The granules may then be seen to have'a 
swarming motion, resembling that of a collection of bees. 
Pus-corpuscles resemble the white blood-corpuscles very closely. 
The corpuscles from an ordinary abscess resemble the white blood- 
corpuscle that has been kept for some hours. In pus-corpuscles the 
swarming motion of the granules is often very distinct. I have 
watched one particular granule in one of these bodies, and seen it 
move more than half-way across the corpuscle before escaping from 
view. Occasionally 1 have seen pus-corpuscles in part of which 
the swarming motion could be seen, while it was absent in the other 
portions. 
These granules within the corpuscles are of a size large enough to 
be easily measured under a power of from twelve to fifteen hundred 
diameters. They are also of an appreciable height, as can be seen 
under a sufficiently high power by gently changing the focus with the 
fine adjustment, and also by changing the direction of the illuminat- 
ing-pencil, as can readily be done with the achromatic condenser. 
My paper was illustrated with drawings. Part of these were made 
by myself from nature; the others were careful copies of drawings 
illustrating the net-work made by Dr. Heitzmann or his friends. 
All my own drawings were compared with the objects themselves 
by persons familiar with microscopic observation, and were pronounced 4 
reasonably good likenesses. Drawings like these were sent to Dr. 
Heitzmann for his opinion. He criticised them in a letter to me in 
the following words: “You draw everything in and out of focus; 
you should draw only what is clear and sharp in one focus.” Who 
will dare determine in every case just what is in focus and what is 
out of focus, and then venture to decide what to leave out of the 
drawing and what to put in ? If Dr. Heitzmann’s words mean any- 
thing at all, they mean, “You should draw not what you really see, 
but what you think you ought to see.” 
I hope he is better able to reconcile this method with old-fashioned 
honesty than I am. I insist that the only proper and honest way to 
draw is to draw everything exactly as you see it, without any change 
at all, and that is what I have tried to do in my figures. 
The first of the illustrations of the net-work was made by Dr. 
Klein, of London. It is commended in Dr. Heitzmann’s article, and 
was referred to by him in a letter to me in the following words: “ He 
draws the net-work even nicer than it really appears.” This disposes 
of the drawing as a representation of what was actually seen, and 
shows that it was constructed on Dr. Heitzmann’s plan. The other 
drawings were made by Dr. Heitzmann himself. 
My paper also contained arguments the bearing of which Dr. 
Heitzmann’s imperfect knowledge of English may have prevented 
his perceiving. He, however, should know the details of a contro- 
versy upon the interpretation of the appearances seen upon some 
delicate silicious shells, which are used as tests for the microscope. 
One of these, called pleurosigma angulatum, was formerly described 
and figured as being covered with a honey-comb of cup-shaped figures, 
whose sides, united to each other, formed ribs, which ran across the 
surface of the shell. This was explained as a beautiful plan of nature 
to economize material and combine strength with lightness. But 
after a while glasses were improved, and the accuracy of this 
description was doubted. Then it was proved that, instead of being 
covered with ridges, the shell was really composed of little beads 
joined together so as to form a plate. The beads result from the 
peculiar manner in which silex is deposited from certain solutions; 
similar beads can be formed artificially. The hexagons, then, were 
the imperfectly-seen interspaces between the beads. 
It is now a recognized fact that a series of circles placed close 
together will give rise to an optical illusion, and produce the appear- 
ance of hexagons bounded by straight lines. If these circles are of 
equal size and at uniform distances the hexagons will be regular, 
but if they are of irregular size and at unequal distances the hexa- 
gons will be more or less distorted. We can, of course, distinguish 
the true shape of the figures if they are large enough and are placed 5 
in a good light near the eye; then they will appear distinct and per- 
fectly round. But if they are removed to a little distance, especially 
if the light is dim, the illusion is so complete as to be almost irre- 
sistible, even when we know the shape of the figures. Any one may 
try this experiment for himself by drawing a series of circles and 
filling in the outlines with black. 
The similarity of these hexagons to Dr. Heitzmann’s figures is 
very striking. It would be of interest to know his explanation of 
the resemblance. 
Most of us who have tried to push microscopic investigation are 
painfully aware that there is a limit of visibility beyond which we 
cannot go. The most difficult natural object which is used as a test of 
the quality of the microscope is another silicious shell called ampld- 
pleura pellucida. This shell is marked with lines 7-gj,0-0- of an inch apart. 
When it was shown that these lines had wavy edges, which gave them 
an appearance somewhat like that of a rope, one of the most difficult 
of feats was thought to have been accomplished. From this appearance 
and the analogy of other similar structures it was inferred that the 
lines were rows of beads. Beads, then, of an inch in diameter, 
are almost beyond the border of microscopic visibility, and are only 
to be seen with the very best of modern homogeneous immersion- 
glasses, used with other modern accessories. But very few have been 
able to see them, even with these appliances. 
Now, to return to Dr. Heitzmann’s drawings. They represent the 
net-work at rest, actively dilated, and actively contracted. In the 
one representing the corpuscle at rest the meshes of the net-work 
inclose spaces which average rather more than half an inch across. 
The white corpuscle in Dr. Klein’s drawing is magnified not far from 
two thousand diameters. The meshes in Dr. Heitzmann’s drawings 
are not less than five or ten times as large as in Dr. Klein’s. If we 
may judge from these facts, then, Dr. Heitzmann’s figures represent 
objects magnified ten or twenty thousand diameters! Let us look at 
these figures a little. 
The nodal points at the intersection of the lines are largest in the 
drawing which represents the net-work as contracted. In this draw- 
ing the nodes are about one-fourth of an inch across. If we suppose 
the figure to be magnified twenty thousand diameters, the real size 
of the bodies would be of an inch. But, not to press matters, 
say it is magnified only ten thousand diameters. This would give 
the bodies a size of of an inch. Such a body might be seen 
without excessive difficulty with a good high-power glass. There 
are, however, some other difficulties that we may consider. 
An ordinary white blood-corpuscle rarely, if ever, exceeds 
an inch in diameter. If these figures represent portions of such a 6 
corpuscle, then twenty of the nodules placed in a row would extend 
across the corpuscle, not counting the interspaces. But the inter- 
spaces, even in this figure, are about as large as the nodes. Turning 
to Dr. Klein’s drawing, we see that between twenty and thirty nodes 
arc found in the diameter of the body. Twenty nodes of 4wwwTr °* 
an inch and twenty interspaces of the same size would be somewhat 
crowded in a space of of an inch. 
In the drawing showing the net-work in a relaxed condition, the 
nodal points are only one-sixteenth of an inch across. Here we are 
in a much better condition as regards room, but there arises another 
serious difficulty. If we still suppose that our corpuscle is magnified 
only ten thousand times, we shall have here a body ymniitv an 
inch across, about one and three-fourth times smaller than those beads 
of amphipleura pellucida, which are so small as never to have been 
clearly seen. 
Again, the widest of the lines which connect these nodes are less 
than the thirty-second of an inch across, and the narrowest much 
less than this. Does he really expect 11s to believe that he, or any 
one else, can see lines less than -jainnro an hieh across, and lines, 
too, exceedingly pale, and imbedded in a mass of tissue like them in 
color and appearance ? 
I might continue this subject further, and call attention to some 
investigations of Professor Abbe, of Jena, on the ultimate visibility 
of objects, which would afford food for reflection in this connection; 
but 1 will leave the point. 
Such are some of my observations and reflections on this subject. 
While engaged in the study I have communicated, personally or by 
letter, with a large number of microseopists. several of whom have 
earned more than a national reputation. Some were kind enough 
to go over the ground together with me and by themselves. Every 
one of them, without exception, who did so agrees with me. Some 
have expressed themselves quite strongly on the point, and I have 
never succeeded in finding an experienced microscopist who believes 
the theory. 
My paper was read at the last meeting of the American Society 
of Microseopists. There were present a number of life-long micro- 
scopists, some of them men of eminence. The paper was received 
by them with marked favor, and without one dissenting voice, so far 
as I know. 
In spite of this support which the subject has received, the follow- 
ing is all that Dr. Heitzmann has to say about it: 
“ Lately Dr. Lester Curtis published an article on this subject, and stated that 
he could not see the reticulum. This is a very modest way to announce that one 
cannot see what another can. If a person publicly confesses that he cannot play PLATE VI. 7 
on the piano a inaster-piece of Liszt’s, we are all willing to believe it; but does 
it follow that others cannot play the piece either? What is gained by such a 
confession ? Dr. Curtis gives illustrations of what Elsberg and I have said and 
seen, and of what he could not see. I mention this because you are all prepared 
to understand that delicate observations of this nature are not easily made by 
every one. A great many look in the microscope, but very few can see. If one 
of you who had never played the violin were handed a good violin and told to 
play a tune, he would say, ‘ I can’t.’ Let him practice for a few years, and learn 
to play a tune. It is very much the same with the microscope. If you look in 
for but a short time, you cannot see. It required more than fifteen years’ appli- 
cation to enable me to see what can readily be seen, and if a tyro comes and 
declares that he cannot see, I do not think such assertions should be taken as 
proofs against facts corroborated by others.” 
I submit to the judgment of all fair-minded readers whether such 
a rejoinder is in any sense an answer to my arguments. And I 
insist that until they are answered I have sufficient ground for holding 
that this net-work is merely the misinterpreted interspace between 
the granules, and that it is one more example of the many optical 
illusions which, from before Ehrenberg’s day up to the present time, 
have so often led astray even good observers. 
The plate herewith accompanied the paper referred to in the text. 
Figs. 1 to 5 were drawn by myself. 
Explanation of the Plate. 
Fig. 1. Au ordinary white blood-corpuscle with one red corpuscle. 
Fig. 2. An ordinary white blood-corpuscle from another person, and two red 
corpuscles lying one over the other. 
Fig. 3. Granular white corpuscle from Mr. Griscom; granules beginning to 
leave the body. 
Figs. 4 and 5. Granular corpuscles from Mr. Griscom, discharging their gran- 
nies. 
Fig. 6. A white blood-corpuscle, referred to by Dr. Heitzmann ; from Klein’s 
“ Atlas of Histology.” 
Figs. 7, 8, and 9. Representation of the net-work from “The Structure and 
other Characteristics of Colored Blood-Corpuscles,” by Louis Elsberg, page 46; 
referred to by Dr. Heitzmann. Fig. 7 represents the net-work at rest; Fig. 8. 
in extreme contraction ; Fig. 9, in extreme extension.