ZOOLOGY. 341 



proof of the pleasure they may have in existence. Dr. Laycock next pro- 

 ceeded to place the seat of these adaptive movements in the cells of the ves- 

 icular neurine which constitute the ganglia of the nervous system, and to 

 sho\v that these could react as a co-ordinating apparatus upon the instrument 

 provided by Divine Providence for the well-being of the animal. lie stated 

 that the seat of consciousness is almost universally acknowledged to be in the 

 ganglia within the cranium of Yc-rtebrata ; yet the headless trnnk of a frog 

 would leap away if it were irritated, or swim away if thrown into water. 

 Hence the conclusion that the cells of the vesicular neurine act, under given 

 circumstances, as adaptively and yet as unconsciously as in the lowest forms 

 of animal and vegetable life. Dr. Laycock then extended these views to the 

 cells constituting the vesicular neurine of the brain, and argued that it might 

 fairly be interred, both d priori and from observation, that their endowments 

 ancl works of action were not inferior to those of the vesicular neurine in 

 insects. It followed, therefore, that they also might act adaptively and in 

 accordance with their assigned functions independently of the will or con- 

 sciousness of the individual. To this automatic action (the link between 

 man's spiritual nature and the external world) Dr. Laycock referred the phe- 

 nomena of mesmerism, electro-biology, spirit-rapping, etc., and expressed his 

 conviction that the derangement of the intellect which those phenomena im- 

 plied could not be altogether harmless, but might lead, and, indeed, had led 

 to permanent injury to the brain. 



ANALYTIC 1TORPHOLOGY. 



The following is an abstract of a paper read before the American Associa- 

 tion, by Professor Peirce : 



Analytic morphology, said Professor Peirce, is the science of organized 

 forms, whether those made by the Deity or those made by man. It seemed 

 to him the only way for us to understand the organization of the universe 

 was that by which we must understand any human work. "We would not 

 understand a play of Shakspeare until we tried to construct it over again 

 for ourselves. Then, and then only, could we understand how all the parts 

 of the play belonged together. So with regard to the work of the Deity ; it 

 was not possible for us to understand this as an organization until we looked 

 at it from the point of view of the Creator. If it were possible for us to un- 

 derstand at all the reason of our divisions, and what their nature really was, 

 we could only do it by looking at it as the man who knew most looked at it. 

 That man, he thought, would make the world just as he saw it made, suppos- 

 ing it to be a perfect work a work worthy of being made by Divinity. 

 Under that point of view, suppose that he, knowing nothing of works of ar- 

 chitecture, should examine the details of bridges ; he would find three forms 

 truss, arched, and suspension bridges. Considering himself as the maker, he 

 would recur to the materials of which they were formed, and he would per- 

 ceive immediately that wood, as a material, necessitated a truss bridge; stone, 

 an arched bridge ; and iron, a suspension bridge. He would have to make his 

 work correspond to his materials. He took it that the main difference between 



