FUNCTIONS OF MOTOR AND SENSORY NERVES 97 



There are two significant differences between these two 

 versions. 



1. Originally — i.e. in 1821 — "The nerve supplies the muscles 

 of the face and jaws." Subsequently— i.e. in 1824 and hence- 

 forth—" The nerve supplies the muscles of the jaws." 



2. Originally — i.e. in 1821 — "Its branches are profuse to the 

 muscles which move the lips upon the teeth." Subsequently — 

 i.e. in 1824 and henceforth — "Its branches are profuse to the 

 lips." 



In short, for Bell in 1821 the fifth nerve, which resembled 

 a spinal nerve by its possessing a cerebral and a cerebellar root, 

 subserved the ordinary motions and sensations of the whole face 

 by virtue of its cerebral root. Whereas in 1824, i.e. after the 

 work of Magendie on the spinal roots and of Mayo on the 

 nerves of the face, the fifth nerve was sensory to the face by its 

 ganglionated portion and motor to the muscles of mastication 

 by its non-ganglionated portion. 



If any one should be tempted to excuse Bell's neglect of 

 accuracy as the pardonable inadvertence of a man of genius, 

 intent upon the discovery and neglectful of petty conventions, 

 let him consult the Narrative of the Discoveries of Sir Charles 

 Bell in the Nervous System, in which Alexander Shaw, as Bell's 

 mouthpiece, fills upwards of two hundred tedious pages with a 

 minute account of what Mayo and Magendie wrote and did not 

 write about what Bell and John Shaw wrote and did not write 

 in this or that month of 1821, 1822 and 1823. Bell was intolerant 

 enough of other people's "inaccuracies" or for what might be 

 represented as such. 



We have seen what Bell says about Magendie and we are 

 naturally curious to learn what Magendie says about Bell. 



Magendie's reply, in words and in conduct, is most dignified. 

 He prints the reclamation made for Bell in the following issue 

 of his Journal (vol. ii. p. 370), quotes Bell in full and believing 

 the " experiment " alluded to by Bell to be a physiological 

 experiment on a living animal — which it was not — gives to Bell 

 a credit that he did not deserve. And while Bell in 1823 uses 

 the most injurious language towards him, he continues to find 

 place in his Journal de Physiologie for Bell's work when he con- 

 siders it to be of value. In the tenth volume of the Journal, in 

 1830, he prints in full the translation and illustrations of Bell's 

 second paper on the Nerves of the Face of 1829, with the 



7 



