82 REPORT—1852. 
may come?” If my notion of this subject be physiologically correct, the mind is a 
force acting as physical forces do, each through the medium of its appropriate coil, 
and returning to a latent state when the coil is withdrawn. A force is not mani- 
fested when the coil is not, any more than thinking is, when the coil is discon- 
nected with mind force. What then becomes of the mind? What becomes of any 
other force? Motion is individualized in a watch—gravitation in a pendulum—heat 
in a thermometer—and gravitation again in a barometer—magnetism in a natural or 
artificial magnet. ; 
Endow appropriate coils with consciousness—as soon as an appropriate coil is 
presented, the force will, as we observe in all coils, enter it, as in the instance of the 
coil for atmospheric electricity. 
Where, then, is mind, when its mortal coil is perishing in the grave? Where are 
the physical forces when the instruments which they actuated (the,pendulum of a 
clock, a steam-engine, a voltaic trough, or a Leyden phial) are broken? Gravita- 
tion, motion, heat, and electricity do not cease to exist. They existed before their 
coils were invented, and will continue to exist when this earth and all material or- 
ganized structures shall have ceased to exist; and that this will be the condition of 
the mind, we have abundant reason to expect. It is the mansion, not the tenant 
that is changed. Mind may still live as distinct from flesh and blood, which is 
sustained by food, as is the swimmer from the flood. 
ETHNOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY. 
ETHNOLOGY. 
Remarks on an Ethnological Collection, in illustration of the Ethnology of 
Java. By Dr. BiaLLoBLorTzKt. 
On the Misapplication of the terms Evolution and Development, as applied 
y Ethnographical Philologists to the Inflexions of a Language. By 
ICHARD CuLL, Fellow and Hon. Sec. of the Ethnological Society. 
Tus paper is more of a critical character than fraught with new facts, as indeed 
its title conveys. Philologists speak of a language developing its inflexions, or 
having its inflexions evolved. It appears to the author that Horne Tooke clearly 
pointed out the nature of the inflexions of languages, that the researches of all 
philologers have confirmed his view, and yet we continue to speak of evolving 
inflexions. Many persons attribute a vast mental superiority, at least in language, 
to certain nations of antiquity, for having developed inflexions in their language ; 
and deem the descendants of those same nations to be inferior, because they have 
not only not developed any inflexions, but have been unable to maintain those which 
were developed by their ancestors. If the views of Horne Tooke be sound, the idea 
of developing, in the sense of opening or unfolding, is erroneous. 
A change in the form of a word to express a different meaning is called an inflexion. 
The form of a word can be changed in two ways. 
1. By adding one or more sounds, or even syllables to it, as love, loved, loving. 
2. By a change in the word, as speak, spoke; and both methods of changing the 
form may occur in the same word, as speak, spoken. 
The word loved differs both in form and sense from the word love. The word 
spoke also differs in both respects from the word speak. And the word spoken differs 
in both respects from speak. : 
What is expressed in one language by such a change, called an inflexion, may be 
expressed in another by a different method; thus the Latin dominus, a lord, besides 
its other changes of form, has one which gives it a feminine signification, domina, a 

