Philosophical Transactions. 127 
9. Second Part of the Paper on the Nerves of the Orbit. By Chas. 
Bell, Esq. 
[Communicated hy Sir H. Davy, Bart., P.R.S.] 
This is a continuation of the subject upon which Mr. Bell had 
entered in his last paper. His object is to explain the reason of 
there being six nerves distributed to the eye, and crowded into the 
narrow space of the orbit. In this investigation he demonstrates, 
that there is a correspondence between the compound functions of 
an organ and the nerves transmitted to it. It is impossible to do 
more, than here sum up the distinct functions of the nerves, as 
unravelled by the skill of the author. 
“ The first nerve is provided with a sensibility to effluvia, and 
is properly called the olfactory nerve. 
** The second is the optic nerve, and all impressions upon it ex- 
cite only sensations of light. 
“ The third nerve goes to the muscles of the eye solely, and is a 
voluntary nerve by which the eye is directed to objects. 
_ “ The fourth nerve performs the insensible traversing motions of 
the eyeball. It combines the motions of the eyeball and eyelids, 
and connects the eye with the respiratory system. 
_“ The fifth is the universal nerve of sensation to the head and 
face, to the skin, to the surfaces of the eye, the cavities of the nose, 
the mouth and tongue. 
‘« The sixth nerve is a muscular and voluntary nerve of the eye. 
‘* The seventh is the auditory nerve, and the division of it, called 
portio dura, is the motor nerve of the face and eyelids, and the respi- 
ratory nerve, and that on which the expression of the face depends. 
“ The eighth, and the accessory nerve, are respiratory nerves. 
“ The ninth nerve is the motor of the tongue. 
“ The tenth is the first of the spinal nerves; it hes a double root 
and a double office; it is both a muscular and a sensitive nerve.” 
Mr. Bell concludes his paper with a few very appropriate words 
in favour of anatomy, as a means better adapted for discovery than 
experiment, 
‘“* Anatomy,” he observes, “ is already looked upon with pre- 
judice by the thoughtless and ignorant: let not its professors un- 
necessarily incur the censures of the humane. Experiments have 
never been the means of discovery; and a survey of what has been 
attempted of late years in physiology will prove, that the opening 
of living animals has done more to perpetuate error, than to confirm 
the just views taken from the study of anatomy and natural motion.” 
With another opinion of Mr. Bell’s we cannot also but coincide, 
and that is, that ‘* Medical histories do not often lead to the im- 
provement of strict science.” 
It is an opivion worthy the consideration of the Committee of 
Papers of the Royal Society, 
