1874.] (56) 
VI. GALL’S DISCOVERY OF THE PHYSIOLOG® 
OF THE BRAIN, AND ITS RECEPTION: 
By T. SyMEs PRIDEAUX. 
“ Strictly speaking you only play the part of puppets in a show; when certain cerebral organs 
are put in action, you are led according to their seat to take certain positions, as though 
you were drawn by a wire, so that we can discover the seat of the acting organs by the 
motions. I know that you are blind enough to laugh at this; but if you will take the 
trouble to observe, you will be convinced that by my discovery I have revealed to you 
more things than you were aware of.’—‘‘ GALL, in a familiar Letter to his Friend 
Baron RETZER, 1798.” 
ae 
EF we are to accept the verdict passed amidst mutual 
a congratulations by the Physiologists of the period 
assembled at Bradford, we are on the eve of obtaining 
a revelation of the physiology of the brain by the localised 
application of electricity to its surface. Facts carefully 
observed and accurately recorded must always possess an 
intrinsic value, but it is possible to err in their interpretation; 
that this has been done to some extent with reference to 
the experiments in question, and exaggerated expectations 
founded on misconception indulged in as to the amount 
and accuracy of the knowledge to be expe¢ted from this 
source, is to me abundantly clear. 
Enthusiasm in the pursuit of knowledge is doubtless 
amongst the highest of the characteristics which distinguish 
the noblest specimens of humanity from the common herd of 
mankind. As an evidence of mental activity, the jubilation 
with which the announcement of the results of applying 
electricity to the surface of the brain has been received is 
in the highest degree satisfactory. The more cordial the 
reception accorded these experiments, however, the more 
prominently the question obtrudes itself,—What are the 
distinctive differences in the path pursued to attain one 
common object by Fritsch, Hitzig, and Ferrier, and the 
method of Gall, that should occasion the results of the 
former to be welcomed with acclamation, whilst those of 
the latter were received with the hail of sneers, scoffs, 
ridicule, misrepresentation, and contumely ? Tothe student 
of the human mind the difference, or rather contrast, offers 
a curious and interesting problem. 
Can we find a partial explanation of the anomaly in the 
more purely physical character of the recent method of 
research—that the subject of attention in the one case isa 
movement visible to the senses, in the other a mental 
quality, an abstraction which presents no sensuous object to 
the mind? What is certain is, that many men have great 
i 
; 
sieieiiaeeat elite eal 
