124 SENSES. 



perceiving those delightful and diversified feelings excited by 

 the various combinations of musical tones. Most men de- 

 rive pleasure from particular species of music. But a musical 

 ear, in a restricted sense, is by no means a general qualifica- 

 tion. An ear for music, however, though not to be acquired 

 by study, when the faculty itself is wanting, may be highly 

 improved by habit and culture. Buffon, after examining a 

 number of persons who had no ear for music, says, that every 

 one of them heard worse in one ear than in the other ; and 

 ascribes their inability of distinguishing musical expression 

 to that defect. But a musical ear seems to have no depend- 

 ence on acuteness or bluntness of hearing, whether in one 

 or in both ears. There are many examples of people who 

 may be said to be half deaf, and yet are both fond of music 

 and skilful practitioners. An ear for music, like a genius for 

 painting or poetry, is a gift of Nature, and is born with the 

 possessor. 



Beside the innumerable pleasures we derive from music 

 and agreeable sounds, the extension and improvement of arti- 

 ficial language must be considered as objects of the greatest 

 importance to the human race. Without the sense of hear- 

 ing, mankind would forever have remained mute. I mention 

 artificial, or improved language, because, from a thousand 

 observations which every person must have made, it is per- 

 fectly apparent, that, if destitute of a natural language, neither 

 man nor the-brute creation could possibly have existed and 

 continued their species. As brutes, without information or 

 experience, are capable of communicating to each other, by 

 particular sounds and gestures, their pleasures and pains, 

 their wants and desires, it would be the highest absurdity to 

 suppose that the great Creator should have denied to man, 

 the noblest animal that inhabits this globe, the same indis- 

 pensable privilege. Without a basis there can be no fabric. 

 Without a natural, no artificial language could possibly 

 have existed. This point is clearly demonstrated, in a few 

 words, by that most ingenious, candid, and profound philoso- 

 pher, Dr. Thomas Reid, formerly Professor of Moral Philoso- 

 phy in the university of Glasgow. ' If mankind/ says Dr. Reid, 

 ' had not a natural language, they could never have invented 

 an artificial one by their reason and ingenuity. For all arti- 

 ficial language supposes some compact or agreement to affix 

 a certain meaning to certain signs ; therefore, there must be 

 compacts or agreements before the use of artificial signs ; 

 but there can be no compact or agreement without signs, noi 



