December 26, 1890.] 



SCIENCE. 



i55 



and, from being a depejj^ftice, they become the comfort and 

 stay of aged parents and other needy relatives; so that I said 

 I have known some instances where the visitation of deaf- 

 ness was a stroke of good fortune. When I see a lad, solely 

 because of his deafness, taken by kind hands from a home of 

 poverty; transported to an elegant institution where every 

 want is anticipated, both in health and in sickness; for years 

 clothed as comfortably and fed as healthfully as the children 

 of opulence; favored with most skilful instructors and kind 

 care-takers; given books and all school supplies; taught a 

 ^ood mechanical pursuit; graduated with honor; then taken 

 to^llege, where for a term of years he is given a course of 

 StuSy as thorough as hearing persons receive and pay for in 

 the best colleges; again graduated with honor; without a 

 day's waiting or search inducted into a lucrative position and 

 an honorable profession; having for these great benefits paid 

 nothing, either himself or his relatives for him (and I con- 

 sider, that, had he retained his hearing, a life of drudgery 

 would as certainly have been his as it has been of the other 

 members of his family), — I plainly see that deafness to him, 

 though always a serious inconvenience, was a stroke of good 

 fortune. 



When I see the deaf daughter of a widow in poverty, after 

 receiving her education, from her earnings purchase a home 

 in which she maintains her mother, lends a helping hand to 

 the other children, and lives for many years in the confi- 

 dence and regard of refined people, I inquire, though always 

 a serious inconvenience, where is the "grave misfortune" 

 that deafness brought either to this lady or her friends, es- 

 pecially since older brothers and sisters do not half so much ; 

 and it is morally certain that she would not but for the ex- 

 cellent training she received because of her deafness. When 

 a finely educated young man who never heard, tells me, in 

 answer to my inquiry as to bow much he laments his deaf- 

 ness, " Not at all,'" and adds in reply to further inquiries, 

 "Because, so far as I can now see, had I been able to hear, 

 I should have continued to live in the same low plane I was 

 taken from, and in which my brothers, whom I dearly love, 

 still live, but with whom I would not exchange conditions," 

 though a serious inconvenience, I do not see in this visitation 

 of deafness a calamity or even a " grave misfortune." When 

 I see a lady congenitally deaf in her neat, tasty, well-k&pt, 

 and well-ordered home, with walls decorated with drawings 

 and paintings the work of her own skilful hands, — a happy 

 mother, having on her lap a lovely child, which she is 

 teaching to speak the utterances a devoted teacher years 

 agone taught her, — and responding to the appeals of a hear- 

 ing brother for financial aid to support his family, I in- 

 wardly ask myself, though always a serious inconvenience, 

 where is the " grave misfortune " in the case of this person, 

 whom I have repeatedly known to express thankfulness for 

 her deafness in the days of her maidenhood? 



A mother who had left with me child after child till four 

 of her deaf children were under my care, once unburdened 

 her heart to me, and complained bitterly of the hard Provi- 

 dence that had inflicted this calamity on her family, but 

 added, " I have one son who hears: he is the apple of my 

 eye and the pride of my life. I shall have great comfort in 

 him." Years passed away. The deaf children completed 

 their education, and were settled in life, when this same 

 mother reminded me of the former conversation, and added, 



" I wish had been deaf also: he has made me more 



trouble than all my deaf children together. If he had been 

 deaf, he would have been under your training, as the others 

 were, and would have been a good man." These are not 



hypothetical cases, but actual facts, to which there are many 

 others similar. I doubt not all superintendents of institu- 

 tions for the deaf have seen parallels. It may be urged that 

 these and similar ones are exceptional cases. Grant that 

 they are. All of them at the first were beset with very dis- 

 couraging prospects. If, in spite of such unfavorable environ- 

 ments, these could rise superior to them, why should the 

 deaf with more favorable conditions be taunted or tortured 

 with the suggestion of grave misfortune? They do not seem 

 so to regard one another. One would suppose that if sym- 

 pathy for " a brother in distress" would anywhere call forth 

 kindly reception and encouragement, it would be at a college 

 where the subjects of "grave misfortune" are assembled. 

 But to our surprise we find that these frolicsome lads 

 "haze" the new-comers in a style that, while it might not 

 do discredit to a Comanche Indian, certainly does no credit 

 to themselves or their college. 



There is a limit to the obligation society owes to its mem- 

 bers who start at a disadvantage on the race of life, but just 

 what the limit is has not yet been clearly defined. For the 

 deaf, provision is made for ten years' care, keeping, and in- 

 struction by the State governments, and for a college course 

 of from four to six years by the United States Government, 

 to which it is now seriously proposed to add a normal school 

 for the training of teachers. A home for the aged deaf has 

 already been established in one section of the country, which 

 is a most worthy enterprise, and is doing a very humane 

 work. With the school and the college at one end of life, 

 and the home at the other, it would seem that the limit must 

 be nearly attained. But when the normal school is estab- 

 lished, it is but a step further to provide an asylum where 

 the intervening years of life may be passed, as is being ar- 

 ranged for the blind. That may be very well for the blind, 

 but I would have no hesitation in denouncing any such 

 project for the deaf as subversive of their best interest and 

 manliness. No one,'so far as I know, has seriously pro- 

 posed such a provision for the deaf (though the inquiry has 

 been 4ade of me as to its practicability), but only a few 

 yearsKgo no one had proposed it for the blind. The ten- 

 denc^peems to be in that direction, and it is about time to 

 call Jlalt. A " grave misfortune" can be used to plead for 

 a large amount of charity. 



Dr. Gallaudet adopts a common fallacy when he states 

 that " all deaf children have the organs of speech." That 

 they have the organ of voice is true, but voice is not speech. 

 The organ of voice is one thing, the organ of hearing is an- 

 other, but the organ of speech is the union of the two. 

 Speech is the result of the intelligent combined use of the 

 organ of voice and the organ of hearing in a healthy condi- 

 tion. Deaf-mutes have not the important organ of hearing, 

 and, for this cause alone, have not speech. There is no 

 speech of any race, tribe, or clan of men, however barbarous 

 or cultured, that is not based upon hearing; so that we may 

 say the organ of bearing is as essential for speech as the or- 

 gan of voice. The two are the physical complements of each 

 other in the production of speech. But there is a third ele- 

 ment, not physical, necessary for speech ; namely, intelli- 

 gence. This the deaf-mute has perfectly. Nightingales, 

 mQcking-birds, and larks have voices that the sweetest and 

 most renowned cantatrices have endeavored to rival in vain. 

 Lions have voices that the basso of the grand opera has 

 never approached. All these and many others of the lower 

 animals have, in addition to voice, the sense of hearing more 

 acute than has ever been known in man; but they have not 

 intelligence sufficient to so use these gifts as to produce 



