110 MEMOIR OF MAGENDIE. 



roots of the nerves — that is to. say, in the spinal marrow ; with this I shall by and 

 by be occupied. Before terminating this article I should offer some explanations 

 respecting the novelty of the results which I have announced. 



" When I wrote the note contained in the preceding number I believed myself 

 the first to have thought of cutting the root of the spinal nerves ; but I was un- 

 deceived by a communication from M. Schaw, a young and studious physician, 

 on recefving the last number of my journal. He informs me that M. Ch. Bell 

 had made this section thirteen years before, and had ascertained that the section 

 of the posterior roots did not prevent the movements from continuing. M. 

 Schaw adds that M. Bell had recorded this result in a small pamphlet, printed 

 solely for his friends, not for publication. Having requested of M. Schaw to 

 send me this pamphlet, if possible, in order that I might render fall justice to 

 the author, I received it a few days after; its title is. Idea of a new anatomy 

 of tJie brain, submitted for tJie observations oj" Ms friends, by Ch. Bell, F. A.S.K. 

 It is curious, certainly, to remark therein the germ of the recent discoveries of 

 the author on the nervous system, and I transcribe entire the passage indicated 

 by Dr. Schaw : 



" ' Considering that the spinal nerves have a double root, and being of opinion 

 that the properties of the nerves are derived from their connections with the parts 

 of the brain, I thought that I had an opportunity of putting my opinion to the 

 test of experiment, and of proving at the same time that nerves of different en- 

 dowments were in the same cord and held together by the same sheath. On 

 laying bare the roots of the spinal nerves I found that I could cut across the 

 posteiior fasciculus of nerves which took its origin from the posterior portion of 

 the spinal marrow without convulsing the muscles of the back, but that on touching 

 the anterior fasciculus with the point of the knife the muscles of the back were 

 immediately convulsed.' 



" It will be seen by this citation from a work which I could not know, since 

 it was not made public, that M. Bell, guided by his ingenious ideas on the 

 nervous system, very nearly arrived at a discovery of the functions of the spinal 

 roots ; yet, the fact that the anterior are destined for motion, while the posterior 

 pertain more particularly to sensation, appears to have escaped him ; it is to the 

 having established this fact in a positive manner, therefore, that I must limit my 

 pretensions." 



Reply of M. Bell to M. Magendie. For the convenience of the discussion 

 M. Bell attributes this reply to a pupil, but this pupil may well have been M. 

 Bell himself : * 



" Although the original experiments (those, namely, of M. Bell) have much 

 more value in all their results than those which have been reported by M. 

 Magendie, yet it is noticeable that the latter, when he found himself compelled 

 shortly after to abandon his pretensions to novelty, had the assurance'to affirm 

 that the experiments made by himself were the most careful. It was really 

 amusing to see M. Magendie make a parade of superior exactness, when, in the 

 same memoir, instead of persisting in his first decision, he changes in the most 

 essential manner what he had established respecting the functions of the nerve-s 

 in question. In this second publication on the subject, he gives a relation 

 altogether different from that which he had offered in his previous memoir. 



" The results derived by M. Magendie from his first experiments were alto- 

 gether accordant with those which our author had announced in 1811. Con- 

 sequently, when an account of them arrived in this country, and it was seen that 

 he gave this discovery as original, measures were taken to make known to the 



* I am indebted for the commtiBication of this paper to M. Benjamin Brodie, a highly 

 competent judge in the matter. M. Brodie knew M. Magendie well, and, in writing to me, 

 justly places him not far from Haller and Bichat : from Haller, of whom he had not the 

 erudition ; from Bichat, of whom he had not the expansive views ; but equal to both, and per- 

 haps superior, for industry in the invention of experiments and skill in their execution. 



