92 Jeffries Wyman. 
same may not hold true with regard to the cerebral organs 
which is known to obtain with regard to the skeleton, the teeth, 
the tongue, and the nose, that identical or homologous parts in 
different animals may perform functions wholly distinct. If 
the doctrine here suggested can be admitted (and if this were 
the place, facts could be cited in support of it), may we not find 
in it an explanation of many inconsistences which now exist 
between the results of comparative anatomy and of physiology?” 
Then, in his chapter on the philosophical anatomy of the 
cranial nerves and skull, after showing that there are but three 
pairs of cranio-spinal nerves, he takes up the controverted ee 
tion as to the number of vertebres which compose the skull, 
out making some real contribution to their elucidation. For 
* “The conclusions which have been drawn from the statements made above — 
are as follows: that in frogs the vagus comprises the glosso-pharyngeal and acces : 
sory nerves; inus comprises the facial, the abducens, and in the 
the patheticus and portions of the motor unis; that other evr 
dence sustai that the whole of the motor comm 
ence trigeminus; if to these we add the Aypoglossus (which in frogs 18 bi 
ceptionally a spinal nerve), we shall have three pairs of cranial m each re 
in te a common spinal nerve, namely, motor and sensitive f 
special sense nerves are considered; if these are admitted as indications, then ye: : 
must presuppose either two pairs of nerves to each vertebra, or the existe y 
i un 
we have taken as affording sufficient grounds for considering them as of 2 peck — 
liar order, and not to be classed with common spinal nerves.” 4 
