SIR CHARLES BELL 



57 



the anterior and the posterior nerve-roots — appeal 

 to certain passages in the 1830 volume : — 



" In a foreign review of my former papers, the 

 results have been considered as a further proof in 

 favour of experiments. They are, on the contrary, 

 deductions from anatomy ; and I have had recourse 

 to experiments, not to form my own opinions, but 

 to impress them upon others. It must be my 

 apology that my utmost efforts of persuasion were 

 lost, while I urged my statements on the grounds 

 of anatomy alone. I have made few experiments ; 

 they have been simple and easily performed, and 

 I hope are decisive. . . . 



" My conceptions of this matter arose by infer- 

 ence from the anatomical structure ; so that the 

 few experiments which have been made were 

 directed only to the verification of the fundamental 

 principles on which the system is established." 



If it were not for the 181 1 pamphlet, the 

 opponents of all experiments on animals might 

 claim Sir Charles Bell on their side. But while 

 his work was still a new thing, he spoke in another 

 way of it : — 



" I found that injury done to the anterior portion 

 of the spinal marrow convulsed the animal more 

 certainly than injury to the posterior portion ; but 

 I found it difficult to make the experiment without 

 injuring both portions. 



" Next, 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, / thought 

 that I had an opportunity of putting my opinion to 



