34 
MALLERY. 
may rightly be applied to their authors in its true etymol¬ 
ogy—the maker. 
My third plea is for the admission of wit and humor into 
scientific writing. No one—not even Sydney Smith’s Scotch¬ 
man—is willing to confess himself incapable of perceiving 
humor. Nevertheless nature has not given it to every one, 
and to those to whom it is denied it is as the absence of a 
sixth sense, by which want much happiness is lost. This 
enumeration of humor with the senses is scarcely forced, for 
man has been styled the “ laughing animal,” as best distin¬ 
guishing him from other genera in his zoologic order. 
Neither the grin of some simians nor the cachinnation of 
the hyena, or similar demonstrations by other animals rep¬ 
resent human smiles and laughter. Hence the man that 
cannot laugh may be incomplete in evolution. The defi¬ 
ciency under consideration may be compared with unappre¬ 
ciation of the arts in general, but the most ready comparison 
may be taken from the histrionic art because on it there is 
least controversy. Every man who is in the normal posses¬ 
sion of his senses appreciates perfect acting. Dr. Johnson 
suffered from defective vision and hearing and therefore (not¬ 
withstanding his famous obituary eulogy) never could recon¬ 
cile himself to the overwhelming success of his friend David 
Garrick as an actor. Translate his physical imperfections, 
while admitting his general judgment, into terms of humor 
and it may be understood how many good and wise people 
fail to enjoy it. They also fail to understand humanity, be¬ 
cause they are straight-line men, with no curves, so that they 
cannot fit into those of their fellow-men. With them the 
dogma is naturally cherished that a witty man is always 
shallow. Sydney Smith, who knew whereof he spoke, says: 
“ The moment an envious pedant sees anything written with 
pleasantry he comforts himself that it must be superficial.” 
Many people admire sententious monotony even if it be 
stupidity and are shocked too much for their delicate nerves 
at the sudden presentation of an intellectual surprise. Yet, 
what is more forcible ? Is there any mode in which truth 
