hed. Harvey's work on the generation
of animals entitled him to a higher rank as a pioneer in science than
his theory of the circulation.

A far greater discovery was that of Dr. Gall, which embraced not only
the anatomy but the functions of the brain as a mental organ--a
discovery twenty times as great, whether we consider the superior
importance of the brain, or the greater investigating genius necessary
to the discovery. It easily ranks at the head of the physiological
discoveries of the past centuries.

Next comes the discovery of the motor and sensory roots of the spinal
nerves by Majendie and Bell, which did not, as commonly supposed,
include the motor and sensory of the spinal cord. This was a small
discovery compared to Gall's, but not inferior to Harvey's discovery
of the cardiac function.

A fourth discovery, perhaps of equal rank, was the discovery by
Harvey's contemporary, Aselli, of the lacteals that absorb the chyle.

A fifth discovery or discoveries of importance was that of the
corpuscles of the blood, and the Malpighian bodies of the kidneys, by
Malpighi.

A sixth discovery, considered more important and occupying a larger
space in medical literature, is the cell doctrine of Schwann, a
doctrine still under discussion and by no means a finality.

Anatomical science has few first class discoveries. Anatomy has been a
growth of observation and description--not discovery. Vesalius and
Eustachius may be considered the fathers of modern anatomy, and the
name of the latter is immortalized by the Eustachian tube, which he
first recognized and described. But the Fallopian tubes, named after
Fallopius, were not his discovery. They had been described long before
by Herophilus and others. Eustachius was nearly two centuries ahead of
his age in anatomy, and should be gratefully remembered as a
struggling scientist. His valuable anatomical works, which he was too
poor to publish, were published one hundred and forty years after his
death, by Lancisi.

From this brief glance at the discoveries of Eustachius, Harvey,
Aselli, Malpighi, Gall, Majendie, and Schwann, it is apparent that but
one physiological discovery on record is sufficiently important in its
nature and scope to be compared with sarcognomy, which comprehends the
relations of soul, brain, and body. What is their relative value?
Gall's discovery embraced about one half of the psychic functions of
the brain, with nothing of its physiological functio