This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1839 ... remark how necessary it was for Mr. Mayo, writing when he did, in July 1823, in order to establish a claim for originality, to make some such statement as the above. Granting, for the sake of argument, that M. Magendie was the only individual who interfered with his claims; if, instead of alleging that his observations concerning the fifth pair and spinal nerves had preceded the publication of this gentleman's memoir, Mr. Mayo had admitted that they were made after that time, it is obvious no one would have listened a moment to his representation, that he was led to perform his experiments on the roots of the spinal nerves, by having previously ascertained the distinct functions of the two roots of the fifth pair. Every person, on the contrary, would have said, that it was from having been acquainted beforehand with the experiments on the roots of the spinal nerves, published by the French physiologist, that he had been led to repeat these experiments; and that it was after this, he extended his observations to the roots of the analogous nerve, the that, in short, he followed the same course again, which Sir Charles Bell had pursued many years before, who commenced his investigations with the spinal nerves, and was subsequently led to examine the roots of the fifth pair. To return to the date, therefore, of his Is it probable that they were completed, as he says, " towards the close of the previous summer?" In the first place, we know that July is the last of the summer months. Accordingly, by this representation, they must have been finished sometime during that month of the preceding year, 1822, at the latest. In the second place, he says they were made before the publication of M. Magendie's memoir. Now, this memoir was published in ...