Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 3.djvu/325

Rh every day to prepare it anew—not having time to go through the process of "studying" it, to which Mrs. Siddons used to give weeks or even months. When questioned respecting the mental process which he employed the first time he performed the part, he said that he entirely lost sight of the audience, and seemed to have nothing before him but the pages of the hook from which he had learned it; and that, if any thing had occurred to interrupt this illusion, he should have instantly stopped.—(Inquiry into the Intellectual Powers, fifth edition, p. 103.)

In the case of Barristers, who are called upon to "get up" the "briefs" which are supplied to them, to master the facts, to apply to them the principles of Law, and to present them in the Court in the form which they deem most advantageous to the "cause" they have undertaken to plead, the very highest faculties of mind are called into active exercise; but, in consequence, it would seem, of the want of previous connection with the "case" (of which they know nothing but what is set down in their "brief"), and of the complete cessation of that connection as soon as the decision has been given, they very commonly "forget all about it" so soon as they have transferred their Attention to their next brief. A curious instance of this kind was mentioned to the writer a few years ago by an eminent Barrister (since elevated to the Judicial Bench), whose great scientific attainments led to his being frequently employed in Patent-cases. A "heavy" case of this kind was placed in his hands, and he was reminded of having been engaged by the same parties in the same "case" when it had been first brought to trial about a year previously. He had not the slightest remembrance of its having ever been before him; none of the particulars of it seemed familiar to him; and he was only convinced that he really had taken part in the previous trial by finding the record of his engagement in his Fee-book. Even when he came to "get up" the case again, no remembrance of his former attention to it came within his "sphere of consciousness."

It seems, then, to admit of question whether every thing that passes through our Minds thus leaves its impress on their Material instrument; and whether a somewhat too extensive generalization has not been erected on a rather limited basis. For the doctrine of the indelibility of Memory rests on the spontaneous revival, under circumstances indicative of some change in the Physical condition of the Brain, of the long-dormant "traces" left by such former impressions as are referable to one or other of the three following categories: 1. States of Consciousness as to places, persons, language, etc., which were habitual with us in early life, and which were, therefore, likely to have directed the growth of the Brain; 2. Modes of Thought in which the formation of Associations largely participates, and which are likely to have modified the course of its maintenance by Nutrition after the attainment of maturity; or 3. Single Experiences of peculiar force and vividness, such as are likely to have left very decided "traces," although the