, and not of human, origin, and the senses
designed for special purposes are not interchangeable without loss. The
theory that the loss of a certain sense is nearly, if not quite,
compensated for by increased acuteness of the remaining ones has been
exploded. Such a theory accuses, in substance, the Maker of creating
something needless, and is repugnant to the conceptions we have of the
Supreme Being. When one sense is absent, the remaining senses, in order
to equalize the loss, have imposed upon them an unusual amount of
activity, from which arises skill and dexterity, and by which the loss
of the other sense is in some measure alleviated, but not supplied. No
_additional_ power is given to the eye after the loss of the sense of
hearing other than it might have acquired with the same amount of
practice while both faculties were active. The fact, however, that the
senses, in performing their proper functions, are not overtaxed, and are
therefore, in cases of emergency, capable of being extended so as to
perform, in various degrees, additional service, is one of the wise
providences of God, and to this fact is due the possibility of whatever
of success is attained in the work of educating the deaf, as well as the
blind.

In the case of the blind, the sense of touch is called into increased
activity by the absence of the lost sense; while in the case of the
deaf, sight is asked to do this additional service. A blind person's
education is received principally through the _two_ senses of hearing
and touch. Neither of these faculties is so sensible to fatigue by
excessive use as is the sense of sight, and yet the eye has, in every
system of instruction applied to the deaf, been the sole medium. In no
case known to the writer, excepting in the celebrated case of Laura
Bridgman and a few others laboring under the double affliction of
deafness and blindness, has the sense of touch been employed as a means
of instruction.[1]

[Footnote 1: This article was written before Professor Bell had made his
interesting experiments with his "parents' class" of a touch alphabet,
to be used upon the pupil's shoulder in connection with the oral
teaching.--E.A.F.]

Not taking into account the large percentage of myopes among the deaf,
we believe there are other cogent reasons why, if found practicable, the
use of the sense of touch may become an important element in our
eclectic system of teaching. We should reckon it of considerable
impor