[Footnote 62:  Essai sur l’Origine des Connaissances humaines, I. Sec. 6.]

[Footnote 63:  Let. sur les Aveugles, 323, 324.  Condorcet attaches a higher value to Cheselden’s operation. Oeuv., ii. 121.]

[Footnote 64:  Dr. M’Cosh (Exam. of J. S. Mill’s Philosophy, p. 163) quotes what seems to be the best reported case, by a Dr. Franz, of Leipsic; and Prof.  Fraser, in the appendix to Berkeley (loc. cit.), quotes another good case by Mr. Nunnely.  See also Mill’s Exam. of Hamilton, p. 288 (3d ed.)]

[Footnote 65:  Confessions, II, vii.]

[Footnote 66:  Darwin, The Expression of the Emotions in Men and Animals, c. xiii. p. 312, and also pp. 335-337.  This fact, so far as it goes, seems to make against the theory of transmitted sentiments.]

[Footnote 67:  Locke answered that the man would not distinguish the cube from the sphere, until he had identified by actual touch the source of his former tactual impression with the object making a given visual impression.  Condillac, while making just objections to the terms in which Molyneux propounded the question, answered it different from Locke.  Diderot expresses his own opinion thus:  “I think that when the eyes of the born-blind are opened for the first time to the light, he will perceive nothing at all; that some time will be necessary for his eye to make experiments for itself; but that it will make these experiments itself, and in its own way, and without the help of touch.”  This is in harmony with the modern doctrine, that there is an inherited aptitude of structure (in the eye, for instance), but that experience is an essential condition to the development and perfecting of this aptitude.]

[Footnote 68:  A very intelligent English translation of the Letter on the Blind was published in 1773.  For some reason or other, Diderot is described on the title-page as Physician to His most Christian Majesty.]

[Footnote 69:  Oeuv., i. 308.]

[Footnote 70:  Pp. 309, 310.]

[Footnote 71:  P. 311.]

[Footnote 72:  Corr., June 1749.]

[Footnote 73:  See Critical Miscellanies:  First Series.]

[Footnote 74:  Diderot to Voltaire, 1749. Oeuv., xix. 421.]

[Footnote 75:  Diderot to Voltaire, 1749. Oeuv., xix. 421.]

[Footnote 76:  P. 294.]

[Footnote 77:  Lewes’s Hist.  Philos., ii. 342.]

[Footnote 78:  Rosenkranz, i. 102.]

[Footnote 79:  Tylor’s Researches into the early history of mankind, chaps. ii. and iii.; Lubbock’s Origin of Civilization, chap. ix.]

[Footnote 80:  Madame Dupre de Saint Maur, who had found favour in the eyes of the Count d’Argenson.  D’Argenson, younger brother of the Marquis, who had been dismissed in 1747, was in power from 1743 to 1757.  Notwithstanding his alleged share in Diderot’s imprisonment, he was a tolerably steady protector of the philosophical party.]