Chapter V: Part 5

With regard to the question of marriages of the deaf, Professor Edward
Allen Fay's work is so complete that the results of his six years'
labour are particularly worthy of notice, for, as the introduction
states, the book is a "collection of records of marriages of the deaf
far larger than all previous collections put together," and it deals
in detail with 4471 such marriages. The summary of statistics is as
follows (_Marriages of the Deaf in America_, p. 134):--

+----------------------+-----------------+------------+--------------------+
| | NUMBER OF | NUMBER OF | PERCENTAGE. |
| | MARRIAGES. | CHILDREN. | |
| MARRIAGES +------+----------+------+-----+----------+---------+
| OF THE DEAF. | |Resulting | | |Marriages | |
| |Total.| in deaf |Total.|Deaf.|resulting | Deaf |
| | |offspring.| | | in deaf |children.|
| | | | | |offspring.| |
+----------------------+------+----------+------+-----+----------+---------+
| One or both partners | | | | | | |
| deaf | 3078 | 300 | 6782 | 588 | 9.7 | 8.6 |
| Both partners deaf | 2377 | 220 | 5072 | 429 | 9.2 | 8.4 |
| One partner deaf, | | | | | | |
| the other hearing | 599 | 75 | 1532 | 151 | 12.5 | 9.8 |
| One or both partners | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf, | 1477 | 194 | 3401 | 413 | 13.1 | 12.1 |
| One or both partners | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf | 2212 | 124 | 4701 | 199 | 5.6 | 4.2 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf | 335 | 83 | 779 | 202 | 24.7 | 25.9 |
| One partner | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf, | | | | | | |
| the other | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf | 814 | 66 | 1820 | 119 | 8.1 | 6.5 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf | 845 | 30 | 1720 | 40 | 3.5 | 2.3 |
| One partner | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf, | | | | | | |
| the other hearing | 191 | 28 | 528 | 63 | 14.6 | 11.9 |
| One partner | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf,| | | | | | |
| the other hearing | 310 | 10 | 713 | 16 | 3.2 | 2.2 |
| Both partners had | | | | | | |
| deaf relatives | 437 | 103 | 1060 | 222 | 23.5 | 20.9 |
| One partner had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives, the other| | | | | | |
| had not | 541 | 36 | 1210 | 78 | 6.6 | 6.4 |
| Neither partner had | | | | | | |
| deaf relatives | 471 | 11 | 1044 | 13 | 2.3 | 1.2 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf; | | | | | | |
| both had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives | 172 | 49 | 429 | 130 | 28.4 | 30.3 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf; | | | | | | |
| one had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives, the other| | | | | | |
| had not | 49 | 8 | 105 | 21 | 16.3 | 20.0 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| congenitally deaf; | | | | | | |
| neither had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives | 14 | 1 | 24 | 1 | 7.1 | 4.1 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf;| | | | | | |
| both had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives. | 57 | 10 | 114 | 11 | 17.5 | 9.6 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf;| | | | | | |
| one had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives, the other| | | | | | |
| had not | 167 | 7 | 357 | 10 | 4.1 | 2.8 |
| Both partners | | | | | | |
| adventitiously deaf;| | | | | | |
| neither had deaf | | | | | | |
| relatives | 284 | 2 | 550 | 2 | 0.7 | 0.3 |
| Partners | | | | | | |
| consanguineous | 31 | 14 | 100 | 30 | 45.1 | 30.0 |
+----------------------+------+----------+------+-----+----------+---------+

One point deserves special attention in the above list. It is that
where there are no deaf relatives (i.e. where there has not been a
history of deafness in the family) only one child out of twenty-four
is deaf, even when the parents were both born deaf themselves. Where
there were deaf relatives already in the family on both sides, and the
parents were born deaf, the percentage of deaf children is seven and a
half times as great. This seems to show that there are causes of
congenital deafness which are, comparatively speaking, unlikely to be
transmitted to future generations, while other causes of congenital
deafness are so liable to be perpetuated that one child in every three
is deaf. We conjecture that one original cause of congenital deafness
which reappears in a family is consanguinity--for instance, the
intermarriage of first or second cousins (hearing people) in some
previous generation. Out of the 2245 deaf persons who were born deaf,
269 had parents who were blood relations, according to Fay. And
perhaps many more refrained from acknowledging the fact. Eleven had
grandparents who were cousins. This theory calls for investigation,
and while the marriage of deaf people is not encouraged, it is fair to
ask those who so strenuously oppose such unions whether they may not
be spending their energies on trying to check an effect instead of a
cause, and if that cause may not really be consanguinity,--witness the
percentage of deaf people among Roman Catholics, Protestants and Jews
before noticed. On the principle that prevention is better than cure
it is the intermarriage of cousins and other relations which should be
discouraged. The marriage of deaf people is inadvisable where there
has been deafness in the family in former generations, but the same
warning applies to all the other members of that family, for the
hearing members are as likely to transmit the defect of which deafness
is a symptom as the deaf members are. We are more concerned to
discover the primary cause of the defect, and take steps to prevent
the latter from occurring at all. Those who have no dissuasions for
hearing people, who might perhaps cause the misery, and only give
counsel to those among the transmitters of it who happen to be deaf,
are acting in a manner which is hardly logical.

2. _Post-Natal._--We have collected and grouped the stated causes of deafness in those partners of the marriages in America noticed by Fay. About a hundred and thirty did not mention how they lost hearing. Any errors in this calculation must be less than 1% at most, and can make no material difference. In some cases two or more diseases are given as the cause of deafness. In such cases where one is a very common cause of deafness, and the other is unusual, the former is credited with being the reason for the defect. Where both are common, we have divided the cases between them in a rough proportion.

Scarlet fever 973; scarlatina 3; scarlet rash 2 978

Spotted fever 260; meningitis 92; spinal meningitis 76;
cerebro-spinal meningitis 70; spinal fever 28; spinal
disease 8; congestion of spine 2 536

Brain fever 309; inflammation of brain 62; congestion of
brain 30; disease in brain 3 404

Typhoid 127; "fever" (unspecified) 117; typhus 17;
intermittent fever 14; bilious fever 11; other fevers 14 300

Gatherings, inflammations, in head; ulcers, disease, sores,
risings, &c., all but 22 being explicitly stated to be in
head or ears 276

"Sickness" 167; "illness" 49; "disease" 8; no definite
specification 12 236

Measles 191

Colds 101; colds in head, &c. 35; catarrh 19; catarrhal
fevers 10; chills, &c. 17 182

Whooping cough 77; diphtheria 34; lung fever, and various
diseases of lungs and throat 60 171

Falls 143

Fits and convulsions 58; spasms 18; teething 16 92

Scrofula 35; mumps 25; swellings on neck 2 62

Many various and unusual causes 60

Smallpox 8; chickenpox 6, cholera, &c. 7; canker, &c. 11;
erysipelas 13 45

Paralysis, &c. 12; nerve diseases 12; fright 8; palsy 3 35

Hydrocephalus 14; dropsy on brain or in head 17; dropsy 2 33

Various accidents, blows, kicks, &c. 31

Quinine 22; other medicines 7 29
----
Total 3804
----

We have counted a hundred and thirty of those who were returned as having lost hearing who were also stated to be the offspring of consanguineous marriages.

Dr Kerr Love (_Deaf Mutism_, p. 150) gives the following list compiled
from the registers of British institutions:--

Scarlet fever 331
Miscellaneous causes 175
Teething, convulsions, &c. 171
Meningitis, brain fever, &c. 166
Measles 138
Falls and accidents 122
Enteric and other fevers 119
Disease, illness, &c. 37
Whooping cough 33
Suppurative ear diseases 18
Syphilis 2
----
1312

Unknown causes 98

The same writer quotes Hartmann's table, compiled in 1880 from
continental statistics, as follows:--

Cerebral affections, inflammations,
convulsions 644
Cerebro-spinal meningitis 295
Typhus 260
Scarlatina 205
Measles 84
Ear disease, proper 77
Lesions of the head 70
Other diseases 354
----
1989

There appears to be no cure for deafness that is other than partial; but with the advance of science preventive treatment is expected to be efficacious in scarlet fever, measles, &c.

_Condition of the Deaf._

1. _In Childhood._--It is difficult to impress people with two facts in connexion with teaching language to the average child who was born deaf, or lost hearing in early infancy. One is the necessity of the undertaking, and the other is that this necessity is not due to mental deficiency in the pupil. To the born deaf-mute in an English-speaking country English is a foreign language. His inability to speak is due to his never having heard that tongue which his mother uses. The same reason holds good for his entire ignorance of that language. The hearing child does not know a word of English when he is born, and never would learn it if taken away from where it is spoken. He learns English unconsciously by imitating what he hears. The deaf child never hears English, and so he never learns it till he goes to school. Here he has to start learning English--or whatever is the language of his native land--in the same way as a hearing boy learns a foreign language.

But another reason exists which renders his task much more difficult than that of a normal English schoolboy learning, say, German. The latter has two channels of information, the eye and the ear; the deaf boy has only one, the eye. The hearing boy learns German by what he hears of it in class as well as by reading it; the deaf boy can only learn by what he sees. It is as if you tried to fill two cisterns of the same capacity with two inlets to one and only one inlet to the other; supposing the inlets to be the same size, the former will fill twice as fast. So it is in the case of the hearing boy as compared with his deaf brother. The cerebral capacity and quality are the same, but in one case one of the avenues to the brain is closed, and consequently the development is less rapid. Moreover, the thoughts are precisely those which would be expected in people who form them only from what they see. We were often asked by our deaf playmates in our childhood such questions (in signs) as "What does the cat say?"--"The dog talks, does he not?"--"Is the rainbow very hot on the roof of that house?" They have often told us such things as that they used to think someone went to the end of the earth and climbed up the sky to light the stars, and to pour down rain through a sieve.

But there is yet a third disadvantage for the already handicapped deaf boy. He has no other language to build upon, while the other has his mother tongue with which to compare the foreign language he is learning. The latter already has a general idea of sentences and clauses, of tense and mood, of gender, number and case, of substantives, verbs and prepositions; and he knows that one language must form some sort of parallel to another. He is already prepared to find a subject, predicate and object, in the sentence of a foreign language, even when he knows not a word of any but his own mother tongue. If he is told that a certain word in German is an adjective, he understands what its function is, even when he has yet to learn the meaning of the word. All this goes for nothing in the case of the deaf pupil. The very elementary fact that certain words denote certain objects--that there is such a class of word as substantives--comes as a revelation to most deaf children. They have to begin at seven laboriously and artificially to learn what an ordinary baby has unconsciously and naturally discovered at the age of two. English, spoken, written, printed or finger-spelled, is no more natural, comprehensible or easy of acquirement to the deaf than is Chinese. The manual alphabet is simply one way of expressing the vernacular on the fingers; it is no more the deaf-mute's "natural" language than speech or writing, and if he cannot express himself by the latter modes of communicating, he cannot by spelling on the fingers. The last is simply a case of _vicaria linguae manus_. None of these are languages in themselves; whether you use pen or type, hand or voice, you are but adopting one or other method of expressing one and the same tongue--English or whatever it may be, that of a "people of a strange speech and of a hard language, whose words they cannot understand." The deaf child's natural mode of communication--more natural to him than any verbal language is to hearing people--is the world-wide, natural language of signs.

2. _Natural Language of the Deaf._--We have just called signs a natural language. While a purist might properly object to this adjective being applied to all signs, yet it is not an unfair term to use as regards this method of conversing as a whole, even in the United States, where signs, being to a great extent the French signs invented by de l'Epee, are more artificial than in England. The old story, by the way, of the pupil of de l'Epee failing to write more than "hand, breast," as describing what an incredulous investigator did when he laid his hand on his breast, proves nothing. In all probability he had no idea that he was expected to describe an action, and thought that he was being asked the names of certain parts of the body. The hand was held out to him and he wrote "hand." Then the breast was indicated by placing the hand on it, and he wrote "breast." Moreover, the artificial element is much less pronounced than is supposed by most of those who are loudest in their condemnation of signs, there being almost invariably an obvious connexion between the sign and idea. These critics are generally people whose acquaintance with the subject is rather limited, and the thermometer of whose zeal in waging war against gestures generally falls in proportion as the photometer of their knowledge about them shows an increasing light. We may go still further and point out that to object to any sign on the ground of artificiality _per se_, is to strain at the gnat and to swallow the camel, for English itself is one of the most artificial languages in existence, and certainly is more open to such an objection than signs. If we apply the same test to English that is applied to signs by those who would rule out any which they suppose cannot come under the head of natural gesture or pantomime, what fraction of our so-called natural language should we have left? For a spoken word to be "natural" in this sense it must be onomatopoetic, and what infinitesimal percentage of English words are such? A foreigner, unacquainted with the language, could not glean the drift of a conversation in English, except perhaps a trifle from the tone of the voices and more from the natural signs used--the smiles and frowns, the expressions of the faces, the play of eyes, lips, hands and whole body. The only words he could possibly understand without such aids are some such onomatopoetic words as the cries of animals--"mew," "chirrup," &c., and a few more like "bang" or "swish."

The reason why we insist emphatically upon the importance of teaching English in schools for the deaf in English-speaking countries, is, firstly, because that is the language which the pupil will be called upon to use in his intercourse with his fellow-men after he leaves school, and secondly, because, if his grasp of that tongue only be sufficient and his interest in books be properly aroused, he can go on educating himself in after-life by means of reading. Time tables are overcrowded with kindergarten, clay modelling, wood-carving, carpentry, and other things which are excellent in themselves. But there is not time for everything, and these are not as important in the case of the deaf pupil as language. Putting aside the question of religion and moral training, we consider the flooding of their minds with general knowledge, and the teaching of English to enable them to express their thoughts to their neighbours, to be of paramount importance, so paramount that all other branches of education in their turn pale into insignificance by comparison with these, while the question of methods of instruction should be subservient to these main ends. Too many make speech in itself an end. This is a mistake. Speech is not in itself English; it is only one way of expressing that language. And we are little concerned to inquire by what means the deaf pupil expresses himself in English so long as he does so express himself, whether by speech or writing, or as he does so express himself, whether by speech or writing or finger-spelling--for if he can finger-spell he can write. It is not the mere fact that he can make certain sounds or write certain letters or form the alphabet on his hands that should signify. It is the actual language that he uses, whatever be the means, and the thoughts that are enshrined in the language, that should be our criterion when judging of his education.

The importance of English is insisted upon because to place the deaf child in touch with his English-speaking fellow-men we must teach him their language, and also because he can thereby educate himself by means of books if, and when, he has a sufficient command of that language. The reason is not because the vernacular is actually superior to signs as a means of conversation. The sign language is quite equal to the vernacular as a means of expression. The former is as much our mother tongue, if we may say so, as the latter; we used one language as soon as the other, in our earliest infancy; and, after a lifelong experience of both, we affirm that signs are a more beautiful language than English, and provide possibilities of a wealth of expression which English does not possess, and which probably no other language possesses.

That others whose knowledge of signs is lifelong hold similar opinions is shown by the following extract from _The Deaf and their Possibilities_, by Dr Gallaudet:--

"Thinking that the question may arise in the minds of some, 'Does the
sign language give the deaf, when used in public addresses, all that
speech affords to the hearing?' I will say that my experience and
observation lead me to answer with a decided affirmative. On occasions
almost without number it has been my privilege to interpret, through
signs to the deaf, addresses given in speech; I have addressed
hundreds of assemblages of deaf persons in the college, in schools I
have visited, and elsewhere, using signs for the original expression
of thought; I have seen many more lectures and public debates given
originally in signs; I have seen conventions of deaf-mutes in which no
word was spoken, and yet all the forms of parliamentary proceedings
were observed, and the most earnest, and even excited, discussions
were carried on. I have seen the ordinances of religion administered,
and the full service of the Church rendered in signs; and all this
with the assurance growing out of my complete understanding of the
language--a knowledge which dates from my earliest childhood--that for
all the purposes enumerated gestural expression is in no respect
inferior, and is in many respects superior, to oral, verbal utterance
as a means of communicating ideas."

The following is an analysis of the sign language given by Mr Payne of the Swansea Institution, together with his explanatory notes:--

"_Analysis of the Sign Language._

I. Facial expression.

/1. Sympathetic \
II. Gesture < 2. Representative (= Natural signs | Conventional
\3. Systematic (a) Arbitrary signs > especially in
(b) Grammatical signs / shortened form.
III. Mimic action.

IV. Pantomime.

"_Observations._--People speak of 'manual signs.' Of course there are
signs which are made with the hands only, as there are others which
are labial, &c. But the sign language is comprehensive, and at times
the whole frame is engaged in its use. A late American teacher could
and did 'sign' a story to his pupils with his hands behind him. Facial
expression plays an important part in the language. Sympathetic
gestures are individualistic and spontaneous, and are sometimes
unconsciously made. The speaker, feeling that words are inadequate,
reinforces them with gesture. Arbitrary signs are, e.g., drumming with
three separated fingers on the chin for 'uncle.' Grammatical signs are
those which are used for inflections, parts of speech, or letters as
in the manual alphabet, and some numerical signs, though other
numerals may be classed as natural; also signs for sounds, and even
labial signs. Signs, whether natural or arbitrary, which gain
acceptance, especially if they are shortened, are 'conventional.'
'Mimic action' refers, e.g., to the sign for sawing, the side of one
hand being passed to and fro over the side or back of the
other.'Pantomime' means, e.g., when the signer pretends to hang up his
hat and coat, roll up his sleeves, kneel on his board, guide the saw
with his thumb, saw through, wipe his forehead, &c."

Illustrations of one style of numerical signs are given below.

Units are signified with the palm turned inwards; tens with the palm turned outwards; hundreds with the fingers downwards; thousands with the left hand to the right shoulder; millions with the hand near the forehead. For 12, sign 10 outwards and 2 inwards, and so on up to 19. 21 = 2 outwards, 1 inwards, and so on up to 30. 146 = 1 downwards, 4 outwards, 6 inwards. 207,837 = 2 downwards, 7 inwards (both at shoulder), 8 downwards, 3 outwards, 7 inwards. 599,126,345 = 5 downwards, 9 outwards, 9 inwards (all near forehead); 1 downwards, 2 outwards, 6 inwards (all at shoulder); 3 downwards, 4 outwards, 5 inwards (in front of chest).

Only the third, and a few of the second, subdivision of the second section of the above classes of signs can be excluded when talking of signs as being the deaf-mute's natural language. In fact we hesitate to call representative gesture--e.g. the horns and action of milking for "cow," the smelling at something grasped in the hand for "flower," &c.--conventional at all, except when shortened as the usual sign for "cat" is, for instance, from the sign for whiskers _plus_ stroking the fur on back and tail _plus_ the action of a cat licking its paw and washing its face, to the sign for whiskers only.

The deaf child expresses himself in the sign language of his own accord. The supposition that in manual or combined schools generally they "teach them signs" is incorrect, except that perhaps occasionally a few pupils may be drilled and their signs polished for a dramatic rendering of a poem at a prize distribution or public meeting, which is no more "teaching them signs" than training hearing children to recite the same poem orally and polishing their rendering of it is teaching them English. If the deaf boy meets with some one who will use gesture to him, a new sign will be invented as occasion requires by one or other to express a new idea, and if it be a good one is tacitly adopted to express that idea, and so an entire language is built up. It follows that in different localities signs will differ to a great extent, but one who is accustomed to signing can readily see the connexion and understand what is meant even when the signs are partly novel to him. We are sometimes asked if we can make a deaf child understand abstract ideas by this language. Our answer is that we can, if a hearing child of no greater age and intelligence can understand the same ideas in English. Signs are particularly the best means of conveying religious truths to the deaf. If you wish to appeal to him, to impress him, to reach his heart and his sympathies (and, incidentally, to offer the best possible substitute for music), use his own eloquent language of signs. We have conversed by signs with deaf people from all parts of the British Isles, from France, Norway and Sweden, Poland, Finland, Italy, Russia, Turkey, the United States, and found that they are indeed a world-wide means of communication, even when we wandered on to most unusual and abstract subjects. Deaf people in America converse with Red Indians with ease thereby, which shows how natural the generality of even de l'Epee signs are. The sign language is everybody's natural language, not only the deaf-mute's.

Addison (_Deaf Mutism_, p. 283) quotes John Bulwer as follows:--"What
though you (the deaf and dumb) cannot express your minds in those
verbal contrivances of man's invention: yet you want not speech who
have your whole body for a tongue, having a language which is more
natural and significant, which is common to you with us, to wit,
gesture, the general and universal language of human nature." The same
writer says further on (p. 297): "The same process of growth goes on
alike with the signs of the deaf and dumb as with the spoken words of
the hearing. Arnold, than whom no stronger advocate of the oral method
exists, recognizes this in his comment on this principle of the German
school, for he writes: 'It is much to be regretted that teachers
should indulge in unqualified assertions of the impossibility of
deaf-mutes attaining to clear conceptions and abstract thinking by
signs or mimic gestures. Facts are against them.' Again, Graham Bell,
who is generally considered an opponent of the sign system, says: 'I
think that if we have the mental condition of the child alone in view
without reference to language, no language will reach the mind like
the language of signs; it is the method of reaching the mind of the
deaf child.'"

The opinions of the deaf themselves, from all parts of the world, are
practically unanimous on this question. In the words of Dr Smith,
president of the World's Congress of the Deaf held at St Louis,
Missouri, in 1904, under the auspices of the National Association of
the Deaf, U.S.A., "the educated deaf have a right to be heard in these
matters, and they must and shall be heard." A portion may be quoted of
the resolutions passed at that congress of 570 of the best-informed
deaf the world has ever seen, at least scores, if not hundreds, of
them holding degrees, and being as well educated as the vast majority
of teachers of the deaf in England: "Resolved, that the oral method,
which withholds from the congenitally and quasi-congenitally deaf the
use of the language of signs outside the schoolroom, robs the children
of their birthright; that those champions of the oral method, who have
been carrying on a warfare, both overt and covert, against the use of
the language of signs by the adult deaf, are not friends of the deaf;
and that, in our opinion, it is the duty of every teacher of the deaf,
no matter what method he or she uses, to have a working command of the
sign language."

It is often urged as an objection to the use of signs that those who use them think in them, and that their English (or other vernacular language) suffers in consequence. There is, however, no more objection to thinking in signs than to thinking in any other language, and as to the second objection, facts are against such a statement. The best-educated deaf in the world, as a class, are in America, and the American deaf sign almost to a man. It is true that at first a beginner in school may, when at a loss how to express himself in words, render his thoughts in sign-English, if we may use the expression, just as a schoolboy will sometimes put Latin words in the English order. That is, the deaf pupil puts the word in the natural order of the signs, which is really the logical order, and is much nearer the Latin sequence of words than the English. But, firstly, if he had always been forbidden to use signs he would not express himself in English any better in that particular instance; he would simply not attempt to express himself at all,--so he loses nothing, at least; and secondly, it is perfectly easy to teach him in a very short time that each language has its own idiom and that the thought is expressed in a different order in each.

Of the deaf child's moral condition nothing more need be said than that it is at first exactly that of his hearing brother, and his development therein depends entirely upon whether he is trained to the same degree. The need of this is great. He is quite as capable of religious and moral instruction, and benefits as much by what he receives of it. Happiness is a noticeable feature of the character of the deaf when they are allowed to mix with each other. The charge of bad temper can usually be sustained only when the fault is on the side of those with whom they live. For instance, the latter often talk in the presence of the deaf person without saying a word to him, and if he then shows irritation, which is not often in any case, it is no more to be wondered at than if a hearing person resents whispering or other secret communication in his presence.

3. _Social Status, &c._--From the 1901 census "Summary Tables" we gather the following facts concerning the occupations of the deaf, aged ten and upwards, in England and Wales. About half of the total number, taking males and females together (13,450), are engaged in occupations--6665. The rest--6785--are retired or unoccupied. Of the former, the following table given below shows the distribution:--

In general or local government work (clerks, messengers, &c.) 11
In professional occupations and subordinate services 87
In domestic offices or services 788
In commercial occupations 12
In work connected with conveyance of men, goods or messages 144
In agriculture 568
In fishing 3
In and about mines and quarries, &c. 151
In work connected with metals, machines, implements, &c. 503
In work connected with precious metals, jewels, games, &c. 46
In building and works of construction 485
In work connected with wood, furniture, fittings and decorations 470
In work connected with brick, cement, pottery and glass 153
In work connected with chemicals, oil, soap, &c. 46
In work connected with skins, hair and feathers 137
In work connected with paper, prints, books, &c. 238
In work connected with textile fabrics 407
In work connected with dress 1829
In work connected with food, tobacco, drink and lodging 194
In work connected with gas, water and electric supply, and
sanitary service 22
Other general and undefined workers and dealers 371
----
Total 6665

Among those in professional occupations are a clergyman, five law
clerks, ten schoolmasters, teachers, &c., thirty-seven painters,
engravers and sculptors, and seven photographers. Of those not engaged
in occupations, 235 have retired from business, and 245 are living on
their own means. Probably a very large number of the remainder were
out of work or engaged in odd jobs at the time of the census; it would
certainly be incorrect to take the words "Without specified
occupations or unoccupied" to mean that those classified as such were
permanently unable to support themselves.

The commonest occupations of men are bootmaking (555), tailoring
(429), farm-labouring (287), general labouring (257), carpentry (195),
cabinet-making (142), painting, decorating and glazing (95),
French-polishing (88), harness-making, &c. (80).

The commonest occupations of women are dressmaking (484), domestic
service (367), laundry and washing service (230), tailoring (170),
shirtmaking, &c. (81), charing (79).

In Munich there are about sixty deaf artists, especially painters and
sculptors. In Germany and Austria generally, deaf lithographers,
xylographers and photographers are well employed, as are bookbinders
in Leipzig in particular, and labourers in the provinces.

In France there are several deaf writers, journalists, &c., two
principals of schools, an architect, a score or so of painters,
several of whom are ladies, nine sculptors, and a few engravers,
photographers, proof-readers, &c.

Italy boasts deaf wood-carvers, sculptors, painters, and architects
graduating from the universities and academies of fine arts with
prizes and medals; also type-setters, pressmen, carvers of coral,
ivory and precious stones.

Two gentlemen in the office of the Norwegian government are deaf, as
are four in the engraving department of the land survey; one is a
master-lithographer, another a master-printer, a third a civil
engineer, and the rest are engaged in the usual trades, as are those
in Sweden.

The deaf form societies of their own to guard their interests, for social intercourse and other purposes. In England there is the British Deaf and Dumb Association; in America the National Association of the Deaf and many lesser societies; Germany has no fewer than 150 such associations, some of which are athletic clubs, benefit societies, dramatic clubs, and so forth. The central Federation is the largest German association. France has the National Union of Deaf-Mutes and others, many being benefit clubs. Italy has some societies; Sweden has eight.

In the United States there are no fewer than fifty-three publications devoted to the interests of the deaf, most of them being school magazines published in the institutions themselves. Great Britain and Ireland have six, four of them being school magazines. France, Germany, Sweden, Hungary have several, and Finland, Russia, Norway, Denmark and Austria are represented. Canada has three.

There are many Church and other missions to the deaf in England and abroad, which are much needed owing to the difficulty the average deaf person has in understanding the archaic language of both Bible and Prayer-book. Until they have this explained to them it is useless to place these books in their hands, and even where they are well-educated and can follow the services, they fail to get the sermon. Chaplains and missioners engage in all branches of pastoral work among them, and also try to find them employment, interpret for them where necessary, and interview people on their behalf.

The difficulty of obtaining employment for the deaf has been increased in Great Britain by the Employers' Liability and Workmen's Compensation Acts, for masters are afraid--needlessly, as facts show--to employ them, under the impression that they are more liable to accidents owing to their affliction.

The new After-Care Committees of the London County Council are a late confession of a need which other bodies have long endeavoured to supply. Education should be a development of the whole nature of the child. The board of education in England provides for intellectual, industrial and physical training, but does not take cognizance of those parts of education which are far more important--the social, moral and spiritual. Some teachers, both oral and manual, do an incalculable amount of good at the cost of great self-sacrifice and in face of much discouragement. They deserve the highest praise for so doing, and such work needs to be carried on after their pupils leave school.

_Education._

_History._[2]--"Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh a man dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I the Lord?" (Ex. iv. 11). Such is the first known reference to the deaf. But the significance of this statement was not realized by the ancients, who mercilessly destroyed all the defective, the deaf among the rest. Greek and Roman custom demanded their death, and they were thrown into the river, or otherwise killed, without causing any comment but that so many encumbrances had been removed. They were regarded as being on a mental level with idiots and utterly incapable of helping themselves. In later times Roman law forbade those who were deaf and dumb from birth to make a will or bequest, placing them under the care of guardians who were responsible for them to the state; though if a deaf person had lost hearing after having been educated, and could either speak or write, he retained his rights. Herodotus refers to a deaf son of Croesus, whom he declares to have suddenly recovered his speech upon seeing his father about to be killed. Gellius makes a similar statement with reference to a certain athlete. Hippocrates was in advance of Aristotle when he realized that deaf-mutes did not speak simply because they did not know how to; for the last-named seems to have considered that some defect of the intellect was the cause of their inability to utter articulate sounds. Pliny the elder and Messalla Corvinus mention deaf-mutes who could paint.

The true mental condition of the deaf was realized, however, by few, if any, before the time of Christ. He, as He opened the ears of the deaf man and loosened his tongue, talked to him in his own language, the language of signs.

St Augustine erred amazingly when he declared that the deaf could have no faith, since "faith comes by hearing only." The Talmud, on the other hand, recognized that they could be taught, and were therefore not idiotic.

It is, however, with those who attempted to educate the deaf that we are here chiefly concerned. The first to call for notice is St John of Beverley. The Venerable Bede tells how this bishop made a mute speak and was credited with having performed a miracle in so doing. Probably it was nothing more than the first attempt to teach by the oral method, and the greatest credit is due to him for being so far in advance of his times as to try to instruct his pupil at all. Bede himself invented a system of counting on the hands; and also a "manual speech," as he called it,--using his numerals to indicate the number of the letter of the alphabet; thus, the sign for "seven" would also signify the letter "g," and so forth. But we do not know that he intended this alphabet for the use of the deaf.

It is not until the 16th century that we hear much of anybody else who was interested in the deaf, but at this date we find Girolamo Cardan stating that they can be instructed by writing, after they have been shown the signification of words, since their mental power is unaffected by their inability to hear.

Pedro Ponce de Leon (c. 1520-1584), a Spanish Benedictine monk, is more worthy of notice, as he, to use his own words, taught the deaf "to speak, read, write, reckon, pray, serve at the altar, know Christian doctrine, and confess with a loud voice." Some he taught languages and science. That he was successful was proved by other witness than his own, for Panduro, Valles and de Morales all give details of his work, the last-named giving an account by one of Ponce's pupils of his education. De Morales says further that Ponce de Leon addressed his scholars either by signs or writing, and that the reply came by speech. It appears that this master committed his methods to writing. Though this work is lost it is probable that his system was put into practice by Juan Pablo Bonet. This Spaniard successfully instructed a brother of his master the constable of Castile, who had lost hearing at the age of two. His method corresponded in a great measure to that which is now called the combined system, for, in the work which he wrote, he shows how the deaf can be taught to speak by reducing the letters to their phonetic value, and also urges that finger-spelling and writing should be used. The connexion between all three, he goes on to say, should be shown the pupils, but the manual alphabet should be mastered first. Nouns he taught by pointing to the objects they represented; verbs he expressed by pantomime; while the value of prepositions, adverbs and interjections, as well as the tenses of verbs, he believed could be learnt by repeated use. The pupil should be educated by interrogation, conversation, and carefully graduated reading. The success of Bonet's endeavours are borne witness to by Sir Kenelm Digby, who met the teacher at Madrid.

Bonifacio's work on signs, in which he uses every part of the body for conversational purposes, may be mentioned before passing to John Bulwer, the first Englishman to treat of teaching the deaf. In his three works, _Philocophus_, _Chirologia_ and _Chironomia_, he enlarges upon Sir Kenelm Digby's account, and argues about the possibility of teaching the deaf by speech. But he seems to have had no practical experience of the art.

Dr John Wallis is more important, though it has been disputed whether he was not indebted to his predecessors for some ideas. He taught by writing and articulation. He took the trouble to classify to a certain extent the various sounds, dividing both vowels and "open" consonants into gutturals, palatals and labials. The "closed" consonants he subdivided into mutes, semi-mutes and semi-vowels. Language, Wallis maintained, should be taught when the pupil had first learned to write, and the written characters should be associated with some sort of manual alphabet. Names of things should be given first, and then the parts of those things, e.g. "body" first, and then, under that, "head," "arm," "foot," &c. Then the singular and plural should be given, then possessives and possessive pronouns, followed by particles, other pronouns and adjectives. These should be followed by the copulative verb; after which should come the intransitive verb and its nominative in the different tenses, and the transitive with its object in the same way. Lastly, prepositions and conjunctions should be taught. All this, Wallis held, ought to be done by writing as well as signing, for he did not lose sight of the fact that "we must learn the pupil's language in order to teach him ours."

Dr William Holder, who read an essay before the Royal Society in 1668-1669 on the "Elements of Speech," added an appendix concerning the deaf and dumb. He describes the organs of speech and their positions in articulation, suggesting teaching the pupil the sounds in order of simplicity, though he held that he must learn to write first. Afterwards the pupil must associate the letters with a manual alphabet. Holder notices that dumbness is due to the want of hearing, and therefore speech can be acquired through watching the lips, though he admits the task is a laborious one. He also urges the teacher to be patient and to make the work as interesting to the pupil as possible. Command of language, he maintains, will enable the deaf person to read a sentence from the lips if he gets most of the words; for he will be able to supply those he did not see, from his knowledge of English.

Johan Baptist van Helmont treated of the work of the vocal organs. Amman says that Van Helmont had discovered a manual alphabet and used it to instruct the deaf, but had not attained very good results.

George Sibscota published a work in 1670 called the _Deaf and Dumb Man's Discourse_, in which he contradicts Aristotle's opinion that people are dumb because of defects in the vocal organs; for they are, he believed, dumb because never taught to speak. They can gain knowledge by sight, he maintained; can write, converse by signs, speak and lip-read. Ramirez de Carrion also taught the deaf to speak and write, as did P. Lana Terzi.

About George Dalgarno more is known. He wrote, in 1680, his _Didascalocophus_, or _Deaf-Mute's Preceptor_, in which he makes the mistake of saying that the deaf have the advantage over the blind in opportunities for learning language. The deaf can, in his opinion, be taught to speak, and also to read the lips if the letters are very distinct. They ought to read, write and spell on the fingers constantly, but use no signs. Substantives are to be taught by associating them with the things they represent; then adjectives should be joined to them. Verbs should be taught by suiting the action to the words, and associating the pronouns with them. Other parts of speech should be given as opportunities of explaining them present themselves. Dalgarno invented an alphabet, the letters being on the joints of the fingers and palm of the left hand.

John Conrad Amman published his _Dissertatio de Loquela_ in 1700. In the first chapter he treats, among other things, of the nature of the breath and voice and the organs of speech. In the second chapter he classifies sounds into vowels, semi-vowels and consonants, and a detailed description of each sound is given. The third chapter is devoted to showing how to produce and control the voice, to utter each sound from writing or from the lips, and to combine them into syllables and words. It was only after the pupil had attained to considerable success in articulation and lip-reading that Amman taught the meaning of words and language; but the name of this teacher will long stand as that of one of the most successful the world has known.

Passing over Camerarius, Schott, Kerger (who began teaching language sooner than Amman did, and depended more on writing and signs), Raphel (who instructed three deaf daughters), Lasius, Arnoldi, Lucas, Vanin, de Fay (himself deaf) and many others, we come to Giacobbo Rodriguez Pereira, the pioneer of deaf-mute education in France, if we except de Fay. Beginning his experience by instructing his deaf sister, he soon attained to considerable success with two other pupils; his chief aim being, as he said, to make them comprehend the meaning of, and express their thoughts in, language. A commission of the French Academy of Sciences, before whom he appeared, testified to the genuineness of his achievements, noticing that he wrote and signed to his pupils, and stating that he hoped to proceed to the instruction of lip-reading. Pereira soon after came under the notice of the duc de Chaulnes, whose deaf godson, Saboureaux de Fontenay, became his pupil; and in five years this boy was well able to speak and read the lips. Pereira had several other pupils. Probably kindness and affection were two of the secrets of his success, for the love his scholars showed for him was unbounded. His method is only partly known, but he used a manual alphabet which indicated the pronunciation of the letters and some combinations. He used reading and writing; but signs were only called to his aid when absolutely necessary. Language he taught by founding it on action where possible, abstract ideas being gradually developed in later stages of the education.

We now come to the abbe de l'Epee (q.v.). The all-important features in this teacher's character and method were his intense devotion to his scholars and their class, and the fact that he lived among them and talked to them as one of themselves. Meeting with two girls who were deaf, he started upon the task of instructing them, and soon had a school of sixty pupils, supported entirely by himself. He spared himself no expense and no trouble in doing his utmost to benefit the deaf, learning Spanish for the sole purpose of reading Bonet's work, and making this book and Amman's _Dissertatio de Loquela_ his guiding lights. But de l'Epee was the first to attach great importance to signs; and he used them, along with writing, until the pupil had some knowledge of language before he passed on to articulation and lip-reading. To the latter method, however, he never paid as much attention as he did to instructing by signs and writing, and finally he abandoned it altogether through lack of time and means. He laboured long on a dictionary of signs, but never completed it. He was attacked by Pereira, who condemned his method as being detrimental, and this was the beginning of the disputes as to the merits of the different methods which have lasted to the present day; but whatever opinions we may hold as to the best means of instructing the deaf we cannot but admire the devoted teacher who spent his life and his all in benefiting this class of the community.

Samuel Heinicke first began his work in 1754 at Dresden, but in 1778 he removed to Leipzig and started on the instruction of nine pupils. His methods he kept secret; but we know that he taught orally, using signs only when he considered them helpful, and spelling only to combine ideas. He wrote two books and several articles on the subject of educating the deaf, but it is from Walther and Fornari that we learn most about his system. At first Heinicke laid stress on written language, starting with the concrete and going on to the abstract; and he only passed to oral instruction when the pupils could express themselves in fairly correct language. Subsequently, however, he expressed the opinion that speech should be the sole method of instruction, and, strange to say, that by speech alone could thoughts be fully expressed.

Henry Baker became tutor to a deaf girl in 1720, and his success led to the establishment of a private school in London. He also kept his system a secret, but recently his work on lessons for the deaf was discovered, from which we gather that he adopted writing, drawing, speech and lip-reading as his course of instruction. The point to notice is that after the primary stages Baker turned events of every-day life to use in his teaching. His pupils went about with him, and he taught by conversation upon what they saw in the streets,--an excellent method; but it is a pity that such a good teacher had not the philanthropy to make his methods known and to give the poorer deaf the benefit of them, as de l'Epee did.

A school was established in Edinburgh in 1760 by Thomas Braidwood, who taught by the oral method. He taught the sounds first, then syllables, and finally words, teaching their meaning. In 1783 Braidwood came to Hackney, whence he moved to Old Kent Road, and in 1809 there were seventy pupils in what was lately the Old Kent Road Institution. Braidwood's method was practically a development of Wallis's. We must regard him as the founder of the first public school for the deaf in England.

It was only at the beginning of the 19th century that a brighter day dawned on the deaf as a class. With the sole exception of de l'Epee no teacher had yet undertaken the instruction of a deaf child who could not pay for it. Now things began to be different. Institutions were founded, and their doors were opened to nearly all.