The Sun.
London, England, 1842-01-26 00:00:00

PHRENOTYPIC CHRONOLOGY.

Mr. Williams, of the Westminster Academy,
has written to us to correct our notice of his book
under the above title. His communication is
too long to be inserted, but the followin; pas-
sage contains the pith of his remarks, doing justice
to himself:—

" In your Journal of Thursday, January 13,
I am accused of borrowing the word, or title,
Phrenotypics,' from M. Beniowski, and of
using that word 'in such a manner as to mislead
the public into the belief that I expound the
Mnemonic principles of M. Beniowski instead of
those of Feinagle.' If you will have the good-
ness, Sir, to look again at my treatise, you will
find that the principles, or system, of Artificial
Memory which I have attempted to expound, are
neither M. Beniowski's nor M. Von Feinagle's,
although founded on a similar plan'of locality ;
also, that, so far from misleading the public into
any such belief, I have naturally been anxious
to establish my own right to the invention of
those combinations, extensions, and improve-
ments in Mnemonics, by means of which I may
safely and fairly say, I have produced results as
beneficial to education as any accomplished by
the system of M. Beniowski. Reference to my
book will prove to you that I have asserted and
established this claim as plainly as words could
convey my meaning. Your charge of plagiarism,
though expressed in general terms, appears to
apply merely to my adoption of the word Phre-
notypics,' which unfortunate adoption seems to
be the whole ' head and front of my offending.'
This, however, is something like a tenable
charge, and I take great pleasure here, as I have
constantly done in my lectures in London, Bath,
Cheltenham, and St. Alban's, in candidly ac-
knowledging my obligation to M. Beniowski for
that very happy and appropriate designation of
the art of artificial memory. When I first heard
it, I considered it to be the best ever invented,
and far more expressive than the words " Mne-
monics,' or Memoria Technica,' which but
weakly convey a just idea of Memory strength-
ened by locality and association. To Phreno-
type,' expresses what our art really accomplishes
—it is the impression of facts upon the brain, as
if with printing types."
The opinion of Mr. Williams's work which we
have expressed he must allow us to retain, and
we cannot open our columns to controvert it.

THE LATE RAILWAY SUICIDE.
It appears that Mr. W. Jupp, one of the officers of
the Sheriff of Surrey, and who also has for some time
kept an inn at Reigate, recently exhibited considerable
despondency, and his melancholy and altered appear-
ance was a subject of general remark. On Saturday
afternoon be went to visit a sister, and remained there
until about dusk on Monday evening, when he left, say-
ing that he was going to Horley, and that ho should be
back to tea. It appeared that he proceeded almost im-
mediately to the cutting for the railway near the Redhill
station, and just as a train was approaching, he rushed
down the bank, and although every endeavour was made
to stop the train, it was impossible to do so. The
engine came in contact with the unhappy man, and the
greater part of the train passed over him, dragging him to
a considerable distance, and inflicting most frightful injury
upon his person. The deceasedwas immediately carried to
the Somers Arms, where a surgeon promptly attended,
and he immediately discovered that life was extinct. An
inquiry subsequently took place before Mr. W. Cartar,
the Coroner for this division of the county of Surrey,
when the driver and guard of the train were examined ;
and from the evidence of the former, it appeared that
when he was within a short distance of the Redhill sta-

tion he saw the deceased standing upon the bank, and
when the train was about ten yards from him he darted
down the declivity, and appeared to throw himself across
the rails directly before the train. He sounded the alarm
whistle, and put on the break, and the guard did the
same, but it was impossible to save the deceased, and the
train passed over him before it could be stopped. They
went back and found the deceased lying on the line, with
his coat dragged over his head, and covered with blood,
and he appeared to be quite dead. The other per-
sons attending the train were also examined, and
it appeared that there was no path across the
line at the spot where the deceased was seen, and it
was stated that he was in the habit of frequently travel-
ling by the railway, and that he was well acquainted
with the locality, and was not likely to have accidentally
got upon the line. The medical gentleman stated that
he was called in to see the deceased, and found him quite
dead. The scalp was lacerated most severely, a portion
of the skull was gone, and the brain protruded; the left
foot was almost entirely ground away, and there was
also a compound dislocation of the right ankle. Some
of the deceased's relatives were next examined, and they
proved that the deceased had been in a melancholy state
for several days before the occurrence took place, but
they had not the slightest idea that he meditated self-
destruction, and they expressed their opinion to be, that
he did not wilfully throw himself under the train, but

that it was the effect of accident. The Jury, after a
searching inquiry, returned a verdict, " That the de-
ceased was killed by being run against by an engine, in
consequence of his running on to the line when the en-
gine was running, whereby he might be killed, being in a
state of mental aberration." The Jury, at the same
time, expressed their opinion that no blame was attribut-
able to any person belonging to the railroad.