Volta had announced that the involuntary organs, such as the heart, the stomach, the intestines, the bladder and vessels, are insensible to the Galvanic action[15]: but we have fully refuted this great physiological error. Unfortunately, however, the Latin memoir containing the decisive experiments which we made on cold-blooded and warm-blooded animals in 1792, presented to the Academy soon after, and which, according to Sue, in his History of Galvanism[16], “are curious, and contain very interesting observations,” did not appear till 1801, when it was printed in the last volume of the Transactions of the Academy. In that interval Grapengiesser found, as we had done, that Galvanism, by means of zinc and silver[17], has an influence on the peristaltic motion. Humboldt ascertained the Galvanic action on the hearts of frogs, lizards, toads, and fishes. Smuch observed the excitability of the heart by the Galvanic fluid; and Fowler changed the pulsations of the heart without the immediate application to it of armatures, and only by adapting them in warm-blooded animals to the recurrent nerve by means of the sympathetic[18]. It is chiefly in regard to the experiments of these learned Germans that the historian of Galvanism states[19], that the involuntary vermicular motion of the intestines, according to the acknowledgment of all physiologists, obeys metallic irritation; whence it follows, says he, that the Italian philosophers have advanced an error when they said that Galvanism exercises no action but on the muscles, which depend on the will. As an accurate and impartial historian, how can Sue accuse the Italian philosophers indiscriminately of such an error, since he had our memoir before him when employed on the second volume of his History of Galvanism, and since he gave a short account of my experiments in his first volume? Nay, I gave an account of my experiments in a small work published in Italian in 1792. But as Italian works are not much read in France, and were less so at that period, I should not have reproached C. Sue with this act of injustice, and his incorrectness in regard to the Italian philosophers, had not my Latin memoir been known to him, as it had appeared in the Transactions of the Academy.