Incidental Recognitions and Confirmations of Phrenology. 147 differences of conformation. But it is by no means improbable that such marked developments have in some cases attracted the notice of individuals, even though no idea may have been connected with them, or system formed to account for their existence. Thus we are informed that Gall's schoolfellows without exception remarked the prominent eyes of certain of their companions, whom accordingly they nicknamed ox-eyed, though there was probably no one among them but Gall who imagined that there was any connexion between their prominence of eye, and their power of committing words to memory. It is plain that observations so made must give no small support to the doctrines of Phrenology. It is difficult for the constructor of a system to view with an impartial eye facts that must either prop or destroy that system; they are viewed through a false medium; and wherever a particular result is desired more than its opposite, there is danger that evidence will be distorted. Thus the testimony of one who had no prejudices of system to cloud his vision, who is ignorant of all system, and who simply registers a fact which he has observed, and of whose bearing he knows nothing, may be depended upon with almost unhesitating reliance. But while it is not impossible to find allusions to the facts of Phrenology, in the works of men ignorant of its principles, we may even expect to find occasional recognition of its doctrines. As these are merely inferences from the facts, it is perfectly natural that the frequent co-existence of a certain conformation of head, and a certain mental disposition, and other facts of a similar nature, should in some cases have given rise to the belief that the connexion between them is uniform and necessary. There has prevailed in almost every age a notion, vague it may doubtless be, that certain characters were connected universally with a certain conformation of different parts of the body. The opinions which have been entertained on this subject differ very much from each other, both in their nature, the extent to which they have been reduced to system, and the degree in which they accord with fact. Amidst much that is false in such theories, we may perhaps find something that is true. Pursuing the track of observation, rashly generalized indeed, as for the most part their observations were, it would be surprising if their authors had not sometimes stumbled upon truth. Now it appears to me to be a useful, and at all events an amusing, undertaking to note all instances of allusion to the facts or recognition of the principles of Phrenology. I shall accordingly from time to time present to the readers of this Journal the most important of a vast number of such allusions and recognitions which I have collected, and I would advise

every Phrenologist to keep a record of all that he may meet with in the course of his reading or research. The mine, I am persuaded, is too rich and extensive to be exhausted by the industry of hundreds, and my only object in this paper is to give a few hints as to the plan on which such an undertaking as I propose may be conducted.

The subject naturally divides itself into two branches, Confirmations, and Recognitions, of Phrenology. The difference is obvious. Thus, for example, when a writer mentions, in passing, that a certain individual had an ample development of brow, and it is evident from the history of that individual's life that he was remarkable for intellectual endowments, then, though the writer may have no idea of their connexion, this fact is still a confirmation of the doctrine of Phrenology, that great intellect and a large forehead must always be found together. This is a confirmation; but it is plain that there is here no recognition of Phrenology. But when an author asserts in general terms that people distinguished for fluency of speech have prominent eyes, then this is a recognition of a phrenological doctrine. But, though it is important to keep this distinction in mind, it is obvious that as every recognition is also a confirmation, it will not serve the purpose of a true logical division. A better mode of classification therefore will be to arrange all such allusions according as they bear upon and illustrate one or other of the chief principles of Phrenology, which may be stated, as follows, to be five in number.

1st. That the brain is the organ of the mind.*

2d. That size of brain, cæteris paribus, is the measure of its power.

3d. That the brain is not a single organ, but a plurality of organs, corresponding to the plurality of mental faculties.

4th. That, IN GENERAL TERMS, the forepart of the head is the seat of intellect, the coronal surface the seat of the moral powers, and the back part of the head (or, much more correctly, the base of the brain) the seat of the animal propensities.

5th. That each individual faculty is connected with a particular locality and cerebral organ.

Under one or other of these heads every thing may, I think, be classed. It remains only to mention from what sources confirmation may most probably be drawn. All descriptions of real historical personages, whose characters are known; all descriptions of persons in works of fiction, in whose cases the characters attributed to them accord with their personal de

A complete history of opinion regarding the brain is a great desideratum in Phrenological literature. In the 2d volume of this Journal, Messrs. Trevelyan and Combe made a contribution towards it, which is very valuable so far as it goes.

scription; all portraits of real or imaginary personages; all theories of mind or systems of physiognomy, properly so called. Allusions may be found in many places which admit of no precise classification, but those which I have mentioned are the principal sources of reference on the subject. The field may be much extended by taking in also the phrenological allusions to be found in writers of our own day, though these, of course, do not come strictly within the object of the present undertaking. Such allusions, as no reader can fail to observe, are every day becoming more common in our modern litera

'ture.

V. On the Management of Criminals. — (From a correspondent.)

THE treatment of criminals, hitherto adopted in this country, presents to the philanthropist one of the most melancholy pictures of gross ignorance of human nature, in the whole range of civilised society. Urged by a spirit of animal revenge, the idea of reformation never seems to have occurred to the framers of our laws; whence are to be seen poor and uneducated offenders incarcerated in the society of others more accomplished in crime; their ready teachers, and seductive examples in the school of vice and infamy. Whatsoever good intentions of self-reform the less corrupted may have previously had, they are soon eradicated in such society. The effects of the system are clearly described, by one of the criminals themselves, in the following words, "Let a man be what he will when he comes there, he is soon as bad as the rest; a man's heart is taken from him, and there is given him the heart of a beast."

One fact alone is sufficient to prove the inefficacy of the system, namely, that an overwhelming majority of the annual committals to our gaols, for crime, consist, as is well known, of re-committals of the same offenders. Phrenology having given us a knowledge of the psychological attributes of man, may suggest useful hints for the prevention of crime. In the first place, it teaches us (by pointing out their causes) that all crimes should be looked upon as diseases, and be treated accordingly, the exciting cause being first investigated, and then` met by appropriate remedies. The causes of crime will be found to consist in, first, innate disposition or propensities, secondly, ignorance and evil example, and, thirdly, distress.

The first of these (happily not the most frequent cause) will be found the most difficult for remedy, and, indeed, may often prove incurable; in which case the unfortunate offender must be classed amongst the irresponsible or insane, and restrained from inflicting farther mischief upon society.

Ignorance and evil example produce a far more numerous class of victims; but these more readily admit of cure. We would undertake to say, that if an enlightened general system of education, physical, moral, and intellectual, were established, commencing with infancy, and unfettered by any sectarian views, in the course of one generation crime would sensibly diminish, and would nearly disappear in one or two more.

To the individual case of each criminal, means based on these principles must be applied, and the moral training continued till he gave decided signs of cure. Combined with

this, must be his instruction in some trade or profession, as the want of such knowledge is too frequently the cause of criminals returning to old habits and occupations, when released from confinement. The taint on their character would prevent their being engaged as servants, and ignorance of an honest trade drives them to steal or to starve, until, after many re-committals, probably for continually aggravating offences, the vengeance of a bloody law is poured forth upon that unhappy head made desperate by the absurd provisions of the law itself. Whereas, by the method proposed, criminals might be cured, and rendered useful members of that society to which they must otherwise remain a bane and a disgrace.*

T.

VI. Notes on Opinions.

Phrenologists and Metaphysicians." As regards largeness of thought and propriety of expression, no comparison can be instituted between the writers we have named [Locke, Butler, Reid, Brown] and the lucubrations of the Phrenologists; but we think the latter's arrangement of the mental qualities is by far the most sensible and natural." — Spectator.

Note. It is a pity that the Spectator's critic, who penned this remark, should not have deemed it worth while to study

The application of Phrenology to criminal legislation was pretty fully discussed in volumes seventh and eighth of this Journal; and the public mind is yet far behind those papers. EDITOR.

"propriety of expression" in his own composition. What can be the literal meaning of a comparison between metaphysical writers and phrenological lucubrations? between the teachers in one sect and the creed of another sect? The critic probably intended his readers to understand a comparison between the writings, or between the philosophical systems, of the two parties. In adopting this reading, the application of the criticism is allowed. Phrenologists study the realities of nature, chiefly by observation on things physical and visible. Their constant motto is "res non verba." Their writings are (or profess to be) truth unadorned; and he amongst them who gives up the reins to fancy is looked upon with suspicion. On the contrary, the metaphysicians have ample scope for speculation and play of imagination. They describe mental phenomena, from nature, but in the grouping of their facts, and in the explanations of their causes, they invent and adorn at will. Phrenologists are kept within the narrow bounds of things made known by observation; the metaphysicians have only the bounds of fancy. To the latter we must concede "largeness of thought," understanding thereby variety and extent; but we claim for ourselves as great a superiority in truth and accuracy, as the metaphysicians have exhibited superiority in the scope of their ideas. In elegance of composition the metaphysical writers greatly transcended those of the phrenological school; and in fitness of expression and exactness in their use of terms, they were also more advanced. The language of phrenological science has yet to be invented; and when invented, it will be found as dry and precise as the language of chemistry or physiology, just because it must describe matters of fact. The critic might have added a second point in which phrenologists are already far ahead of metaphysicians, namely, in the practical utility of their doctrines. We hear much said about the value of Phrenology, in education, and in the treatment of the insane; and its applications in the management of criminals, in the selection of servants, and in many other of the daily concerns of life, are likely to become of great importance. But who ever lauds the application of metaphysics to education, or to the treatment of the insane? Or who dreams of managing criminals, or of selecting servants, on metaphysical principles?

Cause of Character in Uncivilised Nations. "The character of uncivilised nations is determined either by their geographical position, or by the nature of the animal kingdom which surrounds them. Their inhabitants become hunters or fishers, as game or fish abound; bold and enterprising when exposed to