they would resort to other measures than commands and scoldings, for checking their exuberance; and we should then cease to witness such scenes as that pourtrayed by the author, who deems it not necessary, in education, to assume the connexion of the mental faculties with the brain! We dwell on this subject, because the non-attention to the relations of mind and brain is the greatest defect of most plans of education, and is often productive of much injury. More striking illustrations might have been found, but we preferred to select one from the author's pages, where it is given for a different purpose.

It is with less confidence in our own accuracy, that we call in question the following statement of the author of the work; namely, that the intellectual faculties "give us no desire to act, but they direct the propensities and sentiments to their legitimate objects and mode of gratification." In the first place, we think that the intellectual faculties do give us a desire to act. For instance, large organs of Tune and Time are commonly accompanied by a desire to make music; a large organ of Individuality, by a desire to use the senses in acquiring knowledge; a large organ of Language, by a desire to talk or to read, &c. In this way it seems probable that the intellectual faculties do urge to actions; but perhaps we are not yet entitled to say that the desire to act (for the purpose of obtainis grati fication for the intellectual faculties) cannot spring froi Imitation, Constructiveness, or some other of the affective faces. Secondly, we are doubtful about the propriety of asserting t the intellect directs "the propensities and sentiments to the legitimate objects and mode of gratification;" but we should require several pages, to explain our own views of this subject, and must now close our notice of the book under consideration.

III. Colloquies.-Imaginary Conversations between a Phrenologist and the Shade of Dugald Stewart. By J. SLADE, M.D., &c. London: Parbury and Co. 1838. Small 8vo. pp. xxiii. 336.

Not that the

We have felt reluctant to express an opinion of this work, having been much disappointed on reading it. book is bad, if taken for what the author, in an "Address to the Reader," explains to have been his intention in writing the work; but attracted by the title, we had hoped to find its contents justify this title. In "Conversations between a Phrenologist and the Shade of Dugald Stewart," we not unreason

la

ct,

er

ably expected to find a contrast of the philosophical doctrines of Stewart and those of the phrenologists. Or failing this, to the accomplishment of which the author is possibly not equal,

we were at least entitled to expect that Stewart should appear either in his real character as a scornful opponent of Phrenology, or as one whose prejudices had died with him, and whose shade could now lament his intolerance towards the subject during life. Little of this appears. Little of this appears. The Colloquies are Dr. Slade conversing with Dr. Slade. The opinions put into the mouth of Mr. Phrenologist are not always those established by the facts of the science, or recognised by the leading phrenologists: neither does Stewart put forward his own doctrines in opposition. Mr. Phrenologist, in short, propounds Dr. Slade's peculiar version of Phrenology, and his opinions on other topics; whilst Stewart is again Dr. Slade, putting forth the common-places of the day, in philosophy and morals.

It is now so much the custoni with bookmakers, to coin names and title-pages for books, which are unsanctioned by their contents, that we may be deemed hypercritical in censuring Dr. Slade's Colloquies on this ground, and finding fault with the title as a trick to advertise. Yet the author himself almost makes an admission of this, in an explanation of his purpose. "My object," he says, "in selecting Stewart as the imaginary conversationalist, is not to discuss the propriety of his doctrines in detail, which would lead me into abstrusities of no general interest nor utility, but because he occupied a prominent station in metaphysical literature and moral philosophy, and because he was an opponent to Phrenology, and one of the nation among whom the science has especially flourished. If, indeed, I had followed him through the perplexing and intricate labyrinth of metaphysics and morals, my labour would have been in vain, for no one would have read my work. I use him as a vehicle to convey my own notions, having yet carefully avoided putting words into his mouth which he might, were he alive, disclaim, or be able, with reason and force, to disprove." (Page xvi.)

Here we see the confession. Dr. Slade required to have some one to talk to, who for want of his own tongue and brains might only speak through Dr. Slade. A spirit is sought; but why not call forth the shade of John Smith or William Thompson, instead of that of Dugald Stewart; and then no one would have expected to find our conversationalists threading "the perplexing and intricate labyrinth of metaphysics and morals?" Seeing that the Shade of Dugald Stewart was not raised to explain, to defend, or to abjure the philosophical creed of Dugald Stewart, and that the Phrenologist selected is an in

different representative of phrenologists, we really think the title of the book ought to have been, "Imaginary Conversations between Dr. Slade, a phrenologist holding peculiar opinions, and the Shade of John Smith." Under this title Dr. Slade might have said anything; but as an advertising title, it might not have been relished by his publisher.

Dr. Slade appears not to be very deeply imbued with Phrenology. He commits various slight errors respecting Gall and Spurzheim, which lead us to infer that he has not read the works of Gall; and he hazards opinions which no reflecting phrenologist, thoroughly acquainted with the facts of Phrenology, can entertain. He thinks, moreover, "that neither insanity, education, nor legislation, will ever benefit much by Phrenology." This is directly at variance with the opinions and experience of practical phrenologists accustomed to the management of children, insane persons and criminals. But the Colloquies give us a clue to explain this idea of Dr. Slade, for his remarks on the application of Phrenology to Legislation betray an almost total want of conception as to the manner in which phrenological doctrines could be made practically applicable. Dr. Slade's Phrenology, we suspect, lies very much on the surface of things. We do not believe that he has any comprehensive view of it as a philosophical subject; or that he has that terseness of thought and freedom from prejudices, requisite for a philosopher in mental science.

Though we thus object to the work as not coming up to its title, and do not very highly estimate the author's notions of Phrenology, the volume is not wanting merit of another description. The style is polished and pleasing, though too diffuse; the sentiments expressed are in general pure and elevated; the descriptions of scenery-we speak from having heretofore visited the scenery described are well drawn ; and a cultivated intellect and amiable tone of feeling pervade the volume. To this latter quality we should make one exception: the author too much censures the money-getting propensities of his countrymen, and his censures read as if emanating from a discontented, or, at least, from a disappointed spirit.

IV. Biographies of Gall and Spurzheim:

The Biographical Treasury: - A Dictionary of Universal Biography; intended as a Companion to "The Treasury of Knowledge." By SAMUEL MAUNDER. London: Longman and Co. 1828. pp. 846.

The Penny Cyclopædia. Volume XI. 1838.

66.

THE Pages of this Journal have not unfrequently blamed authors and editors for contemptuous neglect of Phrenology and phrenologists, when it was incumbent upon them, as instructors of the public, to have acted otherwise. The two works at the head of this article have attracted our attention, in consequence of their biographical notices of the founders of Phrenology. In the Biographical Treasury, Gall is commemorated as the founder of Phrenology, and Spurzheim as celebrated physiologist" who " joined Gall in making inquiries into the anatomy of the brain." The author of the Treasury has fallen into error in saying that "they" lectured in England, Scotland, and Ireland: it was Spurzheim only who lectured here. The Biographical Treasury itself is a remarkable compilation. It contains many thousand lives, if their brevity can entitle them to be so designated, and is amazingly cheap, considering the quantity of matter compressed into it.

a

We have heretofore found fault with the editors of the Penny Cyclopædia, for their great neglect of Phrenology, defect which we regretted to see in a work adapted to the many. The 11th volume includes the letter G., and in it there appears a biographical account of Gall, penned in a fair and judicious manner. The writer thus concludes his account

of Gall:

"Whatever may be the merits of the Phrenological system, Dr. Gall must always be looked upon as one of the most remarkable men of his age. The leading features of his mind were originality and independence of thought; a habit of close observation, and the most invincible perseverance and industry. Nothing perhaps but a character like this in its founder, and the very popular and fascinating manners of his chief supporter, could have upheld the doctrine against the strong tide of rational opposition and of ridicule with which it was assailed. Whether the system be received or not, it will be granted, that both in the collection of psychological facts which they had formed, and have published, and by the valu able contributions which they have made to the study of the

structure of the brain, to which their later labours had been particularly directed, they have conferred very great benefits on medical science. The character of Dr. Gall's writings is singularly vivid and powerful; his descriptions, though slight, are accurate and striking; but his works are too voluminous to be acceptable to the majority of readers, and have therefore, in this country, been almost entirely superseded by those of Dr. Spurzheim, to which, however, in substantial value they are far superior."

The works of Gall never were in circulation in this country, except to a very limited extent. Those of Spurzheim were pretty largely circulated and read; but latterly they have been nearly superseded by the publications of Mr. Combe. We are not certainly informed who is the writer of this account of Gall in the Cyclopædia, but have heard the article attributed to a medical gentleman, connected with one of the hospitals in London. The change from 1815 to 1838 is striking, after all the thousand bitter efforts to demolish Phrenology and damage the reputation of its founders and supporters. In the former year, a medical writer in the Edinburgh Review pronounced both Gall and Spurzheim to be thorough quacks, "utterly destitute of every qualification necessary for the conduct of a philosophical investigation." He thought it "a thing really impossible," that Gall and Spurzheim" should have brought over any of the better informed in the island, particularly from among those with whom anatomy and physiology are either favourite or professional pursuits, into a belief of any of the amazing absurdities they are bold enough to teach." And after about forty pages of coarse and abusive declamation against the founders of Phrenology, the writer concludes in what he calls "a summary paragraph," as follows: "The writings of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim have not added one fact to the stock of our knowledge, respecting either the structure or the functions of man; but consist of such a mixture of gross errors, extravagant absurdities, downright misstatements, and unmeaning quotations from Scripture, as can leave no doubt, we apprehend, in the minds of honest and intelligent men, as to the real ignorance, the real hypocrisy, and the real empiricism of the authors." We beg our readers to contrast these extracts from the Review and the Cyclopædia.