him completely in the dark, whether they are experienced by means of cerebral organs or not.

It was quite natural, therefore, say the phrenologists, for the medical profession and the public, while these principles were not attended to, to hold the very novelty of the doctrines as presumptive evidence against their truth; but when the proper explanation is given, nothing can be clearer than that they may all be true, notwithstanding these previous opinions against them. Dr. Gall did not discover the organs by dissection; and he did not find them out by reflection. He informs us that he merely observed in nature, that persons in whom a particular mental power was strong, possessed a large developement of a particular portion of the brain, and that other individuals, in whom the power was weak, had that cerebral portion small. This assertion may be true, for any thing that dissection shows to the contrary, for it ought always to be kept in mind, that the brain is not appropriated by anatomists to other purposes, and that its structure affords no evidence against the phrenological opinions:-in fact, if it is not the organ of the mind, its uses are altogether unknown. In like manner, Dr. Gall's statement may be perfectly correct, for any evidence which consciousness affords against it; because we know nothing, from this source, concerning the existence, much less the functions of the brain. Hence, the whole question resolves itself into a point of fact; have such particular forms of head been found in concomitance with such particular mental powers, or have they not? The phrenologists inform us, that practice is requisite to be able correctly to observe and distingush differences of form; and that study is also necessary to be able to recognise and discriminate the different primitive mental powers in their outward manifestations. These propositions appear in themselves reasonable, and such as would readily be acceded to, if advanced in any other science. Every one will admit that practice (as well as theoretical knowledge) is indispensably requisite to constítute an expert operative chemist; and that we cannot learn to dissect by merely reading descrip

tions of the different parts of the body. We have been at a loss, therefore, to understand why it should have been supposed, that a person is to become an adequate judge of the merits of phrenology by merely reading a book upon the subject, or looking at a plate or a cast, without a serious and continued effort to learn by experience the true situations and developement of the organs. Farther, nothing is more common than to hear the most opposite and erroneous opinions announced by superficial observers, concerning the dispositions of other men. The distinction between pride and vanity, when they appear in actual life, is not known by one out of ten of the persons who pass in society as not deficient in penetration; and much less are differences in intellectual talent sufficiently discriminated. A great power of observation and detail, joined with ease and fluency in communicating facts, will, in the estimation of many, constitute a man of genius; while others will regard such a person as a superficial talker. Depth of reflection, when combined with difficulty of expression, will, by many, be mistaken for dullness and stupidity. The proposition, therefore, appears to be also reasonable and philosophical, that study is requisite, as well as some natural talent, to enable a person to judge correctly concerning the primitive mental faculties, from merely observing their manifestations.

While, therefore, we perceive on the one hand a variety of individuals, who have devoted their time to the study of phrenology, and of whose talents we are able to judge by their works, maintaining it to be a true and important science, and vouching for their sincerity by publishing their names; and, on the other a host of anonymous writers overwhelming it with ridicule, but not condescending to meet the alleged facts by counter-statements, or the inferences by legitimate argument, it is not difficult to perceive, on a fair and impartial estimate, to which side the scale of testimony inclines.

Mr. Abernethy treats the subject rather as a system of philosophy than as a physiological discovery of the functions of the brain. He speaks with the highest respect of Dr. Spurz

heim, as a man and a philosopher, but adds, that he told him he would never inquire into the truth of his physiognomical observations, because he apprehended that they would lead to harm; while, at the same time, he proceeds to state his opinion concerning the different faculties of the mind, alleged to have been discovered by this mode of philosophising. We do not precisely enter into Mr. Abernethy's fears of harm, arising from the physiognomical part of the system; for if it be true, which Mr. Abernethy seems, in a subsequent part of his pamphlet, rather to admit, it will be a mere exposition of the constitution of nature; and the days are long gone by, when knowledge of the physical constitution of man was considered as injurious to his soul. Somewhat in opposition to himself also, Mr. Abernethy proceeds to enumerate, and admit as well founded, a variety of the phrenological faculties, and to approve of the situation of their different organs.

I see no objection (says he) to the classification of the superior intellectual faculties, which Gall and Spurzheim have made, into comparison, analysis or causation, and combination; because this arrangement refers to all the elementary powers cognizable in the actions of the human mind: powers which seem exclusively to belong to man. I am even pleased with the station which the organs supposed to be productive of these powers are said to occupy; for we find them arranged in a regular phalanx on a part of the head peculiar to man, the summit of the lofty forehead. As I have said in the lectures addressed to this college, if we find the head more produced in parts peculiar to man, it is reasonable to suppose that he will possess more of the intellectual character; and if in those parts common also to brutes, that he will possess more of those propensities in which he participates with the brute creation. We are all naturally physiognomists; and almost every observant person has remarked the amplitude of this part of the head to be indicative of intellectual power. Shakspeare denotes the eye as the herald of the mind, which so quickly proclaims its mandates, that he compares it to the winged Mercury, new-lighted on a fair and ample hill, so lofty, that, Olympus like, it seemed to touch the heavens.

Mr. Abernethy continues:-

The representation which Gall and Spurzheim have given, places the sentiments and dispositions in their real situation, in the

head; yet, as the brain affects the heart, and other parts of the body, mankind have been induced, in all ages, to believe them situated in the more evidently affected organs; still, I could not but feel surprize, that so late and so eminent an anatomist and phyheart to be the seat of feeling, and the head siologist as Bichat, should represent the of thought. Anger and fright may greatly augment or diminish the actions of the heart; yet the intelligence producing either of these emotions was conveyed by the eye or ear to the brain; first affecting the mind, and secondarily the heart. Good sentiments and dispositions, with serenity of mind, seem to make the bosom's lord sit lightly on its throne,' and produce sensations which may be said, circa præcordia ludere. rooted in the memory, some irrascibly writWhilst, on the other hand, "some sorrow ten troubles of the brain," make us feel,

66

as if the foul bosom wanted to be cleansed of that perilous stuff that weighs upon the heart." But it is surely as simple, and more correct to express ourselves as Gall and Spurzheim would have us, by saying, that a person has benevolent or just senti ments, as that he has a good or an upright

heart.

The author of the second pamphlet, "Observations on Phrenology, as affording a systematic view of human nature," also avoids grappling with the facts on which the system is alleged to be founded, and we regret that he should have done so; because, however ingenious his reflections, and however interesting the views may be in which he presents phrenology, the decisive evidence of observations in support of his views is necessarily wanting. His pamphlet, however, will be useful in dispelling prejudices, and in exhibiting beauty and arrangement in a system in which the public had previously perceived only unseemliness and chaos; and as comprehensiveness in thinking, joined with elegance of fancy, are decidedly displayed in its composition, we recomattention of the reader. mend it as well deserving of the

After discussing some preliminary topics, the author continues;

The argument then leads us to this: if the brain be an organ at all, it is probable that it is the organ of our mental functions. If it be the organ of our mental functions, it is probable, at least possible, that its different parts may be destined to serve different purposes; and, if its different parts are destined to different purposes, where is the absurdity of supposing, that certain se

parate portions of the brain are more intimately connected with, and more closely subservient to, different individual functions of the mind, than any other part? If this be so, it may appear to us a very curious and wonderful provision, but it is no more absurd or inconsistent with reason, than that different organs are appropriated to the use of the different senses-that the eye is connected with and subservient to the sense of sight, the ear to that of hearing, and the tongue to that of taste. The only difference is, that, in the one case the organs are more open to observation, their configuration is more mechanical, and more obvious to our gross and imperfect powers of observing ;-but, in the principle itself, that the different powers may have different portions of the brain assigned to them, connected with and subservient to them, and by means of which they act and manifest themselves, there is no absurdity whatever. It may perhaps not be true;-that is a different matter, and must be decided by observation and experience; but it is quite conformable to reason and analogy to say that it may be so.

Having cleared the ground so far, and come to the conclusion that the different powers of the mind may have different portions of the brain assigned for their peculiar use, it may be proper to consider the scheme as presented to us, in which the situation of the different portions, and the powers to which they are respectively subservient, are distinctly and confidently laid down. I inquire not at present into the truth of the scheme; I merely wish to see if I can reconcile it to reason and analogy. If it be like the rest of nature's designs, we are sure not only that it will be adequate to its purpose, but that it will possess a perfection and a beauty which never are found in any scheme of mere human invention. When I began to consider the schedule or map presented to us by Drs. Gall and Spurzheim, I could at first see none of this beauty in it. In looking over their list of powers, I could observe no order or connection between them. The whole presented to me a rude appearance, quite different, as I then thought, from what is commonly found in nature. After a more attentive consideration, however, light began to dawn upon me, and, beginning to consider the faculties in a certain way, and to group them after a certain order, the whole gradually formed themselves before me into a system of surprising symmetry, and, like the disjointed parts of an anamorphosis when seen from the proper point of view, collecting themselves into one elegant design, delighted me with the appearance of that very order and beauty which I would beforehand have expected to find in them.

In a scheme such as this, where we find powers which are analogous, which resem

ble one another in their nature and uses, or which act upon and co-operate with one another, or mutually' aid and assist, or controul and balance each other, we should naturally expect the organs of these powers to be situated near to one another, and in such a way as either to adjoin, or at least, to admit of an easy communication. Accordingly we find this to be the case, and we farther find the situation of the different powers, or rather of their organs, to correspond in a remarkable manner with their relative degrees of use and dignity.

The author then treats of the positions of the different organs in the head, as corresponding with the places which the faculties attached to them hold in the scale of the mental powers; and of their relative situations in regard to each other, as calculated at once for combined action and reciprocal support. After noticing several of the organs, he continues,

We shall now mention some other groups of faculties founded upon, and including in them some of those already mentioned. We shall begin with Amativeness, the use of which, for the continuance and propaga tion of the species, is too obvious to be overlooked. A blind appetite like this, however, would not of itself be sufficient for the purpose. The young of the human species are by nature so weak and helpless, that, without a very powerful principle impelling the parents to watch over their preservation, they would unavoidably perish, almost at the moment of their birth. We find, accordingly, next and immediately above Amativeness, the organ of Philoprogenitiveness, a distinct propensity, implying not merely a general love towards our offspring, but such a strong anxiety for their welfare as induces us to make the greatest exertions, and to submit to any sacrifices to procure their comfort and accommodation. This principle is generally stronger, and the corresponding organ is said to be accordingly more fully developed, in women than in men.

But this would be imperfect in its operation, and lead to an unfair. distribution of the burden and care of children, without another principle which should restrain man from an indiscriminate intercourse with the other sex, and lead him to attach himself to an individual. In conformity to this we find, immediately adjoining to Philoprogenitiveness, and on each side, organs appropriated to Adhesiveness, or that propensity which suggests such a preference as may lead to the permanent union of one man with one woman-the sacred and indissoluble bond of marriage. That such a principle exists in man, independently of

any positive enactment, is certain, from the practice even of the most savage tribes. There is still another propensity, some degree of which is necessary to the full operation of those now mentioned. I mean the attachment to home, or to the place, whatever it may be, or wherever situated, which contains the objects of our dearest affections. Every part of the world is not equally rich or well supplied with the comforts and luxuries of life; and were it not for some propensity of this kind, every one would naturally prefer those seats which are most abundantly provided with these accommodations, so that some parts would be too crowded with inhabitants, while others, less favoured by nature, would be left to their original solitude and desolation. But by the aid of this principle, a more equal and convenient distribution of the human race is effected, without any compulsionevery one generally preferring the soil where Providence has originally cast him; so that the hardy mountaineer, instead of envying the inhabitant of the plains, looks with contempt on the dull uniformity of these rich tracts, and regards his bleak hills with an affection which seems to be strong in proportion to their barrenness.

On looking at the scheme, we see the love of home surrounded by the love of self, and of those objects which are nearest ourselves, as wife and children, forming altogether a group, which may be denominated the domestic affections,-the very names of which must give rise to feelings that are dear to every heart. We observe, too, that this group of affections is surrounded, and embraced, as it were, by the combative and destructive powers, and cautiousness, indicating that these powers are best employed in preserving and defending the objects of our kind affections.

After adverting to several of the knowing and reflecting faculties, and their organs, the author proceeds :-

Some of the remarks I have here ventured to make, may, perhaps, appear too hazardous, and to have led me rather into doubtful and debateable ground. I have thrown them out as they occurred to me, as at any rate worthy of some examination; but I shall not insist upon them further here, being anxious to avoid every thing that may have the appearance of over-refinement. Without incurring any imputation of this kind, however, it may be observed in general, that nothing can be more simple, elegant, or appropriate, than the arrangement of those organs and faculties which are said to occupy the forehead. Lowest are the faculties of Perception and Observation,-next the knowing powers, above those the reasoning,-and last of all the imaginative. Supposing that we were entirely ignorant of this system,

and had sat down to contrive a scheme in which we should place these powers according to their relative use and dignity, this is assuredly the very order in which we should be inclined to place them. But, in the peculiar positions that are assigned them in this system, there are circumstances of connection and mutual relation to which we could hardly have attended, and which seem to surpass any effort of mere human ingenuity.

As an additional instance of this, I may mention, as deserving notice, the situation of the organ of Ideality, which is considered the organ of poetry, the region of taste, and fancy, and inspiration. It lies, it may be observed, almost in the centre between the lower or animal propensities, the knowing and intellectual faculties, and the moral powers or sentiments. Just around, and adjoining it, are powers of most necessary use to the perfection of poetry. In the front, we find Wit, of which, and its use in poetry, it is unnecessary to speak. Above it is Imitation, leading to the accurate delineation of the passions, feelings, and manners,-Wonder, or the love of the great and marvellous, and Hope, leading to bright and flattering ideas, and a disposition to view things in their gayest and most smiling aspect. Next to hope is Cautiousness, its opposite, leading to a chastening judgment, of use to prevent too great luxuriance of imagination, and to hinder the sublime from degenerating into

rant and bombast. Before are the knowing faculties, from which poetry draws her materials and images. Behind are the animal propensities, the irascible and kindly affections, which conduce to the two great subjects of the poet's art" fierce wars and faithful loves." Above are the moral powers, to which all poetry ought ever to just under Wit, lie the organs of Time be in subservience. Lastly, before it, and and Tune, the source of mellifluous numbers, the vehicles which, in all ages, have been used for the conveyance of poetrythe dress in which it is clothed and adorned, and set out to the admiration of the

world.

The author's mode of treating the subject is illustrated, and rendered easily intelligible, by a plate of the human head having the organs delineated, and it is incomparably the most elegant and accurate which has fallen under our notice. After several additional observations the author adds,

At the same time, it will easily be perceived, that I am not yet a phrenologist: I am sensible that I have not treated the subject in the manner a phrenologist would have done. Taking his stand upon the high ground of facts, and firm in the con