hensive in their objects, as they are the cerebrum and cerebellum are thus

distinct in their offices. With the same organ of vision we behold the figure of every animal, the form of every edifice, the ever-changing expressions on the countenance of "the human face divine," with all the varied hues and colours of the rainbow and the rose. The respective functions of the eyes, ears, and the other senses, are never blended, never interchanged, never confused-each one is perfectly defined, independent, and complete.

parcelled out and distributed amongst the different faculties and feelings of the mind, the five senses, without whose existence many of these imaginary organs could not have been invented, have no portion of the brain allotted to them at all;-the capacities implied by the existence of these very senses have, as Nos. 21, 22, and 23, &c. but the senses themselves, their venerable sires, are precluded from any share in the patrimonial inheritance. The organ of tune is situated in the forehead, and the organ of color about the middle of the eyebrows-at sufficient distances from the primitive organs, we presume, as not to endanger the title of their phrenological rivals.

There is also another striking incongruity in this fanciful arrangement of organs. Some of them are balanced and counterpoised by opposing organs, as in Nos. 28 and 6, Constructiveness and Destructiveness, and in Nos. 15 and 10, The expectation of good, and the apprehension of danger, &c. all which may be very proper and very scientific; but then it strikes us, that in perfect fairness all the organs should have been served alike. Had the system been framed entirely on this principle, it would at least have been uniform, and consistent with itself. But this is not the case. We have the feeling of personal dignity; | but where is the feeling of personal degradation? We have attachment to particular persons and places; but where is the dislike of which we are sometimes the subject in reference to both? We have the organ of SECRETIVENESS, a fondness for secrecy; but are not some persons as fond of telling secrets as others are of keeping them? Where then is the organ that should warn us against persons possessed of this mischievons propensity? We have MARVELLOUSNESS, a disposition to believe in wonders; but is there not the counter tendency to scepticism, a disposition, sufficiently prominent in certain characters, to believe in nothing? And it is really a pity that this doubting organ was inadvertently omitted, as its large de. velopment on the skull of every antiphrenologist would have most satisfac-fact and observation. torily accounted for his rejection of the This we are aware is a bold assertion, system. since the system is declared to be confirmThere is, moreover, something singu-ed by observations the most extended and larly capricious, if not positively unjust, minute, and to be based on facts, to which in this election of organs. For while its principles are said exactly to corres

Now all this appears very partial, and is very perplexing, to those whose familiarity with the system, or whose admiration of its ingenuity, have left the understanding sufficiently awake to perceive its incongruities. Were we to allude to the brain of the phrenologist, under the image of a Commons House of parliament we should certainly say that man, considered as a moral, intellectual, and sentient being, is not fully and fairly represented in that senatorial assembly whence proceed the laws and enactments which regulate and determine all his actions. On the contrary, there is something so analogous to what we deplore in the political world, of undue influence, of partial representation, and rotten boroughs, that we trust the best friends of the system, after they shall have been enlightened by our observations, will see that nothing short of a radical reform, can save it from a speedy and inevitable overthrow.

V. The cranioscopical theory-that the organs of the brain terminating in bumps on the scull, indicate a man's character-is not entitled to a place amongst the sciences of experimental philosophy; for it is not borne out by

pond. To these statements we of course, ment; ay, and many a goose, of another demur. But knowing the confidence species, whose empty head will be found with which they are uttered, and the sup- towering far above his shoulders. - port which phrenology derives from this source, we should consider the present article very incomplete without bringing our arguments to bear upon this line of defence; proportioning the extent of our logical battery to the strength of the fortress against which it is directed. For this purpose we must draw a little further on the attention (perhaps on the patience) of our readers.

Whatever phenomena may claim the credit of suggesting the existence of particular organs, the entire framework of the system has been constructed, we apprehend, on the principle of abstract possibilities. The next thing was to give a sharp look-out in all directions for analogies and coincidences confirmatory of the theory. These, of course, were soon found, and were well worth finding; for they slipped with astonishing precision into the sockets fancy had prepared for their reception: sometimes, no doubt,aided by the vanity of the subject of the speculation, who would be the last man to doubt the correctness of the indications on the outside of his head, which bore so favourable a report of the good things within it: and always favoured on the part of the practitioner by the sentiment of the poet.

"To observations which ourselves we make, We grow more partial for the observer's sake."

We have heard of persons who were remarkably expert in ascertaining the peculiarities of individual character, by the hand-writing. And who has not listened to many a marvellous tale of the virtues and effects of animal magnetism, and the metallic tractors; or of the surprising efficacy of some specific, panacea, or magical philtre, when probably more than twc-thirds of the company who were privileged to hear it gave full credit to the narration.

Wonder-makers, of one sort or other, have seldom been long wanting in the world who, in succession, have played off on the credulity of society.

These remarks, we may be told, have at most only a general bearing on the topic before us. We will proceed then to some a little more special and pointed.

In the first place let it be remembered, that it is one of the principles of the system under review, that any intellectual or moral quality brought to light by a material development-called an organ-is the exact counterpart of that organ; consequently, whatever uncertainty attaches to the character of an organ, necessarily attaches to the accuracy of its supposed discoveries. Now it so happens, that the great doctors of the school have not settled amongst themselves the precise character of some of the organs, or what disposition is Nothing, we apprehend, is easier than actually denoted by them. We must not to find coincidences in favour of any quote from their learned folios in suppre-conceived hypothesis. "Plato in port of this assertion, but their disputes ancient times, and Bichât and Rich- and speculations on these points are no t erand, in our own days, have main- a little amusing, and certainly go to justained, that there is a proportion be-tify any incredulity which may chance to tween the intellectual faculties, and the length of the neck. According to them, the intellectual faculties are weaker the longer the neck is, because the brain is more remote from the heart, and consequently is less excited by the blood." So reports Dr. Spurzheim while he dissents from the theory. And yet how many animals might be referred to in its confirmation. The silly goose will occur to every one's thoughts in a mo

lurk in the bosom of those, whose experimental knowledge is not so profound as their own. As a brief specimen of this versatility, take No. 3., the organ called INHABITIVENESS.

Dr. Gall conceives it to be connected in animals with the love of physical elevation, and in man with pride or selfesteem. Dr. Spurzheim observed it to be large in those animals and persons who seemed attached to particular places,

L L

each others' hands,—leave to the speculator on heads a convenient number of openings for escape in case of failure.

the great masters of the art do sometimes make funny mistakes, when, as Cowper says, like—

and conceived it to show a particular | places at another, kindly covering one disposition with regard to our abode or another's deficiencies, or playing into place of residence. Mr. Combe thinks that it denotes the power, which some persons have in great perfection, of fixing their attention and of concentrating | And with all these advantages to boot, their thoughts on any given subject, and observes, that individuals in whom it is small have great difficulty in transcribing, or engrossing papers correctly. The Rev. David Welsh and Dr. Hoppe of Copen'hagen, endeavoured to reconcile these contrarieties by the inference that "the faculty gives a tendency to dwell in a place, or on feelings and ideas for a length of time, till all, or the majority of the other faculties are satisfied in regard to them." Dr. Spurzheim, however, rejects this interpretation of the case as being at variance with his experience.

So much for the instructions of these great masters of the science with respect to its elementary principles, all of whose knowledge we are to believe is the result of accurate and extended observation. Verily if four or five such witnesses were to appear in any judicial case, to speak to a matter of fact, who boggled half as much on the subject of identity, not a man in the jury-box would proceed upon their evidence.

Secondly, There is a vagueness in the principles of phrenology considered as a science, and a looseness in their application, considered as an art, that gives to its boasted discoveries more the appearance of accidental coincidences, than of necessary results.

"If an organ," says Mr. Combe, "be much developed, and the neighbouring organs very little, the developed organ presents an elevation or protuberance; but if the neighbouring organ be developed in proportion, no protuberance can be perceived, and the surface is smooth."

And he afterwards adds

"That when an organ is largely deve loped it sometimes pushes a neighbouring organ a little out of place."

Similar qualifying clauses might be referred to, which, by allowing organs to push one another out of place at one time, and partly supply each other's

"Sir Harry shooting in the dark
They hit it, quite beside the mark."

Mr. Combe has given us a curious specimen of the flexibility of the principles of the science, and of the adroitness with which he can apply them. “He was acquainted with a Lady,” he tells us, "who had FORM large, and SIZE deficient, she copies the form of an animal or human figure easily and precisely, but is always at fault in the size. She felt this as a natural defect, and complained of it, before she heard of phrenology."

Now we should be glad to know what it was that enabled this good lady to preserve the relative proportions of every part of the figure; hands, feet, head, ears, horns, &c. so exactly as to draw with correctness and precision, if she had no perception with regard to size? On the testimony of Mr. Combe we are bound to believe that she had not the phrenological organ, but we apprehend none but a phrenologist will believe that she was destitute of the faculty, when she judged so perfectly of size in reference to all the parts of an object, and in the nicest and most difficult of their combinations.

In another of Mr. Combe's speculations he was equally unsuccessful. Happening not to coincide with a person of great literary eminence, on the sub. ject of colours, he records it as a curious fact, that in his head the organ of CoLOUR is absolutely depressed, thus placing him in the condition of those unfortunate persons who cannot distinguish dark brown from scarlet, or buff from orange! A more complete destitution

*Francis Jeffery, Esq. Editor of the Edinburgh Review.

of the organ, of course cannot be conceived,' but what says the gentleman himself on the subject?

large a share of intellectual ability as has almost ever fallen to the lot of man,-the celebrated George Buchanan;—and what pray was the result? In every moral and intellectual quality, the Bart Robber and murderer of the Archipelago, and the Scotch murderers of Jedburgh and Edinburgh, were and the poet; in every brutal and animal phrenologically superior to the historian propensity be displayed a lamentable preponderance." gaz

"That he has a remarkable fine and exact perception of colours, so as to be able to match them from memory with a precision which has been the admiration of many

ladies and dressmakers. He has also an

uncommon sensibility to their beauty, and
spends more time than most people, in
ing on bright flowers and peacock's necks,
and wondering, he hopes innocently, what
can be the cause of his enjoyment."

Thus far we have seen the opinions and speculations of the men who founded this School, or who teach its doctrines; let us enquire thirdly, What are the observations and experiments of those who are in nowise committed to the system. Sir William Hamilton ob

serves

But the most ample and decisive evidence deduced from facts bearing on this scheme, has been supplied by a recent publication. The attention excited by the atrocities of Burke and Hare, which drew on those heartless confederates in systematic murder, the execration of the public, led Mr. Stone to apply the phrenological test to their crania. A fairer, because a stronger case, could not be found. If the science of phrenology were trustworthy, DESTRUCTIVENESS should have been enormously developed, in their crania, and CONSCIENTIOUSNESS and BENEVOLENCE proportionably small. The mode adopted was just and simple. Mr. S. compared these organs both absolutely and relatively with fifty crania collected by Sir

"I am acquainted with a gentleman who has two conspicuous prominences on that part of the forehead where the organs of CAUSALITY are said to be posited; he has them in common with Kant, Hume, &c. but as to the faculty itself, few men have it less. Metaphysical speculations are foreign to his habits of thought, altogether repugnant to Another individual, an excellent Arith-William Hamilton; and with fifty colmetician, has not the slightest indication of lected by Dr. Spurzheim, at present in the organ of NUMBER; but on the contrary, the Edinburgh Museum. a cavity where the organ ought to be.

his taste.

A third example is that of a young gentleman who possesses a remarkable prominence in the place allotted to the organ of CAUTIOUSNESS;" but whose character is the antithesis of what the craniologists would discover. I perceive in himno organ of DESTRUCTIVENESS,' and yet he exercises this propensity though not in a dangerous way, whenever, as Poins says, it is his humour."

Passing from living subjects to that class of specimens which is unconscious of our experiments. Sir W. adds the following testimony

"Three heads of murderers, (one of them the celebrated Bart Robber, particularly mentioned by Crawford in his Indian Archipelago, a person distinguished for ferocity even among a nation of savages, and who was at last executed for literally sawing off the head of his mistress,) were compared with the skull of a man distinguished for the possession of many virtues, and for as

The following is the result of these comparisons. In reference to Sir William Hamilton's collection it appears.

have the organ of DESTRUCTIVENESS in its 1. "That thirty-seven out of the fifty absolute size larger than Burke, making his much below the average of these fifty crania; and

2. The relative size of the organ of DESTRUCTIVENESS, or its proportions to the also below the average.” lineal dimensions of the cranium, is in Burke

* Observations on the phrenological development of Burke, Hare, and other attrocious murderers; measurement of the heads of the most notorious thieves confined in Edinburgh Gaol and Bridewell, and of various individuals, English, Scotch, and Irish; presenting an extensive series of facts subversive of phrenology. Read before the Royal Medical Society of Edinburgh, by T. Stone, Esq. President of the Royal Medical Society. Edinburgh, 1829.

In Dr. Spurzheim's collection, thirty- To these experiments Mr. Stone seven heads were male, and thirteen addsfemale, confining the comparison to the former, the result was