lectual improvement, if at the same time the principles of action at the back of the head, such as self-esteem, the love of approbation, &c. are comparatively weak. A man may have the organ of destructiveness very strong; but, if that of benevolence or veneration be also powerful, its influence will be counteracted. A distinguished professor of this new science was lately examining a head in my presence, and discovered a great deficiency in the organ of veneration; but this was compensated, he said, by the organs of benevolence and firmness, which were both very fully developed. Such is the strange reasoning which is to be dignified with the title of Phrenology, and in comparison of which all the speculations of the most eminent philosophers of ancient and modern times are "emptiness."

Phren. You state your objections fairly and forcibly, and I rejoice to meet with such an opponent. You will recollect that the subject of phrenology is Man, and that he is confessedly an assemblage of contradictions. The greatest of poets has said,

"O thou goddess,

"Thou divine nature, how thyself thou blazon'st
"In these two princely boys! They are gentle

"As zephyrs blowing below the violet,

"Not wagging his sweet head; and yet as rough,
"Their royal blood enchafed, as the rudest wind,
"That by the top doth take the mountain pine,
"And make him stoop to the vale."

Now what does Shakspeare do here, but inform us that these boys possessed much combativeness and destructiveness, combined with great benevolence? and yet he receives the highest praise for his insight into nature, in drawing such a representation of the human mind, while the phrenologists, for doing the same thing, are supposed to be fools. Is not the sword carried before the King? and what is it but an emblem of destructiveness, ready to fall upon the heads of evil-doers, ministering thus in its very severity to purposes of benevolence and justice? Does not the soldier go forth to battle armed with the musket and

the sword, instruments fabricated for no purpose but to kill? and does not the surgeon follow in his rear, carrying succour and healing to those who have suffered under the inflictions of the soldier's ire? Were man all benevolence, would the weapons of war exist? of war exist? Were he all fury and revenge, would he come as a ministering angel, with the tear of pity in his eye, to solace those whom his passions had rendered wretched? Instead of the co-existence of those faculties in the phrenological system being a proof of its departure from nature, it affords the strongest presumptive proof, that it is founded on observation. Shakspeare, as I have said, is the most phrenological of authors, because he is the most natural. Iago says, ""Tis in ourselves that we are thus, or "thus."—" If the balance of our lives had not one scale of

REASON to poise another of SENSUALITY, the blood and "baseness of our natures would conduct us to most prépos"terous conclusions. But we have REASON to cool our rag“ing motions, or carnal stings, our unbitted lusts; whereof "I take this, that you call love, to be a sect, a scion." This is just intellect and sentiment governing combativeness, destructiveness, and amativeness. Again, it is not part of the doctrines of phrenology, that one faculty compensates for the want of another. The system teaches, that the same action may be produced by various motives; for example, that one individual may go to church through piety, another through fear, and a third through love of approbation; but this is very different from the doctrine that the love of approbation may produce the feeling of piety, and the faculty of veneration the love of praise, which is the true meaning of one faculty compensating for the want of another.

Phil. But if the same action may be done from a variety of motives, do you not perceive that this renders it impossible to discover which is the true one, and thus may the difficulties multiply which you are endeavouring to remove?

Phren. I do not perceive the impossibility you allude to. Sir Walter Scott, in describing the battle of Bannockburn, uses the following words:

"And O! amid that waste of life,

What various motives fired the strife ?"

According to your theory, the poet should have proceeded to descant upon the impenetrable mystery of human motives, and candidly confessed that he could not answer the question; but, instead of doing so, he proceeds

"The aspiring noble bled for fame,

"The patriot for his country's claim ;
"This knight his youthful strength to prove,
"And that to win his lady's love;

"Some fought from ruffian thirst of blood,

"From habit some, or hardihood."

All this is acknowledged to be strictly natural, and why? Because, on surveying attentively the conduct of an individual actuated by a strong passion, it is not difficult to discriminate the motive which urges him on; and I have often said, that phrenology is proved by cases in which the various faculties manifest themselves, with the energy of passion on the one hand, and by others, on the other, in which the feeling or power does not appear, even in moderate vigour, although strongly elicited by external circumstances. Besides, do you not observe that Sir Walter has here enumerated, among the motives of the warriors, the impulses given by several of the phrenological faculties, in terms identical with those which we employ? "The aspiring noble bled for "fame." This is precisely that he was impelled by love of approbation. "Some fought from ruffian thirst of blood.” This is pure destructiveness.

Phil. You have not answered my remark, that, according to your system, the most splendid intellectual organs may produce no corresponding results, if the organs of propensity and sentiment, situated behind, are deficient in size. This appears to me a very formidable objection.

Phren. The intellect serves the double purpose of directing the propensities and sentiments, and providing for their gratification. It guides our desires to proper objects; but, at the same time, it is greatly stimulated to activity by them. This is the phrenological exposition of the maxim, "rege "animum, quod nisi paret imperat ;" animum, here meaning

the propensities and sentiments. Now, the objection, which seems to you so overwhelming, amounts only to this, that of two intellects, equal in native energy, that one will produce the greatest positive effects which is most steadfastly supported by confidence in its own powers (self-esteem), most forcibly stimulated by the desire of the esteem of others (love of approbation). Instead of such a view forming a valid objection to our science, it demonstrates its perfect accordance with nature. If phrenology had taught, that equal intellectual faculties will produce equally active manifestations, however differently supported and stimulated by sentiment, such doctrine would have stood in direct opposition to every day's experience: I may repeat, that other authors frequently obtain the highest praise for penetration in bringing forward views of the human mind, which, when stated as doctrine by the phrenologists, are instantly treated as absurdities, and charged as objections against their system. Are you aware, for example, that an acute critic has remarked, that "courage is at least as necessary

66

66

as genius to the success of a work of imagination; since, "without this, it is impossible to attain that freedom and "self-possession, without which, no talents can ever have 'fair play, and, far less, that inward confidence and exul"tation of spirit which must accompany all the higher acts "of the understanding?" (Edinburgh Review, No 72, p. 418). In phrenological language, this means, that the most powerful reflecting faculties are greatly aided in producing an impression on the world by a competent endowment of combativeness, firmness, and self-esteem.

Phil. Well, really I am so much pleased with your explanations, that I shall be induced to converse with you again. I admit, there may be things in the world more absurd than your boasted science, but at present I must bid you adieu.

ARTICLE V.

PHRENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF MR OWEN'S NEW VIEWS OF SOCIETY."

MR OWEN denominates his doctrine, "The Science of the "Influence of Circumstances in forming the Human Character;" and to arrive at an enlightened judgment of its merits, it is necessary to take a comprehensive view of the natural constitution of the human mind, and of the modifications of which it is susceptible. Before the discovery of phrenology, no adequate means existed of attaining sound and definite ideas on the former point, and until such information is possessed, all speculations concerning the latter must necessarily be defective; because, without knowledge of the natural qualities of the subject which we desire to modify, we are not in a condition to judge of the means best fitted to attain our ends, nor to discriminate between results attributable to natural constitution, and others springing from adventitious causes. Mr Owen, like many of his predecessors, proceeds to speculate on the modifying power of circumstances, without previously ascertaining the primitive attributes of the subject to be modified; at least, without philosophically doing so; for his table of the original powers of the human mind does not correspond with that contained in any admitted system of mental philosophy, and he offers no evidence,† on his own part, in support of its title to universal acceptance. This is a fundamental error, the effects of which may be easily explained. We, for example, humbly believe, that a natural propensity of "acquisitiveness”

It is proper to mention, that we submitted these observations to a zealous and able advocate of the new views, and that he has favoured us with his corrections and remarks, which we print in the form of notes, signed O. To do him full justice, we offer no commentary on his statements, but leave the reader to decide, according to the dictates of his own judgment, after considering both sides of the question.

+ Except the internal consciousness, which he supposes to exist in each in. dividual.-O.