when they set themselves in array against the observers of nature, disdained to proceed by the slow methods of observation and induction. They at once denounced the notion of the Earth's motion round its axis as contrary to common sense. But we do not now consider the doctrine of the earth's rotation to be contrary to common sense, although common sense alone could never have discovered it.

When we survey the solid foundation of facts,-innumerable, incontestible, well observed facts,-upon which the conclusions of phrenology rest, we who have studied these, and who know what it is we trust in, can regard, with a degree of calm contempt, of which our adversaries can hardly form a notion, the prodigiously imbecile attempts which have been made to put the system down, either by what is considered Reasoning, or what has very erroneously been designated Wit. We certainly are not so unreasonable as to expect, that, on the first announcement of a new science such as this, founded on an extensive observation of facts, our assertions shall be admitted without examination. But we certainly have a right to complain of those who will neither believe us, nor examine for themselves.

The facts observed by the phrenologists are got rid of in a very summary way. "Who knows, for example," asks one, "whether, for every case brought forward by them, there may "not be one of an opposite kind kept in the "back ground?" To say nothing of the delicacy, the candour, or the justice of such a supposition, or rather such a charge (for it infers the utmost disingenuousness and even moral depravity in the phrenologists), we shall merely remark, that it is utterly inadmissible in fair argument. We are not here in an Ossianic or a Rowleian controversy, respecting the authenticity of manuscripts which nobody ever saw, or the genuineness of traditionary poetry which nobody ever heard. The facts are as patent to all as the light of heaven, and within the reach of every, even the meanest, capacity. Nay farther, so very open have the phrenologists laid themselves to detection, that they have published to the world their methods of observation, and furnished every one with the means of making observations for himself, whereby he may be

enabled to detect their errors, if they are in error, and to expose their quackery, if they are really quacks. It is certainly incumbent on those who deny the universality of the coincidences asserted, to prove the exceptions, and to produce instances to the contrary. They have been challenged to do so for at least ten years; and they have been challenged in vain. What is the legitimate inference to be drawn from this?-Plainly, that they have no facts to produce; and, considering the numbers, the weight, the abilities, and the zeal, of the opponents of phrenology,—the rank which they hold in science, and the interest they have to maintain their supremacy,—it is not too much to say, that, had any such contradictory facts existed, they would have been produced before now. To this we cannot imagine

the shadow of an answer.

It will readily be allowed, that it would be perfectly vain and fruitless to enter upon a formal and detailed refutation of reasonings which are nothing more than mere cavils founded on misrepresentation, and, what is worse, a misrepresentation of the most elementary parts of the phrenological system. In order to do this with proper effect, it would be necessary to state the principles of the whole science from the foundation. It is, in some respects, an impediment to phrenologists, that the facts on which they found their doctrines, though abundantly simple and most easy to be comprehended, are so exceedingly numerous and varied, that it is difficult to give even an abstract of them. It is the easiest of all easy things to start some little objections, suited to make an impression on those to whom the subject is utterly unknown, and for a moment the objector "claps "his wings and crows like chanticleer." But the objections are the objections of ignorance, whilst the answers can be perceived and appreciated by those only who possess a knowledge of the subject. Besides, these answers, and the proofs of them, are a thousand; and their irresistible weight depends not upon their single, but their united effect. The phrenologists are absolutely oppressed with the multitude of proofs which crowd upon them; and the same circumstance which forms the amazing strength of this evidence, gives rise to the difficulty, nay the

impossibility, of making it seen by others in any short or easily remembered statement.

Lest, however, it should be imagined that this is all bravado, and an apology for not meeting these writers in the field of controversy, we shall select a single faculty and organ, and present the reader with an abstract of the evidence on which they are admitted.

We shall commence by giving an abstract of the evidence on which Dr Gall founds his own belief in the existence of the organ and propensity, which he named "Instinct carnassier," but which we shall designate "Destructiveness,”—a term not very elegant, indeed, but expressive and familiar to the English public. We shall next state part of the evidence on which we ourselves are disposed to admit such a propensity and organ; and, lastly, We shall notice some facts in human nature, altogether unconnected with phrenology, which may enable any ordinary inquirer to judge of the probability of our conclusions being well or ill founded. Dr Gall's observations and statement of cases on this single propensity occupy sixty pages of the third volume, 4to edition, of his "Anatomie et Physiologie du Système nerveux en generale, et du Cerveau en particulier;" but our abstract must necessarily be very brief and imperfect.

He gives in substance the following account of the discovery of the organ. In comparing attentively the skulls of several of the lower animals, he observed a characteristic difference betwixt those of the carnivorous and the granivorous species. On placing the skulls of granivorous animals horizontally on a table, and raising a perpendicular line from the exterior opening of the ear, he found that only a small portion of the posterior lobes of the brain and cerebellum was situate behind this line. Following the same course in regard to the skulls of carnivorous animals, he observed, that, in the greater number of them, this perpendicular rose about the middle of the head, or, at least, that a considerable portion of the cerebral mass was situate behind it. Farther, he discovered, that, in carnivorous animals in general, the greatest prominence of the brain occurs precisely above the external

opening of the ear.

To prove these statements, he exhibits plates of a variety of skulls, and contrasts that of the marmot with that of the marten,-the skull of the squirrel with that of the mole,―skulls of roebucks with those of monkeys,—the badger, otter, fox, dog, pongo, papion, &c.

In

Dr Gall thus perceived, that certain cerebral parts, lying above and behind the petrous portion of the temporal bone, exist in carnivorous animals, which are not found in granivorous animals. This distinction prevails also among birds. birds. birds of prey, the part of the brain in question is largely developed; whereas in the other tribes of birds, it is small, and the great mass of the brain is placed before the external opening of the ear. In illustration of this fact, he gives a plate of the skull of the falcon contrasted with that of the stork.

For a long time he merely communicated these observations to his hearers, without making the least application of them to phrenology. He merely pointed out that, by inspecting the cranium, even when the teeth are wanting, it is possible to distinguish whether the animals belong to the granivorous or carnivorous genera. It happened, at length, that some one sent him the skull of a parricide; but he put it aside, without ever imagining that the skulls of murderers could be of any use to him in his researches. Shortly afterwards he received also the cranium of a highwayman, who, not satisfied with robbing, had murdered several of his victims. He placed these two crania side by side, and frequently examined them. Every time that he did so, he was struck with this circumstance, that although they differed in almost every other point, each of them presented a distinct and corresponding prominence immediately above the external opening of the ear. Having observed, however, the same prominence in some other crania in his collection, he thought that it might be by mere accident that these two parts were so much developed in the skulls of the murderers. It was only, therefore, after a considerable time, that he began to reflect upon the different conformation of the brain in carnivorous and granivorous animals; and then observing that the part which was large in carnivorous animals, was precisely that which

was so much developed in the murderers, the question occurred to him, Is it possible that there can be any connection betwixt the conformation of brain thus indicated and the propensity to kill?" At first," says Dr Gall, "I revolted from this idea; "but when my only business was to observe, and to state the "result of my observations, I acknowledged no other law than "that of truth. Let us not, therefore," says he, "fear to un"fold the mysteries of nature, for it is only when we shall have "discovered the hidden springs of human actions, that we shall "know how to guide the conduct of men."

66

"Naturalists," continues Dr Gall," are in the practice of distinguishing carnivorous animals by the teeth, claws, and "the form of the stomach and intestines. According to them, "the structure of these parts sufficiently explains the instinct "which prompts these creatures to kill other animals. In con"sequence of this idea, they treat with contempt the notion "that there exists in the brain an organ of this propensity.

66

They ought to consider, however, that although all these in"struments are formed in perfect harmony with such an in"stinct, they could never produce it. Give to the sheep the "teeth and the claws of the tiger, without changing its inward dispositions, and it would never be impelled by these exter"nal appendages to attack and kill other animals. The tiger, on the other hand, placed in a meadow of the richest pasture, "would die with hunger, before he would be prompted to "graze. The idiot and the insane, however perfect the me"chanism of their hands, can neither paint nor build, unless "the influence of a higher power be given to direct these ex"ternal appendages. Naturalists, therefore, ought not to con“found the instruments by which an instinct acts upon its objects with the internal propensity which directs their applica"tion. One phenomenon, at least," continues the Doctor, "they "will find it difficult to explain by means of teeth, claws, the "stomach and intestines, viz. every carnivorous animal has a "manner of killing its prey peculiar to itself. Some strangle "their victims, others with their teeth cut their throat, while "others strike them on the back of the neck, &c. Who, then,"

66