rests, occasions no small trouble to its advocates, by multiplying the sources
of ignorant objections, and rendering a short defence impossible, 24. A
single faculty and organ, namely, of "Destructiveness," selected for the
purpose of furnishing a specimen of the manner in which the science has
been advanced and is supported, 25. The evidence, consisting of numer.
ous observations stated, on which Gall founded his belief in the existence
of this organ and propensity, ib. The corresponding evidence stated on
which the present writers found their belief of the same, 31. Certain phe-
nomena in human nature adduced, from which the existence of the pro-
pensity may be inferred, 35. History and recent testimonies appealed to
for proof of it, 40. Common sense and common candour challenged to
gainsay such evidence and resist such inferences, 44.

CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN MR GEORGE COMBE AND DR. BARCLAY. Mr
Combe kindly requests Dr Barclay's attention to certain misrepresentations
concerning Phrenology, reported to have been delivered in his lectures, and
furnishes notes of one special lecture of an offensive nature, 46. Dr B.
admits the fidelity of the notes generally-but excepts, with remarkable
qualification, a sentence which states him to have asserted that Dr
Spurzheim was one of his best friends and promises to adopt some mea-
sures to remove or prevent misconceptions on the part of his students, 48.
Mr Combe expresses his satisfaction with the Dr's letter, and, on the faith
of its friendliness and spirit, furnishes a statement of the principles on
which Phrenology is founded, to be read after his former communication if
the Dr should think proper, 49. Dr B. voluntarily engages to read the
same, 52. Mr Combe expresses regret that his letter was read to Dr B's
class when only eleven persons were present, whereas the erroneous state-
ment was made before more than forty-and repeats his anxiety to have
justice done to Gall, Spurzheim, himself, and the science maintained by
them, 53. Dr B. accounts for the thinness of his class on the occasion-
pleads that he could not foresee a circumstance so unfortunate for Mr
C.'s letter, and that he endeavoured to remedy the consequent evil-con-
fesses his having laboured under a mistake respecting Edinburgh Phreno-
logists compliments some recent accommodations to the tastes and feel-
ings of the ladies and their beaux, who may think proper to cultivate the
science and declines controversy on the subject, because, besides that the
necessary organs are out of tune in him, he suspects he cannot now climb
precipices like a goat, or live in a garret like a black rat, 54.
PHRENOLOGY AND PROFESSOR JAMESON. Museum of Edinburgh College
greatly aided by objects brought from Paris, 55. Mr Royer, a phrenolo-
gist, transmitted to it about seventy skulls, which, however, have never ›
yet been exhibited, for a very unsatisfactory reason, 56. The professor,
no doubt, not to blame as to this, but admonished of the duty of fairness
towards Phrenology, ib. The skulls described as very interesting to a stu-
dent of the science, 57. A similar collection from India noticed, 58.
BELL ON THE FUNCTIONS OF THE NERVES. This part of anatomy and
physiology amazingly elucidated of late, and now leading to correct views
of the mode of studying mind, 58. The existing probability of greater
improvement on this subject, in ten years, than has ever been made hither-
to, 60. A view of some of Mr Bell's important discoveries, and a com-
mentary to show their accordance with phrenological doctrines, ib. His
great merit in first demonstrating the difference of functions performed by
different sets of nerves, and having accomplished for the physiology of the
nerves what Gall did for that of the brain, 65.

A DIALOGUE ON PHRENOLOGY BETWEEN A PHILOSOPHER OF THE OLD
SCHOOL AND A PHRENOLOGIST. The philosopher, on the ground solely
of his ignorance of it, and under the influence of ill-devised and absurd
prejudice, holds the science to be unworthy of attention, 66. Some of his
objections stated and answered, ib. He becomes warm-but then sobers

down a little, 67. The phrenologist gains on him, 68. The philosopher
vainly has recourse to the anatomists, 69. Then argues on the absurd
modes of prosecuting Phrenology, and charges its disciples with extra-vi-
sion, 71. The phrenologist retorts the pains taken to furnish opponents
with facts and means quite adequate either to prove the system to be true,
or discover where it is false-and exposes the self-esteem and arrant con.
ceit of the opponents, ib. The philosopher silenced takes leave, 72.
ALLEGED CLAIM OF REIL. TO DR GALL'S DISCOVERIES IN THE ANATOMY
OF THE BRAIN. Dr Monro commended for justice done by him to Drs
Gall and Spurzheim, 72. The charge against them, as borrowing from
Reil, first made by Dr Gordon, 73. Answered by quotations from
Birchoff and Loder, ib.

THE SPIDER AND THE BEE. A correspondent speaks of his experiencing
the persecution attendant on a profession of Phrenology; and describes a
dinner-party where he had to contend for his faith, 74. On getting home,
he betook himself for recreation to Swift's "Battle of the Books," in
reading which he fell asleep and had a dream, 75. The spider spoken of
by Swift annoyed in his cobweb by a venturous bee, whom he upbraids
and abuses, 76. Their colloquy, in which the spider represents a meta-
physician of the old school, and the bee a phrenologist, 77.

THE ENEMIES OF PHRENOLOGY. They may be likened unto various ani-
mals, as WASPS, BUTTERFLIES, ANTS, GEESE, DUCKS, OWLS, PARROTS,
MONKIES, BEARS, SWINE, ASSES, CURS. Blackwood's Menagerie in a rage,
86.

MISS CORDELIA HEARTLESS, LETTER FROM. Her brother, a phrenolo-
gist, had long told her of bumps, skulls, &c., which she thought to be
nonsense, till she heard of some eminent men giving credit to Phrenology,
86. She becomes a convert, 87. But is concerned at the loss of her
heart, and alarms her lover by declaring she has none, and pointing
to her head as the source of affection, 88. He thinks her deranged and
leaves her, 90. She has not seen or heard of him for a week; but hopes,
by means of the journal, to assure him of her entire adhesiveness, 91.
APPLICATION OF PHRENOLOGY TO CRITICISM. The superiority of Phren-
ology to metaphysics, in respect to utility, and its power of application
to explain the characters and talents of men, 92. Examples of its ap-
plication projected, 93. The character of Macbeth first chosen, analyzed
phrenologically, and illustrated by quotations, 94. Concluding estimate
of its peculiarities and consistency with nature, 115.
ON THE SKULLS OF THREE MURDERERS. A Swiss gentleman in Edin-
burgh reports what he had heard in Dublin, as to certain skulls not indi-
cating destructiveness, 116. Conduct of the phrenologists in consequence;
thorough inquiry, which is completely successful, 117. Measurement and
comparison of the skulls, confirm the development assigned by Phreno-
logy, 119.

MATERIALISM AND SCEPTICISM. The objection that Phrenology leads to
materialism stated, and shown to be absurd, 120. The question of mate-
rialism discussed generally, 121. Proved to be trivial, 122. Neither ob-
servation nor reflection on Consciousness can give any insight as to the
substance of the mind, 124. But contemplation of the powers of the
mind may afford reasonable presumption of its immortality, 125, which,
however, does not depend on its being immaterial, 126. Mr Rennel
absurdly attempts to show that mind acts independently of organization,
ib. His controversy with Sir C. Morgan and Mr Lawrence noticed, 127.
A common error among the friends of religion, to suppose that the ma-
teriality of the mind necessarily concludes its being neither immor-
tal nor responsible, 129. We ought to argue from the qualities
of beings, and not the substance of which they are made, as to what is

the purpose for which they are destined, 130. The Almighty can

commit no mistake as to the essence of his creatures, 131. Mr Rennel
pursues a very erroneous course in replying to the materialist, ib., and
shows great want of judgment in his arguments, 132. The phrenological
principles which bear on the point distinctly stated, first, that we know
nothing of the substance of the mind, and that all discussion about it is
vain; secondly, that our ignorance respecting it cannot prejudice the in-
terests of society, for that there is no discoverable connexion between the
substance of the mind and its future existence; and, thirdly, that the
evidence of its immortality, so far as philosophy can reach, is to be gather-
ed from the aim and relations of the faculties, 136. Strictures on Mr
Rennel's unfairness towards Phrenology, 137. Christianity decidedly
supported by it, 139. Philostratus, a phrenologist, characterized, and
somewhat censured, 140. Phrenology accounts for peculiar tendencies
to atheism, 142. Dr Thomas Brown affords a similar solution of them,
143, as does also Mr Hume, who, moreover, plainly affirms the propen-
sity to believe in invisible intelligent power to be a general attendant of
human nature, 145. The idea that consciousness of personal identity
possibly depends on a particular portion of the brain, hinted, 146.
TRANSACTIONS OF THE PHRENOLOGICAL SOCIETY. The volume so called gene-
rally noticed, 146. Its contents specially named and characterized,-the
Preliminary Dissertation, by Mr G. Combe,-Outlines of Phrenology,—
Dr Poole's View of some of Dr Spurzheim's Lectures,-Mr William Scott
on the Functions of Constructiveness, Destructiveness, and Secretiveness,
-Mr A. Combe on the Effect of Injuries of the Brain upon the Manifest-
ations of the Mind,-Cases of Deficiency in the Power of perceiving
Colours, by Dr Butter and Mr G. Combe,-Notice of a case in which the
patient suddenly forgot the use of spoken and written Languages, by Mr
Alexander Hood,-Remarks on the Cerebral Development of King Ro-
bert Bruce, by Mr William Scott,-Report upon the Cast of Miss Clara
Fisher, by Mr G. Combe,-The Case of J. G., aged ten Years, by Mr D.
Bridges, junior," On inferring Natural Dispositions and Talents from
Development of Brain," consisting of a Case reported by Mr B. Donkin,
-a Report on the skull of Gordon, a Murderer, by Mr R. Buchanan,-a
Report by Sir George M'Kenzie on the Skull of Bellingham, the Assassin of
Mr Perceval, and a Report by Mr G. Combe on the Head of Mary Mackin-
non, who murdered William Howat,-Observations on the mode of study-
ing Natural Dispositions, by Mr Carmichael of Dublin,-a Phrenological
Analysis of some of Rochefoucault's Maxims,-Mr Andrew Combe's An-
swers to Dr Barclay's Objections to Phrenology, and an Essay on the
Phrenology of Hindostan, by Dr George Murray Paterson, 147-154.
DONNERBLITZENHAUZEN'S LECTURES. The Sieur announced, and his appear.
ance described, 155. Genuine account and fac-simile of his first lecture,-
his extraordinary highly merited titles given by himself, ib.
His course
of fourteen lectures on Akephalonoologia, pronounced in suitable language,
with appropriate specimens, in which he purposes to accomplish the en-
tire demolition of Gall and Spurzheim's quackery, on pain of being grid-
ironed, 156, to expose the falseness of the particular phrenological or
gans, by extirpating their alleged allotments of brain, ib.,-to demon-
strate the utter uselessness of brain, 157,-to cut off and replace a young
lady's head, not only without detriment to the possessor, but also with
much improvement to her beauty, 158,-to confirm the truth of meta-
physics, by coming out of his own body and returning to it, ib.,-to
destroy the claims of the body by a fit of intoxication, which shall leave
him as able an opponent of Phrenology as the best of the bitterest, 159,—
to prove that horsehair in the skull can answer every good purpose of
brain, ib.,-to transpose heads, without any material consequence or dif.
ference to the owners thereof, 160,-to confound and overturn the doc-

trine of Gall and Spurzheim, by showing that the mind resides not in the
upper, but in the lower end of man, ib. The Sieur's luminous advertise-
ment specifies the virtues of his wonderful drugs, and proves their efficacy
by certificates from Anti-phrenologus, William Wastle, Morgan Odoherty,
Timothy Tickler, and Christopher North, 161. His warning against
fraud, and address, 164.

CRANIOSCOPY. The opponents of phrenology are never content with any
previous refutation of it, and always aim at originality in their attempts
to demolish it, 165. Dr Roget's article in the Encyclopædia Britannica
now brought forward as allowing a fair occasion for reply to objections,
166. His first objection as to injuries of the brain having been unaccom.
panied with deranged functions, discussed, in the Transactions of the
Phrenological Society, 167. He properly objects to analogy alone being
trusted to as a basis for a theory on the subject of the mind and brain, in
which opinion he is joined by Drs Gall and Spurzheim; but then he very
inconsistently sets about refuting, by means of analogy alone, what they
allege to be founded on observations, 168. He never assails the principles
of Phrenology, but argues about the difficulty of applying them, 169.
His statement, as to nerves, though not distinguishable into different bun.
dles of fibres, performing both volition and sensation, from which he
infers the same part of the brain may perform double duties, singularly
unfortunate in point of fact, and consequently in logical bearing, as shown
in the notice of Mr C. Bell's observations on the nervous system, 170. Dr
Roget's power of conception, as the source of an objection, is not to be
argued against, but can give no trouble, 171. His objection to the anatomical
evidence for Phrenology has no force whatever, because one of the very
first principles of Phrenology provides against reliance on or hope from
such evidence, 172. What he says about want of parallelism in the tables
of the skull easily disposed of, ib. His attack on the principle regarding
size of organs being any criterion of energy, fairly resisted, 173. This
boasted article, Cranioscopy, now thoroughly gone through, turns out to
be a very harmless work, and not at all able to do the mischief to Phreno-
logy assigned to it, 175.

QUENTIN DURWARD. The character of Louis XI, as therein described,
analyzed and explained satisfactorily on phrenological principles, 176.
Secretiveness and Self-esteem particularly commented on, 179. Character
of Charles the Bold, a contrast to that of Louis, discussed in a similar
nanner, 188. Supposed developments of both in a tabular form, 186.
Their behaviour, when brought into contact, shown quite conformable to
the principles of the science as applied to their character, 187. Phrenology
alone, of all the systems of the mind, can afford solutions of such conduct
as is described, 192. The author sometimes theoretically wrong, though
his sketches be true to nature, 193. His very injudicious allusion to
Phrenology censured, 194.

MILTON'S GARDEN OF EDEN. Mr Dugald Stewart's exposition of the powers
necessary to form it, 195, compared with what Phrenology would suggest,
197. The value of the two theories estimated, by considering Milton in
relation to the character of Locke, ib. The preference awarded to the
Phrenological theory, 199.

SECOND DIALOGUE BETWEEN A PHILOSOPHER AND A PHRENOLOGIST.
The philosopher, content with former systems of mind, 200, allows that
Phrenology has not been refuted by ridicule, but he is stumbled at the want
of great men to advocate its pretensions, 201. The phrenologist annoys
him on this point, ib., and then forces him to abandon it, 204. The phi-
losopher states insuperable difficulties, and the phrenologist shows that
they have no place in the system, 205. The former becomes considerate,
respectful, inquisitive, 206, but is still puzzled, 207, gains more insight
into the matter, 209, and concedes a little, 210. The phrenologist expa-

tiates at length, and is heard, ib., with advantage, 212. The philosopher,
rather silenced than convinced, has recourse to hackneyed objections, 213,
which are readily encountered, 214, but not allowed to be entirely dis
posed of by the philosoper, 215, who, after starting what he thinks a for-
midable difficulty, 216, and seeing it obviated, admits there may be more
absurd things in the world than Phrenology, 217.

PHRENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF MR OWEN'S NEW VIEWS OF SOCIETY.
Mr Owen blunders in the outset, by assuming a constitution of the human
mind without evidence, and which does not comprehend all the original
powers, 218. One general consequence of this error is necessarily a mis-
take as to any remedial application, 219. The leading principle in his
theory is at variance with Phrenology, which is held to be a transcript of
nature, and not an invention, 220. The character of an individual ad-
mitted, and conceived by phrenologists to result from propensities, &c. mo-
dified by education, and this assented to verbally by Mr Owen, 222. Three
fundamental propositions respecting modifying causes, first, we cannot
eradicate what is natural; secondly, we cannot essentially change natural
feelings; and, thirdly, we are limited to restraining and directing them,
ib. Differences of character, and causes of them, must be admitted, 223.
Mr Owen holds human nature to be a passive compound,-phrenologists,
that it is eminently active, ib. Three great classes of mankind,—those
in whom the animal propensities predominate-those in whom they are
nearly equally balanced by the moral sentiments and intellect—and those
in whom the moral sentiments and intellect preponderate, 225. How
far, and the means by which, these may be influenced so as to be im-
proved, according to Mr Owen and according to Phrenology, 226. The
discussion thereon leads to sundry observations on the primitive powers of
human nature, and to the exposure of sundry inconsistencies and absur
dities in Mr Owen's plans and views as respecting the indulgence of Ama-
tiveness, 226,-Controlling or limiting the Love of Offspring, 228,-
Adhesiveness, 229,-Constructiveness, Destructiveness, and Acquisitive-
ness, 230,-Secretiveness, Self-esteem, and Love of Approbation, 231,-
Cautiousness, 232. The influence of Veneration, so great in Old Society,
is merely tolerated, not provided for in the New System, 233. Conscien-
tiousness, though a natural sentiment, is to be supplanted by Benevolence
in Mr Owen's establishments, 234. Examination of Mr O.'s head fur-
nishes a key to his views, 235. His character and proposed arrangements
quite in harmony, 237.

BURKE, FOX, AND PITT. Phrenological sketches of them proposed, 238.
Burke is conceived to have possessed Comparison, Causality, Wit, Ideality,
and Language, large, ib. Great Self-esteem and Love of Approbation,
moderate Firmness, defective Concentrativeness, 239. The characters
given of him by Johnson and Goldsmith considered in relation to this
estimate, ib. His Combativeness and Destructiveness were too inconsider-
able for a mob-orator, and his Self-esteem and Conscientiousness too great
to suffer him to be either servile or wrongly biassed, 241. Mr Fox and
Mr Pitt contrasted, 242. The former supposed to have had a large por-
tion of Combativeness and Destructiveness, and, at the same time, Benevo-
lence, very considerable Ideality, Hope, and Love of Approbation, 243.
Mr Pitt seems to have been largely endowed with Individuality and Com-
parison, but to have had Causality, Wit, and Ideality, in a less degree,―
more Cautiousness and less Hope than Mr Fox, 244,-more Self-esteem
and Firmness than either Burke or Fox, and great Concentrativeness,
245. The importance of Phrenology in making such sketches, 246.
ON THE ORGAN AND FACULTY OF CONSTRUCTIVENESS. The subject pro-
posed to be treated, as Destructiveness was in the first Number, 247.
How and where discovered by Dr Gall, ib. Observations on which belief
in it is founded, 251. Circumstances illustrative of its existence as a