In the year 1811, Dr Thomas Brown, Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh, taught to his students the doctrine, that Resistance is a sensation, not cognised by the sense of touch, but having a specific sense, of which the entire muscular frame is the external organ.

Dr Spurzheim in his " Physiognomical System," published in 1815, comes, so far, to the same conclusion, viz. that Resistance is not cognised by Touch; but differs from Dr Brown in so far as he denies that its cognition is the result of an external sense, and refers it to an internal faculty. I beg it may be kept in mind that both philosophers, however they differ as to the nature of the power cognising, consider the thing cognised as RESISTANCE. The use of such a power is partially and incidentally hinted at by both writers, as necessary for the guidance of our muscular frame, but by neither in a manner suitable to the extent and importance of the subject.+

I was accidentally led to think on the subject of the use, in the economy of nature, of a power for the cognition of Resistance, or Weight, by the occurrence of two very trivial incidents to be afterwards mentioned; and on 15th April 1824, read to the Phrenological Society in Edinburgh, and subsequently to that of London, a paper entitled, "Some reasons for concluding that the cerebral convolution hitherto called the organ of Weight, is the organ of that instinctive perception of equilibrium and the mechanical relations of matter, which is essential to the exertion

of animal power. "The speculation, with its accompanying illustrations, excited among phrenologists something like the interest of a discovery. It was at once felt that we must have a power or instinct by which we place our bodies in accordance with the laws of gravitation and mechanical resistance in general; that without such a faculty no animal could stand, walk, fly, or swim; that in man, the same faculty is the foundation of mechanical skill, from the rudest use of tools up to the highest effort of the engineer and the mechanician; that there is an appetite or necessity for equilibrium, or that due balance of resistance and counter-resistance which is essential to the ease and comfort of every animal; and that, even without relation to his own body, man is offended with any violation of mechanical equilibrium which he sees in external nature. It was im

* Dr Brown's Lectures, vol. i. page 496, published in 1820.

There is every reason to conclude that the doctrine of the cognition of Resistance being the function of a specific power, was an original thought in both philosophers. Although Dr Brown propounded it in his lectures in 1811, these lectures were not published till 1820; hence, Dr Spurzheim was not likely to have known of his views till five years after his own publication. The agreement between them being only partial, is an additional proof that the views of the one did not influence those of the other.

+ Phrenological Journal, vol. ii. p. 412.

mediately seen and acknowledged by phrenologists that these views had an application as extensive as important; and that, as it was expressed by Mr Combe in his Letter to Mr Jeffrey, they "added a chapter of some importance to the philosophy of Mind." I endeavoured to confirm the conclusion that there exists a power to cognise and preserve equilibrium, by adducing some interesting instances of the suspension of it by disease. Miss S. L. for example, in a singular affection, experienced giddiness, believed floors and ceilings to have changed their horizontal for an inclined position, and felt the sensation of being lifted up, and of falling down, and forwards, "as if she had been tipsy." Mr John Hunter, the great anatomist, when attacked by a particular affection, felt as if he had drunk too much; as if suspended in the air, whirled round with great rapidity, and sinking down; he also saw perpendiculars inclined, and did not receive from his own feelings information respecting his centre of gravity." The celebrated Opium-eater, among other dreadful feelings which resulted from his miserable habit, "seemed every night to descend, not metaphorically, but literal. ly to descend, in chasms and sunless abysses, depths below depths, from which," says he, "it seemed hopeless that I could ever reascend; nor did I, by waking, feel that I had reascended."

At first my attention was called to the power in question as an internal faculty exclusively, and I concluded that it must be indicated by a corresponding cerebral organ. This organ had been conjectured by Dr Spurzheim to be the convolution of brain lying upon the orbitar plate between the organs of Size and Colouring. The paper above alluded to adduced a great number of instances of eminent mechanicians in whom that convolution is remarkable for its development, and of persons noted for skill in those arts and accomplishments-as billiards, bowls, archery, &c. -which imply a fine perception of mechanical relations. The organ was held by Dr Spurzheim to be conjectural only; but from the confirmatory observations of a number of phrenologists, it was about this time promoted into the grade of probable, and is so classed in the third edition of Mr Combe's System of Phrenology. Yet, though thus cautiously rated in the books, there can be no doubt that it has for some years been practically believed to be the organ of mechanical perception, with as much assurance as its neighbours on both sides have been trusted to for indicating their respective knowing faculties. The instances are too numerous to be noticed, in which talented engineers and mechanicians have been, at a glance, pointed out even by persons of moderate practice in organology, from the large and particularly easily observed development of this part of the brain. Deficiency has likewise been noticed; though this, to be striking, is rare, Very large development is much more common than very small;

but a medium fulness is chiefly observable,—and there is a reason for this. An endowment under average in this power would be attended not only with suffering, but with danger: the sensibility to disturbed equilibrium must be acute, and the muscular response prompt and instantaneous, otherwise fatal accidents would often be the consequence. An individual may have a weak perception of some other qualities, such as colour, yet live in safety, and even not discover his defect; but there is something to do in obedience to the calls of equilibrium, and an instant's delay may sometimes be fatal to life. In short, like the sense of sight, it is too important a faculty to admit of prevalent deficiency. Deficiencies are, however, sometimes observed. A very intelligible and valuable instance was furnished to the Phrenological Journal by Mr Levison of Hull. He observed in the forehead of a gentleman, with whom he travelled in a stagecoach, so great a depression at the organ of Weight, that the spot, according to Mr Levison, resembled a valley, bounded on one side by the high ground of Size, and on the other by the acclivity of Colouring; and the contrast gave a curious expression to the eyebrows, which were otherwise extremely fine. Mr Levison very judiciously resolved not to question the stranger directly, but to watch his manifestations. He had a large organ of Individuality, and manifested it in the extent of his knowledge and the accuracy of his observative power. "When we had nearly reached Grimsby, he expressed great regret that the rest of the journey to Hull must, per force, take place in a steam packet. My dislike, he said, does not spring from any sensation of fear; but I experience, when on the water, a kind of dizziness and nausea, very like that felt in intoxication; I seem as if I could not balance myself." Presuming this case to have been accurately observed, I consider it as one of the most pointed confirmations of the organ, of the many which have come to my knowledge. I may add, that Miss S. L. had acute pain in the spot where the organ exists, when the perplexing symptoms of its disease were experienced by her.

I have anachronised a little in regard to the history of the organ, that I may dismiss it, and proceed unembarrassed with the faculty. Of the organ, I shall at present say no more than humbly to suggest, that, in respect of its claims being quite as good as those of its neighbours Colouring and Size, it may now be held to be very probable, if not established.

Dr Thomas Brown's doctrine, that the power in question is an external sense, had not attracted the particular attention of phrenologists: not themselves arrived at a discriminate knowledge of the function of the power, they viewed Dr Brown's sense, and Dr Spurzheim's internal faculty, as only different expressions

Vol. vi. p. 134.

for the same thing. They ought, however, to have been aware, that it is metaphysically erroneous to confound an external sense with an internal intellectual faculty. All metaphysicians agree, that a sense receives passively an impression, communicated from an external material object to the brain by a specific nerve, and that there its function ends. An internal intellectual faculty is an active power, to which the sense ministers; and although it has a marked prominence of brain, and corresponding development of cranium, it has of itself no direct organic communication with the external material world. Hence it should have been recollected and noticed, that Dr Brown and Dr Spurzheim, if speaking of the same thing, could not both be right, when the one called this power only a sense, and the other only an internal faculty.

In the harmonious relation of the Creator's works, which renders true science, however branched for human convenience, really one and indivisible, a new and brilliant light was soon to be shed on this difficult question, by talent engaged in a different pursuit, and expecting a different result and a different reward. On the 16th February 1826, Sir Charles Bell, in a paper read before the Royal Society of London,* announced the discovery of the fact that each muscle of the body is supplied with two nerves, one, the motor nerve as formerly known, to contract and move the muscle; and the other to convey a sensation to the brain of the state of the muscle, that the necessary power may be transmitted, through the motor nerve, for adequate contraction or relaxation, as may be required. It is physiologically true that the same nerve cannot act in both directions. By satisfactory experiments on these two nerves, separately and alternately, as mentioned in his paper, Sir Charles Bell demonstrated the existence and the distinct and different function of each; and although he found this new nerve of muscular sensation likewise associated with the nerve which supplies sensibility to the skin,—viz. of pain, and heat, and cold (for the bared muscle does not feel pain acutely, and heat and cold not at all,)—he concluded it probable, that these two nerves are as distinct from each other, as is the motor nerve from the nerve of muscular sensation. † Be this, however, as it may, he has demonstrated that there is a muscular sensation which informs the brain of the state of the muscle, in other words its demand for motive power; and that that power is conveyed by the motor nerve, the other part of what he calls a nervous circle connecting every voluntary muscle with the brain. In the note referred to below, I adduced an instructive instance communicated by a medical gentleman of Edinburgh, of the alternate failure of the energy of the motor nerve and nerve of muscular sensation. It is at once so illustrative and so decisive, that I Transactions, vol. cxvi, page 163.

+ Note in Phren. Journ. vol. iv. page 314.

am tempted to give it again. "I was consulted by the son of a gentleman in the country, who has had a singular paralytic affection. He lost the power of motion in his arms, but retained sensation acutely, and felt another person's hand cold or warm, as the case might be. [This concerns the sensitive nerves of the skin.] Now, at the distance of three weeks, he has regained the power of motion, but has lost the sense of the state of the muscles so completely, that he cannot adapt his muscular contractions to the purposes he has in view. [This is the proper nerve of muscular sensation.] In seizing a small object, he bears down upon it with his extended hand, gathers it in, and grasps it like a vice, not aware of the disproportion of his effort. He has at the same time the complete command of his muscles as to contractions and relaxa tions [another word for the energy of the motor nerve], but wants only the sense of their state."

The discovery of Sir Charles Bell, is broad enough to reconcile Dr Brown and Dr Spurzheim, not as having given different and incompatible names to the same thing, but as having each furnished a name for which there is a distinct corresponding thing: in other words, the constituent part of man in question is compounded of both a passive sense and an active internal faculty; and this I humbly think is demonstrable. The nerve of muscular sensation conveys to the brain information of the state of the muscle, and does no more; it neither has nor can have an ulterior function. The state of the muscles is another phrase for the degrees of the impression of resistance upon the muscular frame, a sensation produced by an external material cause, and therefore beyond all question as much a sense as smelling or tasting. The will is under no moral necessity to act upon the sensation or message from the muscle conveyed by the nerve of muscular sensibility, and to command the motor nerve to do its duty, and change the state of the muscle. That it invariably does so, and with the speed of electricity, is nothing to the purpose: not only are we able to conceive the sensation without the responsive action, but we can suspend that action, and endure the sensation, provided it be not intolerably painful or dangerous, quite long enough to

This discovery is claimed by a physician of Turin, named, by singular coincidence, Carlo Bellingeri; and the medical journals have lately maintained a warm controversy on the question of priority. Bellingeri claims to have distinguished the motor nerves from what he vaguely calls the sensitive nerves. From him therefore, I never should have got the idea of a nerve conveying to the brain a sense of the state of the muscle as to contraction; of this important function, which is every thing for my purpose, I owe my knowledge to Sir Charles Bell. Bellingeri may have discovered two nerves formerly believed to be one; but Sir Charles Bell has thrown greatly more light on their respective functions.

+ Mr Wheatstone, Professor of Experimental Philosophy in King's College, London, has discovered a means of measuring the velocity of electricity, which he declares to be equal to that of light, 190,000 miles in a second.