they rested. Nobody knows better than yourself, that almost every important discovery has been met and opposed by the ignorant and vulgar outery of dangerous consequences. Tein 02 But waying this objection, you neither distinctly nor accurately state the fundamental principles of the system you oppose.

All mental energy or susceptibility," you say, being presumed to be lodged, in the bead, and these to be indicated by the skull, either in its general conformation or in its particular prominences, distinguishable by sight or touch the system set out under the modest title of Cranioscopy, &c. &c. Now, this is not a correct statement of the doctrines of Phrenology, and I must therefore solicit your attention to an accurate account of its real principles. These are, at doidw cost v bodet b. That the human mind manifests its powers, in the present world, by means of the brain.ot lord nd woy à la 2. That the mental manifestations are affected and modified by the size, health, and activity of that organ, dat vodi - [?

*

3. That the brain does not act as one indivisible organ, but consists of a congeries of organs, having distinct and different functions of grozob teds ajaryoko jeziq bis ekztmotans 17

Now, if you deny that the brain is, in any sense, the organ of the mind, you deny some of the best established facts in nature; for, that, the most vigorous minds have frequently been reduced to mere idiocy by disease of the brain, is a fact beyond all cavil or controversy, gong undi jogról tre guilsed odi to zx51260 1691

And why bleed and blister the head for mental derangement, if the disease be really mental and not physical? Those physicians who use physical means for removing mental disease, and yet deny the truth of the first principle of Phrenology, practise as if Phrenology were true, and their own philosophy of the human mind false. Even you will hardly maintain that bleeding and blistering are for the purpose of restoring the tone and temper of the soul itself and yet to this absurd conclusion you must come, or admit the first and fundamental principle of Phrenology, that the brain is the organ of the mind,og festngos

But I will not press you farther with this great fact in the constitution of human nature, as its denial would ruin the reputation of any man as a philosopher, whose reputation as a philosopher r could be ruined, yoyo ni reorge blusa yomɔ ɔmes si

The second phrenological principle is, that the mental manifestations are affected and modified by the size, health, and activity of the brain. Now, with regard to the first of these conditions, you will admit that size in an organ is the measure of its power for this proposition is universal, and one to which there are no exceptions in nature. A cannon-ball, or stream of water, produces (in like circumstances), effects in exact proportion to the quantity of matter which it contains; and wood, iron, brass, bone, and every substance in nature, have strength in

:

proportion to their size. It is obvious that to this great lawthat size gives power there cannot be a single exception, as its denial would be the same thing as to deny that quantities which are equal to the same thing are not equal to one another-so that this fundamental principle of Phrenology is not contradicted by the whole analogy of nature," as you allege, but is in strict accordance with the most obvious and universal law of creation.

And with regard to the health of an organ being a condition of its power, I shall not waste a single word, as no sane man can believe for a moment that a diseased organ can perform its functions with the energy of one in health. Jempts bortos g. Joi to Thus the two fundamental principles of Phrenology are established by facts which it seems to me impossible to resist.

If, then, these two principles must be admitted, and, to be candid, you have brought forward neither facts nor arguments to disprove either,the only remaining question for discussion is, Whether the brain acts as a whole or in parts ? It is on this point, indeed, that antiphrenologists have been the most wayward and wanton in their abuse.

༔

All anatomists and physiologists that deserve the name, have admitted the two first principles; but when phrenologists brought multiplied and unanswerable facts to prove that the brain does not act as one and indivisible organ, but consists of a congeries of organs having distinct and different functions, some of the great masters of the healing art forgot their propriety, and, with the rudeness of ignorance, took leave to rail, most unsparingly, at what they were at no pains to understand and for a very silly reason, namely, because they could not discover different organs in the brain by dissection. } 1 9 39 36 (gum 87 zr 5. 19,

Now, the fact is, that dissection alone never did, and never will, discover the functions of a single organ. The spleen, for example, has been dissected for ages, yet at this moment its functions are totally unknown. So much for the anatomy of the business. But let us examine the question by facts and philosophical principles. to 2 ant to in godt mod in

1. And, in the first place, if the brain acted as one indivisible organ, partial genius would be impossible. (JORIT

For if a brain possessed great energy, and acted as a unity, the same energy would appear in every mental manifestation in which that brain was employed. But is this the fact? Why, the very reverse is generally the case. Some children lay their hands upon an instrument, and make music at once; while thousands of young ladies who distinguish themselves in other branches of knowledge, never arrive at any proficiency in music, even after the labours of many years, under the greatest advantages of education. The same thing takes place in painting, poetry, sculpture, eloquence, and mechanics; in one word, in

all the arts and sciences within the compass of human knowledge. Now, these facts are utterly incompatible with the unity of the brain.

But you seem to belong to that class of philosophers who maintain that partial genius is the result of habit and education. This is inverting the order of nature. For what is a habit but the effect of repetition of acts prompted by some mental pulse and hence the impulse must have formed the habit, and not the babit the impulse. No man will ever acquire the habit

im

of making music who has hardly any pet of melody; and

in all

other cases.

You put the eart

the horse.

But besides the unphilosophical character of this philosophy of yours, it is contradicted by the whole history of mankind. How many men have remained sheer dolts, after circumstances, habit, and education had done their utmost! To schools and colleges they went in "stirks and came out asses; and if honest nature made them fools, what serves their grammars ? And how many men of original genius bave risen to eminence regardless alike of helps and of hinderances! The list of such men is long and glorious, and from that list it were easy to mention names which ought to put your habit and education men to the blush. But in mercy I spare you, and shall only add, that the man who believes that the genius of Shakspeare was the result of habit and education, should have some reserve in speaking about the gullibility of mankind.

2. But, in the second place, partial insanity is incompatible with the unity of the brain. You must admit that nothing is more common than partial insanity. Now, if the brain acted as a unity, this phenomenon would be impossible; since, if the brain acted as a unity, whatever affected it must affect it as a whole and not as a part.

3. In the third place, that the mind is found to be relieved by merely changing the objects of thought and study, is another fact inconsistent with the unity of the brain. For, if the whole brain were employed in all manifestations of mind, it could not be rested by any change of thought or contemplation. A man would not be rested by first running east and then west upon the same level plain.

4. In the fourth place, partial injuries of the brain, by producing partial derangement of the mental manifestations, exhibit another fact inconsistent with the unity of the brain. Baron Larrey (no phrenologist) has given a body of facts on this point, which no sound understanding can resist.

5. In the fifth place, dreaming would be impossible, if the brain acted as a unity. For if the brain acted as a whole, it must be either all asleep or all awake, and in either case dreaming could not take place.

Thus, my dear sir, I have established by undeniable facts,

1st, That the human mind manifests its powers in the present world by means of the brain; 2dly, That these mental manifestations are affected and modified by the size, health, and activity of that organ; and, 3dly, That the brain does not act as a unity, but consists of a congeries of organs. Now these are the great and fundamental principles of Phrenology-which, however, you have left absolutely untouched either by fact or argument. You have wasted your strength, and misspent your time, in endeavouring to lop off a few unseemly branches engrafted by enemies; while you have left the true phrenological tree to spread its roots wider and deeper in the earth. Antiphrenologists have in general shewn themselves very inaccurate in their knowledge of its real principles and character; and in this list I am sorry in being obliged to assign you a distinguished place.

About the middle of your essay you say, "Had the bumps on the skull been intended to be the mode of comprehending each other's views and intentions," &c. Now, that the views and intentions of one another can be ascertained by inspection, is distinctly denied by every phrenological writer; and therefore the absurdity which you oppose must find a father elsewhere than among phrenologists. The same want of correct knowledge characterizes your account of its rise and progress, a circumstance the more inexcusable, as Dr Gall has given a very minute account of the origin and progress of his discovery. You are equally infelicitous in calling the science" mushroom-like” in rapidity of growth; as Phrenology is nearly in her fortieth year, and still possesses all the freshness and vigour of youth, though from her cradle exposed to strangulation and death in every possible form, which ruthless and relentless enemies could devise. Your friend Mr Jeffrey, the present Lord Advocate, instead of trying her by the forms of law, turned quack, and at three dif ferent times gave her three pills, which he hoped would have proved her death; but as he was ignorant of her constitution, his pills merely acted as an emetic, and she did not die; and Í venture to predict that she will be in high places when the learned lord is out of office. Dr Gall lectured on Phrenology in Vienna in 1796, and Mr Combe in Edinburgh in 1832.

In your remarks on the common form of speech, in referring thought to the head, and the affections to the heart, the same fatality attends you. For this mode of speech neither suggested the system, nor is referred to as a proof of its truth,-but simply to shew, that mankind, in every age, believed the mind

Though the facts and arguments adduced by Mr Tod in support of the principles of Phrenology are amply sufficient to establish them, our readers of course will not understand that he has here exhausted his case. Had every fact and argument demonstrative of the truth of these principles been stated, the letter would have occupied volumes.-ED.

to act through the medium of material organs; and for this purpose it is not without forces, e

f

In your observations on the organ of Acquisitiveness you are still at fault in point of correct knowledge, as its direct use is neither theft nor avarice, but the simple desire of personal property. 7. Theft and avarice are abuses of the faculty unregulated by justice and benevolence. You call avaricea secondary passion." That at least implies that there is a first: and if there be a first and second kind of avarice, there may be a third and fourth, even to the tenth generation. This philosophy is to me, sheer absurdity. For from the simple desire for an object, to the most violent passion for its the desire is not different in kind but in degree. You are displeased with phrenologists for having so large a number of original principles in human nature. But though yours are less numerous, they are far more prolific; for if each of them produce ten illegitimate children, no wonder that your whole philosophy is in a state of absolute bastardy. The fact, however, is, that the whole analogy of na ture is in favour of unity of function. The ear cannot see, nor the eye bear and the discovery of Sir Charles Bell, which you mention, is in strict accordance with the principles of Phreno logy and unity of function. It was formerly believed that the same nerve produced sensation and motion, which would have been a double function of a single organ; but Sir Charles Bell's discovery tends to support the conclusion, that no organ per forms double functions; so that this fact is distinctly against you antiphrenologists. Your objection to the number of origi nal principles in the human mind, lies equally against the actual constitution of the body, as you would have made one nerve perform ten different functions; but by the fact just mentioned, you see that nature is constituted upon the principle of distinct organs and unity of function. So much for the discovery of Sir Charles Bell.

1

"

T

You seem to think it very difficult to distinguish one head from another. This, however, is in truth far more easy than to distinguish one face from another, of the difficulty of which nobody complains, There are not two things alike in nature more than heads. Your prejudices against the system have kept you in sad ignorance of the facts upon which it rests. Dr Gall has left six volumes, full of the most important facts regarding the physical and mental condition of our race. Double that num ber of volumes have been published in this country, all abounding in carefully observed and accurately recorded facts. Crania have been collected of a great variety of tribes, savage and civilized, ancient and modern, which have been carefully compared with the national character of the different tribes to which they belong; so that your difficulties have been solved a thousand