nerves of volition; the single, double, or multipled origin of nerves, which had not escaped notice, not being supposed to be connected with these separate offices.

"Such, so vague, so obscure, so inexact, so unsatisfactory, was the kind of knowledge communicated to the student, until a very recent period; and the impression left by it was that of confused and unintelligible profusion in the distribution of nerves, of intricacy without meaning, of an expenditure of resources without a parallel in the other works of nature." (Pages 447, 448.)

Unless, then, Dr. Gall could boast of some other methed of investigation than those of the ordinary physiologist and metaphysician, he could offer no legitimate pretensions to the solution of the question, What parts of the brain, and what mental faculties, are connected? By great good fortune, however, he was led to adopt a different and superior mode of inquiry; and this leads me to state shortly a few particulars of the history of the science which is now to be expounded.

DR. FRANCIS JOSEPH GALL, a physician of Vienna, afterward resident in Paris,* was the founder of the system. From an early age he was given to observation, and was struck with the fact, that each of his brothers and sisters, companions in play, and schoolfellows, was distinguished from other individuals by some peculiarity of talent or disposition. Some of his schoolmates were characterized by the beauty of their penmanship, some by their success in arithmetic, and others by their talent for acquiring a knowledge of natural history or languages. The compositions of one were remarkable for elegance; the style of another was stiff and dry; while a third connected his reasonings in the closest manner, and clothed his argument in the most forcible language. Their dispositions were equally different; and this diversity appeared also to determine the direction of their partialities and aversions. Not a few of them manifested a capacity for employments which they were not taught: they cut figures in wood, or delineated them on paper; some devoted their leisure to painting, or the culture of a garden; while their comrades abandoned themselves to noisy games, or traversed the woods to gather flowers, seek for bird-nests, or catch butterflies. In this manner each individual presented a character peculiar to himself; and Gall observed, that the individual who in one year had displayed selfish or knavish dispositions, never became in the next a good and faithful friend.

The scholars with whom Gall had the greatest difficulty in competing, were those who learned by heart with great facility; and such individuals frequently gained from him, by their repetitions, the places which he had obtained by the merit of his original compositions.

Some years afterward, having changed his place of residence, he still met individuals endowed with an equally great talent for learning to repeat. He then observed that his schoolfellows so gifted possessed prominent eyes, and recollected that his rivals in the first school had been distinguished by the same peculiarity. When he entered the university he directed his attention, from the first, to the students whose eyes were of this description, and found that they all excelled in getting rapidly by heart, and giving correct recitations, although many of them were by no means distinguished in point of general talent. This fact was recognised also by the other students in the classes; and although the connexion between talent and external sign was not at this time established upon such complete evidence as is requisite for a philosophical conclusion, Gall could not believe that the coincidence of the two circumstances was entirely accidental. From this period, therefore, he suspected that they + Born at Tiefenbrun, near Pforzheim, in Suabia, on 9th March, 1757; died at Paris, 22d August, 1828.

stood in an important relation to each other. After much reflection, he conceived that if memory for words was indicated by an external sign, the same might be the case with the other intellectual powers; and, thereafter, all individuals distinguished by any remarkable faculty became the objects of his attention. By degrees he conceived himself to have found external characteristics which indicated a decided disposition for painting, music, and the mechanical arts. He became acquainted also with some individuals remarkable for the determination of their character, and he observed a particular part of their heads to be very largely developed : this fact first suggested to him the idea of looking to the head for signs of the dispositions or affective powers. But, in making these observations, he never conceived for a moment that the skull was the cause of the different talents, as has been erroneously represented: from the first, he referred the influence, whatever it was, to the brain.

In following out, by observations, the principle which accident had thus suggested, he for some time encountered difficulties of the greatest magnitude. Hitherto he had been altogether ignorant of the opinions of physiologists touching the brain, and of metaphysicians respecting the mental faculties. He had simply observed nature. When, however, he began to enlarge his knowledge of books, he found the most extraordinary conflict of opinions everywhere prevailing; and this, for the moment, made him hesitate about the correctness of his own observations. He found that the affections and passions had, by almost general consent, been consigned to the thoracic and abdominal viscera; and that, while Pythagoras, Aristotle, Plato, Galen, Haller, and some other physiologists, placed the sentient soul or intellectual faculties in the brain, Van Helmont placed it in the stomach, Descartes and his followers in the pineal gland, and Drelincourt and others in the cerebellum.

He found also that a great number of philosophers and physiologists asserted that all men are born with equal mental faculties; and that the differences observable among them are owing either to education or to the accidental circumstances in which they are placed. If differences were accidental, he inferred, there could be no natural signs of predominating faculties; and, consequently, the project of learning, by observation, to distinguish the functions of the different portions of the brain must be hopeless. This difficulty he combated by the reflection, that his brothers, sisters, and schoolfellows had all received very nearly the same education, but that he had still observed each of them unfolding a distinct character, over which circumstances appeared to exert only a limited control; and farther, that not unfrequently those whose education had been conducted with the greatest care, and on whom the labours of teachers had been most assiduously bestowed, remained far behind their companions in attainments. "Often," says he, "we were accused of want of will, or deficiency in zeal; but many of us could not, even with the most ardent desire, followed out by the most obstinate efforts, attain, in some pursuits, even to mediocrity; while in some other points some of us surpassed our schoolfellows without an effort, and almost, it might be said, without perceiving it ourselves. But, in point of fact, our masters did not appear to attach much faith to the system which taught equality of mental faculties; for they thought themselves entitled to exact more from one scholar, and less from another. They spoke frequently of natural gifts, or of the gifts of God, and consoled their pupils in the words of the Gospel, by assuring them that each would be required to render an account only in proportion to the gifts which he had received."*

Being convinced by these facts that there is a natural and constitutional diversity of talents and dispositions, he encountered in books still another * Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau, Preface; and tome v., p. 12.

obstacle to his success in determining the external signs of the mental powers. He found that, instead of faculties for languages, drawing, music, distinguishing places, and mechanical arts, corresponding to the different talents which he had observed in his schoolfellows, the metaphysicians spoke only of general powers, such as perception, conception, memory, imagination, and judgment; and when he endeavoured to discover external signs in the head, corresponding to these general faculties, and to determine the correctness of the physiological doctrines taught by the authors already mentioned regarding the seat of the mind, he found perplexities without end, and difficulties insurmountable.

Abandoning, therefore, every theory and preconceived opinion, Dr. Gall gave himself up entirely to the observation of nature. Being a friend to Dr. Nord, physician to a Lunatic Asylum in Vienna, he had opportunities, of which he availed himself, of making observations on the insane. He visited prisons and resorted to schools; he was introduced to the courts of princes, to colleges, and to seats of justice; and wherever he heard of an individual distinguished in any particular way, either by remarkable endowment or deficiency, he observed and studied the developement of his head. In this manner, by an almost imperceptible induction, he at last conceived himself warranted in believing that particular mental powers are indicated by particular configurations of the head.

Hitherto he had resorted only to physiognomical indications, as a means of discovering the functions of the brain. On reflection, however, he was convinced that physiology is imperfect when separated from anatomy. Having observed a woman of fifty-four years of age, who had been afflicted with hydrocephalus from her youth, and who, with a body a little shrunk, possessed a mind as active and intelligent as that of other individuals of her class, Dr. Gall declared his conviction, that the structure of the brain must be different from what was generally conceived-a remark which Tulpius also had made, on observing a hydrocephalic patient who manifested the mental faculties. He therefore felt the necessity of making anatomical researches into the structure of the brain.

In every instance where an individual whose head he had observed while alive happened to die, he requested permission to examine the brain, and frequently was allowed to do so; and he found, as a general fact, that, on removal of the skull, the brain, covered by the dura mater, presented a form corresponding to that which the skull had exhibited in life.

The successive steps by which Dr. Gall proceeded in his discoveries are particularly deserving of attention. He did not, as many have imagined, first dissect the brain, and pretend, oy that means, to discover the seats of the mental powers; neither did he, as others have conceived, first map out the skull into various compartments, and assign a faculty to each, according as his imagination led him to conceive the place appropriate to the power. On the contrary, he first observed a concomitance between particular talents and dispositions, and particular forms of the head; he next ascertained, by removal of the skull, that the figure and size of the brain are indicated by external appearances; and it was only after these facts had been determined, that the brain was minutely dissected, and light thrown upon its structure.

At Vienna, in 1796, Dr. Gall, for the first time, delivered lectures on his system.

In 1800 Dr. JOHN GASPAR SPURZHEIM* began the study of Phrenology under him, having in that year assisted, for the first time, at one of his lectures. In 1804 he was associated with him in his labours; and, subsequently to that period, not only added many valuable discoveries to those *Born at Longuich, near Treves, on the Moselle, 31st December, 1776; died at Boston, United States, on 10th November, 1832.

of Dr. Gall in the anatomy and physiology of the brain, but principally contributed to form the truths brought to light by their respective observations, into a beautiful and interesting system of mental philosophy. In Britain we are indebted chiefly to his personal exertions and printed works for a knowledge of the science.

In the beginning of his inquiries, Dr. Gall neither did nor could foresee the results to which they would lead, or the relation which each successive fact, as it was discovered, would bear to the whole truths which time and experience might bring into view. Having established any circumstance, he boldly affirmed its reality, without regard to anything but truth. Perceiving, for instance, that the intensity of the desire for property bore a relation to the size of one part of the brain, he announced this fact by itself, and called the part the organ of Theft, because he found it prominent in thieves. When he had discovered that the propensity to conceal was in connexion with another part of the brain, he announced this fact also as an isolated truth, and named the part the organ of Cunning, because he found it very large in sly and fraudulent criminals. In a similar way, when ne had discovered the connexion between the sentiment of Benevolence and another portion of the cerebral mass, he called the part the organ of Benevolence; and so on in regard to the other organs. This proceeding has nothing in common with the formation of an hypothesis; and, so far from a disposition to invent a theory being conspicuous, there appears, in the disjointed items of information which Dr. Gall at first presented to the public, a want of even an ordinary regard for systematic arrangement. His only object seems to have been to furnish a candid and uncoloured statement of the facts in nature which he had observed; leaving their value to be ascertained by time and farther investigation.

As soon, however, as observation had brought to light a great body of facts, and the functions of the organs had been contemplated with a philosophical eye, a system of mental philosophy appeared to emanate almost spontaneously from the previous chaos.

Although, when the process of discovery had proceeded a certain length, the facts were found to be connected by relations, yet, at first, it was impossible to perceive their relationship. Hence, the doctrines appeared as a mere rude and undigested mass, of rather unseemly materials; the public mirth was, not unnaturally, excited by the display of organs of Theft, Quarrelsomeness, and Cunning, as they were then named; and a degree of obloquy was brought upon the science, from which it is only now recovering. At this stage the doctrines were merely a species of physiognomy, and the apparent results were neither very prominent nor very inviting. When, however, the study had been pursued for years, and the torch of philosophy had been applied to the facts discovered by observation, its real nature as the science of the human mind, and its beautiful consistency and high utility, became apparent, and its character and name changed as it advanced. For, as Middleton has finely remarked, no truth "can possibly hurt or obstruct the good effect of any other truth whatsoever for they all partake of one common essence, and necessarily coincide with each other; and, like the drops of rain which fall separately into the river, mix themselves at once with the stream, and strengthen the general current."*

:

Having now unfolded the principles and method of investigation of Phrenology, I solicit the attention of the reader to one question. We have heard much of antiphrenologists; and I would ask, What does the term antiphrenologist mean? Does it mean a person who, like Lord Brougham or Lord Jeffrey, denies that the mind in feeling and reflecting ases organs at all? such I reply, that they ought to call themselves

Middleton's Life of Cicero, Preface.

antiphysiologists; because, as already mentioned, every physiological writer of eminence in Europe maintains, that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that injuries of it impair the mental faculties. Or does antiphrenologist mean one who admits the brain to be the organ of the mind, but contends that the whole of it is essential to every mental act? Then I request of him to reconcile with his theory the phenomena of dreaming, partial genius, partial idiocy, partial insanity, partial lesion of mental functions arising from partial injuries of the brain, and the successive developement of the mental powers in youth. If antiphrenologist means a person who admits the mind to manifest a plurality of faculties by a plurality of organs, but denies that phrenologists have ascertained any of them, I ask him, Whether he disputes the three grand propositions, first, That dissection alone does not reveal functions; second, That reflection on consciousness does not reveal organs; and, third, That mental manifestations may be compared with developement of brain? If he denies these principles, he is beyond the reach of reason; while, if he admits them, I would ask him to state what forms of brain, and what mental manifestations, he has found concomitant in his observations? because, until he shall make such a statement, his denial of the correctness of the observations of others is entitled to no consideration. But an antiphrenologist furnished with counter-facts has never yet appeared. The word, in its common signification, seems to indicate only an individual who, like the Ptolemeans in the time of Galileo, is pleased to deny that phrenologists are right, without knowing either their principles or their facts, or having any pretensions to advance the cause of truth by pro pounding sounder data or correcter observations of his own.

GENERAL VIEW OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE SPINAL MARROW AND NERVES.

BEFORE entering on the discussion of the cerebral organs, it may be useful to give a brief account of Sir Charles Bell's discoveries of the functions of the Nerves. Dr. Spurzheim, and many authors before him, very early published the conjecture, that there must be different nerves for sensibility and for motion, because one of the powers is occasionally impaired, while the other remains entire. Sir C. Bell has furnished demonstrative evidence of this being actually the fact. He has also given due prominence to the philosophical principle so urgently insisted on by phrenologists, That, in all departments of the animal economy, each organ performs only one function; and that wherever complex functions appear, complex organs may be safely predicated, even anterior to the possibility of demonstrating them. The present section is derived from Sir C. Bell's Anatomy and Physiology of the Human Body, vol. ii., 7th edition, 1829; and, in as far as possible, I have adhered to his own expressions. My object is to introduce general readers to a knowledge of his discoveries, which form parts of an extensive System of Anatomy, or of Philosophical Transactions, or of other professional publications, which they seldom peruse. I shall omit all details necessary only for medical students, as Sir C. Bell's work is the proper source of instruction for them. Even the general reader will probably resort to Sir C. Bell's pages, after being informed of their interesting contents; he will find them clear, instructive, and most ably supported by evidence. Any errors or inaccuracies in the following condensed abstract are chargeable against myself; for although in general ! have followed the author's own expressions, the arrangement is greatly altered, and occasionally sentences of my own are introduced:

A nerve, says Sir Charles, is a firm white cord, composed of nervou