Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

Cautiousness and Secretiveness, however, with Conscientiousness and Firmness relatively less, will produce a tendency to prefer indireet to direct ineans of accomplishing an end. In difficult situations dexterity and address will be more relied on than open manly courage, and an apparent expediency will sometimes be preferred to justice. The intellect is capable at once of managing details, and taking in comprehensive views, and if, as is affirmed, appearances of mystification occasionally present themselves in his public conduct, they are not owing to imperfect intellectual conceptions, but are designed to serve a purpose. The combination of the whole organs resembles that which one would expect in a dexterous and successful courtier in an absolute monarchy, rather than in the president of a democracy. Vol. i. p. 144.

January 4. Phrenology.-Mr. Nicholas Biddle, President of the United States Bank, called and informed me that he had attended a course of lectures given by Dr. Gall at Carlsruhe, in Germany, in 1806 or 1807. He subsequently presented me a skull which Dr. Spurzheim had marked for him, showing the situations of the organs as then discovered, and which had remained in his possession ever since. This relic possesses historical value. It has often been asserted that Dr. Gall invented his physiology of the brain, and did not discover it. When I was in Germany in 1837, I saw a collection of books describing the science at different stages of its progress, and also skulls marked at different times; all proving that the organs were discovered in succession as narrated by Drs. Gall and Spurzheim. This skull, which records the state of the science in 1806 and 1807, presents blank spaces where the organs of Hope, Conscientiousness, Individuality, Concentrativeness, Time, Size, and Weight, are now marked, these having at that time been unascertained. Farther, the local situations, and also the functions of the organs then marked by Dr. Gall as ascertained, continue unchanged in the marked skulls of the present day.. Vol. i. p. 188.

Washington, Feb. 20. Mr. Calhoun, of South Carolina, spoke two or three times. He seemed to be about sixty, tall and slender, and of a highly bilious and nervous temperament. The lower ridge of his forehead projects much, indicating great powers of observation, but the superior ridge devoted to reflection, is much smaller. Although the latter region looks narrow and retreating, yet there is enough of brain to give average power to his reflecting faculties. He has very large Selfesteem and Firmness. The head indicates much self-will and determination; great powers of perseverance; a capacity for details, but little profound judgment.

I saw also Mr. Clay, but he did not speak. He is nearly bald. The anterior lobe of the brain is long and high, the middle perpendicular portion predominating. He seems to have large Acquisitiveness and considerable Ideality. In him also Self-esteem and Firmness are large. The coronal region rises moderately high above Cautiousness and Causality, and the head altogether is high and long, rather than broad. It is of ample size. His temperament is nervous-sanguine, with a little bilious. He is tall and slender; and apparently between sixty and seventy. This combination indicates great natural vivacity, readiness of apprehension, facility of illustration, with force of character ; but there are two defects in the brain which will prevent such an individual from rising to the first class of minds. Causality and the moral organs do not present the highest degree of developement. Men thus constituted do not sufficiently appreciate the influence of the moral sentiments as a natural power, nor do they trace the causes with which they deal, to their first elements, nor follow them to their remote consequences. Mr. Clay's head, however, bespeaks a man greatly above an average in point of mental power, and also practical in his tendencies; and therefore well adapted to the general American mind of the present day.

Here, also, sits Daniel Webster, looking like an intellectual giant among the senators. His enormous anterior lobe, and generally large head, reinforced by large lungs, mark him as a natural leader; but his reflective organs are too much developed in proportion to his Individuality to render his eloquence equally popular with that of Henry Clay. Mr. Webster needs a great subject, involving a profound principle and important consequecnes, before his strength can be called forth. Give him these, and he will rise to the highest eminence as a pleader and a statesman; but his intellect is too profound and comprehensive to be fully appreciated by the people. On seeing the man, therefore, I am not surprised at a circumstance which I have remarked, that, while Mr. Webster is regarded by a few as the great political character of the United States, Mr. Clay has at least a hundred devoted followers for one of Mr. Webster's admirers. Webster, however, like Burke, will be quoted for the depth of principle and wisdom involved in his speeches, when the more fascinating but less profound orations of Mr. Clay have sunk into oblivion. Vol. i. p. 271.

MISCELLANY.

Phrenological Lectures and Examinations of the Messrs. Foulers in Boston.-We copy from the Boston Daily Mail of May 28th, the following account of the Messrs. Fowlers' Lectures and Examinations in Boston. It is a record of facts, and is due no less to the individuals concerned than to the science: “Ilaving been one of a pretty numerous and very attentive audience that attended the lectures and demonstrations of the skilful phrenologists above mentioned, it seems to be but an acı of justice to a science too little understood, to make known the impressions I received from what I heard and saw. When Spurzheim was here, I listened with delight to the illustrations he gave of his favorite science, but I felt as if there was something wanting to compel me to assent as fully to the principles of phrenology as I did to the wisdom and knowledge of our nature with which his lectures abounded. So also Mr. Combe in his public lectures omitted to give that satisfaction which is derived from an application of principles upon the spot where they are asserted. The Fowlers, with a courage amounting to almost rashness, have just dared to do what their great predecessors with greater caution had avoided. At the commencement of their course, a committee of gentlemen no more interested in them or in the science than all men are interested in discovering the truth, and some of them unbelievers in the science, were chosen by the company to provide suitable persons, of well known character, on whose heads after each lecture an application of the science could be made. Those who take a pride in scoffing at the science, and who are sure that they are wiser than other men, because they can see the folly of phrenology without looking into its claims, have repeatedly said, “ If the science is true, why not demonstrate its truths at once, without talking so much about it. If it is founded on facts, tangible and evident, let us see some of them and we will believe." These doubters have had an opportunity such as should content the most unreasonable.

“Every evening, from four to ten persons were brought forward by the committee, persons, in all but one or two instances, entirely unknown to the lecturers, who, in the face of their friends and the audience, have named their leading characteristics with a readiness and a minuteness of detail, which would have puzzled the owners of the heads themselves to equal. So exact in general were the descriptions of character, that failure in even one point was rare, and correctness in every point was

A mistake was an exception to a hundred truths. The committee were gentlemen of known respectability and talent; and, as one of them remarked to the audience, “as unwilling to deceive as to be deceived.” In the course of the lectures, perhaps fifty heads were examined publicly in this manner without any considerale error. This trial one would think sufficient to show that there was some indication of character on the exterior of the cranium ; but this was not the only trial to which these lecturers were subjected. In almost every case one lecturer was shut up in a remote room, while the other examined a head, and then the absent lecturer was called and required to pronounce upon

a

common.

a

.

the same head. That one should for once guess right, would not have surprised me; that one should always have guessed right, would have been strange, but that the decisions of both should have coincided. so remarkably strange in every particular, as they did, compelled one to believe that the decisions were based upon facts and principles, and not upon guess-work as some pretended. But still there were sturdy doubters, who could not deny that the characters had been faithfully drawn, but who maintained that the lecturers were guided by their eyes, by the physiognomy and general appearance of the persons examined, and not by the bumps and general proportions of the head. To meet this unreasonable cavil, the lecturers were for one whole evening subjected to such an ordeal as none but rash men would submit to. They were both blindfolded effectually by the Committee, then separated, and required, in turn, in the absence of each other, to examine such heads as the Committee subjected to their touch.

The Committee, moreover, had previously written the characters of the candidates as nearly as the candidates and their best friends could describe them; and after both lecturers had done, the written character was read. I believe I do not exaggerate when I say that, in almost every particular, it seemed as if the written character was only notes taken during the examination, as the words dropped from the mouth of the lecturers. Were it desirable or proper, I could allude to some of the cases, but as I have no permission to do this, it being more properly the business of the Committee, I will only notice one remarkable case presented at the last trial.

While the lecturers were blinded, a gentleman called aside the chairman of the Committee, and said that he had just brought a girl 14 or 15 years of age, a complete idiot. He had been endeavoring for three years to have her taught something, but without success. She could not even learn a few of the letters; and ideas, intellect, she had none. When it was urgued that a public examination might hurt her feelings, he assured the Committee that she could not understand what might be said, and as he was axious to know what was the deficiency, the examination might lead to good; she was accordingly placed under the hand of the blindfolded lecturer, who felt one or two seconds and then said he had rather not say any thing about the head under examination. Some of the company said “speak out.” He at last said that the head was a most unfortunate one, so destitute of intellect that it could not belong to an accountable being. The moral sentiments were wanting, and the only indication of intellect was a desire to see what was going on around, whilst there was no intellect to treasure up or use the facts thus collected. The other lecturer was then called, and his hands had hardly touched the head, before he declined saying any thing about it. When urged to speak freely, he very reluctantly said that the intellect was deficient, and the person incapable of taking care of himself, (he supposed it was a boy, as females were seldom subjected to examination.) The gentleman who brought the idiot, declared that the description was exact except in one point. They had said that her organ of Language, (perhaps one of the most difficult to decide upon without sight,) was not deficient, and he averred that she had not been able to learn half a dozen letters of the alphabet in three years. He acknowledged, however, that she

,

could talk, and the chairman of the committee removed the objection by stating that the organ of Language would not be exercised in learning the characters of the alphabet, any more than in learning geometrical figures.

“Such is an imperfect sketch of this remarkable course of lectures. As to the qualifications of the lecturers as speakers, it may be said that they are plain, unpretending men, more remarkable for their sound sense and acute observations upon men and manners, than for finished elocution or style. A strong spirit of philanthropy and a high moral tone distinguish all their remarks. They evidently wish to make their science useful to mankind, and the writer of these remarks, no more interested in their leetures than any other citizen, and a stranger to them till after the course had commenced, wishes them good speed."

F. Professor Gibson and Phrenology.-Dr. Wm. Gibson, Professor of Surgery in the University of Pennsylvania, in his recent work titled " Rambles in Europe,” makes several allusions to Phrenology. In describing an interview with the celebrated writer, Miss Edgeworth, who, it appears, is very much prejudiced against the science, Dr. Gibson remarks that she “ finally pressed me so hard to say what I really thought of the science, as to induce me to tell her that I believed the general principles of the science to be correct; that many of the facts brought forward by Combe and other distinguished phrenologists, were undoubtedly striking and important; that some of the details were inaccurate and inferences drawn from them equally erroneous; that the seience had, however, suffered immensely from ignorant pretenders and charlatans, and that great allowance must be made for the mistakes of such persons who often undertook to examine heads and pronounce decisively on character without knowledge of the form of a single bone, or of the structure of any part of the brain: all which she admitted seemed reasonable enough, but still maintained she was sure there could be nothing in it, as she herself had known many persons of extraordinary intellects with small heads." Query-Whose testimony is most to be credited on the merits of Phrenology, Dr Gibson or Miss Edgeworth?

Mr. Combe's Tour. This work is now being published in Waldie's Circulating Library, which will bring it before many thousand readers. We learn also that the first edition of the work published by Carey & Hart of this city, is already nearly exhausted. The character and circulation which these volumes are obtaining, must be gratifying to Mr. Combe as well as to every phrenologist.

Rights of Women.— The New York New World, of May 8th, contains an excellent essay on the Rights of Women, by E. P. Hurlbut, Esq. The principles advanced in this essay are based entirely on physical organization, (Physiology and Phrenology) and are presented with great clearness and ability. We sincerely hope Mr. Hurlbut will be induced to publish a work, embracing his views in full, on Political Ethics,

« VorigeDoorgaan »