affection,' and to be 'given up to vile affections.' 'As they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness.' They are 'men of corrupt minds.' They are in an unnatural state. They are degraded, debased, and 'gone out of the way.' But while we may point to them as melancholy proofs of what human beings may become, we must not point to them as evidences of what human nature, in its essence and constitution, is. We might as justly adduce Socrates, Newton, and Howard, as proofs that the nature of every man is wise, and good, and great, as hold up Nero, King Henry the Eighth, and Judge Jeffreys, as evidences that the nature of every man is base, cruel, and depraved. To place the crimes of men to the account of an uncontrollably sinful nature, is to exculpate them from blame. It is more it is asserting that man is unimprovable. It is condemning all plans and attempts which aim at exalting the human mind. It is pronouncing all human means unavailing to elevate the human character. It is representing a human being as too worthless, despicable, and vile, to be the object of virtuous affection. Let man be the loathsome reptile that he is sometimes supposed, and he is unworthy of regard, undeserving of respect, and utterly destitute of any claims upon the laws of benevolence and truth. Then, duty to each other men cannot owe. Beings who were compounded of only brute propensities and demon hate, worked up to a nature radically and universally depraved, must invariably act as demon-brutes. But is this the case? Are our social, scientific, charitable, and religious institutions, proofs that we are demon-brutes? Whenever a man sincerely laments that the human race is nothing but beast and demon, his own lament demonstrates that his views are false. He is not himself a demon-beast; for if he were, no such lamentation could escape him.

"Does the tiger lament his own fierceness, or the serpent mourn over his degradation and poison? And as impossible would it be for man-for any man-to sigh for human nature, if the nature of every human being were brutified and demonised. The good man's sighs over sin, prove that he is not all sin. Man has, indeed, an animal nature, but he has also an intellectual nature. When the former absorbs the latter-when the mind, or soul, is swallowed up in mere sense-then truly man becomes an awful offender. His enormities are terrible. He would then disgrace the beasts, and perhaps even dishonour demons. But when the animal part of mas is purified by man's moral sentiments, and absorbed by his intellectual faculties, then is it manifest that there is a noble spirit in man, and the VOL. III.-12

inspiration of the Almighty giveth him understanding.' His deeds then are wrought in the love of God and man.' 'He then evinceth the same mind which was also in Christ;' and then he gives forth evidence that God hath made him but a little lower than the angels, and hath crowned him with glory and honour.'"

The second lecture is devoted to the moral sentiments, regarding which the teachings of phrenology and Christianity are thus compared. "The one teaches that there are certain natural moral sentiments, which are elementary constituents of the human mind; the other appeals to these sentiments as to things which actually exist in man. By one it is asserted that these sentiments, rightly directed, will lead to the discharge of individual, relative, and religious duties; by the other it is affirmed that man must employ those powers to do as he would be done uuto-to serve his God, and to work out his salvation. One system teaches that human beings are constituted moral agents; the other treats them as such. Every page of man's history proves his possession of those moral powers. Every page of the New Testament addresses itself to them. Too often have they been most wofully neglected, misapplied, enfeebied, and debased. But was there ever upon earth a people devoid of the sentiments of right and wrong, honour and dishonour? Did ever a people exist, who evinced no sentiments of wonder and veneration towards things stupendous, and a power superhuman? The religion of the most superstitious is evidence of some natural powers in man, which prompt to the adoration of superior objects; the grossest idolatry must be the effect of some mental cause. What is it? From the animal propensities alone it could not possibly proceed. Were man reduced to the condition of the ourang-outang, he would not then be a worshipper of even an idol. Paganism, under its most disgusting forms, still points up to mental powers, which in their nature must be good and noble, and in their designed use most salutary. The worshippers of Boodh, in India-of Foe, in China-and of Lama, in Thibet, evince the very same mental sentiments as those which are manifested by the worshippers of the only true God. Only change the object of worship, and the truth of this position will be demonstrated. The inhabitants of India, China, and Thibet, might worship the Christian's God without undergoing a change of nature; and any people might exchange an inferior code of morals and religion for one that was better, without exchanging a single power of the mind for some other."

Mr. Clarke has included among the moral sentiments, Self-esteem, Love of Approbation, and Cautiousness; "because," says he, "they have in their uses a decided moral tendency." Self-esteem he

regards as "the basis of all true honour, dignity, and moral greatness," and as "that which exalts the mind above meanness, servility, and baseness." We suspect that few of our readers will here concur with Mr. Clarke; for humility, which is the only result of deficient Self-esteem, is neither inconsistent with "true honour, dignity, and moral greatness," nor necessarily accompanied by "meanness, servility, and baseness." When directed by higher faculties, Selfesteem, Love of Approbation, and Cautiousness, have doubtless, like every other mental power, "a moral tendency;" but still, in themselves, they have no tincture of morality. Indeed, we have long been much inclined to the opinion that the received list of "moral sentiments" is far too extensive; and that Benevolence, Veneration, and Conscientiousness, are the only affective faculties which exercise a disinterested control over the animal powers. So far as we are able to perceive, neither Hope, nor Wonder, nor Wit, nor Firmness, nor Imitation, exercises any such control; and even Ideality can hardly be looked upon as a barrier in the way of selfish indulgence, at the expense, or to the annoyance or disregard of other men. Every one of the six faculties last named, may be so harmoniously leagued with the propensities, as to start no objection whatever to the performance of the most immoral acts.

In the third and concluding lecture, Mr. Clarke treats of the human intellect, and the necessity of cultivating and enlightening it before Christianity can be fully realised. "As the intellectual faculties," says he, "are the only media of access to the moral sentiments, and the moral sentiments are the only instruments by which the animal propensities can be duly restrained and beneficially directed, virtue, piety, and true religion, must be in proportion to the strength, activity, and harmonious co-operation of the intellect and moral powers. It has been said, that 'ignorance is the mother of devotion.' But of what devotion? Can ignorance produce the devotion of the wrapt-ennobled soul? Can it send forth the devotion of Christ? No. The devotion of ignorance is low, grovelling, superstitious; it is mere fear, tinctured deeply with the dark colouring which the animal nature has given it. It is false devotion. That which is true, is ever brightened highly by the glowing tints that the combined energies of the intellect and moral powers have impressed upon it. There is no beauty in the devotion which is the offspring of ignorance; its parentage is base; the issue is of but little worth; too often has it proved worse than worthless. It has led men to fanaticism and persecution-to the commission of the most atrocious crimes, and the infliction upon themselves and others of the direst miseries. It has given the name of religion to that which

was positive madness. But such insanity was never produced by hearing the Word and understanding it, and receiving the good seed into the good ground of the mind. Thirty, sixty, or a hundred fold of bigotry, anger, wrath, and malice, are the very counterpart of those fruits of love, and joy, and peace, that the religion of Jesus is designed to produce; and by their fruits shall ye know them.'

a man hath not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his.' But to know what that spirit was, requires the exercise of both the perceiving and reflecting powers. The fundamental command, Learn of me,' cannot be obeyed without a vigorous use of the intellectual faculties; but the more carefully these are trained, and the more assiduously the moral sentiments are at the same time cultivated, the higher must the individual ascend in excellence, true religion, and positive enjoyment."

ARTICLE V.

REPORT OF AN OPERATION FOR THE REMOVAL OF A LARGE RONY TUMOUR, CALLED SPINA VENTOSA OF THE SKULL.

BY GEORGE M'CLELLAN, M. D.

Professor of Surgery in the Pennsylvania Medical College.

[The following cut is introduced for the purpose of illustrating one of the most interesting cases that has ever occurred in the history of surgery. As it involves facts which have an important bearing upon a correct knowledge of the functions of the brain, we have taken some pains to obtain a full and accurate account of the particulars in the case. This engraving is carefully drawn from the bust of an individual who, about two years since, underwent, in this city, a most severe surgical operation for the removal of a large bony tumour upon the vertex of the head. The cut represents very correctly the cicatrix of this tumour, the operation for the removal of which was performed by Dr. George M'Clellan, whose skill and success in surgery is certainly not surpassed by any other surgeon in the United States. What is most interesting and important in this case, is the peculiar and marked change that occurred in the character of the individual soon after the operation. The following communication, describing clearly and minutely the facts in the case, has been kindly furnished us by Dr. M'Clellan, and cannot fail to interest every reader.-ED.]

Early in the month of December, 1838, Thomas Richardson, a resident of the city of Pittsburg, called on me for surgical aid. He was then twenty-two years of age, and had been afflicted about three years with a tumour upon the vertex of his skull. About six months before the first appearance of the tumour, he received a severe blow from a missile on the affected region, after which he occasionally experienced tenderness and pain there. As the tumour gradually increased, it produced a determination of blood to the head, attended with a sense of fullness and a giddiness on stooping. But he was not deprived of any intellectual power; nor were any of his sensations or muscular actions disturbed.

The tumour was very hard and unyielding, and had been pronounced to be an exostosis by every surgeon who had examined it. It was oblong in shape, being four inches in the long, and three and one-fourth in the short diameter. It was raised in the centre about one and three-fourth inches above the surrounding portions of the outer table of the skull, and extended from about an inch beyond the sagittal suture on the right side obliquely to the left, and backwards over the adjacent portion of the left parietal bone. It occupied, phrenologically, the organs of Firmness, Self-esteem, Approbativeness, and a part of Cautiousness, on the left side.