The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1838-01-30 00:00:00

R.UIkiBALL'S SECOND LECTURE ON
PH ULNOLOGY.

On Tuesday evening last Mr. Runibalt delivered his second
lecture on phrenology, at the Medical Institution.
we were obliged to omit this lecture in our last publication
for waist of space, and we have thereby got one'ins arrear. We
must in eoneerraente, from the great length to- whicit the-lee-
tureg extend, givU them in brief,, so far as possible, emiraeting
the iubsiance.
tie lecturer commenced by saying that he must notice some
remarks and errters with regard to his lectures, which appeared
in the. Lire, pool Siandwd. He had corrected in a letier stone
inaccuracies which had crept into a report of his first lecture,
owing. to the crowded slate of the 'imn peeve-to iog the itenitter
takOteg notes. Ile should have been content to have left the
matter there, lAt that with great generosity the Siaartard had
given him a very long, and he must say, alto sing for souse little
variation! in the precise shade of sentiment he hail expressed, a
very accurate report; and they had been pleases!. also to make
some remarks on that lecture, to which be feat it net,ssacy to
allude. He had usually put dowu the opponents of phrenology
with a very short sentence, by asking what Ihoe knew of phre-
nology, and the answer had always been "nothing." Now the
&and-art.; did know something about it, but it had-even said be,
fo:fe'liis time that "a little knowledge was a dategeroesthing"
Holten proceeded to contend that phrenology Was "suiron-
sition." It these were any science which dis.lainen sueposi-
Lions, which discarded theory, which said " we will only go ita
the Newtonian doctrine of deductions" from facts. loon expe.
fleece from any one matter in which the mind of matt has been
octuated, which said we will have no theory for or against,
which said if you will show us anythiug that is supposition we
will discard it; it was the science of pito enology. li thee called
botany a science. which looked into the nature and habits
plants. if they called zoology a science, which looked into the
character aria habits of animals, and physiology, a science
which looked into the nature of diseased structures of Irving
bodies, why phuuld they not call that a science which took cog-
nizance not only of all this but of man; his mind, anti body, and
understanding, what was the end of his being and the means of
obtaining it? In the allusion to the objection we Urged that
inter al or inferior developments of the braid, which were con-
cealed, might indicate contrary propensities to what the de-
velopeinettis of the soperficies did, and overwitehu them, and
that therefore so long as only a part of the brain was taken cog,
nizance of, no certain knowledge of a man's capabilities and
character eoutd be obtained from the surface of the skull alone,
and what therefore became of the science of phrenology? the
lecturer denied that it was any argument against a science
cause it was imperfect. It was craneology which the eiiitor of
the Shrew/a:4 had mistaken for phrenology. He said " phre-
nology only means the knowledge of brans, and character ob-
tained through an examination of the skull." Now that was
craneology. It was a branch of phrenology; but if men. had no
eternal
.heir heads were buried in fur caps, phreno-
logy would still be a science. Phrenology meanings knowledge
or).he mind, end especially a knowledge of the mind as maul-
Tested by oiganitatiou, yOu might be as accurate a phrenologist
now as Jr you never saw another skuil, or if you did not apply
it to parts equally with the skull. It was a science whirl shoisld
knock down every other, because it gave you a true hsxlirry of
the human mitel whin no other science had attempted ; Or if
attempted bad failed. He denied that he had said the soul had
always been considered mind. What he said was that the soul
by the generality of philosophers had been considered mind.
He knew that the Siaadard was correct, that the old :philoso-
phers considered ;win to consist of three things, mind, soul, apd
body. Let them.show him any one fact whereby they could
show the existence of two immaterial essences, and then he
would allow that man was composed of three distinct prim iples.
But if they could not do that they would agree witb him that it
was a dispute whether the mind was the result of organization
like life, or a first principle, au immaterial principle. If it were
an immaterial principle they could know nothing about it what-
eter, except it was manifested to them, and he had-stated that
the-dlapiite hail arisen in his mind upon words, as most disputes
hart arisen. Men had been taught to consider intelligence and
mind the result of organization from seeing the dependence of
mind on organization. Ile contended that the phrenologists
were riot Materialists. If the soul could not keep op the memory,
and jddgment, and feelings of the mind, it would go out of the
world a blank, a tabla erasa as it canoe into the world, accord-
ing to the theory of Aristotle. Therefore the soul hail the pro-
perties of the Mind, and therefore the mind was the soul. But
the. Strict rule of logic said you had no right to assume
two causes when one was ; therefore if the emit per-.
furnsed all the Itintitions, which had been eousidered to apper-
tain ti intelligence and mind they were the same. Men bad
selitAlseinselves into sects, and had become advocates of ma-
terialism or tutmaterialistre bat that did nit affect-the question
of the soul at all. If we denied that animals had souls, taking
the anal as the. mind, we denied oinselyes, Mind was not the
result of organization, and yet animals had minds. Whether
or tie they they had souls to be saved was a matter which no
philosophy could answer. and what no philosophy would attempt
to answer, .That, they had something that took cognizance of
the:acne of the body, nobody could deny; but, that they had
so4lsArr Lie, saved, no man could contend for. The Bible only
muse tie their guide. He cootended that phrenology threw a
geeater light on the natural application of scripture than any
likttsgPt. • If ever he fou'ud phrenology opposed to the,Bible,
he wool:. say phrenology must be false. He alluded to the

doctrine of Dr., Prl`Cartney, not being able to conceive how the
brain could act' in pat ts.and not' as a Whole, it was so intimately
connected that no traces of any division couhi not be fermi.
He couttl not say that he had'a very brilliart idea of his intellect.
Couk he 'conceive how dividing the sift it pair pair of nerves
&mulct affect the tins of a donkey or his own tins that- he should
not he able to put lips to trod, or not be able to take it up.
He knew he could nut conceive anything abouZ the brain, as
connected with the mind. NO anotomist of the brain had ever
told them the least ihing alenn the mind. In aoswer to Dr.
Alacariney's ii.siance of a man having a pitchfork driven
iuio his brain, 'and losing some part of his Wain, and yet per-
fecity revovering, and not having his mental functions (lest nrired
at ail he it, he contended he knew twirling about phrenology ;
the reason why his meuta! functions were not disturbed was,
because the other parts of the brain . could perform their rune-
lions. Mr. tturnball then gave a brief recapitulation or the
heads of his last lecture, before proceeding with the lecture of
site evenite. CO/11,:ntiireileSS was placed about an inch behind
and on a level with the top of the ear on each side of the head.
It was bestlexhibited in the bull-dog. Every mart knew-there
wasan inamense difference between a brave man and a coward;
every man knew that the brave man was instant in courage in
opposition to any thine; whereas the coward would quail before
any thing. He had examined Sam Scott's head, the jumper,
and he found Courage very well tleYeloped, and firmness greatly
developed. But he was insane, ache should show. Combative-
ness, was not a quality likely to be suddenly eirovoked..but when
provoked it was like a weaponput into our hands by Providence
when wanted, which' should • cut. down every thing before it.
Sir 'Sydney Smith had this faculty very fullv'developed, and
Lord 'Howe.- He did not know what fear was.' He quoted a
number 'of examples of the power of this faculty—Joan of Arc,'
Lord Cockrane, Paul Jones, &c. The large aevekpement of
this faculty predisposed to the commission of 'violence, if not
checked by other faculties. Those who had this developement
very largencould be looked upon as less guilty by•the Almighty
then many a man who committed sin less in degree, bet with
greater powers of controlling it. It rested .between man and his
maker; but it would serve them to read that text, that in the
day of lodgment "the last should be first and the first last."
A man who had this -developementrnustnut necessarily become
a matter to it ; he had the power of Controlling it. lie *as re-
sponsible to both God and man for his conduct, and bound to
control it or meet punishment. Secretiveness was-the next
faculty ;• 'it was very strongly developed in some kind 4 of birds,
and in squirels. Man had it in his nature, and endeaVoured to
conceal by it that which he had acquired. 'lt was in its abitse
that we 'saw this faculty display itself in the most powerful
mariner. It taught men to conceal 'their thoughts. Men with.
out this faculty, whonold everything they.knew, put themselves
-in die position to be imposed upon by every one. Wellington,-;
when a minister, when asked what lie intended to do, answered
" Why. it' L thought the hairs of my head knew what I .intended
to do l-would have my head shaved and wear a In its
abuse it led to lying. if a man was so secretive as to conceal:
what ought to be known, he would conceal it right or erring:.
and tilt ineans•reas so ready at hand as a lie. They would find
Wbettever se,,-eiiveness formed a decided part of the character,
'that the head was enlarged above destructiveness—from the
latter part of destructiveness to the forehead, surrounding de-
s‘ructiveness, Acquisitiveness was the. next organ.. It showed
self in animals in the desire to acquire, and was greatly mani-
fested in themagpie. In its unrestrained action it led men to
-aenuire io spitetof everything.. The lecturer gave several
'eeanaples of thise,old Elwes; Daniel Denser, &c. •Curt,iouseess'
was the next organ. It was said to he circumspection looking
about. it was not timidity. It tended to self preservation.
lierd Eldon had great cautiousness. He could' never decide
.roe.conscientinusness and cautiousness, and be • did moreab-
settee wrong by following out the impulses of his cautiousness
than ifhe had been hasty. Cautiousness was very common to.
the female sex; and secretiveness and acqusitiveness'weie also
verycoin mon to them. The American Indian exhibited this
feature'very strongly; he never attacked an enemy in the
front. It was•exhibited in- the great width of thee-back part of
the ,ead. The• Hindoos were said to have it very large. It
was the combination - of these qualities that formed character.
Love of approbation was the next quality. The dog,. the horse,
and the peacocle all passessed it. The pig and the sheep had it
uotat all. Amongst mankind, females were-particularly dis-
tinguished by it. It was very largely developed in the female-
charaeter.• lint it tended to some of their best qualities as
females; though in its abuse it was derogatory tolliem. The
wmrran that. did uoreare for the praise' of herboshand would
Wake •atverv. so-so wife. la its abuse•they had' the constancy
andeaffeetiOn of the tried lover frittered away in a thousand
pieces bv•being exposed to the concombery of many. Self:
esteem, was the next organ. If man's mind were made up of
understanding and propensities only, why then they would
have men, as he' had heard them btasphemousty cared, hair
beasts and half devils. But, though lie possessed propensities
in coalmine with animals, they had no centrolling power, and
therefore we did not look on animals as committing theft or'
murder; marched this controlling. power. Marc had implanted:
inlinn!by the Divine Being powers essentially-ontkrsert in'their •
nature to the !ewer propensities, and it was perfectly possible
sir arsy•man to vont rol these propensities. Every man not lean•
enidint or a lunatic, in a greater'or less degree, possesse-i suffi-
cient control over his organization, therefore man was respon.
sibleno God and to society. •

Mr. IZurn--'u-ail—c*O-n-cide.cl his lecture at ten o'clock.

THURSDAY'S LECTURE.

On Thursday evening Mt'. Rumball gave his third lecture on
phrenology, at the Medical Institution. Mount pleasant.
In commencing be said be was afraid he should not give a
satisfactory lecture that evening, as he had been exceedingly 111
and hadhail no time for preparatiun and that therefore instead
of drawing, on memory for facts he must thaw on hitactuat'
knowledge or the subject, He had omitted one ol- the propel).—
sities in his last lecture, which was common to man and ani-
mals, that of ronsirticiiveness. If they exnunioed birds and ani-
mals, they saw a very great difference in their• habiiii in this
particular. They saw some with a very great powerof con-
structing or fashioning their nests and habitations, thebeaver.
for instance whose habitation was large and of a complicated
construction. They found o:her animals of a-much higher de-
gree of intelligence without the smallest sign of. this faculty ;
the horse and the elephant for instance. Some animals build
their habitations in a.very beautiful manner, in a. manner that
could not even he imitated by man with all his ingenuity. This
was evidently not the result or reason, otherwise man would be
able to imitate and surpass these constructittns because his reas
s•m was superior. Moreover they would fin'lnn uniformity of
construction. The bird bunt in a cage, if let out, would build
the same nest as its kind. II t was clearly, thetefore, an instinct
which impelled them into a certain line or conduct; so long as
it. was nit counteracted by some other instinct. Man had this
instinct, and it was not. the result of reason in him, because it
deielhped itself very early in youth' before, reason develo:ied
itself: Peter. ahe Great was a sitin-builder, andaftetwards a
watchmaker. sand they had many instances of kings and em-
perms amusing themselves in mechanics. They must also
have remarked the very great difference in Fatties is the con-
struei ion of bonnets and caps, and some milliners would far
iordass others inthisiesnect, not because they were of Snneribr
intelligence. Gall w'aa.struck with the width of the head just
beatind the eyebrow in those who had a taste for mechanical
pursuits.. They would find that amongst men-eminent for me-
chanical ingenuity, their hrows.swelled in that natlicular snot.
They might expect that those who had this facally would delight
in having their thinigh;s and expressions arranged' in order.
Lure of opprobalion belonged' to the higher sentiments. It was
said that the higher sentiments evidenced a:certain indefinable
emotion, well known to the metaohysicians of old, which. they
could better understand than dese.ribe. W hen in early youth
we were praised, we all knew that we had undefined emotion
which we. could not describe. So in adhesiveness when you met
your-friend; but that was placed amongst the lower 'faculties,
From /ore of opprobalion they went tin to self' esi.enz. 'lt was
was a pritilaryone. Gall _save the
allowed that this feeling
name of hauteur twits abuse. ft was essential that man should
not be left to the capriciousness of others tot anplobat ion. That
Lis love of aparohatiun should not receive its cue from the coin-
pany.hefell info. He would thrrt be a weathercock veering round
to the opinion ()revery luau. Therefore nature had given to him a
feeling which acted as a silent monitor, not of right and wrong,
but or his "rn'"z up to hid own satisfaction or contentment or
not; and when a inan lost his self esteem, or self respect, be any
act whatever, he would fee! exceedingly the value of tiris•senti-
anent. It was more developed, in, the English than the French.
The French had love o/ approbation strongly developed, the
Ems:lists, set,' esieein. The French looked on the English as
prond and haughty, and the English on the Ft ench as frivolous.
Jr had been attributed to animals, but he thought improperly.
The peacock did not hold its- head up because it was proud, but
strutters to (4-bit its peahen. The pio-cd man was known by his
walk. The late Lord Salisbury went througit the whole of the
continent it was said, wi hoot once touching the haul: of his
carriage; he was so proud that he would not lean even throe (a
lasts:ht. Rut if 17 rid e taught a inart to seek for his own ap-
proval, and if it would pro-serve him as it would most effectually.
in default or better feelings, from giviros way to his lower pas-
siring, his self esteem was his best possession, and if it wuuld
keep him from' associating with those whom he constueted below
his character, he could see nothing of this feeling whatever in
man.. The race horse would as soon lie down with the cart
horse in the commonest shed, as with his biotiter in his own
well aired and ventilated statute. In bolding this opinion he ran
• counter to other phrenologists. They saw self esteem more in
its abuse than in its 'legitimate ocrupation which was to •
keep Man in his self respect—to preserve him from falling
in his rank of life, whether moral or statistical, in which
it had pleased God to place him. But in its abuse it
aeeceunlished strange results, and made trier fancy themselves
kings, and persoits iufinitely above what they were. He knew
one man who waaltvays looking after great people, and if he
did not see them he used to fancy he saw them. Vanity and
pride were by mane writers eonfounded, but they were as mm.
site as light and darkness. The vain man was not what Gad
had Marie him, but what lie had acquired. He was not satisfied
with his own opinion or himsetf, but pleased with the opinionv.
anthem He went cap in hand, asking of everybody theft'
mite of approbation; bot tlie proud man was far from wishingl
your approbation—he despised it; it passed like's shadow over
bit mind withoutt touching it. What was the natural result of
this? That he was a very contented man, anti that ambition
was not one o;"1 he at tributes of self esteem, as declared by Cox.
What did ambition mean? To get oat of the position aou are
in. 't he proud man was col-fleeted if as ignorant as au urn amid
as ugly as Romeo Coates. The man who was most proud of
himself teas frequently the most ignorant. Because it was quite
evident that the man who arts most satisfied 'with himself
would not try to•improve, and, therefore, sell' esteem was for the
ionivirlual a most desirable quality,. but for society and man-
kind it was one of those qualities which ought to be kept under
much enntroul indeed. The next quality was benevolence.
The-benevolent man would refuse charity with a kind word, but
the man devoid of it would spurn the beggar though he gave a
penny.•
It was said to belong to animals. • The horse dealer
knew a good tempered home by the reuntlness of his forehead.
If•ever volt buy a horse with a hollow forehead and narrow eats,
he assurer) voni will have a vicious had tempered Loose. Bene-
volence taught a nantrtrado good to auottler to, I lie sacrifice of
himself. It eats a very line feeling, but a feeling as little prac-
tised. by-the %odic at large as possible, and as inuelt lauded by
the .pit.blic as postilite. Whenever a mat) did a benevolent
action to his (two wrong, he wastauded as the finest individual,
and laugher) at as a
great fool. Ile instanced Sir Fraucis Bur-
dett as an example on his faculty, which lie loot very largely
developed, amid he attributed Sir Francis Burdeirs exertions in
early life to relieve the oppressed, and him whom lie considered
as suffering wrong, to this faculty.
_As men grew older they
were obliaed to modify this faculty in the present false state of
society. It taught 'men to avoid cruelty. A benevolent roan
would not half kill an animal and hang it up to gloat en its
agonies, as be 'hail heard of 'a botcher doing; therefore it was a
softener. Whenever they found individuals gifted with that
quality, whatever their irritability of temper, they would always
had the good of their fellows at
find that in their hearts they
heart, and in spite of their misfortunes they would always be the
pleasanter people to live with. But they would not succeed in
life; they would not be able to go and turn the (+lidless widow
into the street out of her house; they would not be able to
wring the last farthing from the debtor: but as plen:y would do
that to them, these would get their tights and they would not,
and must go to the wall. .Never: heless it was one of the finest
qualities. It was developed in the front of the top of the tote-
head. It was the part which the hair last left, as if old time lett
a lock there to its honour. Veneration was the next faculty.
The Almighty had revealed himself to man, and had commander,
him not to worship him as the result of season, not because he
should think it right to worship him, and tie told man that it
should be the first impulse of his mind. The traditional reve-
lation of the Deity bad descended to the present time amongs t

all lands. The North_ American Indian, in his worship, used
almost the very words, "Our Father who art in heaven." He
believed. in the great spirit, and called him Father. It was.
(dear that they only, did so from, traditional. evidence, not from
any re:tanning of their own. When the traditional evidence of
the Deity was- lost; atan's reason set up degraded notitins of the
Deity. There was not one Deity but mane, as, in Greece.
They deified whatever they - admited. ttensoia could .not dis-
cover anything reating to the Deity. The Romans tiad.deilited
heir emperors, and tbus became idolaters • of Ibe worst. kind.
The 11 indoo betrayed a much li;glier notion of the Deity. He
was no sufficiently a historiau to know how catty they had se-
oarat eil from the original stock, bet they seemed-to have carved
away a much more beautiful philosophy in the Vedas,the scrip-
tures of the Bralimina, which were believed ai by 80,000,000 of
people. "The Supreme Being is not to be comprehended by
reason; not to be conceived .by devotion or virtuous.. practices
beyond the limits of the explanation of the Vedas, and•not to
be compassed by any human faculty whateve..." They went
further, they defined the Supreme-Being as being•Hiru loin
whom the universe proceeds, who was the Lord of the universe,
ant, whose work was the universe. This was a far superior doe-•
trine to that of the Greeks or Romans. God bad commanded
man to worship him, and had given him the faculty to worship,
him. This did not depend on ,reason it was clear, because
'Christ had said, " These things were hidden from .t he wise •and'
learned; and revealed unto babes." 'Therefore, infants had the
faculty to worship Him. This faculty, ii', not tightly directed,
, • wouldjusf as soon worship•a cow as the .true Lord, and, there-s
fore, the intensity of a man's piety was no proof of the truth of,
his religion. In• itsnaause it .led• to• very great evils. 'This
• faculty,. from a tingularcoincidence, formed the key -stone of the,
arch of the head. They would find that,in men-who were eminent
for this pious feeling—this impulse, the middle or the top of the
head was very prominent indeed.. He • instanced a :likeness of
St. Augustine as an example. The abuse of this faculty de-
.stroYed its object. He knew a lady who was on her kneesseven
hours a day, who had an exceedingly fine mind, and he never
saw her do a kind ton, or heard a kind, sent intent from .her, she
was altogether occupied in the worship of Gad. t excited the
greatest • bitterness of feeling; history recorded instances of
children having lieenalaahed brainless on the pavement; and the
mother thrown iuto the flames,- the result •of this feeling. In
insanity, veneration ft equent ly occupied the whole, mind. This
faculty led in',co,tseientiousness. Animals had not this feeling,
The horse never refused to take food from his. neighbour's
manger; and it was this faculty whicluessentially distinguished
man-from all created animals., Firmness was the• neat quality,
and was said to esist most . where active courage .was wanting,.
Gives firm man time to -collect his thoughts and to.measurohis,
antagonist, and then he became a man capable of carrying him-
self througlnalanger as well asthe physically brave man. It
was a feeling which would be a very good-substitute for the
physical courage of Sam Scott, who saw-no danger. and whq
told him that if he would pay him 100 guineas he 'would jump
from the top of St. Paul's iuto_the,area. If a line were drawn
from the chin, through the ear to the salient portion at the top
of the head, • there- they- found -the•organ of self esteem,; and
firmness was between self esteem and :veneration. The Ninth
American Indian. was very largely made at that part of the
' head, and no tot tureconld makelatin utter ta,groan• When his
persecutors were blowing up his skin With guupowder, instead:
of groaning, he was taunting. them. Another faculty was hope,
which was situated on either side of veneration.. He did note
thick it apt irnitive The• sanguine man hoped . wheel
hope was lust ; it Was a happrdisposition.. There was a faculty. •
in the mind which animals had. not,- which gladdened the life of
man; there was an imagination and a play of fancy.which the
money-getting man. had little not ion.of. He could not walk in
the fields but the song of the birds had a sweeter tone for him.
He lived in a world of his own; he lived, find
,was despised by
the world below him, but the world was immeasurably- below
him. This was the faculty of I(:eality. The poet was born not
made. Ile might labour for ever-at shoe-making.- hut ifhe had
nut ideality and became a, poet, he (Mr. lininballl would be-
come- a shoemaker.. This quality was situated on. either side of
their head below benevolence-. Wont er was a higher order of
ideality. and was situated beside it. More than half the
suicides of this land were committed under the direction and
orders of what-the pour infatuated iiidiyittuat. thought spirits.
'They now came to-Sam, Scott, and he had done what no other
individual had done with• impunity, and did, it because he was
insane,. Ile had told him, that one night at twelve o'clock, a
spirit came -to his bed side. and tidal him he was to go through
these,exercises and take those jumps, and that he could dolt.
The spirit came to him over-and over again,- and at last. he did
it, and flew he *as constantly doing it. These were- the moral
faculties given liy-God to repress• the lower propensities.*
*- We have so many points to notice in the preceding lectures,
and the space allotied to us is necessarily so confined, that we
hardly know where to begin or which to cull. Passing over
Mr. Rumball's introductory observations in his second lecture,
as introductory, we cometo his arguments. He first strenuous-
ly contends that phrenology is a science—one " that goes on
the Newtonian doctrine. of deductions. from facts," and that it
is not any argument against a science because it is imperfect.
Both these positions-we takeleaveto deny. What-is the mean-
ing of the science of any thing, but that all about that thing is
known-and understood, •or, at- least, that that which is con-
fidently spoken of is fully knoan and understood ? Would the
mathematician call mathematics a science if he could only
demonstrate one-third of a problem, and come to no conclusion
whatever as to the other parts, whether they bore out his de-
tnonstration of the one part or subverted it, and thereforearrive
at no matherratical,certuinty as to his right demonstration of the
whole problem-? Why, the mere tyro mathematician of a day
would laugh at- the absurdity of such a proposition, And we
maintaiu that the• cases- are parallel. The phrenologists- hold
that the convolutions of the brain are the orgal-is of it, and that
on their relative- fullness depends- th&stsength.of the faculties
attributed to those organs: Take-this theory: 'The convolutions
of the brain-denote its organs. Mr. Rumimil instanced a con-
volution, as being under the organ of ronnhativeness. lie also
instanced that whereatte convolution to whict, phrenologiats have
given the faculty of veneration was wanting, the man was not ne-
cessarilydestitute ofreligion, as other faculties-might in a great
measure supply its wants, of which the phrenologist on exami-
nation would judge, by the deveopement of the other higher
faculties, benevolence, conscientiousness, self esteem, &e, The
phrenologists have two-thirds of theconvolutions of the brain
only, front which to draw conclusions. Tnere is an extensive
surface of more intricate and larger convolutions—therefore, it
is-fair to presume, on this mode of reasoning, of faculty de-
pending on convolution, of more intricate. and• extensive
faculties—on the surface-of the cerebellum, of which the phreno-
logist cannot take any cognizance. Therefore, he demonstrates
the whole from its part; and dues this leaving out all the intri-
cate-and interior structure of the brain. But, if• the 'man desti-
tute of the faculty of veneration must not necessarily be-devoid
of religion because other moral faculties may supply the
deficiency, the opposite argument must also be allnwed that a
man' with immense combativeness, acquisitiveness, sectetiveiress,
together with the want of benevolence, must not neCessarily be
a villain, a thief, or a murderer,. because- other faculties may
overpower these so largely developed; and whether other facal-
tiesdo so-ovet power them or not, the- phrenologist cannot tell,
because he cannot see, nor know all the faculties. Then
what becomes of the demonstrated certainty of character
from phrenological observation? Why there is no certain
knowledge;' all is guess work and "supposition," and phrenology
is, • therefore, no- science at all. Mr. Rumball says, "in our
last arguments we spike of craniology not of phrenology."
This is a distinction without a difference; for both words are
the-same essentially in meaning, and are used indiscriminately
by most writers on. this subject for the same thing. The cra-
niologist maps out the cranium into faculties, and the phrenolo-
gist by a different name does the same things We do not un-
derstand what Mr. Rumbell means by "if men's heads were
buried in a fur cap von might be an accurate phrenologist;" •
and to be a phrenologist he further on explains 10 mean to have •
E think"a knowledge
ne
findby oarugtaan, irnz aattilo.rsi
amount
oNuVnet
of reneration for instance. on the principles of phrenology if be
poufzzmleitAhliz.alturnmagairlels-
• had a fur cap on his head! We will stay a moment, however,
before we proceed further, or we shall trespass beyond oar li-
mits, and revert to the. convolutions of the brain,
and to the.
phrenologists' " Newtonian doctrine of deduction front facts."
And first we ask is it a deduction from facts that the con volu-
tions of the brain are the faculties thereof? Certainly, says the
phrenologist, for from observation we find certain. faculties in-
dicated by certain enlargements of the bead, under which by
anatomy we find convolutions. This we deny, as a false de-
duction and coot rary to facts. Because the convolutions of the
brain, according to Spurzheim's own plates, are irregular in size
and form in different heads, and present no more approach :to
unifurmity than the windings of the small intestine. 'Therefore
there ran be no coinparing of blains-in this way, for men have
not all the same convolutions of the brain, differing only in
developeunent, but have different convolutions. So much for ,
this deduction. But the organ for combativeness,, for instance,-
as other organs are said to do, exists on both sides of the head,
and the two organs act the same as the two eves in the same
way. Now leaving aside the anatomical facts that all the dis-
coverable fibres of the brain converge to one c.eutre front the
surface, ensuring, as it were, concord and imity iu. the whole
brain, that there is no discoverable fibrous or oilier connection
between the two organs separately on each side of the head, we
come to the fact that the cocvolutions- of. the brain, which are
the developed faculties of it according to the phrenologists,
di, ger on di pent sides of the same head, and that on the showing
or Spurzhenn's own plates; therefore there must be a difference
of faculties on each side of the head, and not a duplicity pro-
vided by nature to ensure the continuance of function in acci-
dent or disease of the one; so there is tan end of that argument,
and so much for that Newtonian deduction from facts. • Let
us enquire what are the facts. Man when he decides on any
thing, does it qhickly, with his whole mind, and promptly
follows out. his mental decision by action, in numerous
instances Of daily occurrence, this is done "as quickly as
thought," showing unity of determination carried out into
actiou When a man 'delays coining to a determination
—considers a point, his judgment takes cognizance of it in
every shape, and of the impulses and biaSes of his own mind
also, and decides the question on its whole merits, and on that
decision the men acts, sometimes against his impulses, which
give in to his judgment, showing unity. It is remarkable phre-
nologists have given judgment no place in the head! The ana-
tomy of the brain discovers several series of white fibres, all

converging towards one centre, the spinal :narrow; and the
whole structure of the brain shows indivisible complexity, and
therefore leads to the conclusion of the unity of the organ.
Floureus, a French anatomist, found, by experiments,
that as the cerebrum of a bird was cut away by degrees, by
degrees it lost the power of motion all over the bodyorgan—nr4
of,parts of the body, nit by bit—proving it to be the
of motion, not of sensual passion. On cutting away, in
'slices, the cerebrum of a chicken, he found it lose its faculties
by degrees—sight, hearing, smell, taste, perception—that he
could go to a certain extent without destroying the functions of
the hemispheres, that of each hemisphere was enough for the
performance of all its functions, till at last on cutting the whole
away it was found in a state of apathy, but still had the full
power of motion. It could dy when thrown in the air, and tun
when impelled forward, but knocked against anything in its
way—yvas devoid of faculty, and would starve if not fed; " it
was without desites, without cares, without pains, without
pleasures," and in this state it lived for ten months and got fat,
and died through neglect. On these grounds may we not con:.
elude that the brain is one organ, and that the fact related by
Dr. Macartney may so be explained—that a person may lose
a part of the brain and not lose his faculties, but only
lose them in degree. According to the phrenologists he must
lose that faculty v hich was injured only. We have several
cases to quote to prove this portion as well grounded, and as
the only rational position, but time and space will not permit
us now to give them. But we shall recur to this subject. Only
imagine the condition of a man on the phrenologists' theory—
possessed of 24 or 35 distinct faculties, with no bond of union;
now, and at the same moment, impellediq beszendenceto charity,
and by acquisitiveness to meanness ; now, and at the same mo-
ment, impelled to fight by combatireness, and witheld by cau-
tiousness; now, and at the same moment, impelled try secretire.
ness, to tell a lie, and by sell-esteem to scorn it—why a man by
this stale of things would he eternally playing at see-saw within '
himself. without any fixed.principle on which to act,,and would

, ..
go about a living type of Mahoniet's coffin. ever suspended be-;
tween right and wrong.. We have a better (and 'we trust a
well. founded) opinion of our race, and ground it upon the
almost innumerable examples of men having followed .out one

strong ment.il determinant...o through every obstacle that could

oppose or seduce.

A barrister was apprehended a few digs since on a charge of
attempting to pick pockets in the Regent's Lark.