that it was only in such individuals that I could find striking differences of the head, and that I could distinguish well-marked protuberances."* Since the announcement of Dr. Gall's opinions, there have been many discoveries in physiology, and numerous pathological researches bearing upon the functions of the nervous system. These have not shaken the system of Gall, but, on the whole, have strengthened it. In fact, I am confident that opinions respecting the brain being a congeries of organs exercising different functions, and the probability of learning something respecting the functions of the brain by the external examination of the skull, would have been by this time advanced and embraced by many, solely in consequence of the physiological and pathological discoveries and researches to which I have alluded.

So far as regards my personal observation on this subject, I am compelled to say, it has not been great. The attention I have given to it has, however, impressed me favourably. I have never found any striking instances in contradiction of what Dr. Gall considers established. For three years I have been a director of the Connecticut State Prison, and have had abundant opportunity of examining and comparing the heads, and learning the character of several hundreds of prisoners. I have not, to be sure, embraced the opportunity thus afforded of studying this subject as thoroughly as I might. Still, I have not been wholly neglectful of it, and can state that I have found, in numerous instances, confirmation of the opinions of Gall.

In conclusion, I consider this method of studying the functions of the brain deserving of the attention of medical men, who, of all others, have the best opportunity of testing its correctness and determining its value, particularly by pathological investigations.

ARTICLE III.

ON THE HARMONY BETWEEN PHRENOLOGY AND THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF REGENERATION.

Many good people have had their fears excited, lest there should be some discrepancy between the principles of phrenology and the doctrines of revelation. They seem to forget this important fact, that the God of revelation is also the God of nature, and that, consequently, the laws of the latter, when correctly interpreted, must necessarily be in perfect harmony with the truths of the former. It is impossible, in the very nature of the Divine attributes, that the will of God, as revealed in his Word, should contradict his will, as manifested in his works. If there should appear to be any discrepancy between natural and revealed truth, the cause, and of course the error, must originate entirely on the part of the creature, and not on that of the Creator. The advocates of phrenology have at different times attempted to

* Gall on the Functions of the Brain and each of its Parts, &c., Vol. 3.

show the harmony which subsists between their science and the essential truths of Christianity. We have presented several articles of this nature in the Journal, and now take pleasure in copying another, on the Scripture Doctrine of Regeneration, from the fourth number of the Edinburgh Phrenological Journal. The writer, (whose name is not given,) after some prefatory remarks, presents us with the following excellent essay :

The first step of our investigation must be to state distinctly what the several doctrines in question are; if they are once understood, it will not be difficult to make their consistency apparent.

The following, then, I take to be a correct statement of the respective doctrines:

The doctrine of phrenology is, that the strength of the different propensities, sentiments, and intellectual faculties, with which any individual is endowed by nature, bears a relation to the size of different portions of his brain; and may be ascertained by examining the configuration and dimensions of his cranium.

The doctrine of Christianity is, that all men, whatever be their natural character, are called upon to repent, to believe in the Saviour, and to turn from sin to God and holiness.

Now, the objection drawn from these doctrines has been twofold: 1st, In the first place, there is an inconsistency said to lie in thisthat if a man is proved by phrenology to have a bad natural character, it is impossible for that man to obey the gospel-call, to turn from his evil ways, and to walk in the paths of righteousness.

To the objection, when thus stated, the answer is extremely obvious; and it is this, that, if it be an objection to any thing at all, it is an objection, not to phrenology, but to Christianity. Phrenology does not pretend to make men's minds, but simply to know them as they have been formed by the hand of nature. That there are great natural diversities in human character, and that there are some men naturally very bad, no person will deny; and if any one chooses to say that this undoubted fact militates against Christianity, we reser him to the divines for an answer to his objection. But to impute the objection to phrenology, which merely asserts, and proceeds upon this fart, already known and allowed by all, is very short-sighted, or very perverse. Every body knows that there are some men by nature extremely wicked. Such characters may be discovered by common observation. Phrenology furnishes another mode of observation by which they may be discovered. But as to their capacity of embracing Christianity, we leave that as we found it. If their having bad natural characters does indeed incapacitate them from embracing Christianity,

the incapacity arises from their character, and not from our becoming acquainted with it, either by one means or another.

2d, But the objection has been put in another shape, which will require somewhat more attention. It has been said, if the characters of all men are fixed down by the boundaries of their crania, in the determinate way which phrenology presents, how is it possible that they should undergo that total revolution which Christianity requires? When a man is converted, is his whole cranium new modelled? Certainly not; and what I now proceed to show is, not only that the doctrine of regeneration, as laid down in Scripture, does not imply any change of the original powers and qualities of a man's mind, but that Scripture most distinctly and expressly declares, that no such change does take place, either at conversion, or at any future period of the Christian's course, and that the native elements and constitution of the Christian's mind remain unaltered till his dying day.

In order that the full import of the proposition now announced may be understood, and that its effect in reconciling the doctrines of phrenology and Christianity may be distinctly perceived, it will be necessary to expound at somewhat greater length the doctrines of the two systems which have been briefly stated above.

And, first, with regard to the doctrines of phrenology-I have stated, that the phrenological doctrine is, "that the strength of the different propensities, sentiments, and faculties, with which nature has endowed any individual, may be ascertained by examining the configuration and dimensions of his cranium." It is the primary elements of intellectual and moral character conferred by nature, which phrenology proposes to discover, and nothing else. It does not pretend that the cranium gives information as to the actual attainments which any individual has made either in intellectual or moral pursuits. It reveals a man's capabilities and tendencies, but not the extent and manner in which these may have been fostered, controlled, and regulated, or neglected, crushed, and perverted.

Circumstances and education have an extensive power in modifying human character. Both the intellectual powers and the moral qualities are alike subject to their influence; the good may be cherished, or it may be thwarted; the evil may be checked, or it may be pampered and nursed into unnatural activity. The mode in which these causes operate upon the human mind, is not very material to my present inquiry. It is obvious, however, to remark, that every mental power and disposition has certain external circumstances which are adapted to its nature, which excite it into activity, and form, as it were, the element in which it naturally moves and acts. By placing any individual, therefore, carefully and constantly, in VOL. II.-26

circumstances which exercise one set of his faculties or dispositions, and by removing and separating him from those circumstances which would exercise a different set of his natural faculties or dispositions, the one class of exercises becomes familiar and habitual, while the individual remains unacquainted with, or becomes estranged from, the other class of exercises. It is moreover possible, indeed it is what is done every day, to fix in the mind itself certain maxims, rules, and motives of conduct, which propel and stimulate in one direction, while they restrain or form, as it were, a barrier in another direction. One course may be made to appear to the mind as fit or honourable, or as profitable and satisfactory in the long run; while another course is made to appear unworthy, degrading, unsatisfying, and in the end ruinous. This may be regarded as only a different modification of the influence of circumstances over the mental functions. It is the bringing of future and distant circumstances, of indirect and remote consequences into view, representing these vividly, and impressing them strongly upon the mind. Whether the representations thus made to the mind be true or false, they are taken by the mind to be true-as true as existing realities; and it is this impression of their reality which gives them their control over the workings and habits of the mind. But without stopping to illustrate this subject farther, I observe that the fact, that circumstances and training have an extensive sway over the human mind, is beyond all dispute. Now, phrenology does not stand opposed to this plain truth; nor does it pretend that a man's whole circumstances, education, and history, are stamped in the shape of his skull. It does not pretend to gather one iota of these from an examination of the cranium; and the whole effects which they are capable of producing upon the character are, and are acknowledged to be, utterly beyond its ken. What it has to do with, are the natural endowments of the mind.

To speak more correctly, phrenology affords external indications by which we can estimate the relative strength of the different powers of the mind as bestowed by nature, and it thus furnishes a key to the discovery of the effects likely to be produced by any combination of circumstances on the characters and dispositions of different individuals; but it affords no indication by the observation of which we can tell in what circumstances an individual has been placed, or which of the faculties possessed by him have been most cultivated and excited.

But the natural endowments of men's minds are as various as are the natural dimensions and proportions of their bodies. The influence which circumstances and training exercise over mind and body, is great; but it is still limited. It will never make either mind or

body anew. A pigmy cannot be converted into a giant; a puny and sickly constitution cannot put on the strength, and be nerved with the power of a Hercules; a clumsy and deformed man will never be made a model of grace, or the champion in athletic exercises. And as it is with the body, so it is with the mind. There are pigmy minds, and there are gigantic minds; minds puny and morbidly weak, and minds of Herculean nerve and prowess; clumsy minds and awkward minds, cripples and deformed; and the variety of these natural mental frames and constitutions is, at the least, as great and as conspicuous and undeniable as are the diversities of corporeal form and power.

This, then, is the province of phrenology; and a wide and legiti mate province it is, and one which it is easy enough to distinguish from the province of circumstances, education, and habit, with which it has been too often ignorantly or designedly confounded. The phrenologists do not pretend to tell whether a man actually speaks Greek, or writes poems, or commits murders. What they undertake to do, is to tell how far a man possesses the natural powers which, under proper circumstances, would enable him, with ease or with difficulty, to attain either to high or to moderate excellence in any. branch of intellectual pursuit; or how far his natural tendencies, either to good or to evil, are strong or feeble. But whether all or

any of the powers and qualities of his mind have had scope and opportunity to exercise and display themselves, whether the mind has been raised and stimulated, and sustained in its exercises; or whether its good qualities have been damped, or its bad qualities disciplined and brought under control, phrenology does not inform, and the phrenologists do not pretend to tell.

If there is any strong natural peculiarity—and every person knows what is meant by a natural peculiarity, and how distinguishable it is from what is acquired and artificial-if there is any strong natural peculiarity in any department of mind, temper, or character, the phrenologist will have no difficulty in detecting it, though nothing should occur in his presence to call it into play, or though it should be habitually concealed, so as altogether to elude the notice of ordinary observers. And it is thus with every one individual faculty and quality, whose separate and independent existence our science has revealed to us. We can say in what degree any person has the capacity or tendency to exercise or indulge it; but whether it has been manifested according to its native strength-that depends not only on the capacity-which we know, but upon circumstances and opportunities-of which we know, and upon which, therefore, we will decide nothing.

The doctrine of phrenology is now, I hope, pretty distinctly under