*

"In another of my scholars, Augustus H., I observed, as soon as he came to me, a considerable development of Secretiveness and Acquisitiveness, and on this account kept a strict eye upon him. I knew, however, of no instance of the t committed by him, and made no inquiry after any such, I, on one occasion, shewed my collection of skulls, arranged in a neighbouring room, to my scholars, and shortly explained the use of them. In the evening, after the close of my schoolhours, when all the scholars were gone, I wished to compare some specimens, and found that several small skulls were wanting, and nowhere to be found; and immediately my suspicions fell on this boy. Next day I inquired privately of two of his comrades, if they knew of any thefts committed by him. They mentioned that his parents had already been forced more than once to pay for articles stolen by him from shops. When he and the other scholars came back to me, I mentioned to them in a soft, friendly manner, that these skulls were missing; that nobody had been in the room where the skulls were kept since they had been there; that one of them, from liking, must have taken them; and that, if the individual who took them would candidly acknowledge his fault, I should not punish him in the least: but I added, in solemn earnestness, that although the guilty one should not confess, yet I knew him, and now looked on him. No one, however, pleaded guilty. With friendly admonition I asked each of them individually, if he had taken the skulls? but every one assured me that he knew nothing concerning them. H. cast timid and sly looks around him, betraying inquietude, but without blushing. Immediately I broke out, seized him, tore him from his seat, gave him several heavy blows on his posteriors so that he cried, and thrust him out of the door, with these decided words, "Begone! bring me the skulls, otherwise never enter this school again!" And, behold! after dinner, before the other scholars assembled, he came to me with the skulls, and, deeply ashamed, begged for pardon. I admonished him earnestly alone, and after the other scholars came together, on his conduct. I do not know whether he afterwards committed any other thefts."

It occurs to us, on reading this narrative, that Mr Schlatter probably might have made a better moral impression on this boy, if, when he saw him troubled by conscious guilt, he had encouraged him more assiduously to confess. The boy's demeanour shewed the existence of an internal struggle between the moral sentiments and the propensities; and it is often difficult for young delinquents to muster courage to act on their higher impulses, when they are conscious of having

done wrong. A little kindly encouragement will often enable them to do so; and only after all the higher motives have been tried in vain, does it become expedient to move them to virtuous conduct, through the medium of their selfish faculties, by blows.

Mr Schlatter mentions the case of another scholar, who, by falling into the ditch of the town, fractured his skull, and lost a portion of brain on the left side, as big as a pigeon's egg: nevertheless, there was not the least trace of diminution in the power of manifesting the faculties whose organs lay in the injured region, viz. Constructiveness, Tune, Number, and Time. The corresponding organs on the right side remained uninjured, and seemed to manifest the faculties successfully.

Our limits prevent us from noticing several other interesting cases reported by Mr Schlatter, as well as from entering on the second and third parts of his essay. Part second is on the differences between the right and left side of the body in man and animals; and part third, on the possibility of a physiognomy possessing the character of a branch of natural science. We agree entirely with him, not only that Gall's discovery of the functions of the brain has rendered this possible, but that Gall himself advanced a considerable way in executing the idea. We observe that the German editor mentions, in a note, that "the modest author (Mr Schlatter) here expresses a wish which he himself has accomplished. The editor is in possession of a manuscript work by him, illustrated by many hundred drawings and copperplates, on Physiognomy founded on Phrenology, the result of the experience of a lifetime." The editor requests that any printers or publishers who may be willing to disburse the expense of printing and publishing it, will apply to him. If such a work were well executed, and embraced the application of physiognomy to the fine arts, it could scarcely fail of success.

The next article in the Journal is an "Examination of the Development of the Brain of Mr F. W. Hackländer, by Dr Castle of New York," in which Dr Castle's usual analytic power and profound discrimination are shewn. After this follows a short article by the editor, calling on Dr Gall's correspondents to preserve, and, if they are inclined, to send him for publication, the letters of that eminent man; and he gives a jac-simile of the letter dated 26th February 1807, written by Dr Gall to the Finance Minister of Saxony, Mr Blöde, of which a translation has already appeared in our pages, (vol. xvi., p. 394).

The "Short Notices of Books," by Dr Scheve, are at once

pleasing and interesting. He cites the objections urged in 1805 by Ackermann against Gall, (many of which are nearly identical with those brought forward by Dr Gordon in No. xlix. of the Edinburgh Review); and shews how extensively Gall has already triumphed even in Germany. Ackermann denied, and, as was then believed, completely refuted, Gall's anatomy of the brain; yet that very anatomy is now taught in almost every medical school in Germany, and forms the groundwork of the best recent publications on the subject in that country! Dr Scheve next notices Dr Frederick Arnold's treatise on Human Physiology, quotes from his pages acknowledgements of the truth of the great and leading principles of Phrenology, and replies to the objections which he urges against particular doctrines. Dr Arnold, like many other able men, appears to recognise the truth of Phrenology just so far as he knows it accurately; and, where his knowledge fails, he substitutes fancies of his own, and refutes them, believing them to be Phrenology.

Dr Scheve next notices a work entitled Psychologie, oder die Wissenschaft vom subjectiven Geist, von K. Rosenkranz, ordentlichem Professor an der Universität zu Königsberg. 1843. "Rosenkranz," says he, "knows very little of Phrenology; but he is just so much the more disparaging towards it, and confident in himself, although his own views are, in a corresponding degree, weak, offensive, and untenable."

The Number concludes by an interesting selection of miscellaneous notices. A copious index is appended, completing Vol. I. of the German Phrenological Journal, extending to 484 octavo pages. Long may the editors persevere in their high and useful vocation!

Our limits do not permit us to notice at present the 5th and 6th Numbers, which we have also received.

II. The Fallacies of our own Time. By OLIVER BYRNE, late Professor of Mathematics, &c., and Professor JOHN BYRNE, Norfolk, Virginia, United States, &c. First Part: FALLACY OF PHRENOLOGY. London: Sherwood & Co. 8vo, pp. 79.

Such is the title under which the most impudent and "fallacious" pamphlet of " our own time" is ushered into the world. The "advertisement" prefixed to it informs us, that "This work, the object of which is to discuss the principal fallacies commingled with our sciences, laws, religion, educa

tion, and conventional usages, will be published in twelve parts; each part will be complete in itself." The Fallacy of Phrenology forms part first, and the subject of the second part will be "The Fallacies of restricted Trade and Monopoly." Though "London" is on its title-page, the pamphlet is evidently from an American press.

Judging from the profound ignorance of the simplest principles of physiology and mental philosophy, as well as of phrenology, which pervades this work-from the disregard of truth, consistency, and reason, which are displayed in it—and from the tone of self-conceit and arrogance which runs through every page-we cannot conceive a greater mischief happening to Free Trade, than that Messrs Byrne should become its advocates. Punch lately remarked that the calamities of unhappy Ireland were about to be consummated by the author of The Great Metropolis writing a book about it! In the lowest depths there is a lower still. Let the Messrs Byrne write a book in defence of Ireland, and her cause will be ruined for ever.

As a specimen of their facts we select the following:"The theory of Phiz. has long since ceased to be advocated; but the protuberances on the cranium seem to be on the meridian in America; though, in Europe, Phrenology has descended far below the horizon, and can be seen by reflection only"! (P. 5.) The French, German, and British works on Phrenology, noticed in our last and present numbers, will serve as an answer to this assertion.

As an example of their ignorance of physiology and their powers of reasoning, we take at random the following remarks:

"Now, the very idea of making the mind of man depend* merely on the increase or diminution of any part of his body, is, indeed, self-contradictory; it brings man below the brute; for it approaches to the vegetative. Again, to conceive such a tender and delicate substance as the brain forcing out such a hard and durable material as the skull at a mature age, in particular places, is almost argument enough to upset this anagram of a science in its first commencement." Nothing can exceed the illogical inconsequence of these propositions ; while the authors, at the same time, appear not to know that it is a recognised law of physiology, that the soft parts give form to the hard; or that the "particular places" of the skull receive their form from the brain, not, in the general case, as here stated, "at a mature age," but in youth, when the brain and skull are both increasing. But even in mature age the

* Here they omit, what phrenologists constantly include, the words, "for the power of manifesting itself in this life." 2 c

VOL. XVII.-N. S. No. XXVIII.-OCTOBER 1844.

soft parts give form to the hard. Did they never see a hydrocephalic head, in which the "tender and delicate brain," when distended by water, had enlarged the "hard and durable material of the skull ?" Did they never hear of the ribs falling in, when the lungs decayed, and were no longer able to support them, although the lungs are as tender and delicate as the brain?

There is no proof, say these critics, that "the brain is the organ of the mind; it is not self-evident; it only amounts to a conjecture, and one of the lowest degree; because it rests on the argument that the premises assumed cannot be disproved!" This needs no comment.

·

Again they say, "It is a fundamental doctrine in Phrenology, that every faculty is originally good ;' and that the legitimate exercise of every faculty is virtuous.' If this be one of the axioms of Phrenology, instead of being self-evident, it is not true, nor has it even plausibility to support it!" (P. 41.) What, then, becomes of the wisdom and goodness of the Creator?

On page 57 they inform us that "There is a curious fact, not irrelevant to the present subject, as it illustrates the nature of the brain; at least, as far as regards the lower animals. Naturalists have discovered that large flies sometimes enter the brain of the elk (or generate there), and eat the brain almost away before the animal dies." They do not mention how this "illustrates the nature of the brain;" but we may infer, that, as they deny it to be "the organ of the mind," and do not assign to it any other function, they mean us to understand that it is a fungus created for the purpose of feeding flies—" at least, as far as regards the lower animals." We suspect, moreover, that Thomas Moore is the "naturalist" on whose authority they rely for the fact itself; at least he is the only one quoted by them. He says :—

"In the woods of the North, there are insects that prey
On the brain of the elk, till his very last sigh!

Oh, Genius, thy patrons, more cruel than they,

First feed on thy brains, and then leave thee to die."

As Messrs Byrne are discussing the talents of men and animals, we recommend to their notice, as an important contribution to their next edition, another fact, resting on an authority in natural science, which they seem to have deeply studied, although we do not observe that they have anywhere honestly quoted it.

"The trout and salmon

They played backgammon,
All in the river's tide so fair."
Groves of Blarney.