תמונות בעמוד

phrenzy, caught up for the time being, is manifest from the radical nature and tremendous scope of their plans of improvement. They mean to begin with the babe, at its first entrance into being. No sooner does it breathe the vital air, than it shall inhale the delicious odors of phrenology. They mean to carry this new regimen forward through all the stages of its ascent to the maturity of being; so that all the notions of men, political, social, moral, intellectual and religious, are to be dyed through and through in the new colors of this science. They intend to root out the old ideas of teaching and preaching from among men ; since, in spite of them, we still have the abounding ignorance, iniquity and misery of a fallen world. They see clearly, how their inventions can remedy these disorders. To this end, governments must be torn down and re-constructed, education metamorphosed, and religion new-fangled, according to the latest phrenological discoveries. Thus they stand ready to give, nay, they volunteer lessons of wisdom to parents, rulers, teachers and divines, who, poor souls! have groped blind-fold these sixty centuries, without a gleam of light from the doctors of craniology. We shall verify this statement by and by, in more distinct and formal propositions, when we shall attempt to canvass the justice of these pretensions. We will here briefly notice each of these volumes separately.

The first work on our list, by Mr. Combe, treats, as its title imports, of the Constitution of Man, considered in relation to external objects.” He begins with a chapter on law, which he defines to be " a rule of action.” There are three classes of laws, applying to as many different orders of being. First, the physical laws, which govern mere dead inorganic matter. Secondly, the organic laws, according to which, life and organization proceed, and which sway the vegetable and animal creation. Thirdly, the rational and moral laws, which control the intelligent and moral nature. In regard to these laws, he insists on four points. “ 1st, Their independence of each other ; 2dly, Obedience to each of them is attended with its own reward, and disobedience with its own punishment ; 3dly, They are universal, unbending, invariable, in their operation ; Athly, They are in harmony with the constitution of man.” He then, in the second chapter, treats briefly of the physical laws, which relate to man; next, of his organic laws; and thirdly, what is evidently the denouement of the

whole,—of the mental faculties. These he surveys through his phrenological glasses, and here he appears to be at home. He provides us with no less than thirty-three “fundamental faculties," each of which is domesticated in some corner of the skull. All these faculties have their laws, which rule in the lobes of the brain, where they are seated. Violation of these laws, entails misery on ourselves and offspring: to obey them, consummates our felicity. The third

chapter goes on to show, that the miseries of men result from infringements of the laws of nature. Three sections are devoted to the three kinds of pain following the violation of the three sets of laws, physical, organic, rational and moral. The concluding chapter sums up the whole in an effort to show, that the prevalence of phrenological views will cure all maladies among men, whether of the soul or body. On the whole, if we except Mr. Chenevix, of whom we shall soon speak, Mr. Combe is by far the most respectable and decent writer whom we have consulted on this subject. He is less arrogant and presumptuous than his compeers. He shows none of their overweening vanity. Instead of their reckless contempt for the master-thinkers of the human race, he displays a chastened and becoming respect for them. He has all the philosophy and little of the sciolism of pbrenology. He is a clear thinker and writer. He shows facility and vigor of style, and encumbers it less frequently with phrenological barbarisms, than most of his co-laborers. Abating the grievous errors which belong to these works as a class, it contains many entertaining and instructive facts, and much judicious and valuable remark.

The volume by Mr. Levison has its contents sufficiently indicated by its title, if we only add to it five words, thus,-Mental Culture; or, the means of developing the mental faculties by the aid of phrenology. Mr. Levison, we suspect, is a physician. At any rate, he is familiar with the anatomy of Gall and Spurzheim. So far as we can judge, he ranks much below Mr. Combe in mental power, discipline and culture, and especially in the range of his reading and acquirements. He has not been humbled in his pretensions, and chastened in his style, by communion with the great masters of thought and diction. Hence his pages bristle too much with self-conceit, dogmatism and denunciation. His composition, too, though not wanting in freshness and vigor, is apt to be clumsy and verbose, entangling itself too much with the contortions of long sentences, and too little redeemed by their inspiration. Like Mr. Simpson, he betrays the want of that classical training which both assail. His book opens with a fierce onset upon current doctrines, and their advocates, imputing to them the most driveling imbecility and malicious wickedness. He insists, that men cling to their ancient beliefs, either from a dogged and willful blindness, or that, seeing the light, they conspire to exclude it from their fellow-men, lest they should be smitten down by its dazzling brightness from their places of authority, honor or enjolument. He claims, that the opposition which men show at seeing the phrenological improvements undermining all which they have ever deemed and felt to be true, is malicious persecution. He spices the story well with accounts of the antipathy and contradiction which every important discovery has had to encounter at its first announcement; so that we are left to infer, forthwith, that phrenology, with its whole retinue of contemplated changes, must be a valuable discovery. True discoverers are sometimes driven to the adoption of this plaintive tone. But quacks are generally loudest and most vociserous in wailings of this sort. We confess, we begin to suspect, when we hear them. Having finished his exordium, Mr. Levison brings forward his table of mental faculties, which is substantially the same as Mr. Combe's. His views and explanations are likewise nearly the same, though set forth with less skill and ability than by his master. The subsequent sections apply these principles of mental philosophy to the rectification of prevailing ideas of intellectual and religious education. With much that is judicious and proper, on these things, is mixed much that is weak and foolish, as we shall hereafter see.

The next volume in our list is Mr. Simpson's. It professes to relate simply to popular education and criminal law. His treatise might more aptly be entitled, the application of phrenology to these subjects. He is evidently a hearty, downright phrenologist, though he does not avow, or directly recognize, the fact. He seems as shy of such words as “organs," * frontal,” i sincipital,” and the like, as if he had constructed an index expurgatorius, containing the whole phrenological vocabulary. The artifice, however, is of no avail. He is too well disciplined under the phrenological drill, not to show his good soldiership, though he hangs out no colors, and flourishes no regimentals. Of course, he feels and writes very much as other plirenologists do.

His first chapter portrays the condition of the laboring classes in Great Britain. Some of their characteristic feelings and vices he describes with uncommon clearness and discrimination. In his second chapter he treats of defects in the education of the higher classes. Here he does not well understand himself. In bis third and fourth chapters, he goes through with an analysis of the mental faculties on the phrenological basis. In the succeeding chapters, he applies bis scheme to the work of education, first in infancy, and then through the successive periods of growth. There is also an appendix, containing a chapter on "efficient protection from crime," " homicidal insanity," and a report on the conduct of an infant-school at Edinburgh on the new model. His style, though vigorous, shows the want of that classical study which be opposes. His sentences are often trails of cumbrous involution, in direct contrast to the grace, perspicuity and polish, of the classic idiom. His book, however, contains much valuable information.

Mr. Chenevix's article, which first appeared in the Foreign Quarterly, is, on some accounts, the most praiseworthy document in the whole catalogue. It is by far the neatest and most scholarlike in style. Its air betokens more calmness, candor, and selfpossession, than belong to its partners. He is evidently well drilled in that classical routine, which, unlike most of his fraternity, having enjoyed, he does not despise. In short, he is a scholar and a gentleman. The first part of his article is an interesting delineation of the growth of phrenological science, through its successive stages, from its first crude conception by Gall, in bis boy hood, while noticing the fondness for language of his oc-eyed school-fellows, to its supposed perfect demonstrations in the hands of Spurzheim. The latter half is a summary of the phrenological argument, pro and contra, canvassing the reasons of the doctrine, and the benefits likely to flow from its universal reception. Although he wears the aspect of an unbiased judge, yet his prepossessions are all on one side, and he dextrously throws the whole current of the argument into the wake of phrenology. Nevertheless, we know not where else to look for a statement of their doctrines, arguments and pretensions, at once so ingenious, so winning, so compact, yet lucid and complete. None of their works is so free from foolish pretensions, and, on all accounts, so likely to incline a plain man favorably towards the scheme.

The last book on the list is well known. We have brought it forward, not so much for the sake of describing it, as because it is ultimate authority with phrenologists, and contains the germs of all the truth and of all the error which run through the numerous progeny that have sprung from it. If we have occasion to refer to it, we shall feel assured, that we speak from the oracle.

of the anatomical and physiological relations of the subject, we have spoken out our sentiments in two preceding numbers of our journal. We shall not now meddle with the hobby of these men, as to bumps, organs, etc., since in one of the treatises under review, the thing is not mentioned, though the faculties are, in every case, arrayed in the exact phrenological order; so that on this point, we suppose, there may be doubt or credence salva fide. But these writers are not content to take the anatomy of the brain as their grand arena of distinction. They ground their claims on the sweeping reform that they have in preparation for mental science, religious doctrines, political economy, and education, both as relates to its nature, extent, and comparative importance. In doing this, they are leaving their proper home for a strange land, to whose atmosphere they are not yet acclimated, of the nature of whose soil they are ignorant, and of whose extent and bearings they have taken no mensuration. They show out all the awkwardness and improprieties of strangers. Here we propose to join issue with them, more particularly since most of their lucubrations have, and are meant to have, a religious (some perhaps might say an irreligious) bearing. Here they tread on sacred ground, which we are set as sentinels to defend. And until they do better than they have thus far done, we say to them, -Procul, procul, este profani !

The first doctrine of these writers which requires examination and comment, is, that they have been the first to discover a true science of mind, based on immutable facts, differing from all former philosophy, in substituting observation for conjecture, and capable of accounting for all phenomena. Almost every page and line expresses or implies the import of the following passages :

• Before the appearance of Drs. Gall and SPURZHEIM, mankind were practically acquainted with the feelings and intellectual operations of their own minds; and anatomists knew the appearances of the brain. But the science of mind was very much in the same state as that of the heavenly bodies prior to GALILEO and NEWTON.' Combe, p. 278. .

• The theory of mind advocated in these pages, has a more solid claim upon your attention ; for instead of being suggested by the imagination, it originated in observation upon men, and its merits will be unimpaired by time or human weakness, because it is based on a foundation of facts.' Levison, p. 105.

* The general key which effaces all contradictions from every moral manifestation, is phrenology.' Chenevir, p. 78.

Indeed, Dr. Spurzheim and his followers scarcely write a syllable, except on the supposition, that former systems of philosophy were vague, shadowy, and purely hypothetical. In volume second, he applies his new gauge to the notions and systems of all preceding philosophers, and fulminates a common anathema upon all, because they show a want of conformity to his standard.

Now, what is the ground of these pretensions? For the proper answer to this question, let us glance a moment at the state of mental science, as the phrenologists found it, and compare it with their notions.

The philosophers who pursued their inquiries without the aid of this new guiding light, observed, or thought they observed, in man, bis body fearfully and wonderfully made, having all the physical properties of matter, the conditions of organic life, the affections and sensibilities of animal existence, such as the five senses, and a susceptibility of pleasure or pain. They further saw, that these capacities were so modified and ennobled by their co-existence with other faculties yet to be mentioned, as to be superior to the merely animal nature of brutes. All this they, in their simplicity, took to be matter of fact, attested by observation; and so far as they deduced any conclusions from it, they imagined themselves building on fact, instead of hypothesis. They supposed it to be no less a fact of observation, that man can retain and re-produce the

« הקודםהמשך »