PHRENOLOGY WITH PHYSIOGNOMY. 271 



time, fashion the hard outline of the features. But when there is 

 only a moderate capacity — that is, when there is nothing de- 

 cided in a character — the face will then be a bad index to read, par- 

 ticularly if we desire to understand the subject in a definite manner. 

 The features, when in a quiescent state, can only furnish certain 

 arbitrary rules to judge by, as all kinds of disposition, every variety 

 of temper, and every modification of the intellect, are found associ- 

 ated with similar typical forms of noses, mouths, chins, &c. I 

 know a person with high mental qualifications, having features of 

 a Roman cast, and another, equally talented and moral, with fea- 

 tures resembling some kind of Monkey. The expression may be 

 extremely similar in persons whose features are nevertheless very 

 different. In these cases, the persons have invariably a similar 

 cerebral organization, although they are unlike in the form of their 

 features. Hence, in the science of Phrenology, there is considerably 

 more certainty in our examinations than there is in Physiognomy, 

 although both are interesting in forming conceptions of character. 



We have abundant evidence that there exists a general harmony 

 between the features and the head, similar to that which is to be 

 traced throughout the whole of the bodily organs of an individual ; 

 there is an individuality in every organ. But how absurd would be 

 the attempt to decide the mental qualifications of any one by his pe- 

 culiar gait or stature, or by the form of the hand or arm, &c. ! It 

 is quite another thing when we have to judge by means of the ce- 

 rebral organs : having ascertained their numbers and their func- 

 tions, and how far the mental power is modified by the size of the 

 whole brain, or its separate organs, under certain conditions,* we 

 may be more accurate than by any other species of investigation. 

 Our knowledge of the functions of the cerebral organs is as correct 

 as the certainty of our knowledge of the functions of the eye or the 

 ear. I now proceed to offer some proof of these statements. When 

 there is anything like a definite character, the phrenologist cannot 

 fail to recognise it ; but the individual he examines may have na- 

 tional or family features similar to many commonplace personages. 

 These may be considered exceptions to physiognomical rules, but 

 they prove that these rules are less to be depended upon than are 

 the phrenological data. Suppose a person is examined with the 

 base of the brain and back of the head (basilar and occipital regions) 

 larger than the moral sentiments and intellectual faculties ; we 



* The modifications alluded to are the bodily constitution or tempera- 

 ments. 



