( 11 ) 



II. — On Dreams. By the Rev. James Wills, D. D. 



Bead May 28, 1855. 



J-N all inquiry to which the name of science can have any just application, there 

 should be found some data capable of being precisely observed, and communi- 

 cated with suiEcient evidence. The theories of the human understanding offer 

 many exceptions. Too often, the experimental instance, from which alone sure 

 inferences can follow, is not only confined to the mere apprehension of self- 

 consciousness, but even removed beyond the scope of immediate or direct atten- 

 tion. It is, indeed, to be observed, that it seldom occurs that the processes of 

 the understanding are themselves the objects of thought; they are, for the most 

 part, so involved with whatever may happen to be the subject matter of consi- 

 deration, that it is only by a very laborious and difficult effort of recollection 

 and analysis that they can be recalled and separated. If such obstructions are 

 to be encountered in direct observations of the mind in its normal state, it may 

 be felt with how much diffidence any attempt must be entered upon to offer a 

 distinct and grounded theory upon the most vague, indistinct, and evanescent 

 operations in which the thinking faculty can be engaged. 



Under this and other difficulties from the same causes, with which I will 

 not weary your attention, I offer the following observations and inferences 

 both as illustrative of views already submitted to the Academy, and as a further 

 contribution to that mass of experiences on the ground of which the theory of 

 mind may, at least hereafter, attain some reliable substance. 



It would, I am persuaded, be a hopeless undertaking to ascertain upon un- 

 questionable ground of observation the initial process of the mind in dreaming. 

 Mr. Stewart, with his usual facility, has offered very specious explanations; but 

 these I have already shown* to be inconsistent with his own Uieory, as also 



* Transaction?, Vol. xix. 



b1 



