On Phyftognomy. 437 



fubftance of his remarks, and difproportioned 

 to the occafion.* 



4. His remarks themfelves, in numerous 

 inftances unfupported by the illuftrations, and 

 fometimes, apparently oppofite to common 

 obfervation.* 



5. His too great reliance on fingle features, 

 as the foundation for deciding on a chara6ler.-j- 



6. His premature opinions on the phyfiog- 

 nomy of the ears, hands, nails and feet of 

 the human fpecies ; on hand writing ; on the 

 phyfiognomy of birds, infeds, reptiles and 

 fifties. On none of thefe can a fufficient num- 

 ber of accurate obfervations have been made, 

 to warrant the flighteft conclufion. J 



7. His 



* Inftances of thefe I think will occur frequently, 

 efpecially on perufing his Phyfiognomic Remarks on 

 the illuftrative engravings, but of thefe each reader 

 will be the beft enabled to -judge for himfelf, until the 

 fcience fliall put on a more fyftematic form, than the 

 prefent collodion of obfervations will permit. 



t That there is fuch a thing as homogeneity, and 

 harmony of feature there is no doubt, but the inftances 

 of exception are fo numerous, and the illuftrative cafes 

 fo fcaitered and unarranged, that it appears to me inju- 

 dicious prefumption in moft inftances, to decide pofitively 

 on the obfervation of a fingle feature. "^ 



X The old phyfiognomifts who (in the fpirit of the 



times) would in no wife have omitted to treat the fubjeft 



Jyjiematically, were on that account induced to take into 



F f 3 confideration 



