/o 



MISCELLANEOUS, 



Phrenology. — A skull was sent, by one of the members of tli« 

 literary society at Chatham, to Dr. Elliotsoii, the distinguisliccl 

 President of the London Phrenological Society ; and the opinion 

 of the Society was requested respecting the character of the 

 individual to whom the skull had belonged. Dr. EUiotson's 

 reply : 



" I exhibited the skull, with which you favoured me, to the London 

 Phrenological Society Ht their last meeting, and we were all perfectly 

 agreed upon the character of its original possessor. The Society, how- 

 ever, never delivers a judgment upon character on any Phrenological 

 point; but when an opinion is desired, leaves any member, or private 

 individual, who may think it proper, to do so. 



'• I take it for granted that the deceased was of soun'l mind ; but to 

 be acciuate, we should likewise know how far he had been educated, 

 and whether his constitution was active or inilolent. 



" Ignorant of these particulars, I should say, that he was a man of 

 excessively s'rong passions ; that these were far an overbalance for his 

 iniellect; that he was prone to great violence, but by no means courageous ; 

 that he was extremely caafi'cus anrf s/i/, and fond o{ getting ; the animal 

 propensity must have been strong, but his love of offspring very remark- 

 able. 



" I can discover no good quality about him, except the love of his 

 children, if he had any. The most staking iH<f//<'c/K(i/ quality in him, I 

 should think, was his wit. This must have been not only great, but pro- 

 bably of a dry cast. 



" He might also have been a good mimic. 



Dr. Elliotsoji had the satisfaction of being assured in reply — 



" That his explanation of this character was sin^vhniy correct in every 

 particular, affording a new and powerful proof of the truth of phre- 

 nology." 



His correspondent, however, informs him that many persons, 

 unable to overturn the facts of the case, turn round and sny, 

 ^' that he must ha^■e had some ])revious or private intimation of 

 the character of the individual in question. He puts the fol- 

 lowing questions at once openly to Dr. Elliotsou: — 



" Is your detail of the felon's character drawn solely and entirely from 

 the shape of the skull ? 



" Had you any previous information whatever as to his past life, habils, 

 or education?" 



Dr. Elliotson's Reply. 



j "Sir, — I beg to assure you, that I drew my conclusions as to tli« 



1 character of the individual solely from the size of ihe various parts of the 



skull; and lliat up to the moment of receiving your letter yesterday, I 



