J42 NATUHAL THEOLOGY. 



branes, except the skull. Why should not the brain be con- 

 tent with the same covering as that which serves for the 

 other principal organs of the body ? The heart, the lungs, 

 the liver, the stomach, the bowels, have all soft integuments, 

 and nothing else. The muscular coats are all soft and rL>cm- 

 branous. I can see a reason for this distinction in the final 

 cause, but in no other. The importance of the brain to 

 life — which experience proves to be immediate — and the 

 extreme tenderness of its substance, make a solid case more 

 necessary for it than for any other part; and such a case 

 the hardness of the skull supplies. When the smallest por- 

 tion of this natural casket is lost, how carefully, yet how 

 imperfectly, is it replaced by a plate of metal. If an anato- 

 mist should say that this bony protection is not confined to 

 the brain, but is extended along the course of the spine, I 

 answer that he adds strength to the argument. If he re- 

 mark that the chest also is fortified by bones, I reply that I 

 should have alleged this instance myself, if the ribs had not 

 appeared subservient to the purpose of motion as well as of 

 defence. What distinguishes the skull from every other cav- 

 ity is, that the bony covering completely surrounds its con- 

 tents, and is calculated, not for motion, but solely for defence. 

 Those hollows, likewise, and inequalities which we observe 

 in the inside of the skull, and wliich exactly fit the folds ol 

 the brain, answer the important design of keeping the sub- 

 stance of the brain steady, and of guarding it, against con- 

 cussione. 



