PHYSIOGNOM Y. 
ducing them, by petty bribes, to confefs their own faults, 
and betray thole of their companions. He excited them, 
for inftance to fight together, in order to difcover which 
pofl'effed moft courage; and thence drew inferences as to 
the organ which prompted that fentiment. In order to 
obtain more precife data for his conclufions, he endea¬ 
voured to procure models of the more remarkable heads 
that he met with ; and generally got permiflion from the 
individuals themfelves to take a call of their heads in 
plafter of Paris. The Count of Sauran, then minifter of 
police at Vienna, gave him material affiftance in effecting 
thefe objeCts; and he was thus in no long time in pofiel- 
fion of a very large collection of calls, all bearing more 
orlefs upon the feveral points of his theory. If he hap¬ 
pened to hear of the death of any one whofe head he had 
already moulded, he was at great pains to procure his ficull, 
that he might compare the form of its different parts with 
the lhapeofthe head during life. And thus he contrived 
to amafs an extenfive collection of fkulls in illuftration of 
his dodtrines. He next availed himfelfof the aid of com¬ 
parative anatomy 5 and, having no family to provide for, 
fpared no expenfe in procuring fkulls of all forts of ani¬ 
mals, with a view of tracing the form and fize of corre- 
fponding organs throughout the whole feries. Being 
phyfician to the ellablilhment for the Deaf and Dumb at 
Vienna, he had opportunities of obferving the natural 
features of uncultivated minds, and the various degrees 
in which they were fufceptibie of education. With the 
■fame view, he ufed to call together into his houfe perfons 
■of the lowelt clafs, even beggars from the fcreet, and ex¬ 
cite them to difplay their characters before him. His 
profefiional practice made him acquainted with a great 
number of families, and afforded him many opportunities 
of making valuable obfervations. He negleCted no means 
of inltruClion that could be derived from the infpeCticn 
of the heads of patients labouring under different forms 
ofinfanity. He was phyfician to the director of eftabliih- 
ments for education ; and was allowed to examine every 
child who excelled, or fnowed any remarkable difpolition. 
He vifited the prifons and houfes of correction, as well as 
the hofpitals for idiots and lunatics. He took cads of 
the heads of criminals, inquired into the offences for 
which they were confined, and collected the hiftory of 
their lives. 
Having thus derived from every quarter materials for 
bringing his theory to perfection, he affociated himfelf 
with Dr. Spurzheim, a man of extenfive obfervation, who 
multiplied and varied his experiments. The refult of 
their conjoined labours brought thefe authors to the fol¬ 
lowing conclufions. i. As had been long believed, that 
the brain is the organ of all mental operations. 2. That 
the minds of men, from their birth, differ as to povvpr and 
bias. 3. That, contrary to the general opinion that the 
brain performs the office of a common fenforium, to which 
all kinds of imprefnons go, and from which all aCtions 
• are derived, it is competed of many diftinCt portions, each 
made to receive one peculiar impreffion, or to produce one 
peculiar aCtion. 4. That, provided health be prefent, 
the power of each faculty is in direCt ratio to the fize of 
the particular organ. 5. That, as the brain is formed 
'firlt, and the fkull over it, the fhape of the latter mull 
depend on that of the former; and, as the inequalities 
on the outfide of the head correfpond nearly with thofe 
on the internal fide of the lkuli, we can, by examining 
the former, learn the character of its poffeffor. And now 
to (how the proofs of thefe conclufions. 
The firlt propofition, that the brain is the organ of the 
mind, needs fcarcely any proof, being generally admitted 
by phyfiologifis, with the exception of Bichat and his 
followers, who have thought that the intellect only refides 
in the brain, but that the nerves of the abdominal and 
thoracic vifeera are the organs of the fentiments. This, 
however, is denied, becaufe it is faid, that fome animals 
pofiefs thefe fentiments, who have not the particular or- 
■ gans mentioned by Bichat, and many who have them do 
not pofiefs thefe fentiments. Moreover, compreffion of 
the brain produces an entire fufpenfion of all fenfation 
and confcioufnefs, and a complete flop to every operation 
of intellect. All the other parts of the body, on the 
other hand, may be wounded or deftroyed, and even the 
nervous mafs of the fpinal marrow may be compreffed or 
injured, at a certain diftance from the brain, without the 
immediate deftruction of the feelings and intellectual 
faculties. In tetanus, while the fpinal marrow and all the 
fenfes are affedted in the moft violent manner, the func¬ 
tions of the mind continue unimpaired. 
The fecond propofition, that the mind of every indivi¬ 
dual is aborigine different from that of his fellow, is like- 
wifi- one commonly affented to. Not but that we find 
many ill aflrious writers who have fupported the contrary 
opinion. Helvetius ufed much ingenious argument to 
prove, that we were all formed with the fame mental 
powers, and that genius is merely the effeCt of education 
or accident. He found in the circumftance of the apples 
falling from the tree (fee Newton), the origin of New¬ 
ton’s greatnefs; and in thofe accidents which forced 
Shakefpeare to adopt the profeflion of the ftage, the caufe 
of that divine bard’s furprifing infpirations; forgetting 
how often apples had fallen, and the ftage been exhibited, 
before other perfons, without producing thefe mighty 
effects on the imagination. Yet the Helvetian hypothefis 
has been a favourite with many poets ; and even Dr. 
Johnfon fo far came into it as to affert, that all kinds of 
genius were alike. He thought Newton could have 
written plays like Shakefpeare 5 for, faid he “ he who can 
run fifty miles to the north, can run fifty miles to tffie 
fouth.” Dr. Gall proves, however, that all minds are not 
the fame, by the faCt, that- children, from their earlieft 
infancy, difplay the mod decidedly different characters, 
characters as diftinCt as thofe exhibited by mature men. 
And, if we confider how much the education of boys is 
conducted alike in large fchools, we fiiould naturally 
exp.eCt to find characters entirely the fame in thofe places, 
if men were born alike; yet the contrary is the faCt. 
The third propofition, viz. that the brain is not one, 
but many organs, is the grand point of Gall’s doCtrine, 
and mull be llriCtly enquired into. Before Gali’s time 
this fubjeCt was viewed in two different lights. One fet 
of authors fixed the foul in a particular fpot; as Defcartes, 
who faid the pineal gland was this fpot; Boutekoe, who 
thought the foul inhabited the corpus callojwm; Digby, 
who difeovered it in the feptum lucidum; <$'c. <$’ c - But 
the opinion which commonly obtained, (except among 
the wifer few, who confeffed their total ignorance,) was, 
before Gall’s labours, that all the faculties are exercifed 
by the whole mafs of brain confidered as one organ. 
This notion is the only one worth notice. Gall objeCts 
to it, however, on the ground that it is contradicted by 
analogies derived from the other animal aCtions. He 
fays, that every different fecretion has its appropriate 
gland, the offices of which are never interchanged ; the 
liver never fecreets urine, nor the-kidneys bile. The 
five external fenfes are diftinCt and independent of one 
another. He thinks that anatomy alfo ftrength- 
ens his propofition; for he finds the ftruClure of the 
brain in its different parts is far from being 
fimple and uniform ; that it is compofed of two 
fubltances ; the one foft, pulpy, and afli-coloured ; the 
other white, opaque, and fibrous in its texture. The 
fibres of the latter run parallel to each other, having, at ^ 
the fame time, various collateral connexions, but by no 
means uniting in any one central part, that can be confi¬ 
dered as their common origin or termination. The parts 
of the brain are numerous, and diftinCt from one another, 
bearing evidence of a very complex and artificial conftruc- 
tion, and are conftant in their general arrangement in 
different fubjeCts. From comparative as well as human 
anatomy, he derives arguments in his favour. In amend¬ 
ing the fcale of being, he finds that the number of the 
faculties increafes with the number of the cerebral organs; 
and 
