And it is hardly a question, whether every individual is not accustomed in some degree to decide on character from the features, the colour of the hair, and other external indications, independently of that expression of the countenance, which rather marks the actually existing state of the mind than the latent disposition of it. But if it be in any degree probable that the connexion between the soul and body may be traced in the conformation of the features or other parts of the body, in a much greater must it be probable that that connexion may be traced in the structure of the brain. Nor does there appear, on the ground either of reason or of religion, any thing objectionable or absurd in the assumption, antecedently to observation, that the intellectual and moral tendencies of the soul may in a qualified sense be determined, or at least modified, by the peculiar structure of the body: that they are frequently coincident with certain peculiarities of corporeal structure is a matter of actual observation. Is it absurd to suppose that, man being a compound of soul and body, the body has been so constructed in each individual as to become a fit arena on which that struggle shall be manifested, which undoubtedly takes place between the conflicting pas * Shakspeare has several references to indications of personal character, as depending on the form of the countenance, &c. Cleopat. Bear'st thou her face in mind? is't long or round? Messeng. Round, even to faultiness. 66 Cleopat. For the most part too, They are foolish that are so. Her hair, what colour? Messeng. Brown, madam: and her forehead "Caliban. "Julia. As low as she would wish it." ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA, Act III. Scene 3. We shall lose our time, And all be turn'd to barnacles, or to apes With foreheads villanous low." TEMPEST, Act IV. near the end. Ay, but her forehead's low; and mine's as high." F sions of the soul? For it will not be denied by those to whom this treatise is addressed, that the soul wants not the substance of a corporeal frame for the mere existence of its evil principles, but only for the external manifestation of them. An authority at least which cannot be questioned by a believer in revelation, asserts that out of the heart, that is, evidently from the context, out of the soul, proceed murder, theft, adultery, and the like. Is it absurd to suppose that, the brain being a very complicated organ, made up of distinctly different parts, these parts are subservient to the exercise of different functions? or, since it is evident that in every other individual organ of the body, where there is an identity of structure, there is also an identity of function in all the parts, may we not fairly presume that, were the integral parts different, the effects produced would be different; and, consequently, that as the integral parts of the brain differ from each other, the offices of those parts may be different? Or, again, will it be denied as a matter of fact that different faculties and propensities manifest themselves in different individuals; and is it unreasonable, on the ground of analogy, our only ground in this case, to suppose that they manifest themselves through the agency of different instruments? And since the visceral nerves are appropriated to the mere vital functions of nutrition; and the spinal nerves to general muscular motion and common sensation; and the nerves of the special senses occupy but a very small portion of the brain; to what assignable purpose can the great mass of that organ be applied, if not to the operations of that intellectual and moral principle, which, after the abstraction of the organs of nutrition, motion, and sensation, is the only imaginable part of our present nature? Is the language of Scripture entirely allegorical throughout the sacred volume? or do we believe on just grounds that we are contaminated with an innate propensity to evil; that there are two principles within us constantly struggling for the mastery; and that, spite of our better part, and against the strongest feelings of conscience and determination of judgment, we still are for ever yielding to the worse? Shall we deny that the tendencies to evil are different in character in different individuals; and by that denial shall we attempt to falsify the testimony of experience as to the fact itself; and the conclusions of antecedent reasoning as to its probability: for, if all men were avaricious for instance, or ambitious in the same points, where would be the field for the display of other qualities; and how could the affairs of the world be conducted? But whatever may be the real state of the casewhether the brain act as a simple organ by the simultaneous operation of all its parts; or whether those parts act independently in the production of specific effects-no one can doubt that the organ itself is the mysterious instrument by means of which, principally, if not exclusively, a communication is maintained between the external world and the soul. Nor can it be doubted, indeed it is a matter of fact which is constantly open to our observation, that the degree of approximation in the structure of the brain of other animals to that of man bears a very obvious relation to the degree of intelligence manifested by the various classes of animals: so that, in just reasoning, it must on every consideration be admitted to be the instrument by which the various degrees of intelligence are manifested. It is a matter also of observation, that the powers of the mind are capable, like those of the body, of being strengthened by exercise and cultivation : and, further, that not only do the mental faculties gradually manifest themselves from the moment of birth onwards; but that the physical developement of the brain advances proportionally up to a certain period. But on this point it will be desirable to make a few more particular remarks. SECTION V. The Developement of the Human Brain, compared with that of other Animals. THE brain of all vertebral animals, including even man, is nearly identical in structure in the early period of the embryo state of those animals. But at the period of birth there is a very remarkable difference between the degree of developement of the human brain, and of that of the inferior animals. In quadrupeds for instance, the brain, according to Wenzel, is fully developed at the moment of the birth of the individual; contains, that is, at that time, all the parts in as perfect a state as they are in the adult animal of the same species (Wenzel, p. 246:) while, with respect to the human species, it is asserted by Wenzel, and his statement is confirmed by the observations of others, that although the brain makes continual and rapid advances to its ultimate magnitude and perfect state, from the period of conception to the seventh year after birth, yet all the parts have not attained their full size till the age of seven years (p. 254.) And this difference is exactly what might be antecedently expected, from the comparatively greater degree of intelligence manifested by the young of other animals, of the higher orders at least, than by the human infant. But it is very worthy of observation, that those parts of the human brain, which are formed subsequently to birth, are entirely wanting in all other animals, including even quadrupeds, which Wenzel has examined (p. 246:) and that during the evolution of the parts peculiar to the human brain, the peculiar faculties of the human intellect are proportionally developed: and finally, that, till those parts are developed, those faculties are not clearly perceptible (Wenzel, p. 247.) But at the age of seven years the human being essentially possesses, although not yet matured by exercise and education, all those intellectual faculties which are thenceforward observable: and at that age the brain is perfect in all its parts. And, from the age of seven years to the age of eighty, the changes of the human brain with respect to size, either collectively or in its several parts, are so trifling as hardly to be worth notice (p. 247— 266.) In comparing either individual actions or the complicated operations of man, with those of other animals, it is observable, that the actions and operations of the adult human being as much excel in design and method the actions and operations of all other adult animals, as those of the infant are excelled in precision and adroitness by the young of all other animals (p. 247:) and both these facts correspond with the relative constitution of the brain at the respective periods; the brain of other animals being perfect at birth, which is not the case with the infant; while the brain of the adult human being manifests a higher degree of organization than that of any other animal, and is therefore physically fitted for functions of a higher order. It appears then highly probable, both from the intuitive conviction of mankind at large, and from a comparative examination of the structure and developement of the brain in man and other animals, that the intellectual superiority of man, physically considered, depends on the peculiarities of the human brain: and with respect to the rest of his body, it is certain that the hand is the instrument which gives him that decidedly physical superiority which he possesses over all other animals. In all other respects there is no physiological difference, of any importance at least to the present argument, between man and the higher orders of animals: and the peculiarities of his physical condition, with reference to the form and general powers of his body, rest therefore on those two organs, the hand and the brain. And as the adaptation of the external world to the physi |