ARTICLE XIII.

DISCUSSION ON PHRENOLOGY AT THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF MEDICINE AT PARIS.

Most of our readers have heard of the famous four days' discussion on the subject of Phrenology, which occurred last spring in the French Academy of Medicine, and which was trumpeted about at the time as a death-blow to the science. In the January Number of our esteemed contemporary the MedicoChirurgical Review, we find an abstract of the sentiments expressed by the different speakers, and willingly avail ourselves of the facility thus afforded, of transferring it to our own pages. We need scarcely add, that we attach no great value to dis cussions of this kind, apart from a direct reference to facts, and that on this as on most similar occasions, both parties left the matter precisely where they found it. Speaking generally, we cannot say that either of them manifested that minute and familiar acquaintance with the details of the science, which alone can enable any one to obtain a conviction of their truth, and to expose the sophistries of the opponents. Some of the speeches, such as those of Broussais and Adelon, were, however, very effective, so far as they went; but what follows is only a meagre outline of them.

"Here closed the discussion on the causes of apoplexy; and the other topic of debate-Phrenology-was introduced by M. Bouillaud. He took a rapid view of the rise and diffusion of this new system of mental philosophy, and shewed very ably that its leading principles had been recognised by many of the wisest physiologists long prior to the time of Dr Gall. M. B. did not hesitate to avow, that while he believed in the general axioms of the science, he was very far from yielding an assent to all its details, as expounded in any publication on the subject. For example, he did not think that the feeling of sexual desire, or, as it is denominated, Amativeness, has any

*

In his recent work on Medical Philosophy, M. B. has expressed sentiments to the same effect. His words are:- Without doubt a good deal remains to be done to determine the precise seat of the intellectual and moral faculties and their instruments; without doubt the new science is still wrapped in obscurities and uncertainty. But the foundation of the doctrine rests upon such a numerous collection of facts and observations, that it is indestructible.' He then alludes to the incredulity of M. Magendie, who ranks Phrenology with necromancy, alchemy, and astrology, and has stated his opinion in this sentence: The efforts of that pseudo-science reduce themselves to assertions which cannot bear examination for an instant.' M. Bouillaud in reply says: In vain Cuvier and Napoleon opposed the doctrine of Gall. It triumphed over their resistance, and by a revenge worthy of itself, it makes use of the heads of these two great men to support its own principles. After such a victory, what can Phrenology have to fear from any other enemy?'

connection with the cerebellum,-the function of which is in his opinion to preside over and regulate the equilibrium of the muscular system in walking and in other movements of the body.

"M. Rochoux was delighted to hear his honourable confrere make so liberal an avowal of his sentiments, and he was anxious thus publicly to call attention to the concessions now elicited; for the main scope of his attack on Phrenology was directed against that manía for the localization of mental faculties, which induced Dr Gall in the first instance to portion out the brain into twenty-seven different sections, and his followers to add nine additional sections to the number.

"M. Broussais stated that he was not prepared to defend all the opinions either of Dr Gall or Spurzheim, or of any other phrenologist. Many of the details of authors on this, and indeed on every other branch of science, are necessarily imperfect and inaccurate; but such an objection cannot invalidate its leading principles and conclusions. These have been deduced from a patient examination of facts, which no mere reasoning can gainsay, and which most satisfactorily establish this important truth, that certain mental developments are always associated with certain cerebral formations. This empiric' fact is the foundation of all phrenological reasonings, and notwithstanding the indiscreet and ignorant haste of many disciples of the science, its essential doctrines are based upon the most incontestible observations.

"M. Rochoux has rather contemptuously asked us to shew him those various organs of the brain, which exercise different functions, and which are alleged by us to preside over different powers of the mind. No discreet phrenologist has ever professed to point out the different portions of the brain, as if they were separated and distinct organs. Like the faculties of the mind itself, they are intimately and indissolubly connected together, and it is impossible to ascertain the exact boundaries of each division or cerebral organ. Of late years, little has been said by the opponents of Phrenology of that argument, drawn from the want of perfect correspondence between the inner and outer surfaces of the cranium; an argument which was so boastfully dwelt upon twelve or twenty years ago. The phrenologist does not require the measurement to a line, either in point of extent or of prominence, of organs, before he can estimate the prevailing character of any individual. The abandonment of this weak objection shews that a very great change has taken place in the sentiments of those who are still hostile to Phrenology. It has been said by some that comparative anatomy is opposed to our science; for example, that the brain of many of the lower animals very much resembles that of a

human being, and yet their mental endowments are few and feeble. This argument, when examined, lends but little support to the opponents of Phrenology. It is very doubtful that man possesses a much greater number of mental feelings and faculties than many of the lower animals. In them they exist probably en germe, en esquisse.' No one will deny that they are endowed with the feelings of love for their offspring, and of attachment to their abodes; and we think that it is equally true that they possess a memory for persons, things, and places, as well as a perception of sounds and distances. Who will deny that pride, or some feeling close akin to it, is felt by the cock surrounded by his feathered dames, by the pigeon strutting about with puffed-out neck, and the pea-cock displaying his gorgeous train? Is there not something almost human in these exhibitions of Self-Esteem and Love of Admiration?-Glimmerings of Ideality (?), of judgment, of Comparison, of Veneration, of Hope, &c. are often observed in some animals, and most conspicuously in those which approach nearest in organization to the human development. Does not the lively joy of the dog, when unkennelled for the chase, betoken something of the workings of an imagination which recalls to him the pleasures which he has already enjoyed? and are we wrong in saying that this most faithful animal has a feeling of veneration (we do not say theosophy) for his master?

"We have heard lately a great deal of certain direct proofs -as they have been called-drawn from the measurement of the heads of notorious criminals-against the truth of Phrenology.

"The language which has been used by our opponents must satisfy every candid inquirer that they have not at all understood the doctrines which they were assailing. It is rare that a murder is committed from mere love of murder, or from the direct impulse of the feeling of Destructiveness. Other baneful passions too frequently urge on to the commission of this most dreadful of sins. Jealousy, revenge, avarice-these are often the prompters of the murderous deed. Again, it has been urged against Phrenology, that very few scientific men, distinguished for their attainments in mental or physical philosophy, have announced their assent to the truth of its doctrines. This, indeed, is a most feeble objection. In all ages, the savans' have been the most opposed to the diffusion of new discoveries. The dread of ridicule, envy, the reluctance to be taught any subject by younger and less lettered men, and a host of other feelings-such are very often the true causes of their hostility.

"M. Broussais is ready to admit that Phrenology is far from being yet complete as a phrenological or descriptive system of

all the cerebral functions, and that the localization of certain faculties is still imperfect. What remains to be done may be easily accomplished by the careful and repeated examination of the heads of those who are conspicuously distinguished for any particular mental endowment. There may be difference of opinion as to the exact limitation of certain organs; but such a discrepancy on smaller matters affords no solid objection to the fundamental positions of the science.

"That education and the exercise of particular faculties will, at least in youth, induce a larger development of the corresponding cerebral organs, than if no such education or exercise had been undergone, M. Broussais has repeatedly assured himself by minute observation; but we are to remember that it is only when there is no remarkable predominance of any one organ, that the brain takes the direction given by cultivation.

"The next speaker was M. Adelon, one of the most scientific members of the Academy. He observed that M. Rochoux was not quite correct in stating that in apoplexy, whatever may be its seat, the whole of the brain suffers, and that the general symptoms are the same in all cases. Cerebellar apoplexy has been very frequently diagnosticated by the presence of involuntary erections of the penis.*

"With respect to the labours of the phrenologists, M. Adelon very justly remarked, that surely they are quite as deserving of scientific examination as the attempts of anatomists to measure the facial angle and the area of the cranium in animals-attempts which have engaged the attention of such men as Camper, Daubenton, Cuvier, and Söemmering. All these inquiries rest on the same foundation, and have the same object in view-to discover, by the formation of the (anterior part) head, the amount of intelligence 'possessed. Moreover, every series of experiments on the brain and nerves performed, within the last fifty years, has tended to establish a plurality of organs. The divisions of Bichat, the researches of Sir Charles Bell, Magendie, Flourens, Foville, &c. all tend to this result, and the conclusions which these eminent physiologists have come to, have met with very general assent. If Phrenology has more lofty pretensions, aiming, as it does, to penetrate

* "M. Recamier, well known as a most experienced and able physician, stated, as the result of his experience, that, when the cerebral hemorrhage was on the anterior lobes, the organs of speech were very generally paralyzed. M. Bouillaud confirmed the truth of this remark, and observed that the loss of speech was in some cases of apoplexy unaccompanied with any other mental infirmity. It is necessary not to confound the mere paralysis of the tongue with the loss of the faculty of speech. The movements of the tongue may be quite free, and yet the patient cannot articulate a word. The cause of this special aphonia is unquestionably some lesion of the anterior cerebral lobes."

into the depths of mental philosophy, it encounters, we must acknowledge, difficulties numerous, great, and perhaps insurmountable. But be it remembered that it professes to have been built, and still to advance on the results of cautious, minute, and repeated observation; and if so, although the subject may be still encompassed with difficulties, it does not be come the man of science to reject or despise its labours. The 'point culminant' in Phrenology is, first to determine the number of faculties, and then to ascertain the precise localizations of these faculties or endowments. Perhaps we shall never arrive at exact and indisputable truth on such questions; and this is the only real objection which can be made. In conclusion, M. Adelon expressed his opinion that it was rash and unphilosophical in any one to profess his contempt of Phrenology, until he has minutely and most attentively studied the subject. Few medical men have leisure enough to devote to such difficult inquiries as those involved in Phrenology.

"M. Amussat professed himself favourable, on the whole, to the conclusions of Phrenology. He denied the assertion of M. Rochoux, that the history of apoplectic symptoms affords any just objection. Many cases of the disease seem to confirm the doctrines of M. Gall. With respect to the alleged inconsistency of the cranial development in Fieschi and other notorious assassins with their well-known characters, M. Amussat was of opinion, that many incorrect statements had been made by the friends, as well as by the foes of Phrenology. It has been asserted that the head of Fieschi is not to be distinguished from that of a moral man. Now, in truth, it is (shewing the mould) the head of a miserable wretch. It is of small dimensions. The organs of Pride and Firmness-the most prominent and motivant' features in Fieschi's characterhowever, are of considerable size. The lateral depressions in a murderer's head may at first sight surprise us; but be it remembered, that Gall has never said that a person may not be an assassin sans l'organe du meurtre.' The conformation of the head of Fieschi accounts for, if not his last and most atrocious crime, the profligate dispositions of his general character.* His destructive propensities were by no means so conspicuous as his inordinate and unprincipled love of notoriety. It did not appear that he had been urged on to his villanous acts by revenge or bloodthirstiness. He had no cause of resentment against the king or any of his attendants; but leading for a length of time an idle, unoccupied, and unprincipled life, his heart had been open to some vague, and almost undefinable Satanic whisperings of personal distinction.

In our opinion the head of Fieschi is in all its parts one of the most striking illustrations of the truth of Phrenology.(EDITOR, P. J.)