cessation of our influence over you precludes our exerting or even possessing the power of interceding in your behalf. The only medium is Christ. PHRENOLOGIST. May we not so much as pray for our departed friends? STEWART. Your supplications may not be sinful, but they will avail nothing. The lot of every man is cast, his destiny fixed, and nothing can alter the purposes of God. PHRENOLOGIST. And yet prayers for the dead were offered up by the early Jews. * STEWART. It is a very common custom, and was in use long before the Romish faith prevailed. It was observed by the primitive Christians as well as by the Jews before the birth of Christ. There is a liturgy, of very ancient date, now in existence in proof of this.† PHRENOLOGIST. Then these prayers were valueless. STEWART. Certainly. The Redeemer, I repeat, is the only Mediator. By pursuing this subject we should be neces * 2 Maccabees, xii. 43, 44, 45. † Gentleman's Magazine for 1787, Part II. p. 979. sitated to enter into all the errors and superstitions of the Romish Church. This would lead us far away from the main object of our Colloquies, and to a subject that has called forth endless acrimony, gross impiety, unrelenting persecution, and martyrdom. We had, therefore, better waive all discussion concerning it; and since night is fast closing upon us, defer our conversation upon that more interesting and less objectionable topic, phrenology, till our next interview. COLLOQUY XIII. STEWART. AT our last meeting we conversed upon a subject which had a moral tendency exclusive of any thing phrenological. Let us now confine our attention to the science, if I may so speak of it, and rather to that part which refers to the uses and abuses of those faculties which the phrenologist has professed to have discovered. PHRENOLOGIST. Say, rather, organs. STEWART. It matters little whether we say faculties or organs, if it is clearly understood that the organ is merely an instrument of the faculty, and indisputably clear that organs exist. PHRENOLOGIST. Both of these positions are, I conceive, established. Were they not, I should be loath to name the subject, much less to enforce the necessity of its observance. S STEWART. Do you believe that all the organs as they are arranged on the common phrenological bust or map, are proved to have an existence? PHRENOLOGIST. I think that at least two-thirds of the number are established, and I behold the others as highly probable. There is, no doubt, great consistency in the system of faculties in the phrenological classification. They seem, in every way, suited to that state of existence which experience and Scripture prove to be the true state of man in his various relations. I have said, in my "Letters on Phrenology," that they connect us with the external world in an endless variety of ways, giving us knowledge of such things as are within the comprehension of man, each preserving an admirable adaptation in its functions to the purposes of life-functions without which it would be impossible for man to enter upon and perform those relative duties in which it was obviously intended he should be engaged, though it were not expressly designed he should absolutely and necessarily fulfil them. I have also said that the faculties are primitive, being necessary to our existence as rational, moral, responsible, reflecting, and physical creatures, equal to supply all our wants, and to regulate our conduct-that though they may minister to evil, they are yet capable of answering the ends of Divine Providence, morally speaking. It is likewise affirmed, that from them we derive our intellectual enjoyments, and the pleasures which attend pious emotions and moral impulses; that they are capable, if rightly directed, of providing even a higher degree of happiness than we now enjoy; and that if man were deprived of any given portion of these faculties, he would lose much of his usefulness, and be incapable, in a word, of enjoying that mental feast which is afforded by the study of nature, the pursuit of science, the lawful gratification of propensity, and the contemplation of the relation subsisting between him and the moral government of God. STEWART. While the phrenological faculties have this tendency, no reasonable objection can be offered to them on that account. It is very plain that the first and paramount object of the phrenologist should be, to shew that the organs he has established are the instruments of faculties not only innate, essential, and inseparable, but also really destined to fulfil useful purposes in the scheme of creation, and capable, withal, of answering that end, subject only to the option of man himself. Unless you can establish an absolute utility in each organ consonant with the express design of the Creator-unless you can shew that each faculty is in itself good, and in harmony with the external world-unless it can be proved that man would fall short of an essential part of his nature if deprived of either faculty, now considered innate, there must be a radical defect in the system of phrenology; since whatever is created must, in its own sphere, be perfect, and not objectionable to the Deity. The Creator must be set forth, as he is, consistent in every part of his work. It cannot be supposed that he has executed any plan, or accomplished any end, which does not manifest both his wisdom and goodness; and therefore an organ or a faculty capable only of abuses, or of acting in opposition to his good purposes and the interests of man, cannot exist. Hence, if the phrenologist has assigned right functions, |