Page images
PDF
EPUB

then we must remember (and here the exception may prove the rule), that we usually think only on one side of the brain at a time, except under great excitement. But the organs most used, and more frequently required to act together, are nearer to the central line, where the two organs come in close contact, with slight partitions between. And if we consider those central organs, that is, from Individuality over the nose round over the head to Love, we shall find a purpose or reason for these organs being central. Individuality relates to the whole, of which Colour, Space, Weight, &c., are but qualities. It is a kind of abstract; and adjoining and around it are Size, Form, Locality, &c. And certainly you can hardly recognize an object without a sense of its position, form and size.

The next central organ recognizes events, irrespective of particulars. Above lies Comparison,the sense of resemblance, suggesting unity from the analogy of knowledge. Beneath is the Eye of the Mind, the abstract Mind;—and then Consciousness, or central being;-Benevolence, contemplating universal happiness;—and then the sense of universal Power, Rule, and the dependence consequent on these. Then Firmness, like a central hold or prop; -the Will and Concentrative faculty;-and Selfreliance, and Love; all central powers involving unity or oneness.

The faculties of the Coronal region are all those furthest removed from sense impressions and bodily relations, with Consciousness deep in the midst, and

joining upon that faculty which has the power (at least under certain conditions) of acting independently of the ordinary processes of sense and reason; and in which perception and judgment may be said to become one. The cerebellum, on the contrary, having specially to do with the bodily conditions, is situated behind and beneath all the rest. The Muscular powers form the lateral portions, with their master passions, Combativeness and Destructiveness, immediately above; the limbs, and the organs to which they chiefly relate, being also lateral organs; particularly the organs requiring the muscular sense and direction most. I think you will perceive that it is only by tracing out these relations, or laws of position, that we shall discover a clue, whereby to find our way through all the difficulties of Comparative Anatomy. It appears, also, that the lower side of the cerebellum has most to do with the activity of the body, and the upper side with the senses, these senses bearing a relation to the intellect, as well as to the bodily conditions. The lateral portions more particularly of the cerebellum, the muscular organs, are united together by the Pons Varolii; and with its fibres are interlaced the nerves of motion which pass down the spinal column. These nerves, for the most part, cross to the opposite side of the body; thus forming the most complete means of varied action. This crossing of the nerves may account for the tendency we have to cross the legs and fold the arms.

The central portion of the cerebellum, having to

do with the secretions and general condition of the body and nerves, as regards health, &c., communicates with the body by a thick cord of nerve, forming the back portion of the spinal column— communicating by another cord with the brain and nerves of sense. From its function, we should expect to find this part the first that is formed in the foetus: and this is the case. The brain of the fœtus "consists, about the second month, chiefly of the mesial parts of the cerebellum, corpora quadrigemina, &c.," and goes on expanding, as it were, from this into the other parts of the convolutions. * But without going further, (and I fear I have been too lengthy already,) I think I am now justified in saying that the views of phrenologists, and these additions of mine, are in accordance with the results of anatomy, and present a remarkable show of consistent relations.

We have now gone over, in a hasty way, what I regard as the means of discovering the functions of the brain, and what I have as yet discovered through the use of these means. What I have advanced, I give simply as my opinions, and as suggestion to others. I appeal to Nature as known by the facts before us. I have nothing to say to any one's reasonings upon the question, unless they are sup

* See Fletcher's Rudiments of Physiology, quoted in “Vestiges,” p. 226.

+ Galileo writes to a friend, "O! my dear Kepler, how I wish that we could have one hearty laugh together! Here at Padua is the principal Professor of Philosophy, whom I

ported by facts, and by a knowledge of the matters to which I refer.

I have written so long a letter, that I will not remark upon the excellent instances you give me in your last note. It is such material we want.

XI.

H. M. TO H. G. A.

:

I was just going to write to you yesterday, when I took up Dr. Howe's Report to the Legislature of Massachusetts on Idiocy and I found it so interesting, that I could not put pen to paper till I had gone through it. One of the best things in it is the quiet exhibition of the mess made by Law, Medicine, and Philosophy, of the statement of the case of idiots. One would think nothing could be done in the legal direction without some definition or description of Idiocy which might be of pretty general application to the class of the imbecile: but

have repeatedly and urgently requested to look at the moon and planets through my glass, which he pertinaciously refuses to do. Why are you not here? What shouts of laughter we should have at this glorious folly! And to hear the Professor of Philosophy at Pisa labouring before the Grand Duke with logical arguments, as if with magical incantations to charm the new planets out of the sky!"-Galileo to Kepler.

nothing can be more loose, and, at the same time, limited, than the description that English and American law give of an idiot. The philosophers who have attempted to define do no better. Proceeding from the idea that the mind is one thing, and the body another, only arbitrarily connected with it, and entangled by the notion of freewill, they talk in the most confused manner of weakness of the understanding as accounting for failure of the affections; -of weakness in that connection which should bring the other faculties under the control of the will; and so on, till one wonders whether the writers really believed that they had any clear idea in their minds when they wrote what was so vague and utterly unsubstantial.

Here we have the law saying, that a man is an idiot, "if he has not any use of reason: as if he cannot count twenty pence:" "if he has no understanding to tell his age; or who is his father or mother." Yet, again, it says, "a man shall not be called an idiot if he has the understanding to learn or know letters:" whereas, one of the most utterly silly and helpless idiots conceivable (in regard to matters contemplated by the laws), was a man whom I knew when he was upwards of thirty, whose delight was to copy upon a slate the Scripture lessons and hymns of the preceding Sunday. He could read, write, and even spell well (though deficient from birth), while he had no power of apprehending, in the slightest degree, the meaning of what he wrote.

« PreviousContinue »