moires de Chirurgie Militaire, et Campagnes," by Baron Larrey, vol. ii. p. 150, vol. iii. p. 262; "Serres on Apoplexy;" "Richerand's Elements of Physiology," pp. 379, 380, Kerrison's Translation; "Dr. Spurzheim's Phrenology," p. 148.

"It is impossible," says Dr. Spurzheim, "to unite a greater number of proofs in demonstration of any natural truth, than may be presented to determine the function of the cerebellum;" and in this I fully agree with him. Those who have not read Dr. Gall's section on this organ, can form no adequate conception of the force of the evidence which he has collected.

M. Flourens has lately performed some experiments on the lower animals, chiefly by inflicting injuries on their cerebella, and contends that these experiments show that the cerebellum serves for the regulation of muscular motion. "On removing the cerebellum," says he, "the animal loses the power of executing combined movements." Magendie performed similar experiments on the cerebellum, and found that they occasion only an irresistible tendency in the animal to run, walk, or swim, backwards. He made experiments, also, on the corpora striata and tubercula quadrigemina, with the following results: When one part of these was cut, the animal rolled; when another, it went forward, and extended its head and extremities; when another, it bent all these so that, according to this mode of determining the cerebral functions, these parts of the brain possess an equal claim with the cerebellum, to be regarded as the regulators of motion. The fact is, that all parts of the nervous system are so intimately connected, that the inflic tion of injuries is not the way to determine the functions of any, even its least important parts.

The great size of the cerebellum, however,-the circumstance of its lateral portions not bearing the same relation to the middle part in all animals, and also the results of some late experiments, bave suggested the notion that it may not be a single organ, but that, although Amativeness is unquestionably connected with the largest portion of it, other functions may be connected with the other parts. This seems not improbable, but as we have no direct evidence in proof of the fact, or in illustration of the nature of these

supposed functions, it is unnecessary to do more than announce the proposition as one worthy of investigation. If I might hazard a conjecture, founded on such facts as are known, I would pre sume the middle portion to be the organ of Amativeness, and the two lateral portions to be those of motion. The middle portion springs from the same roots as the organs of the other propensities, while the lateral portion by means of the pons varolii are placed in connexion with the corpora pyramidalia, from which originate the organs of intellect that preside over motion. Besides the anterior columns of the spinal marrow are the roots of the nerves of motion, and seem to be a continuation of the corpora pyramidalia.

Mr. Scott, in an excellent essay on the influence of this propensity on the higher sentiments and intellect,* observes, that it has been regarded by some individuals, as almost synonymous with pollution; and the notion has been entertained, that it cannot be even approached without defilement. This mistake has arisen, from attention being directed too exclusively to the abuses of the propensity. Like every thing that forms part of the system of nature, it bears the stamp of wisdom and excellence in itself, although liable to abuse. It exerts a quiet but effectual influence in the general intercourse between the sexes, giving rise in each to a sort of kindly interest in all that concerns the other. This disposition to mutual kindness between the sexes does not arise from Benevolence or Adhesiveness, or any other sentiment or propensity alone; because, if such were its sources, it would have an equal effect in the intercourse of the individuals of each sex among themselves, which it has not. "In this quiet and unobtrusive state of the feeling," says Mr. Scott, there is nothing in the least gross or offensive to the most sensitive delicacy. So far the contrary, that the want of some feeling of this sort is regarded, wherever it appears, as a very palpable defect, and a most unamiable trait in the character. It softens all the proud, irascible, and antisocial principles of our nature, in every thing which regards that sex which is the object of it; and it increases the activity and force of all the kindly and benevolent affections. This explains many Phrenological Journal, No. vii. p. 392.

*

facts which appear in the mutual regards of the sexes towards each other. Men are, generally speaking, more generous and kind, more benevolent and charitable, towards women, than they are to men, or than women are to one another." This faculty also inspires the poet and dramatist in compositions on the passion of Love; and it exerts a very powerful influence over human conduct. Dr. Spurzheim observes, that individuals in whom this organ is very large, ought not to be dedicated to the profession of religion, in countries where chastity for life is required of the clergy.

The abuses of this propensity are the sources of innumerable evils in life; and, as the organ and feeling exist, and produce an influence on the mind, independently of external communication, Dr. Spurzheim suggests the propriety of instructing young persons in the consequences of its improper indulgence, as preferable to keeping them in "a state of ignorance that may provoke a fatal curiosity, compromising in the end their own and their descendants' bodily and mental constitution." The organ is established.

2. PHILOPROGENITIVENESS.

THE attachment of the inferior animals to their young has often been the subject of admiration. In them it is attributed to instinct. Instinct means an original propensity, impelling the animal endowed with it to act in a certain way, without intention or purpose. Is the attachment of human beings to offspring, the consequence of a similar innate feeling, or is it the result of reason, or a modification of benevolence, or of other feelings? That it does not spring from reflection is abundantly evident. Reason only investigates causes and effects, and decides on a comparison of facts. The mother, while she smiles with ineffable joy on her tender offspring, does not argue herself into the delightful emotion. The excitement is instantaneous; the object requires only to be presented to her eye or imagination, and the whole impetus of parental love stirs the mind. Hence a feeling or propensity is obviously

the basis of the affection. It is not a modification of any other sentiment, but an original propensity; for, on going into society, we find, that the Love of Offspring bears no perceptible proportion to any other feeling or faculty of the mind. If it depended on Benevolence, no selfish individual should be ardently attached to offspring; and yet the opposite is frequently the fact. If it were a modification of mere Self-Love, as some have supposed, then parental affection should be weak, in proportion as generosity was strong; but this theory also is contradicted by experience. Neither do we find Love of Offspring bear a definite relation to intellectual endowment. Sometimes a woman of limited understanding loves her children ardently; occasionally another equally weak is indifferent towards them. Some highly intellectual women add maternal affection to their other virtues; while others, not less acute in understanding, look on offspring as a burden. There are, therefore, the strongest reasons for holding it to be a primitive tendency of the mind; and phrenological observations coincide with this conclusion.

The organ is situated immediately above the middle part of the cerebellum, and corresponds to the protuberance of the occiput. Dr. Gall gives the following account of its discovery. In the course of his observations he had remarked, that, in the human race, the upper part of the occiput is in general more prominent in the female skull than in the male; and inferred, that the part of the brain beneath was the organ of some feeling which is stronger in women thau in men. But the question presented itself, What is this quality? During several years various conjectures occurred to him, which he successively adopted and rejected; and he frequently stated to his pupils the embarrassment he felt upon the subject. He remarked at last, that, in this particular point, the crania of monkeys bore a singular resemblance to those of women, and concluded, that the cerebral part placed immediately under the prominence, was probably the organ of some quality or faculty, for which the monkey tribes and women were distinguished in a remarkable degree. He was led the more to entertain this idea, because, from the discoveries he had already

made in this region, he was aware that he was not to look for the seat of any superior intellectual or moral faculty. He repeatedly revolved in his mind all the feelings manifested by the monkey tribe, so far as known to him. At last, in one of those favorable moments, when a lucky thought sometimes does more to elicit truth than years of labor and reflection, it suddenly occurred to him, in the midst of a lecture, that one of the most remarkable characteristics of monkeys, is an extreme ardor of affection for their young. This quality had been noticed in them by the most distinguished naturalists; and persons who have resided in countries where monkeys are common, have also observed it, and remarked, that it led them to bestow caresses even on the young of the human species, especially Negro children, when these were so unlucky as to fall in their way. The thought flashed upon his mind that this might be the feeling or quality of which he was in search. Impatient to put this conclusion to the test, by a comparison of all the male with the female skulls of animals in his extensive collection, he begged his hearers to go away, and leave him to his researches; and on this examination he found, that there existed, in fact, the same difference between the male and female skull of the lower animals in general, which he had observed between the male and the female skull in the human species.

idea, that the quality of which

This seemed a confirmation of the this cerebral part is the organ, is that of affection for offspring --which, he had already remarked, was possessed in a greater degree by the females of the animal tribes, than by the males. The inference appeared to him more plausible, from the circumstance, that this organ was placed in close vicinity to that of the instinct of propagation. Many subsequent observations established the conclusion.*

The faculty produces the instinctive love of offspring and delight in children.

The feeling is beautifully represented in the following lines of Lord Byron:

Gall Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau. Edit. 1823. vol. iii.-Phren. Journ. vol. ii. p. 23.