54

elongated cells, connected by their extremi-ties, and constituting a ramified interlace-ment of hollow cylinders, which Dr. Grubyregards as a vegetable formation, a crypto-gamic plant, belonging to the genus myco-dermis. The terminal cellules retain theordinary form of cells, being very little longerthan their breadth, and these Dr. Grubyconsiders to be the seeds or sporules of theplant; so that favus, according to thisauthor, is a disease communicated by thetransmission of seeds, and these latter fallingin a situation favourable for their develop-ment, take root and grow. Dr. Gruby addsto this narration the singular observation,that he has succeeded in reproducing themycodermis upon a plant by inoculating itstissues.

A microscopical discovery not less re-

markable than that of Dr. Gruby, has beenmade during the present year, by Dr. Simon,of Berlin. It consists in the detection withinthe small mass of sebaceous substance whichcollects in the follicles of the skin, and be-comes darkened at its extremity, and towhich we give the name comedo, or gi-ub, ofan articulated animalcule of considerablesize.

During the summer I have examined se-veral hundreds of these animals-they areobtained without difficulty, being found inalmost every collection of sebaceous sub-stance which can be squeezed from the skin ;and they have been termed by Dr. Simonacarus folliculorum. According to my ob-servations, the animalcule is about 1-1 OOth ofan inch in length, and about one-fifth of thatmeasurement in breadth. It has a headprovided with mandibles, and two largemaxillary palpi ; a thorax, the largest partof the animal, with eight stout legs ; and alengthened abdomen, composed of annularsegments, which overlap each other frombefore backwards. The head is capable ofretraction within the chest ; its movements Iare slow but powerful; and it undergoestransformation during its development, fre-quently exuviating its epidermis. It is wor-

thy of remark, that this singular creaturegives rise to no morbid irritation of the skin,exciting at most a very trifling degree ofitching.

I have thus, Gentlemen, endeavoured topresent to you a brief sketch of the profes-sion into which some amongst you are aboutto enter. And I feel that I cannot concludemore aptly than by again urging upon youthe reflection that knowledge, talent, andindustry will avail you little in the medical

profession, and will gain you little esteem,either among your professional brethren orin the eyes of the public, unless you conjoin,with mental ability, the uprightness and dig-nity of conduct which are the natural offspringof a religious and a virtuous life.

CHARING-CROSS HOSPITAL.

THE introductory lecture was given byDr. SHEARMAN at this hospital on the 1stinstant.The lecturer commenced by recommending

the thorough knowledge of anatomy andphysiology as being essential to the medicalstudent. He took a hasty glance at varioushypotheses which have been broached on thenature and origin of life, denying the truthof those which attributed life in its origin orcontinuance to the action of chemistry orelectricity, to the exclusion of an inherentvital principle. He then proceeded to drawa contrast between the instinctive faculties ofthe lower animals, and the rational facultiesin man ; showing that the actions of animalsregulated by the former, were invariably thesame under given circumstances throughoutall generations, and in every individual ofthe respective species ; whereas the actionsof man under given circumstances, variedaccording to the greater or less successfulcultivation and improvement of his rationalpowers.

Dr. Shearman then brought under reviewcertain’ phrenological doctrines, towardswhich he seems by no means to be favour-ably disposed. We shall give a few ex-tracts from this part of his lecture :-" That different mental faculties are located

in separate portions of the brain appears tome to be an untenable hypothesis; the brainfurnishes the medium of communication be-tween the internal and external world, bymeans of which organ the various attributesof mind are displayed. But conscientious-

ness, for instance, no more resides in the

brain, by means of which its existence is

displayed, than the will resides in the volun-tary muscles, by means of which the desireof locomotion is accomplished. * * * *

The voluntary muscles are the organs bywhich the will is manifested, and it cannot

be manifested in any other possible way;yet the will does not depend upon the sizeand development of the muscles. The brainis the organ by which conscientiousness ismanifested, but this faculty does not dependupon the size and development of any parti-cular portion of that organ. The will is notthe result of the action of the voluntary mus-cles ; conscientiousness is not the result ofthe action of the brain, or any of its parts.

* * * *

« Some instincts are temporary, lasting nolonger than is requisite to fulfil the purposefor which they were planted; such as thelove of offspring in the lower animals, whichcontinues no longer than is essential to rearingthe young, and then entirely ceases in the

parent, at least for a time, and until a futureprogeny may be benefitted by its operation.If the degree of this manifestation, as thephrenologists call it, be in exact proportion

55

to the size and development of the organmanifesting it, how is it that the instinct orpropensity entirely vanishes; that the mani-festation of philoprogenitiveness entirelyceases, whilst the organ can have sufferedno diminution, but rather, on the contrary,must have become increased by the exerciseof it. * ’ If the organ increases insize in proportion to the exercise of the fa-culty, this organ must be larger at the termi-

. nation of the instinct than it was at the com-mencement ; it must have been increasing indevelopment during the whole time the ani-mal was fostering its young; why, therefore,did the instinctive feeling cease, its appropri- ate organ not only not diminishing, but, uponthis hypothesis, actually increasing in size,by exercising the propensity. * * *

"If we wish to eradicate an evil propen-sity in any person, we do not think to effectthis by primarily operating on the brain, anddiminishing the size of one particular portionof that organ. Indeed, how could we ac-complish this without employing some ma-terial substance which could operate on thematerial substance of the brain ; but we em-ploy moral means only which produce theireffect solely upon the mind, considered as adistinct entity, and cannot primarily act uponthe material substance of the brain. * * -)k

It is difficult to conceive that when we em-ploy moral means to eradicate any viciouspropensity, its primary effect should beexerted upon some part of the brain, so asto diminish the size and activity of some dis-tinct organ, and in consequence of such dimi-nution the disposition shall be amended. If,on the contrary, the moral means act pri-marily upon the mind, and the organ becomesdiminished in consequence of its being lessexercised, then the knowledge of the connec-tion between the organ and the disposition,if such there be, cannot be of the slightestpractical utility. We employ the moralmeans to effect our purpose of correcting thedisposition; whether the phrenological or-

gan does or does not vary in size or activityduring the progress of this correction, cannotbe of the slightest importance for us to know.

* * * *

"We know of no method by which wecan primarily diminish the development oractivity of the material organ of destructive-ness, so as to diminish the propensity to

cruelty ; but we do know that such propen-sity may be diminished by moral means fur-nished to the mind. Whether any particularpart of the brain undergoes diminutionwhilst we are improving the moral feelingsof an individual by motives furnished to themind, is not of the smallest importance forus to know. * * * Moral feelings werecultivated and improved before any suspicionwas entertained that they resided in anyparticular portion of the brain; and if it bea fact that they do so reside, a knowledge ofthis fact neither increases nor diminishes the

facility of our still effecting the same im-provement by the means previously em-

ployed. If we wish to eradicate the propen-sity, we must still employ moral means ; wecannot primarily effect the diminution of thesupposed organ, and in this way improve thedisposition. * * * The different phreno..logical organs must at the time of birth eitherbe in a state of equal balance, or there mustbe some degree of preponderance in someone or more of them ; if the latter be thecase, if any one preponderates, the propen-sity or feeling belonging to such preponde-rating organ must necessarily be predomi-nant, and there can be no moral responsi-bility. If, on the other hand, all the organsbe at birth in a state of equal balance, whatcan at first disturb or derange this balanceso as for the individual to manifest any pre-ponderant propensity or feeling? What canproduce the enlargement or increased activityof one partical portion of the brain? * *

Some phrenologists exhibit casts of the skullof the same individual, taken at different anddistant times, when the shape of the craniumand preponderance of the different organshave undergone a change, and are said tocorrespond to the alteration which has takenplace in the moral and intellectual characterof the individual. Here a question arises,Which alteration took place previous to theother? Did the shape of the skull first alter,and the character change subsequently ? andif so, by’what means was the alteration ofshape produced ? If the character waschanged, solely by the exercise of judgmentand reflection, purely moral means, of whatpossible utility can the knowledge of theconnection between the organ and the dispo-sition be? Since the organ only alters sub-sequently to, and in exact proportion to the

previous alteration of the character, the con-duct of an individual will be a surer test ofan amelioration of disposition than the alte-ration in the shape of the skull. * * *Children at a very early age exhibit signs ofa benevolent or malevolent disposition ; acareful parent endeavours to ameliorate oreradicate the latter by judicious moralmanagement, and sometimes with success.

Is this effect produced by primarily dimi-nishing the size or development of a particu-lar portion of brain, the supposed seat of thevicious disposition ? If it is not, but thecorrection of the disposition arises from mo-tives operating on the mind, of what conse-quence is it whether the particular portion ofbrain constituting what the phrenologists callthe organ, be diminished or not? The know-

ledge of the connection between the organand the disposition is perfectly useless. Itwould be otherwise if the organ could bediminished by manipulations applied to thescalp. * * *

" Admitting that the disposition and pro-pensities of a child could be ascertained byobserving the formation of the head and the

56

preponderating size of particular organs, ofwhat possible utility would it be, since thecure of vicious propensities can be effectedby moral means only, and not by externalapplications. The actions of the child will ,’soon lead to a knowledge of his disposition,without any examination of his skull, andsuitable moral means would be adopted, theeffect of which could not be at all’increasedby any knowledge of the external protube-rance of the supposed organs. * * * Itis asserted by some phrenologists that theinferior propensities or faculties are to becontrolled by the faculty of conscientious-ness, meaning by that word, I suppose, con-science or the moral sense; by which weperceive some things in human conduct tobe right and others to be wrong; the firstprinciples of morals being the dictates of thisfaculty. But as the extent and degree ofconscientiousness must, according to their

doctrine, depend upon the size and develop-ment of the organ, there can be no equal re-sponsibility. How can a man with a verysmall organ of conscientiousness restrain theinferior faculties or propensities as effectuallyas a man who is endowed by nature with avery large development of the organ of con-scientiousness ? There can be neither meritnor demerit in a person whose organ of con-scientiousness is larger or smatler, accordingas it has pleased his Creator to bestow it.That the moral character and conduct of aperson depend solely upon the relative sizeof the different organs cannot be denied, ifthe doctrines of phrenology be true. Indeed,I find it stated in a review of a phrenologicalwork that phrenologists have long pro-claimed that the great cause of the incorri-gibility of criminals is the excessive predo-minance of the organs of the animal propen-sities over those of the moral and intellectualfaculties.’ Can the individual be responsiblefor this excessive preponderance? Is thematerial organisation of his bodily frameunder his own control ? * * *

" If the various degrees and kinds of in-tellectual power and of moral feeling depend(as is asserted by an author of no meantalent) upon those diversities of-cerebralorganisation which are indicated by, and

correspond to, the differences in the shape ofthe skull, over the structure of which hehas no power, there can be no moral respon-sibility in man. As it is not in man’s powerto determine or regulate the size and deve-

lopment of those organs, man cannot possiblyprevent his disposition and conduct being inaccordance with the preponderating influenceof these respective organs. But if he pos-sesses within himself, as he most assuredlydoes, that which enables him, independent ofall material organisation, to eschew evil andto practise good, according to the fixeddetermination of his own will, then he be-comes responsible as being a perfectly freeagent. * *

" I have now briefly animadverted upontwo pernicious errors which are of late be-coming in some degree popular, and fromthe adoption of which I wish to dissuadeyou. One, the sufficiency of the ordinarylaws of mechanics and chemistry to explainthe varied and important functions of the

living system. The other, the dependence ofthe intellectual and moral powers of manupon the size and development of certainparts of the cerebral mass; the latter ofwhich, if carried out to its fullest extent,must unavoidably lead to materialism andfatalism. * * * No apology, it is pre-sumed, can be necessary for canvassing theopinions held by others. Truth can neversuffer by discussion. If the objections Ihave brought forward are untenable, it is forthe supporters of such opinions to show thefutility of them, and to demonstrate thereality and utility of their science. If theycan do this effectually no opposition canoverturn it. * * * The attempt to im-pugn these doctrines, will, I am aware, beconsidered a proof how far I have been leftbehind in the railroad progress of moderndiscoveries; but whilst I can travel securelyupon the ancient and beaten path of soundobservation and experience, I am content totravel slowly ; nor am I at all inclined to

adopt opinions which, however imposing andcaptivating they may appear on a superficialview, are far, very far, from being basedupon the immutable foundation of truescience."

ST. BARTHOLOMEW’S HOSPITAL.

INTRODUCTORY LECTURE.

MR. WILLIAM LAWRENCE gave the intro-

ductory lecture at this institution at half-pasttwo on Saturday afternoon.He commenced by saying that the profes-

sion which had been chosen by his auditorywas one of the noblest pursuits which couldbe followed by man, provided it were under-taken with that due respect for morality andreligion which should form its most promi-nent feature. He proceeded to eulogise the

piety and benevolence of those individualswho had founded that hospital, originallyestablished for the treatment of the sick only,but within the last half century convertedalso into a valuable school of medicine. Ithad been questioned at first whether suchunion could be safely effected, but experi-ence had proved that the school and hospitalafforded mutual aid to each other ; for whilstthe hospital formed an ample field of clinical

’ study,-the only solid basis of medical know-ledge,-the presence of students in thewards kept up the attention of the medicalofficers to the patients, and ensured the bestkind of treatment. The hospital was large,which, however, was of less importance than