The excitement appears to commence along the median line and in the brow, for Consciousness is roused, and Form, Size, Light and Shade, Color, Weight, Order and Number, are all impressed by surrounding objects. There may be also some exercise of Foresight and of Sagacity.

The progress of life necessarily directs this excitement outward and upward; a more and more extensive or remote memory is developed, upon which judgments and opinions are formed. This accumulation of materials, facts, appearances, opinions, &c., stimulates System, Invention, Reason, Scheming and Ideality. The natural progress of growth, therefore, is from the inner portion of the forehead outward, and from the lower upward. The upper and outer portion of the forehead, therefore, is characteristic of the adult and of the matured mind, as the lower and inner is characteristic of the infant.

If the antagonist organs to those of the forehead should be so much excited as to suppress the organs of the outer part of the forehead, the man would necessarily be reduced to the intellectual condition of infancy. If those of the inner part are thus suppressed, he is thrown into the mental condition of the old man, who lives upon old memories, and has no observation or recollection of recent things.

This infantile condition involves a certain degree of dependence, or disposition to rest upon and cling to those who support and befriend us; for the child has no independence, and, being incapable of supplying its own wants, looks entirely to the ministrations of kindness in its parents. This condition of dependence involves a desire to receive kindness from others-in other words, a desire to have ministering friends, which would lead to manners calculated to please and identify others with ourselves. This state is, however, one of selfishness. It is not a desire to serve others, but a desire to be served by them. Still, it is a friendly relation. It involves a sentiment of mutual kindness, some feeling of gratitude, a strong feeling of preference, and a feeling of possession of, or property in, the object of the feeling.

These elements constitute what has been called Adhesiveness. Hence we may say, that the region antagonistic to Memory and the reflective intellect, is the organ of Adhesiveness. The man who has the highest and most unrestrained order of intellect, looks into everything the world contains, and arrives at truth without partiality, prejudice or attachment. He perceives the defects of his friends, himself or his relations, and is perfectly impartial between friends and enemies. Looking upon others in that light, it is difficult for him to form partial attachments. He awards to each what is his due, and nothing more or less. His estimates are strictly just. Thus separated from his friends by his impar tiality, and feeling ready to be more interested in others who have superior powers or virtues, he is still more isolated by the

fact, that, departing from the path of custom, and disregarding the influences of society and early education, he goes boldly on to the adoption of views and practices which are considered eccontric, and which conflict with the opinions or violate the sentiments of his associates. He has no occasion to ask the opinions of reputed wise men, and no disposition to pay deference to that which he knows to be false. His friends, therefore, finding that they are as liable to his criticism as others, and that he will not identify himself with them, but stands ever ready to oppose an improper course in themselves or their friends, become less cordially attached to him, or sometimes look upon him as a species of social Ishmaelite.

At the same time, everything contributes to increase this alienation. Full of pleasure from the resources of his own intellect, solitary habits are more congenial, because they nourish and perfect his predominant organs. Society becomes unpleasant or tedious, since, in every company, he finds falsehood passing unquestioned, and high philosophy treated as an unwelcome intruder, his own views being opposed or assailed in every direction. Thus he withdraws from society, and society at the same time withdraws from him-intellectuality having destroyed the antago nistic power of Adhesiveness.

It remains to show, on the other hand, that Adhesiveness is the antagonist of intellect. We know that he who is dependent upon others, and who never goes his own course, has a dull and spiritless air-he has no original, penetrating thought. Attachments exclude thought; they forbid our investigating certain subjects, or least forbid impartial examination; they create a habit of receiving passively the impressions made by other minds, instead of originating thought for ourselves; they confine our attention to persons and present things, matters of pure observation and not of reason or research: they deprive us of the quiet and secluded haunts of the student, by making us continually gregarious; and in this gregarious association we know that the animal instincts and passions are excited, rather than high mental powers. The philosopher and scholar shun the crowd. because its presence is hostile to their pursuits, and because they are unfitted by their pursuits for such association. It is seldom that the hard student is fit for any species of popular gathering. The philosopher is, in manners, antipodal to the demagogue and to the dissipated votary of fashion. He is unable to operate upon the gregarious instinct, and draw men with him-he has not the animal life and spirits to amuse or excite them. The purely intellectual speaker is never followed by large auditories; the purely animal exhibition (a circus or a bull fight) always attracts a multitude. The purely intellectual thinker is always in the minority in his extreme and favorite opinions. Hence, every great innovation in science or philosophy, being the offspring of

pure reason, is in the minority. He who assumes the absurd side of a philosophical question, as easily attracts the masses to his ad captandum harangue, as the bold and eccentric thinker repels

them.

The law of the intellect is continual progression and readiness to change. The law of Adhesiveness is the perpetuation of that which has been handed down by our ancestors. The intellectual man seeks to destroy hereditary errors. But the Adhesiveness which defends them is closely akin to Combativeness, and he is pelted for his pains. There is nothing in which men are more unanimous than in banding together to put down the innovator who would bring his intellect to bear against that which has been established by time, whether in morals, religion, science, government or social arrangements.

There is, then, a positive antagonism between Adhesiveness and the philosophical, reflective intellect. It is not utterly destructive of all intellect, for it leaves the perceptive to act, and qualifies it for acting with quickness, but not with profundity. It is the hasty, superficial observation of society, not the profound and accurate observation of the naturalist. It is (as the hydraulic law would indicate) more the observation of character than the observation of physical facts, and more of proximate than of remote objects.

According to the hydraulic law, the organs which antagonize the outer portion of the forehead would associate with the perceptive powers of the median line, and with the external range which gives breadth. This would make a pleasing character, sensitive to impressions from the feelings of others, quick in appreciating their character, and in becoming adapted to it, modest and refined, neat, fond of the arts and elegancies of life, of poetry and romance, of light literature and conversation, of everything humorous and sentimental; for the region just above the intellect would be involved, as well as the sense of Force, and the conductor organs just below, so as to produce a fine, social and graceful character, continually pouring out the finer feelings. This is substantially the character ascribed to Approbativeness. Is not, then, this unintellectual region the region of Approbativeness? Certainly that feeling must be next neighbor to Adhesiveness, and therefore must be located in this region. If so, to what organ is this Approbativeness antagonist?

As a gentler feeling than Adhesiveness, a more refined and abstract impulse, it should certainly be located higher, and should find its antagonism, therefore, lower. If Adhesiveness antagonizes Memory and Reason, Approbativeness should antagonize the perceptive and understanding faculties. If it antagonizes them, it must produce an indifference to, or unconsciousness of, all external nature; but with this utter unconsciousness of the external world, its form, magnitude, solidity, resistance, power

and extent, its varied phenomena, grandeur and sublimity, there must be, of course, an overweening estimate of our own importance in the comparison, as Memory, and all the other intellectual faculties, are left active, so that Ingenuity, Scheming, Invention, Ideality, Sense of Force, &c., give us an idea of our own powers not counterbalanced by any proportionate conception of the sphere in which they are to be exercised, and of the difficulties or resistance to be overcome.

The tendency of the organ, then, must be to vanity-that species of vanity which is blind, which regards every opponent as an object of contempt, and treats him with a supercilious air. Such a character is an excellent illustration of vanity, is unfitted for any exact or profound attainments in science, or for the observation of nature, but capable of displaying some learning or literature and accomplishments, and capable of relating personal experience, having a pretty good store of personal recollections.

That there are organs of Adhesiveness and Approbativeness, thus antagonizing the intellect, I am compelled to admit, not merely by this reasoning, but because, in experimenting upon the unintellectual region, Adhesiveness and Approbativeness have been displayed, and I have been unable to prevent this result. The idea that Adhesiveness was antagonistic to the reflective intellect, seemed at first so improbable that I repeated the experi ment many times to detect some inaccuracy, but the uniformity of this result baffled the attempt. I then supposed that possibly Adhesiveness might be the antagonist of some repulsive functions which might be reached through the neck anteriorly, but the locations opposed this idea. The subject was, therefore, held for a long time undecided, and finally I have been compelled to admit what the experiments indicated at first, and to adopt this explanation.

According to the hydraulic law, the most anterior portion of Adhesiveness, antagonizing the internal portion of Memory, may be supposed to originate the attachment to family and children, as it tends to produce the condition of the old man; while the posterior portion, tending to produce the childish condition, may be conceived to produce an attachment rather to seniors or parents. The portion still further back may be supposed (antagonizing System) to produce the attraction to a crowd or discrderly assembly. This portion acting in conjunction (according to the hydraulic law) with Ideality and Order, would be well suited to the ball room; or, in conjunction with Scheming and Invention, to the battle field. The antagonism of Order and Calculation would be suited to scenes of great disorder and excitement, having a wild and playful, but not a hostile, character. Its tendency would be healthy, invigorating and restless, but somewhat convulsive.

In furtherance of the views just given, let it be observed, that

the organs of the brow, Form, Magnitude and Weight, have a close association with those of the sidehead-Modesty, Reverence, Sublimity, Cautiousness- to which they supply the ideas upon which these organs act, and without which they would have no aliment. The relation between these organs implies something of the same kind among their antagonists. Hence, as Perception is tributary to the sidehead, so is the region of Vanity antagonistic to Perception, connected with Ambition, Pride and Arrogance, which are antagonistic to the sidehead.

The organ of Adhesiveness, being lower than Approbativeness, will be found to co-operate with organs lower down, along or near the median line. With which it will co-operate, may be learned by observing with which its antagonist co-operates; for, when any two organs co-operate in producing a certain result, their antagonists must co-operate in preventing it. Thus the intellectual reflective organs (and especially Reason) co-operate with Sanity or soundness of mind, the antagonist of Idiocy and Mania. The organs of Foresight and Scheming appear to have an especial relation to Cautiousness, to which, indeed, the whole intellect is somewhat tributary. The reflective organs, too, are intimately associated with Tranquility, without which they cannot have proper action, and with Sublimity, a portion of which directly stimulates the brain. The antagonism of the reflective organs, therefore, must tend to mental derangement and folly, to rashness, carelessness and animality, which are antagonistic to the organs of the sidehead co-operating with reflection. Hence the vehement attachments of persons in whom the mind has not been cultivated and well disciplined, are very apt to unsettle the judgment, to lead to excesses, and to produce derangement or fatuity, if the passions are disappointed by the death or alienation of the beloved object. And hence it is, too, that when the gregarious faculties are indulged, when men herd together in crowds and mobs, there is always a deteriorating influence produced. In the mob they become restless, reckless, fierce and brutal. In all assemblies which are not under some restraining influence, the passions are apt to acquire an ascendancy, and men go headlong into excesses which separately they dare not approach.

Even our legislative assemblies manifest too often the influence of blind animality and partisan prejudice-men becoming banded together by the esprit du corps of a party, and sacrificing to party spirit all pure, elevated principles. Men of philosophical pursuits have always found it desirable to shun the crowd, the influence of which is so hostile to pure intellectuality. For the same reason, the city has always been considered the home of corrupt passions, and the country the region of quiet virtue, where men had less of the gregarious influence to pervert the dictates of judgment and conscience.

That the unintellectual organs should manifest themselves in