this work of Mr Combe's, and on a subject, as he says, very closely analogous, is it conceivable that Dr Chalmers would have entirely omitted all mention of that work if he had approved of the doctrines which it contained? Knowing the high character of Dr Chalmers, and how much he must be above any feeling of jealousy in a matter of this kind, I say it is inconceivable that he should not, in such circumstances, have taken some notice of Mr Combe's book, if he had considered it to be deserving of a favourable notice.

Lastly, Mr Combe has in this letter referred to the announcement of my intended publication; as to which he says, "I can hardly anticipate that Mr Scott will consider himself called on to supply the supposed omission of the two learned Doctors in Divinity above named. If, however, I shall be mistaken in this, and if Mr Scott shall make any attempt to shew that my work contains doctrines inconsistent with sound Christianity, it will be sufficient for me to remind you and the public, that Mr Scott is a layman, that he enjoys no reputation for theological learning, and that his opinions, therefore, are not of authority to decide the question."

What Mr Combe has here stated of me is all

literally and strictly true. It is true I am a layman, as Mr Combe himself is, and that I enjoy no reputation for theological learning. I never heard, and do not now understand, that

Mr Combe enjoys any reputation for theological learning, and, therefore, so far as mere authority goes, his opinion will probably not have greater weight than mine. I may also observe, that if Mr Combe, a layman, has written any thing erroneous in reference to Christianity, there can be no objection to his being answered by a layman. Still less can there be any objection to such an answer coming from me, when it is recollected that his attacks against the teachers of our religion are professedly founded on the doctrines of Phrenology, which doctrines circumstances had led me to make a subject of study; and therefore, I may be supposed better prepared to meet him on this particular ground than those who are comparatively strangers to these doctrines.

little

I have nothing more to add here, except to express my gratitude to those friends who have favoured me with their advice, encouragement, and assistance, during the progress of my work. To one of these my acknowledgments are particularly due, without whose assistance I should hardly have been able to finish my undertaking, even in the imperfect manner in which, I am well aware, some parts of it have been executed.

EDINBURGH, August 5, 1836.

THE

HARMONY OF PHRENOLOGY

WITH SCRIPTURE.

CHAPTER I.

EXAMINATION OF MR COMBE'S HYPOTHESIS, THAT THE WORLD IS CONSTI

TUTED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF SLOW AND PROGRESSIVE IMPROVEMENT. GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUBJECT.

IN the commencement of his work on the Constitution of Man, Mr Combe draws a parallel between the inferior animals and the human race, and the circumstances in which they are respectively placed. He observes, most truly, that animals exhibit a much more simple constitution than man does; that, whether their nature is wild and ferocious, or gentle and inoffensive, they are uniformly and consistently so; and that each tribe is placed in circumstances obviously suited to its character and habits. Man, on the other hand, presents anomalies and inconsistencies without end,—at once destructive and benevolent, selfish and generous-capable of the grossest sensuality, cruelty, and deceit; or of high attainments in wisdom, piety, and virtue. "But how," says Mr Combe, "shall these conflicting tendencies be reconciled, and how can external circumstances be devised that shall accord with such heterogeneous elements?" These questions have puzzled philosophers in Mr Combe thinks he is able to solve the

all ages.

enigma.

A

It is to be regretted, that, in entering upon this most interesting field of speculation, Mr Combe should have thought it necessary, at the very outset, to come into collision with certain doctrines which are generally supposed to lie at the very foundation of Christianity,— I allude to the doctrines of the Fall, and the consequent depravity of the human race.

Mr Combe had no occasion whatever to enter upon topics like these. If it had been his wish to treat his subject in a manner purely philosophical, and to consider the state and prospects of man, as far as he was able, by the lights of natural reason, he might have done so without trenching upon ground which is within the peculiar province of revelation. He might, and, as a philosopher, he was bound to have confined himself to that part of the history of the human race to which we have access from authentic human testimony, or existing monuments; and if, from facts thus established, when compared with the actual state of the race in various parts of the world, he could, by a legitimate induction, succeed in establishing any general laws respecting the progress of society in times past, there might then have been rational grounds for drawing conclusions as to the probabilities of this progress in ages to come. In choosing this course, Mr Combe would have avoided all risk of shocking the prejudices, or insulting the faith of any class of professing Christians, or of awakening, what he so much deprecates, the angry feelings of religious controversy.

But Mr Combe has not chosen to take this safe, rational, simple, and truly philosophical course. Instead of a regular induction, drawn from an extensive and well arranged collection of facts, he sets out with an hypothesis of the most sweeping description, drawn from analogies the most remote, and premises the most slender

and insufficient. This hypothesis is announced in general terms as follows: "The constitution of this world does not look like a system of optimism. It appears to be arranged, in all its departments, on the principle of slow and progressive improvement."

In support of this position, Mr Combe first refers to the facts recently discovered by geologists, shewing that this earth has, in very remote periods of time, undergone various revolutions, and has been covered by various races of vegetables and animals, successively produced and successively destroyed, all tending to prepare it for the residence of its present inhabitants, and particularly of man, the most important of them all. "At last," he says, "man was created, and since that period there has been little alteration in the physical circumstances of the globe."

After some general observations respecting the powers and faculties of man, and their adaptation to the circumstances in which he is placed, he goes on to draw an analogy between the progress of the human race and that of the physical world. "If the physical history of the globe," he observes, “clearly indicates progression in an advancing series of changes, the civil history of man equally proclaims the march, though often vacillating and slow, of moral and intellectual improvement;" and he takes for an example of this improvement the progress from barbarism to civilization in our own country, and upon this slender shred of a very remote analogy, he thinks he has established a new theory of the Divine arrangements, of universal application, which is to explain the secret purposes of Providence in regard to the human race," and vindicate the ways of God to man."

He now brings forward his views in a more definite form, and states them in opposition to those generally received. I shall give them in his own words: