does it point out whatever may be predominant in our nature for good or for evil, teaching us by a monitor far more true than even the heart itself, how to remedy our faults in this life, and gradually by severe and constant practice, teaching us how to become more fitted for the life to come. HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF PHRENOLOGY. In examining the history, or the progress of discovery in any particular science, we are irresistibly led to enquire _why_ a series of facts like those which constitute its basis should have remained so long hidden from the eye of man. We know that the doctrines we are investigating are founded upon facts, and if those facts are in operation at this moment, they must have been equally so a thousand years ago, or our enquiries cannot be based upon Truth, since Truth is eternal. If, then, in perusing the records of phrenology, we are led to wonder at the long ages of human ignorance, Are we not equally surprised that all physical science should have existed so many ages, without the cognizance of man? Do we not wonder that thousands of years floated down the stream of Time, before man discovered _why_ the lightning flashed across the heavens, or _why_ the needle pointed to the pole, and are we not even now unable to tell _why_ the polar Aurora diffuses its ethereal light? Why then single out Phrenology for disbelief, because it is new, is gold the less gold because fresh from the mine? or truth less true because recently revealed? _We_ cannot tell why phrenology has so long remained unknown, but we may refer the reason to the wisdom of that Almighty Intelligence who placed his bow in the heavens, and fashioned that wonderful cycle of events that in every age has been suited to the wants and capacities of man. Phrenology could not have existed in any age but one wherein mind had asserted its mastery over matter, and although the understanding was in some measure prepared for the reception of new truths by the physiognomy of Lavater, and the facial line introduced by Camper, yet experience proved that Lavater's theories were not generally applicable, and the means proposed by Camper at the best times uncertain. Anatomists and physiologists toiled at discovering the seat of the mind, they dissected and drew conclusions--but so vague and unsatisfactory was the knowledge communicated, that the more the anatomist dissected, the more he became entangled in a mass of conjecture and perplexity. The metaphysician failed too; he studied the mind chiefly through himself and by recording his own knowledge of his faculties, was led into error: like the nautilus he retreated into his own shell and thus sought to learn what was without, and as may be supposed men of different minds arrived at different results:--such was the state of mental knowledge about 1760. The method pursued by Dr. Gall, was essentially different; at an early period he was led to notice the difference of talents and disposition in his schoolmates and companions,