to which function has been diminished. Where a brain is diseased, it is not enough to say that the patient remains sensible; because, as we have seen, the organs, though im

, paired still, perform their functions. The question to be put and answered is, “ Whether the intellect remain as vigorous as before, and to what extent has its vigour been impaired ?"

It is hoped, that these few remarks may have the effect of directing, in a proper channel, the inquiries of those whose pursuits bring them in contact with cases where observations of this nature can be made.

ARTICLE V.

MONOMANIA,

The following extract was sent us by a friend, who found it under the head of “Gleanings" in the Dundee, Perth, and Cupar Advertiser of 2d October, 1828. It is gratifying to observe the newspaper press diffusing sound ideas on a disease which only ignorance can confound with crime: the lives of the insane, and the feelings of their relatives, are placed by the law in the hands of juries, and nothing is more desirable than that persons liable to serve in that capacity should be instructed concerning the effects of disease in the organs, on the mental manifestations, before being called on to decide the fate of a fellow-creature. There is a vast difference between a disgraceful death, as a convicted felon, and confinement, as a patient in an asylum for the insane ; and yet the annals of our criminal courts, in both divisions of Great Britain, bear too many examples of the former having been inflicted on individuals who ought to have been consigned only to the latter.--EDITOR.

MONOMANIA.—The Clinique, a French daily paper devoted almost exclusively to medical and surgical reports, contains an account of the recent trial, at Angoulème, of a man named Jean Fort, charged with the wilful murder of his mother. This case, it seems, has been brought forward in the Clinique in support of the arguments of Doctors Gall, Georget, and others, who, from careful and long experience, bave declared

that the monomania of homicide is found frequently in persons who in every other respect are not only free from mental alienation, but who also sometimes display great intellectual powers, and, but for the longing to shed human blood, which in them is unconquerable, might be considered mild and humane members of society, their general conduct being usually correct, and, during the absence of the paroxysms, decidedly benevolent. The description given by Gall, Georget, Esquirol, and other eminent surgeons and physicians, of the monomaniac, is as follows:-" When the monomaniac has accomplished his object, he no longer thinks of any thing else. He has destroyed life-his end is attained. After the murder he is calm, and does not attempt to conceal himself. Sometimes even, full of satisfaction with the deed that he has committed, he avows, and delivers himself up to justice. If he is taken, however, against his will, he is morose and melancholy; he uses no dissimulation or artifice, and reveals with calmness and candour the minutest details of the murder." Opposed to the doctrines of this party, by which monomania is declared a mental failing over which the subject of it has no control—the development of the passion being greater than the corrective powers of the mind are some of the principal surgeons of the French metropolis, who deny, first, the correctness of the facts as stated by their opponents, and then comment on the bad example and danger to society of allowing monomaniacs to escape without punishment. As cases of real or pretended monomania are now become frequent in France, particularly in the south, which appears to be as fertile in the production of crime as of the gifts of nature, the discussion excites great interest in Paris, and is kept up by the new facts of which the opposing parties daily avail themselves. The following case seems to support the doctrine of Gall in a strong degree :-The murderer, in his calmness during the perpetration of his horrible purpose, and after its completion, resembles much the unfortunate man who was tried at Cork for the murder of his crew. On that

occasion a strong effort was made to convict the prisoner of wilful murder, against the concurrent testimony of the medical witnesses, who deposed to his monomania in the most positive and decided manner. The general correctness of the prisoner the total freedom from mental imbecility, and even great powers of intellect in the ordinary affairs of life-were clearly deposed to; but the horrible disease (for it is a disease) of monomania was clearly evident, and it seemed extraordinary that there should be persons who had been well educated who could doubt its existence. Jean Fort, the mo nomaniac tried at Angoulème, is described in the account of the trial as an object of disgust, from the appearance of his face, which was covered with an ulcer which had nearly destroyed his nose; and instances of his having used threats of destruction to many persons, some of whom perhaps had ridiculed him on his appearance, were related in evidence. On one occasion he had been seen attempting the life of his mother, and, when disturbed, he exclaimed, "Well, if I do not kill you to-day, I can do it to-morrow!" At another time he attempted to destroy a young child, after having said to it, "I will kill you, you little rogue; for if I allow you to grow up, you will some day or other turn me into ridicule." On the 18th of June last, Fort was accosted by a woman, to whom he said, "I am determined to kill all the people of Querroy." "And why ?" said the female. "Because they are too thick, and want thinning; some are too honest; but altogether they have caused me to kill my mother!" "Your mother!" "Yes; I have killed her, but I will put her into a coffin, and bury her myself." On the following afternoon, another woman, who lived near the house of the prisoner's mother, saw him enter the garden with a spade, mark out a grave, and begin to dig. She asked him what he was going to do? "I am digging a grave for my mother," said he, "for I have killed her; and if you don't believe it, go into the house and see." During the night he continued to dig. The woman and her husband rose at midnight, and called VOL. V.-No XIX.

2 E

him to go to bed. He replied coldly, "Go to bed yourselves. I am not working on your property." When the mayor went to apprehend him, he was found lying in the grave fast asleep. Being awakened and asked what he was doing, he said, "I am digging a grave for my mother, whom I have killed," at the same time showing the instrument with which he had destroyed her. On entering the house the mother was found murdered in her chair. Fort followed, and began to prepare her for interment. He was suffered to do this, and in a few hours he had made a complete shroud. He was then taken to prison, and soon afterwards put upon his trial. The mayor, and several persons who had known him for years, swore that they had never witnessed in him any act of insanity. The physician of the place, and other medical men, gave similar testimony. He acknowledged the murder; said he could die but once; and that, if found guilty, ten days (making a sign to imitate the falling of the guillotine) would end every thing. The jury acquitted him, on the ground that at the time of the murder he was suffering under mental aberration.

ARTICLE VI.

LETTER FROM DR SPURZHEIM TO THE EDITOR OF THE PHRENOLOGICAL JOURNAL.

SIR,-In No 18 of your Journal, article 14 by Dr Fossati, p. 304-305, there are assertions which oblige me to trouble you with the request to insert in your next Number the following remarks:-Dr Fossati's manner of giving the statements and of arranging the arguments must prevent your readers from perceiving the inaccuracy of the former and the weakness of the latter. He evidently accuses you of partia

lity, and tries to diminish my merit. Your note, page 305, sufficiently explains why you were authorised to speak of “ Gall and Spurzheim” together. Dr Gall taught you to do so long before I came to England, and we had published, under our joint-names, long before each of us published separately under his own name. I have by no means the intention to discuss the particular merits of Dr Gall and myself at the moment when I regret his death, because he can no longer enjoy the pleasure of witnessing the propagation of the most important science of which he laid the first foundation. I am glad, however, that I did not wait till after the end of his life to settle our account in stating fairly what belongs to him exclusively, and which are my claims, as far as discoveries and improvements are concerned. I have done it in the appendix to my French work, entitled Essai Philosophique de l'Homme Moral et Intellectuel, Paris, 1820. The only object of these present remarks is to show, 1st, That Dr Fossati, being ignorant of the progressive improvements of Phrenology, has no right to say that I have contributed only to consolidate Phrenology, and, 2d, That his manner of reasoning in the following quotation is little conclusive:

“ The founder of the doctrine,” says Dr Fossati, “is M. Gall “ alone ; every thing written and published before 1808 proves “ it sufficiently. Mr Spurzheim himself, who has deserved well

of the science, cannot believe himself one of the founders of the " intellectual physiology, since he only derived his knowledge of it “ from Dr Gall's lectures at Vienna in 1804. He acknowledges " this in the preface to his Anatomy of the Brain,' lately pub“ lished in London, as he had previously honourably done in his former works. If we were to add the names of all those who co-operate by their observations and labours to the consolidation of the doctrine, we would soon have a numerous list.”

In all my publications, I acknowledge, that Dr Gall is the founder of the PHYSIOLOGICAL PART of Phrenology; but how does Dr Fossati know that I only derived my knowledge of the doctrine "from Dr Gall's lectures at Vienna in 1804," since Dr Gall's lectures were interdicted in 1802, and he did not lecture at all in 1804, and I attended him for the first