UC-NRLF 
 
 
 B 3 1.07 
 
THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 PRESENTED BY 
 
 PROF. CHARLES A. KOFOID AND 
 MRS. PRUDENCE W. KOFOID 
 
CURSORY OBSERVATIONS 
 
 UPON j 
 
 THE "LECTURES 
 
 ON 
 
 PHYSIOLOGY, ZOOLOGY, 
 
 AND 
 
 THE NATURAL HISTORY OF MAN, 
 
 DELIVERED AT THE 
 ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 
 
 W. LAWRENCE, F. R. S. 
 
 PROFESSOR OF ANATOMY AND SURGERY TO THE COLLEGE, 
 
 IN A SERIES OF LETTERS 
 
 ADDRESSED TO THAT GENTLEMAN ; 
 
 WITH 
 
 A CONCLUDING LETTER 
 
 TO HIS PUPILS. 
 
 BY 
 
 EDWARD WILLIAM GRINF1ELD, M. A. 
 
 MINISTER OF LAURA CHAPEL, BATH. 
 
 THE SECOND EDITION, 
 
 TO WHICH IS ADDED, 
 
 Congralttlatorp aro&refts to ^ftr. JLatorence 
 
 oN THE SUPPRESSION OF HIS " LECTURES." 
 
 LONDON: 
 PRINTED FOR T. CADELL AND W. DAVIES, STRA D; 
 
 AND SOtD BY W. BLACKWOOD, EDJMBUBGH. 
 
J.M'Creery, Printer 
 BUck-Horse-Court, Lon< 
 
 urt, London, 
 
' * SJ / 
 
 CURSORY OBSERVATIONS, 
 
 
 LETTER I. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 THE ability and information which you have 
 displayed in your Lectures at the Royal College 
 of Surgeons, have deservedly placed you amongst 
 the brightest living ornaments of your profession. 
 To a consummate knowledge of those sciences 
 which more immediately relate to anatomical and 
 physiological inquiries, you have joined a taste 
 for general literature, and shewn a considerable 
 acquaintance with the history and progress of 
 Philosophy. 
 
 The opinions of a man thus gifted by nature 
 and polished by education, are calculated not 
 only to command the attention of the Public, 
 but, in some degree, to influence its judgment. 
 When I consider, indeed, the nature of that 
 audience to which these lectures were addressed, 
 consisting chiefly of young men just entering on 
 life, many of whom are unfixed in their prin- 
 ciples, and of which but a very small part can 
 be supposed to have formed calm and deliberate 
 
 M375834 
 
opinions on religious and moral subjects; I am 
 disposed to regard you almost in the light of a 
 dictator, and to consider you as invested with an 
 office of extraordinary and undefined responsi- 
 bility. By the range which you have taken of 
 delivering your sentiments on political and theo- 
 logical subjects, you have voluntarily exposed 
 yourself to the 'criticisms of those who have no 
 immediate connexion with your professional 
 studies: for, ignorant as I anrt of physiology and 
 anatomy, I can perceive in your researches the 
 evils which they portend to society in general, 
 and to the morals of your awn profession in par- 
 ticular. 
 
 From your Introductory Lecture, I learn, that 
 Mr. Abernethy has also been struck with this 
 dangerous tendency in your speculations; but 
 remember, Sir, that I charge you " with no un- 
 worthy design of propagating opinions detrimen- 
 tal to society." Far be from me to impute to 
 you such wicked and malignant motives. I doubt 
 not that you are engaged in the most honour- 
 able of all occupations, that of diffusing what 
 appears to you to be important truth. It is 
 with the effects, not the intentions, of your 
 writings that I have any controversy; and, as 
 you profess to be a lover " of fair argument and 
 free discussion," I trust that you will not disdain 
 to give me a patient hearing. 
 
 I repeat, Sir, that I have no concern with 
 your professional studies ; and that, if you had 
 confined yourself to a statement of anatomical 
 
facts or physiological observations, I should have 
 felt myself totally incapable of estimating the 
 value of your Lectures. But, since you have 
 travelled into the regions of history and morals, 
 have denounced the abstractions of metaphysics, 
 and ridiculed the records of revelation, I feel 
 myself at liberty to offer you my opinions on 
 these subjects, and I shall do it with the greater 
 freedom, because I am satisfied that your time 
 and attention must have been chiefly devoted to 
 other inquiries. In your reply to the charges of 
 Mr. Abernethy, you have facetiously alluded to 
 the currier who proposed a fortification of lea- 
 ther in a council of war. I fear, Sir, that many 
 of your readers will be disposed to turn this al- 
 lusion against yourself. In your ardor for phy- 
 siological studies, you have contrived to destroy 
 the value of almost every other science. In 
 your hands, ancient history is but a maze of ob- 
 scurity,* and modern history but a perversion 
 of government. f Christianity is chiefly of va- 
 lue as the stepmother of quakerism ; J and the 
 whole science of mind is represented a Utopian 
 research. Indeed, Sir, as we are not all intended 
 for surgeons and physicians, you should have 
 shewn some little regard for those who may be- 
 come your patients, as well as your pupils. As 
 it is not every man who can enjoy the opportu- 
 nity of studying human nature in a Caucasian 
 or Mongolian variety, you might as well have 
 
 P. 254, f P. 19. 37. 42. % P 43. 
 
left us to the belief that the knowledge of anti- 
 quity was to be derived through the vulgar me- 
 dium of ancient history. What is to become of the 
 morals of the populace, if they once should adopt 
 your opinions? "Takeaway from the mind of man 
 " the operations of the five external senses, and 
 cc the functions of the brain, and what will be 
 " left behind ?" * What truly, Sir, but the jail and 
 the gallows neither of which would long deter 
 from crimes and atrocities; and you would then 
 find that the " odium theologicum" f " was not 
 " the most concentrated essence of animosity 
 " and rancour." 
 
 But, perhaps, you will reply, that these were 
 mysteries intended only for the initiated, and that 
 your pupils alone were to receive the benefit of 
 such instructions. I fear that this apology will 
 prove of little service in your defence. It re- 
 quires no great intimacy with the state of the 
 metropolis, to know, that young men of this de- 
 scription do not require to be told of the into- 
 lerance of religious sects, nor to be furnished 
 with excuses for religious indifference. Indeed, 
 Sir, you might have found more appropriate and 
 more profitable topics, than to rail at the priests 
 of former times, and to compare the discussions 
 of religion to the quarrels of the ladies. { From 
 what is generally understood of the morals of too 
 many of those young gentlemen who walk the 
 hospitals, and frequent the medical schools of 
 
 * P. 7. f P. 10. j P. 10,11. 
 
our capital, the Public will not be inclined to 
 thank you for your ingenious apology for scep- 
 tical opinions, nor your reiterated sneers at the 
 government and religion of your country. 
 
 In accepting the office of a Professor at the 
 Koyal College of Surgeons, you were not indeed 
 bound to accede to the creed of the Established 
 Church, nor compelled to express your admira- 
 tion of the civil institutions of the English na- 
 tion. You were still at liberty to enjoy your 
 opinions in private, nay, to publish them to the 
 world in any separate and independent form. 
 But, I appeal to your sense of decorum and pro- 
 priety, whether it be fair or expedient to trans- 
 form the professor's chair into the seat of the 
 scorner and the sceptic ? Suppose, Sir, that I 
 had sent my son to attend upon your Lectures, 
 that your fame and reputation as Anatomical 
 and Surgical Professor, had determined him to 
 give you the preference above all your brethren ; 
 should not I be shocked, on his return, to find 
 that his religious principles were destroyed, and 
 his moral principles corrupted; that he had 
 ceased to admire the constitution of his coun- 
 try; and that he had gained his professional 
 knowledge at the expense of all dignified and 
 elevated moral sentiment ? 
 
 It would be a poor satisfaction for me to 
 learn, that you had no such nefarious design; 
 that all you wished was, to divest him of pre* 
 conceived prejudices, and to free him from na- 
 tional partialities. I had sent him to perfect 
 
8 
 
 himself in anatomical and surgical acquirements, 
 not to be made the disciple of Hume or Volney, 
 of Voltaire or Gibbon. Indeed, Sir, you have 
 completely travelled out of your record, by en- 
 deavouring to influence the moral and political 
 sentiments of your pupils. Instead of contem- 
 plating physiology, in its reference to surgery 
 and medicine, you have exhibited it as the road 
 to materialism in metaphysics, to faction in po- 
 litics, and to infidelity in religion. These are 
 grave and serious charges ; and if 1 cannot sub- 
 stantiate them, I shall be content to rank as a 
 bigot and calumniator. But if, in the following 
 Letters, it shall be proved that thes,e are the na- 
 tural consequences of your speculations, then, 
 as a man of honour, you will feel yourself driven 
 to the following dilemma: either you will, for 
 the future, refrain from expressing such opinions 
 in your character as Royal Professor, or, you 
 will renounce a situation so totally incompatible 
 with the display of these sentiments in politics 
 and religion. 
 
 I remain, Sir, yours, &c. 
 
LETTER II. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 IN your introductory Lecture, you have 
 endeavoured to establish the doctrine of mate- 
 rialism in its grossest and most disgusting form, 
 as will be apparent from the following quota- 
 tion : fc Where then shall we find the proofs 
 " of the mind's independence on the bodily 
 " structure ? of that mind, which, like the cor- 
 " poreal form^ is infantile in the child, manly 
 " in the adult, sick and debilitated in disease, 
 " frenzied or melancholy in the madman, en- 
 " feebled in the decline of life, doting in decre- 
 ' pitude, and annihilated by death ?" p. 7- 
 
 Before you had resolved to publish such opi- 
 nions, you should, at least, have inquired who 
 they are that believe in the independence of 
 the mind on the bodily structure? You are 
 fighting only against the followers of Berkeley : 
 the disciples neither of Locke nor Dr. Reid, 
 nor any other school in metaphysics that I am 
 acquainted with, believe in such arrant con- 
 tradictions. But, it is one thing, Sir, to believe 
 in the connexion of the mind with the body, 
 and another to assert their identity. This con- 
 nexion we call life; but the mind itself consti- 
 tutes the soul of man. However you may please 
 
10 
 
 to denounce these opinions as mere cc immate- 
 " rial abstractions/* you should consider that 
 they are at least venerable from their anti- 
 quity, and popular from their general reception 
 amongst mankind. To do you justice, indeed, 
 I find that you have admitted this to be the 
 fact. You endeavour to qualify the above sen- 
 tence by stating it as only delivered in a physio* 
 logical meaning, and that the " theological 
 " doctrine of the soul, and its separate exis- 
 " tence, has nothing to do with this physiolo- 
 <c gical question, but rests on a species of proof 
 <c altogether different. " And you afterwards 
 very candidly admit " that the doctrine of the 
 c immortality of the soul, and a future state of 
 " rewards and punishments, was fully recog- 
 " nized in all the religions of the ancient world," 
 &c. p. 8, 9, &c. 
 
 I do not pretend, Sir, to reconcile this sen- 
 tence with the general principles which are ad- 
 vanced in your Lectures; but, after a very at- 
 tentive perusal of them, I am impressed with 
 the conviction, that their general tendency goes 
 to destroy this belief of the soul's immortality ; 
 and that I am not mistaken in this opinion, I 
 shall beg leave to refer to your own expressions. 
 
 In p. 60, you inform us that " life is merely 
 " the active state of the animal structure; that 
 " it denotes what is apparent to our senses, and 
 " cannot be applied to the offspring of meta- 
 f ' c physics or immaterial abstractions." You 
 then declare that the anima means nothing more 
 
11 
 
 than wind or breath, and in the same way the 
 Latin spiritus, or original of our spirit, from 
 spiro, to breathe, means merely " breath ; the 
 " same is the case with the Greek smv/xa, and 
 " this is the original sensible object out of 
 " which all the abstractions and fancies, all the 
 V verbal sophistry and metaphysical puzzles 
 " about spirit have proceeded/** 
 
 If you had continued to observe the distinc- 
 tion between animal life and the thinking 
 faculty, in other parts of your work, I should 
 have quietly passed over this harmless mate- 
 rialism, however I might have questioned its 
 reality. But, when you proceed, in the subse- 
 quent parts of your Lectures, to warn your 
 pupils againstf cc metaphysical chimeras, and 
 " the intrusion of immaterial agencies ;" when 
 you denounce all belief in these agencies as the 
 J <c regions of imagination, and the poetic ground 
 
 For these wondrous discoveries, Mr. L. is indebted to the 
 philological speculations of Mr. Tooke, who by the same de- 
 composition of words reduced right into no other than rectum. 
 (regitum) the past participle of the Latin verb regere ; so that 
 right) in this vocabulary, means nothing more than the thing 
 ordered : and just homjubcre, is exactly of a similar import. 
 By the same analysis, truth means nothing more than the thing 
 trowed; and instead, says this great philosopher, " of its 
 <c being a rare commodity on earth, there is nothing but truth 
 " in the world." Reader I If thou art grave, I would refer thee 
 for a .confutation of these etymological speculations to the Fifth 
 Essay of Dugald Stewart's Philosophical Essays ; if thou art 
 merry, to Dean Swift's account of the studies in the Academy 
 of Lagado, Gulliver's Travels, Part III. Chap. 5. 
 + P. 78 and 189. J P. 83. 
 
12 
 
 cc of physiology ; when you ridicule those who 
 c think it impossible that the living organic 
 " structure should have vital properties, without 
 " some extrinsic aid;" when you assert that* 
 " life consists in organization, and that such or- 
 " ganization is destroyed by death -" when you 
 sneer at the belief f" of thought as an imma- 
 " terial agent, and represent its office as no bet- 
 <c ter than that of a sinecure;" when you deride 
 the supposition of an " immaterial mind" and 
 assert that J" mankind are superior to brutes 
 " only on account of superior organization;" 
 above all, when you speak of death " as that 
 " awful moment from which all sentient beings 
 " shrink back with instinctive dread, as the ter- 
 <e mination of their existence ;" from these and 
 similar passages, I am compelled, however un- 
 willingly, to draw the conclusion, that you have 
 no fixed or settled belief in the immateriality of 
 the soul, or its continuance in a future state of 
 being. 
 
 Certain, at least, I am, whatever may be 
 your own opinion on this subject, such would 
 be the natural effect produced on your hearers. 
 Surely, Sir, if you had not wished these mis^- 
 chievous consequences to be drawn, you should 
 have blended a few cautions and admonitions to 
 the young and unwary. These moral observa- 
 tions would, at least, have been as appropriate 
 as allusions to the Green-bag conspiracy,^ or 
 
 * P. 93. 4- P. 105. $ P. 109. jJ P. 577. 
 
 5 P. 12. 
 
13 
 
 to forgotten disputes in the Greek church.* 
 Since you have condescended to smile so often 
 at priests, and to anticipate <c the destruction 
 <c of all creeds and articles of faith, "f it would 
 not have been much out of your way, to have 
 interspersed a few remarks on the dangers, 
 whether real or imaginary, which are generally 
 supposed to belong to the doctrines of materia- 
 lism. 
 
 I am strongly disposed to think that you have 
 not as yet made up your mind on these interest- 
 ing topics, but that you indulge in that philoso- 
 phical WW which is at once the pride and 
 torture of its possessor. And what leads me to 
 this supposition is, the great uncertainty which 
 I find in the statement of your opinions, and the 
 impossibility of arriving at any fixed conclu- 
 sions respecting them. Thus, in p. 13, whilst 
 you assert in the text, " that the foundations of 
 " morality and religion are secure, by their natu- 
 " ral and firm establishment in the feelings and 
 <c propensities, in the common sense and mutual 
 <c wants of mankind," you give the authority 
 of Pascal, in a note, for maintaining them 
 merely on the grounds of revealed religion, and 
 assert, " that the immortality of the soul, the 
 " great truths of religion, and the fundamental 
 " principles of morals, cannot be demonstrably 
 " proved by mere reason," &c. Surely, Sir, be- 
 fore you attempt to direct the opinions of others, 
 
 * P. 10. t P- 96. 
 
14 
 
 you should choose and determine your own. I 
 shall take occasion, in other parts of these Let- 
 ters, to shew, that the same uncertainty per- 
 vades your opinions, not only on moral subjects, 
 but in those departments of knowledge which 
 relate more immediately to your professional 
 studies. But, at present, I would only beg you 
 to reflect whether you are authorized, in this 
 sceptical state of mind, to enter upon topics 
 which are not essentially connected with ana- 
 tomical and surgical pursuits. Can it answer 
 any one useful or honourable purpose, to un- 
 settle the opinions of young men, who are just 
 entering on the world, and who are exposed to 
 all the temptations of a luxurious metropolis? 
 If your physiological principles have led you to 
 this state of doubt and uncertainty, why should 
 you think it necessary to spread the infection ? 
 Cannot you be content to enjoy the reputa- 
 tion of an able professor of anatomy and sur- 
 gery, without aspiring to the fame of an intel- 
 lectual philosopher ? 
 
 You confess yourself an ardent admirer of the 
 French and continental schools, and are evi- 
 dently fond of adducing the names of Voltaire 
 and Volney, in defence of your opinions. I 
 trust that I am not insensible to the high lite- 
 rary merits of these and other foreigners ; but 
 if in your admiration of their writings, you 
 expect to introduce amongst us the spirit of 
 their speculations, I trust, and confidently be- 
 lieve, that you will be signally defeated in your 
 
15 
 
 endeavours. Englishmen, Sir, may sometimes 
 carry their nationality to an unwarrantable 
 height, and I think that you have detected 
 something of this over-patriotic spirit in the 
 writings of Mr. Abernethy. But these minor 
 faults would be ill-redeemed by throwing off 
 our alarms against those who have filled Eu- 
 rope and the world with disorder and desola- 
 tion. Experience has convinced us these 
 "charming'* writers, are not less dangerous 
 from the seductive embellishments, with which 
 they have adorned their principles. Whilst we 
 admire their taste and genius, we are not disposed 
 to embrace their scepticism and irreligion ; and 
 if you, or any man should attempt to hold them 
 up in these kingdoms, as the guides and in- 
 structors of our youth, I feel confident, that 
 you would but sacrifice your own reputation at 
 the shrine of your attachment to foreigners. 
 
 But it is not only France and the continent 
 which are to be preferred to this country, we 
 are also to be humbled and taunted by the su- 
 perior excellence of our American descendants. 
 Truly, Sir, this is going beyond your official 
 duties, merely to insult the civil and religious 
 institutions of Great Britain. If such be your 
 private opinions, why are they to be delivered 
 from the theatre of the Royal College? Why 
 should your pupils be instructed to consider 
 Europe * " as one great state prison >" to con- 
 
 * P. 37. 
 
16 
 
 template our governments " as the worn out 
 " despotisms of the old world ;" why should the 
 United States be insidiously contrasted with 
 this country, as the spot *" where religion is 
 " in all its fervour, without needing an alliance 
 " with the State, and where the law commands 
 " by the respect which it inspires, without 
 " being enforced by military power?" 
 
 No doubt you are at the most perfect liberty 
 to enjoy your own opinion on these or any other 
 subjects. We do not complain of them as con- 
 stituting your private sentiments, but as being 
 brought forward in an official manner, and from 
 the chair of the Royal College. Neither you, 
 nor any other man, have a moral right to use 
 such a public office, for the purpose of degrad- 
 ing and vilifying the civil and religious institu- 
 tions of their country. When our children are 
 sent to acquire a knowledge of surgery and 
 anatomy, we do not expect them to be hearing 
 tirades against the manners, the laws, and the 
 religious principles of their ancestors. It is not 
 for me to say how others should feel or act on 
 such an occasion, but I am a plain man, and 
 I will honestly give my opinion. If I had the 
 honour to be a member of the court which 
 elects to this office, I could not conscientiously 
 allow you to fill the station, f" However flat- 
 " tering to your vanity to wear the gown," I 
 
 * P. 489. t P. 3. 
 
17 
 
 would take you at your word, and with all my 
 admiration for your talents, " would allow you 
 " to strip it off/' rather than behold the minds 
 and morals of so many young men endangered 
 by speculations which are subversive of their 
 temporal happiness, and their eternal welfare. 
 
 I am, &c. 
 
 LETTER III. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 THE multifarious subjects of your Lectures 
 will render me, I fear, somewhat desultory and 
 unconnected in my remarks on those inquiries, 
 which are incidentally introduced into your 
 work. I have already confessed, that I have no 
 pretensions to criticize your surgical and anato- 
 mical knowledge. In this respect, you com- 
 mand my admiration, by the extent of your ac- 
 quaintance with foreign authors, and my im- 
 plicit deference to that tribunal which has al- 
 ready assigned you so large a share of reputa- 
 tion at home. But, when you step beyond 
 your own profession, to interfere with morals, 
 
 B 
 
18 
 
 or politics, or theology, I must confess, that 
 you instantly remind me of Pope's observation : 
 
 One science only will one genius fit, 
 So vast is art, so narrow human wit. 
 
 You have scarcely entered on the subject of 
 your second Lecture, before you display the 
 extent of your attachment to the doctrine of 
 materialism. How far your late friend Dr. 
 Gordon would have admitted * " that Dr. 
 " Spurzheim, on account of the prevalence of 
 " war, was amply justified in having marked 
 " out so considerable a tract in his map of the 
 " human brain, for the abode of destructiveness, 
 " and its near neighbour, and close ally, com- 
 " bativeness," I will not pretend to decide. 
 These are cc high matters" which none but 
 those who are initiated into the mysteries of 
 your profession can determine. As a plain 
 man, however, it does not appear to me why 
 you should blame kings and legislators for pur- 
 suing " a practice so essentially characteristic 
 " of human nature," and to which they are 
 irresistibly determined by the organization of 
 their faculties. It is singular, indeed, that the 
 quakers should be devoid of these celebrated 
 tracts in the human brain, but I see not why 
 they should be praised for this lucky arrange- 
 ment of their cerebra. You are particularly 
 
 * P. 42. 
 
19 
 
 unfortunate in adducing these Christian Mys- 
 tics, " as holding no unintelligible articles of 
 faith." p. 43, note. 
 
 Though you are so unwilling to allow of any 
 mysteries relating to " immaterial agencies,' 1 
 yet you find no difficulty in the admission of 
 the most unintelligible jargon, as explanatory 
 of the existing phenomena of nature. Thus to 
 account for the existence of certain parts, par- 
 ticularly in some marsupial animals, where the 
 function does not exist, or where the parts are 
 not employed, you recur to the ideal fancy* of 
 ja " certain model or original type," which had 
 been fixed on as " the pattern" of these ana- 
 logous beings. Truly, Sir, these are something 
 like the " eternal forms" of the ancient meta- 
 physics, or the <c internal moulds" of Buffon, 
 or that " principle of order," which Paley has 
 so successfully ridiculed in his " Natural The- 
 " ology." But I am inclined to think that you 
 hold the writings of this author in no great re- 
 pute, since you endeavour to decry the value of 
 these physico-theological speculations, and to 
 withdraw the minds of your pupils from the 
 contemplation of final causes. f 
 
 Now, when it is considered, that the writings 
 of these " short-sighted" physico-theologists 
 are of all others the best adapted to imbue the 
 minds of young men in your profession with 
 sentiments of love and veneration for the Author 
 
 * P. 1, 49, and p. 94. f P- 51. 
 B 2 
 
20 
 
 of nature, I do not think that the public will 
 be inclined to thank you for attempting to ridi- 
 cule their merits, or diminish their influence. 
 If you had contented yourself with merely recti- 
 fying their occasional errors, we should have felt 
 obliged to you for your superior means of infor- 
 mation ; but when even Haller* cannot escape 
 your sneers on this subject, it is plain, that you 
 mean to treat the whole body of these writers 
 with derision and contempt. 
 
 " To talk of life as independent of an animal 
 " body, to speak of a function without refe- 
 fc rence to an appropriate organ/' you say, 
 " is physiologically absurd, &c. -What should 
 c we think of abstracting elasticity, cohesion, 
 " gravity, and bestowing on them a separate 
 <c existence from the bodies in which these pro- 
 " perties are seen ?" Since you have so roundly 
 put this question, let it be as roundly answered. 
 We should think much more highly of the man 
 who viewed them as existing apart, than he 
 who confounded them together. The co- ex- 
 istence of things will not prove their identity. 
 Even, if it should be allowed, that these were 
 the necessary and inseparable properties of 
 matter, it would not show that these properties 
 were to be confounded with their subjects, f 
 
 * P. 203. 
 
 f Sir Isaac Newton expressly denies gravity to be a power 
 inherent and essential to matter, and consequently attraction 
 of cohesion, which is the same power acting at a smaller dis- 
 tance. See Newton's Letter to Bentley, Jan. 17, 1692-3. 
 
21 
 
 You conclude this Lecture, by recommend- 
 ing the works of Haller to the attention of the 
 English student. Indeed, Sir, it would be 
 well if you had imitated, not only the experi- 
 mental research, but the piety of " this father 
 " and founder of modern physiology." Haller 
 was a believer not only in all the great truths of 
 natural religion, but a zealous advocate for the 
 truth and authority of the Christian revelation. 
 In an admirable work addressed to his daughter, 
 hfc has left us his deliberate opinions on this 
 subject. " Your father, who now addresses. 
 " you, during the course of a long life, spent 
 " in continual labour and study, thought him- 
 " self obliged to consecrate some of his leisure 
 " hours, to inquiries of this nature. The re- 
 " suit of which was, that those truths which 
 "have been called in question, always ap- 
 " peared to him the more evident and res- 
 " pectable, the more attentively he examined 
 "the proofs and reasons on which they were 
 " founded." " The rock of salvation is solidity 
 e< itself. It cannot be shaken, either by the 
 " doubts of the sceptic, or the sarcasms of the 
 
 sneerer." 
 
 I remain, &c. 
 
LETTER IV. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 I MUST acknowledge, that your third Lec- 
 ture abounds with many solid and striking ob- 
 servations on the extent and limits of human 
 science as connected with physiology : in which, 
 as you remark,* " we follow the links of an 
 ** endless chain, and by holding fast to it, we 
 " may ascend from one link to another; but 
 " the point of suspension is not within the 
 " reach of our feeble powers." 
 
 <c To call life," you continue, " a property 
 " of organization would be unmeaning it 
 " would be nonsense." Now, Sir, permit me 
 to confront this opinion with the following sen- 
 tence in the ensuing Lecture. f " Such a kind of 
 " composition (viz. of solids and fluids) and such 
 " an arrangement of the constituent parts, is 
 " called organization ; and as the vital pheno- 
 " mena are only such motions as are consistent 
 " with these material arrangements, life, so far 
 " as our experience goes, is necessarily con- 
 " nected with organization. Life pre-supposes 
 " organization, as the movement of a watch 
 " pre-supposes wheels, levers, and other mecha~ 
 " nism of the instrument." 
 
 * P. 82. f P. 93, and p. 104 
 
I will not attempt to reconcile these contra- 
 dictory statements, but I conclude they are 
 specimens of that * " variety which is the source 
 <c of every thing which is beautiful and interest- 
 c * ing in the external world the foundation of 
 cc the whole moral fabric of the universe." 
 
 On these principles it is no difficult task to 
 account for your dislike of " all attempts at 
 " making mankind act or think alike." No 
 wonder you cannot endure " those legislators 
 " and rulers of the world, who have persisted 
 * c for centuries in endeavouring to reduce the 
 " opinions and the belief of their subjects to 
 <c certain fancied standards of perfection, and 
 cc to impress on human thought that dreary 
 " sameness and dull monotony which all the 
 " discipline and rigor of a religious sect has 
 " been hardly able to maintain in its followers, 
 " &c." Indeed, Sir, this would be a fatal era 
 for scepticism, if the success of such projects 
 could be realized. " You cannot doubt there- 
 " fore that a day will arrive when the attempt 
 " at imposing uniformity of opinions will be 
 " deemed as irrational and as little desirable, as 
 " to endeavour at producing sameness of face 
 " or stature." f 
 
 Passing over those remarks at present, which 
 relate to the difference of a species and variety, 
 1 shall confine my observations to the conclud- 
 ing parts of this Lecture, in which you put 
 
 * P. 95. f P. 96. 
 
forth all your powers in defence of materialism. 
 As to your arguments. Sir, I must confess they 
 lie within a very small compass, being almost 
 confined to the following sentence " that un- 
 less we allow the brain to be identified with 
 <c thought,* its office is only one remove above 
 "a sinecure; it is a kind of porter, entrusted 
 " to open the door, and introduce new comers 
 " to the master of the house, who takes on 
 " himself the entire charge of receiving, enter- 
 " taining, and employing them." 
 
 After this, you most earnestly exhort the stu- 
 dent to enter on this subject with a serious and 
 earnest love of truth , but who would believe 
 that you commence the investigation with at- 
 tempts at ridicule and tales of impiety ? The 
 story of the " homunculus" and the syringe, as 
 a piece of wit, belongs to Sterne and Tristram 
 Shandy ; but as an endeavour to raise the mirth 
 of your pupils " at the little mortal who has a 
 <e soul to be saved/ 1 it is exclusively your own. 
 You are probably, Sir, the first Lecturer at this 
 Royal College who has ever brought forward sub- 
 jects of this nature as illustrations of Physiology ; 
 and I trust your own sense of shame, conjoined 
 to the indignation of the public, will leave 
 you no successor. You may discourse as you 
 please on the contracted cranium and the re- 
 treating forehead of the unfortunate negro \ but 
 I am sure there is no rational being, however 
 
 * P. 106. 
 
'25 
 
 low in the scale of intellect, who would not con- 
 demn such allusions, when introduced before 
 such an audience, merely for the purpose of 
 mirth and irreligion. 
 
 To put a finishing stroke to this controversy, 
 you refer to Pathology as affording the most 
 signal evidences in favour of materialism. 
 " They who consider the mental operations as 
 <c acts of an immaterial being, and thus discon- 
 <f nect the sound state of the mind from organ- 
 " ization, act very consistently in disjoining 
 " insanity also from the corporeal structure, 
 " and in representing it as a disease, not of the 
 " brain, but of the mind. Thus we come to 
 " disease of an immaterial being, for which, suit- 
 * c ably enough, moral treatment has been recom- 
 " mended. " Yes, Sir, we accept your chal- 
 lenge, and are obliged to you for this appeal. 
 The Retreat at York, and many other recep- 
 tacles for insane persons, will furnish you with 
 the result. But here, as in every other part of 
 the argument, you misstate the question. We 
 do not disjoin the corporeal organs from the 
 mental faculties ; nor is it found that moral 
 treatment will suffice without the aids of medi- 
 cine. It is the conjunction of both which affords 
 the best means of recovery ; and for this plain 
 reason that they apply to both the mental and 
 corporeal parts of our constitution. 
 
 You finish your Lecture by disclaiming all 
 regard to the expediency and effects of divulging 
 any hurtful opinions, supposing them to be true. 
 
26 
 
 The supposition is monstrous, and in direct 
 opposition to the inductive spirit of the sound- 
 est philosophy. If these opinions be true, it is 
 also expedient to publish them to the world ; 
 but if they are calculated to destroy the hopes 
 and happiness of mankind, to corrupt and de- 
 moralize society ; then their falsity is confessed 
 and apparent " by their fruits you may know 
 them." 
 
 I remain, &c 
 
 LETTER V. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 IN the first chapter of your " Natural His- 
 " tory of Man," you have very justly defined 
 the labours and subdivisions of those who culti- 
 vate the different departments of this science. 
 *" The anatomist and physiologist unfold the 
 " construction and uses of the corporeal me- 
 " chanism ; the surgeon and physician describe 
 " its disease; while the metaphysician and mo* 
 " ralist employ themselves with those functions 
 " which constitute the mind with the moral 
 
 * P. 119, 
 
" sentiments. Man in society, his progress in 
 " the various countries and ages of the world, 
 " his multiplication and extension, are the pro- 
 " vince of the historian and political econo- 
 *5 mist." 
 
 After this just and accurate classification, we 
 are surprised to find you in the suspicious cha- 
 rafcter of a monopolist, especially as you have 
 determined " that this labour is much too ex- 
 " tensive to be properly executed by any indi- 
 '* vidual." If any proof were wanting of the 
 truth of this opinion, you have certainly con- 
 firmed it by your own example, and have shewn 
 to the most sceptical of your pupils, " that the 
 " inscription on the temple of Delphi contained 
 " a more difficult and important precept, than 
 " all the books of the Moralists," p. 123. 
 
 We are obliged to you, however, for ventur- 
 ing so far to differ from Monboddo and Rousseau, 
 as to assign us a distinct species from the mon- 
 key and oranoutang; yet I cannot feel very proud 
 of the following zoological definition of human 
 nature. " Order, bimanum (two-handed). Ge- 
 " wtt,homo; the jrpec/w, single, with several varie- 
 " ties. Characters: erect stature, two hands, 
 " teeth approximated and of equal length; the in- 
 tc ferior incisors perpendicular ; prominent chin, 
 " rational, endowed with speech, unarmed, de- 
 <c fenceless." Whether Linnaeus might have been 
 satisfied with these circumstances as " so obvi- 
 t ous and abundantly sufficient to characterise 
 " man," and to distinguish him from the ape 
 
and baboon, I will not pretend to determine ; 
 but I am certain that common mortals, after 
 studying this description of their nature, are 
 not likely to rise in their own estimation, or to 
 attempt * " the apparently impracticable task 
 " assigned by the poet, 
 
 " Go, wond'rous creature ! mount where science guides, 
 " Weigh air, mete earth, and calculate the tides." 
 
 To be serious, Sir, these attempts to charac- 
 terise man by his animal, rather than by his 
 mental functions, will always appear ludicrous 
 to those who are not initiated into the art of de- 
 grading their own species. We carry about 
 with us a firm conviction, that these are the 
 mere accidents, not the essentials of our nature; 
 and that however proper it may be to mention 
 them as the technical statements of physiology, 
 yet that they are totally inadequate to the de- 
 scription of a being who feels himself " but a 
 " little lower than the angels." 
 
 You have an easy method, however, for de- 
 termining the superiority of our species, as 
 compared with other animals. A pair of scales, 
 with a few small weights, is all the apparatus 
 which is required, f " The largest brain of a 
 " horse weighs one pound seven ounces; the 
 " smallest brain in an adult, two pounds five 
 u ounces and a quarter." Indeed, Sir, these 
 are noble discoveries, whether they originate in 
 
 * P. 235. f p. 193. 
 
England or in Germany; yet it is mortifying to 
 learn, * " that it is hardly to be expected these 
 " matters will receive any clear elucidation, 
 " while we continue so ignorant as at present of 
 " the functions executed by the different parts 
 " of the encephalon." 
 
 Remember, Sir, that if these statements ap- 
 pear ridiculous, it is yourself who have con-, 
 trived to render a grave science the subject of 
 drollery. If you had adduced these facts mere- 
 ly as physiological data, they would still have 
 retained all their importance in relation to ana- 
 tomy and pathology ; but when you bring them 
 forward as illustrative of morals, or theology, or 
 metaphysics oh ! then we cannot command 
 the solemnity of our muscles, and in spite of the 
 dignity of a Royal Professor, we are obliged to 
 give vent to our emotions. 
 
 Towards the conclusion of this chapter, you 
 offer some remarks on what you term f" an in- 
 * teresting part of the female structure." I 
 am sorry to observe that here, and in several 
 other parts of your Lectures, you indulge in cer- 
 tain licentious allusions, which are very foreign 
 to the modesty and sobriety of real science.; 
 You need not be informed, Sir, that there is a 
 certain technical phraseology belonging to these 
 subjects which has not the slightest tendency 
 to awaken any impure ideas. It is not usual, I 
 believe, in medical books, to speak of J" the rites 
 
 * P. 194. f P. 201. | P. 228. 
 
30 
 
 ic of Venus,*' nor to enlarge on the size of the 
 breasts, *"even in this pious age of societies 
 S( for suppressing vice and the distributing 
 ".bibles;" nor to discourse on certain other 
 facts in the same page, " relating to an inte- 
 <c resting point in natural history. " Indeed, 
 Sir, as I am not a surgical professor, I cannot 
 pretend to follow you through your various suc- 
 ceeding details; but I remember something in 
 Juvenal of the "maxima debetur puero reveren-. 
 " tia" which I think might have excused your 
 account in page 419, and might have saved you 
 the trouble of copying certain lascivious notes 
 from Warton's Theocritus ! f 
 
 The very nature of these particulars forbids 
 my adducing such passages at length. I will 
 pot, for the sake of becoming more perspicuous, 
 raise a blush on the cheek of modesty, or afford 
 a single jest and gratification to the profligate. 
 If you read the character of Gibbon, as drawn 
 by Mr. Porson, in his Letters to Travis, you 
 will have some faint conception of the con- 
 nexion of infidelity with these licentious descrip- 
 tions. In the mean time, Sir, I would refer it to 
 your sense of decorum and propriety, whether 
 you should lend your office to awakening any 
 of those emotions which are too apt to arise on 
 this subject, and whether, considering the na- 
 tural opportunities and tendencies of your pro- 
 fession, you should not be particularly delicate, 
 
 * P. 419. f P. 293. 
 
31 
 
 on these subjects relating to sexual distinctions* 
 But I feel the consequences of my resolution 
 the dread of offering examples, has rendered my 
 argument somewhat dubious. Brevis esse laboro 
 obscurusjio. 
 
 I remain, &c. 
 
 LETTER VI. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 You next proceed to investigate a very in- 
 teresting and important question, viz. whether 
 different kinds of men were originally created; 
 or whether we are to account for the diversities 
 which exist amongst mankind by the opera- 
 tions of subsequent physical and moral causes, 
 On the first supposition, as you remark, there 
 would be different species of the human race ; 
 whereas on the latter, they will form only dif- 
 ferent varieties of the same species. 
 
 It is your next endeavour to shew that this 
 question must be exclusively determined by the 
 principles of physiology, independent of all 
 argument d priori, and of all national and his- 
 torical traditions. You then attempt to ridi- 
 cule those " regula fhilosophandi" which 
 were laid down by Newton,, and which would 
 
lead us to the conclusion *"that as nature 
 " does nothing in vain, she would not give her- 
 " self the trouble to create several different 
 " stocks, when one family would be sufficient 
 " to colonize the world in so short a time." It 
 is rather unfortunate for your consistency, that 
 in a subsequent part of your work, you should 
 adopt that very kind of argument which you 
 here deride, f " We should openly violate the 
 4< rules of philosophizing, which direct us to as- 
 " sign the same causes for internal effects of the 
 " same kind, and not to admit more causes 
 " than are sufficient for explaining phenomena, 
 " if we recurred, for the purpose of explaining 
 " the varieties of man, to the perfectly gratu- 
 " itous assumption of originally different spe- 
 " cies; or called to our aid the operation of 
 " climate and other external influences. " 
 
 The last member of this sentence will per- 
 fectly startle some of your readers, who will 
 not be able to comprehend what your opinions 
 can be on this interesting subject, especially 
 when you proceed to observe, cc that if it be 
 " allowed all men are of the same species, 
 " it does not follow they all descend from the 
 " same family." The truth is, Sir, that, like 
 Mr. Hume, you furnish us only " with a seep* 
 " tical solution of certain sceptical doubts." 
 You have not been able to make up your own 
 mind on the subject. If you had openly ad- 
 
 * P. 245. 4 P. 515. J P. 247. 
 
S3 
 
 mitted the conclusions of the soundest phi- 
 losophy, it would have exemplified too near 
 an agreement with the account of Moses ; but 
 your shame and good sense would not permit 
 you to run into the contrary absurdity. Is not 
 this the real statement of your difficulties? 
 
 Since " these principles of general physio- 
 " logy" have been so little able to lead you to 
 any sure and satisfactory conclusions, it will 
 naturally be thought that they are by no means 
 sufficient to afford us the requisite instruction 
 concerning the origin of mankind. By common 
 mortals, indeed, it has always been supposed 
 that ancient history was the safest guide in 
 subjects of this description ; and that notwith- 
 standing all the obscurity attending its details, 
 it forms our best and surest director in the 
 knowledge of antiquity. 
 
 But to prepare your pupils for these scepti- 
 cal opinions, it was first necessary to shake 
 their confidence " in the Hebrew Scriptures, as 
 " writings composed with the assistance of Di- 
 M vine Inspiration, and therefore commanding 
 " our implicit assent."* For this purpose you 
 inform them, that this account of the creationf 
 " has the allegorical character common to 
 " Eastern compositions," and that " there is an 
 " irreconcileable opposition between the pas- 
 " sions and sentiments ascribed to the Deity by 
 " Moses, and that religion of peace and love 
 " which is unfolded by the Evangelists/' To 
 
 * P. 247. f P. 248. 
 C 
 
complete your argument, and at once demolish: 
 their belief in Revelation, you pronounce " the 
 " representation of all the animals when brought 
 " before Adam," and their subsequent collec- 
 tion by Noah in the Ark, as "zoologically 
 " impossible." p. 249254. 
 
 It is not my intention, Sir, on the present 
 occasion, to enter with you into any discussion 
 on the force or futility of these objections ; but 
 merely to remonstrate with you on the danger 
 and impropriety of mixing up questions of this 
 description with those inquiries which relate to 
 physiology, in its connexion with surgery and 
 medicine. You must allow me to doubt, Sir, 
 whether even your " knowledge of the original 
 " and other Oriental languages,"* qualifies you to 
 become judge in matters which are so entirely 
 foreign to your profession. But, whatever may 
 be your acquirements, you must know, that 
 those whom you address are altogether incom-* 
 petent from their youth and imperfect educa- 
 tion, to form any just or deliberate opinion on 
 this subject. It is unfair and uncandid in the 
 highest degree, to attempt to unsettle the minds 
 of your pupils on topics with which you have 
 no professional concern, and on which they are 
 totally unprepared to follow you. 
 
 Having destroyed the authority of the Jewish 
 Scriptures, you afterwards desire to set aside 
 that verdict in which the annals and traditions 
 of all nations have involuntarily concurred, by 
 establishing the authenticity of these accounts. 
 
 * P. 249. 
 
35 
 
 It is in vain, Sir, that you dwell on the fabulous 
 and obscure relations of ancient history ; and 
 hang upon the phrase of " Gratia mendax-" 
 and tell us that " we cannot trace the branches 
 <c of any such original family, nor point out 
 " the time and manner in which they divided 
 " and spread over the globe." p. 255. All this 
 has been long since accomplished by men of the 
 most comprehensive learning and consummate 
 talents, who have collected such a mass of evi- 
 dence, and with such minuteness of detail, as 
 was hardly to be expected on subjects of this 
 remote antiquity and undefined extent. 
 
 The author * whom you have cited, after 
 having compared the affinities of a hundred 
 languages, and circumnavigated the bounds of 
 human knowledge, was obliged to acquiesce in 
 an account of the origin of the human race, very 
 similar to that of Moses. He places Paradise 
 in the regions of Cashmire, and gives it as his 
 opinion, " that no spot on the whole earth 
 " unites so many advantages, and that it 
 " seems to be the most appropriate situation 
 " for the birth-place of the human race." p. 260. 
 
 But I forget, that I am insensibly deviat- 
 ing into argument. It is my present object 
 not to debate this question with you on the 
 grounds of evidence ; but merely to point out 
 the impropriety of bringing it before such an 
 
 * Adelung's Mithridates. See also TownsencTs Life and 
 Character of Moses. To these I would wish to add a most va- 
 luable work frequently cited by Mr. L. viz. Dr. Pritchard'* 
 Researches into the History of Man. 
 
 C 2 
 
36 
 
 audience, and on such an occasion. You con- 
 fess yourself a sceptic, and that you have not 
 been able to arrive at any clear or distinct con- 
 clusion, <c whether our species owes its origin to 
 " a single pair of human beings."* This ques- 
 tion you represent, as entirely unimportant, and 
 on e which zoology does not possess the means 
 " of solving." On these grounds, you were not 
 called upon to introduce it to the notice of your 
 pupils, either by its connexion with your pro- 
 fession, or by the means which you possessed 
 of imparting to them any useful information. 
 The conclusion which I draw is this, the mere 
 vanity of displaying your sceptical opinions, 
 has rendered you indifferent to the effect which 
 they may produce on the morals and happiness 
 of those who attend on your lectures. 
 
 I remain, Sir, &c. 
 
 P.S. At page 2149, 254, you state it as an in- 
 surmountable objection to the Mosaic account of 
 the creation that it represents all the different 
 kinds of animals, as issuing originally from one 
 and the same quarter of the world. " How 
 " could the Polar bear have traversed the Torrid 
 " Zone, &c. ?" Now, with very little alteration, 
 you may apply the same question to the different 
 varieties, or, as I should say, nations of men 
 " How could the inhabitants of Greenland live 
 " amidst the burning wilds of Africa ?" If you 
 admit that the American, Mongolian, Ethiopian, 
 and Malay varieties originally came from the 
 centre of Asia, why should you question the 
 same fact with respect to the brute creation? 
 f P, 271. 
 
37 
 
 t1 ; LETTER VIL 
 
 SIR, 
 
 SINCE you have confessed that you cannoi 
 solve the problem concerning the origin of the 
 human race by the assistance of philosophy, it 
 might have been hoped that you would have 
 lent a favourable ear to the intelligence of Reve- 
 lation; at least, that, as the account of Moses 
 could not be rectified by the calculations of 
 science, you would have permitted your pupils 
 to repose, in this respect, on the pillow of the 
 national faith. It seems you are determined to 
 inform them of the difficulties under which you 
 labour, and to invite them to join you in 
 sharing the burden. Perhaps it would not have 
 been discreditable to your character as a teach- 
 er, if you had concealed these difficulties from 
 their eyes ; and in compassion to the ignorance 
 and dangers of youth, had not thrown open the 
 portals of that scepticism, to which the descent 
 is so easy when compared with retreat. Facilis 
 descensus Averni : Sed revocare gradum. 
 
 After the most attentive study of your opini- 
 ons, I have not been able to arrive at any clear 
 or satisfactory conclusion concerning your sen- 
 timents on the question whether mankind 
 consist of one species, or several. Allow me 
 
ss 
 
 to present to you a few of the contradictory 
 statements which you have made on this sub- 
 ject, before you pronounce me either incor- 
 rigibly stupid, or wilfully blind. Pity me, Sir, 
 I am only in the situation in which you repre- 
 sent Ajax " I require nothing but day-light 
 " and fair play." p. 107. 
 
 " On reviewing the facts," you say, < f which 
 " are detailed in the foregoing pages, we see, 
 " that, although the various races of men differ 
 " from each other in stature, as well as in other 
 " points, these differences are confined within 
 <c narrower limits in man than in the species of 
 f< domestic animals, and consequently that they 
 " do not prove diversity of species." * This 
 reasoning does not appear very luminous ; but 
 we are enabled to collect from it, at least, 
 your opinion. Now, I would beg you to con- 
 trast with this sentence the following, which 
 occurs at p. 555 : " I cannot yet assume it as 
 *' a point fully proved, that all the varieties of 
 " mankind have proceeded from one and the 
 Cf same breed." Indeed, Sir, then I should sup- 
 pose we ought to withhold our assent to attri- 
 buting them to one and the same species. If it 
 could be shown, that the Mongolian, Ethio- 
 pian, American, and Malay varieties have 
 really proceeded from different stocks ; then, it 
 would prove them to be in fact, different spe- 
 cies i and in as much as you are doubtful on 
 
 * P. 44$, and p. 305. 
 
39 
 
 this subject, you have no reason to pronounce 
 it to be " the wrong opinion." p. 246. 
 
 As far as I can comprehend your meaning 
 concerning a variety, as distinguished from a 
 species, it consists in a certain unknown and 
 unaccountable deviation " from the law of re* 
 " semblance between parents and their off- 
 " spring." * Thus as you remark, f two white 
 cats will sometimes produce a black kitten 
 amongst several white ones : and it is on this 
 sage observation that you would attempt to ac- 
 count for the varieties in the human race, inde- 
 pendent of climate, food, &c. If so, why is it 
 that we do not discover white negroes (not Al- 
 binoes) mingled with the black ? And why are 
 not black children occasionally born amongstus? 
 
 " If it be allowed," you say, " that all men 
 " are descended from the same species, it does 
 " not follow that they all descend from the same 
 " family." J No, Sir, it will not follow to any 
 one who will maintain the absurdity, that God 
 would unnecessarily create multitudes of the 
 same species at the same moment. Yet, even 
 admitting this absurdity, what becomes of those 
 varieties, which you have already asserted not 
 to be coeval with the race; but to arise from some 
 accidental deviations from the laws of nature ? 
 But what are we to think of the wisdom of a 
 writer who actually believes that the English and 
 Scottish nations have originally descended from 
 
 * P. 446. f P- 510. + P. 516. 
 
40 
 
 different stocks?* Yet the same writer, in a 
 more serious moment, could be startled at the 
 incalculable number of original species to 
 which such wild suppositions would lead us. 
 " If we admit this/' you observe, " the number 
 " of species would be overwhelming." f 
 
 Instead of these perplexing contradictions 
 and palpable absurdities, it would have shown 
 your prudence to have left your pupils reposing 
 on the simple and sublime account of Moses. 
 After all your researches, it is plain that you 
 have nothing better to offer; and that sound 
 philosophy, as well as history and tradition, 
 conspire to confirm these relations of Scrip- 
 ture. By the help of dresses and costumes, 
 you have contrived to make some pretty pic- 
 tures, which you call Mongolian, Caucasian, 
 Ethiopian, American, and Malay varieties. On 
 the same principles, you might have extended 
 the varieties of the human race to every country 
 under heaven. If these are the discoveries 
 which are to destroy the authenticity of the Old 
 Testament, it is wonderful, indeed, that it should 
 have survived the opinions of 3000 years. But 
 though such speculations are ridiculous when 
 viewed by men of real learning, they may 
 prove of incalculable mischief amongst the 
 half-educated members of your profession. It 
 is solely on this account, not from their in- 
 trinsic weight or importance, that they re- 
 
 * P. 454. f P. 502. 
 
41 
 
 worthy of any serious notice. The very obli- 
 quities of your reasoning may help to puzzle 
 those who have no better clue to guide them, 
 whilst your merit, as a Professor of Anatomy 
 and Surgery, may conceal from them your igno- 
 rance and deficiency in all other departments of 
 the " Natural History of Man." 
 
 I am, Sir, &c, 
 
 LETTER VIII. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 AMIDST all this hesitation and uncertainty, 
 respecting the diversities of mankind, which you 
 have sometimes represented as sufficient to con- 
 stitute different stocks and races,* and, at others, 
 as nothing more than varieties of the same spe- 
 cies,f we are surprised to find you so dogmati- 
 cal and positive respecting the natural and 
 (essential inferiority of the Negroes to the Eu- 
 ropeans ; or, as you would express it, of the 
 Ethiopian to the Caucasian variety. This dog- 
 matism, on a subject so open to controversy, 
 forms a remarkable exception to the general 
 scepticism of your reasonings. But who can 
 
 * P. 260, 485, 486. 491. * f P- 270. 445. 474. 559. J 
 
42 
 
 account for the changes of Proteus, or oblige 
 the sceptic to maintain a unity of argument ? 
 
 Verum ubi correptum manibus vinclisque tenebis ; 
 Turn variae eludent species atque ora ferarum. 
 Fiet enim subito sus horridus, atraque tigris, 
 Squamosusque draco, &c. &c. 
 
 Since you appear, however, on the whole to 
 resolve these diversities into varieties of the same 
 species, it is necessary for us to endeavour to 
 understand what you mean by this word. The 
 following sentence is the most intelligible which 
 I can find, as explanatory of your opinion : . 
 " Under certain circumstances, with which we 
 " are not well acquainted, a more important 
 " change of organization occurs. A new cha- 
 " racter springs up, and is propagated by gene- 
 " ration : this constitutes a variety, in the Ian- 
 * c guage of naturalists," p. 97. Truly, Sir, this 
 description savours marvellously of the occult 
 qualities of the ancients. I should be glad to 
 learn in what history of mankind you have ever 
 met with occurrences of this nature. Unless 
 you can produce something more determinate 
 and authentic, than this explanation, I am afraid 
 that the opinions of Hunter and Buffon, and 
 your friend Blumenbach, which resolve these 
 varieties of the human race into the effects of 
 climate and food, &c. are likely to remain unaf- 
 fected by your speculations. 
 Let us, however, attempt to argue the point 
 on the principles which you have here laid down. 
 
We will suppose that, at some unknown era of 
 the world, and, ".under circumstances with 
 " which we are not sufficiently acquainted," 
 these varieties began to take place, i. e. to use 
 more common language, these national distinc- 
 tions began to appear. Now, Sir, supposing 
 that climate, and food, and manners, had no- 
 thing to do with these distinctions, why is it 
 that the individuals of the same nation do not in 
 time as much differ from each other, as these 
 Mongolian or Caucasian varieties ? The same 
 circumstances, however odd and unaccountable 
 they may be, would, in the course of events, na- 
 turally occur again and again, and would pro- 
 duce similar effects. You hint, indeed^ that 
 such is the case between the English and the 
 Scotch, and that we are to account for the high 
 cheek bones of the latter on this very principle. 
 But I maintain that these principles, if carried 
 to their full extent, would destroy all national 
 peculiarities whatever ; since there would be an 
 endless variation of varieties in the same people, 
 and it is probable that some of these varieties 
 would be not less striking than those between 
 Negroes and Europeans. 
 
 But, leaving these unintelligible speculations, 
 I would now proceed to offer some remarks on 
 the consequences which you deduce. Having 
 laid it down as an incontrovertible fact, that 
 these varieties exist, and that they arise from a 
 difference of the internal organization, you en- 
 deavour to establish the consequence, that there 
 
44 
 
 is a necessary and inherent inferiority of the 
 Negroes to the Europeans. Now, with all de- 
 ference to your superior knowledge, it appears 
 to me, that you have adduced a sufficient num- 
 ber of facts to destroy your own argument. 
 First, you inform us of the fine * " moral qua- 
 * f lities of the Araucans of Chili," and you 
 allow, that " in the savage tribes of North Ame- 
 " rica we meet with lofty sentiments of inde- 
 <c pendence, &c. which would sustain a compa- 
 <c rison with the most splendid examples in the 
 " more highly-gifted races." Now this, Sir, is 
 sufficient to shew that the superiority of the more 
 highly-gifted races does not arise from any thing 
 in their internal structure, but from the effects 
 of government and civilization. So much for 
 the American variety. Then, as to the unfortu- 
 nate Negroes, t <c you see no reason to doubt 
 " that taken altogether they are equal to any in 
 " natural goodness of heart," and since you 
 have shewn that they are capable of learning 
 all kinds of u delicate manual labors ;" that they 
 form expert carpenters and watchmakers ; that 
 even the wild Bosjesman may become an accom- 
 plished draftsman; that some have excelled in 
 music ; others in painting ; others in mathema- 
 tics; others in physic, in poetry and theology, J 
 after these confessions, most of your readers 
 will be inclined to think that they are not infe- 
 rior to us " in natural goodness of head," in 
 
 P. 482. f P. 496. J P. 494. 498. 
 
45 
 
 spite of the retreating forehead, and the depressed 
 vertex. 
 
 Indeed, Sir, under these circumstances, I see 
 no reason why * " Missionaries or Bible Socie- 
 " ties, the conductors of either Bell or Lancaster 
 " Schools/' should despair of overcoming the 
 obstacles to their civilization and conversion to 
 Christianity. Since you have kindly furnished 
 us with this information, we cannot any longer 
 doubt, " whether they are capable of fathoming 
 " the depths of science, and of understanding, 
 " and appreciating the doctrines and mysteries 
 " of our religion. " As to the latter point, Sir, 
 I fear that you labour under some sad misap- 
 prehensions, since the Author of this religion 
 designed it particularly for the poor and igno- 
 rant, and has told us that we must become as 
 " little children" ere we can enter into its spirit, 
 or enjoy its benefits. 
 
 " To expect," * you add, " that the Ameri- 
 " cans or Africans can be raised by any culture 
 <c to an equal height in moral sentiments and in- 
 " tellectual energy with Europeans, appears to 
 " me quite as unreasonable as it would be to 
 " hope that the bull-dog may equal the grey- 
 " hound in speed ; that the latter may be taught 
 " to hunt by scent, like the hound ; or that the 
 " mastiff may rival in talents and acquirements 
 " the sagacious and docile poodle." I will not 
 pretend to reconcile these opinions with the 
 
 P. 501. 
 
46 
 
 facts which you have already furnished, nor de- 
 sire you to consider whether comparisons of this 
 nature are not degrading to our species, and de- 
 structive of mutual benevolence. But it may be 
 worth your consideration, whether Europe, some 
 ages ago, did not present a spectacle very simi- 
 lar to the most savage and uncultivated parts of 
 Africa or America; whether the naked Pict ex- 
 hibited any superiority on account of the pro- 
 minence of his forehead, or the barbarous Gaul 
 and German discovered any intellectual ability 
 when hunting in their forests. 
 
 This kind of philosophy, which would sub- 
 vert the natural dominion of mind over matter, 
 and reduce the capabilities of the soul to the 
 calculations of nerves, and fibres, and cerebral 
 distinctions, is in direct opposition to those con- 
 clusions which are drawn from the history and 
 experience of mankind. It has hitherto been 
 deemed the triumph and tendency of science to 
 render us more and more independent of these 
 external and accidental distinctions ; to shew 
 that knowledge and education may elevate the 
 lowest and meanest of our race, and bring them 
 to an equality with the most favoured nations of 
 the earth. This, Sir, has been the result of the 
 progress of knowledge and civilization, on what- 
 ever land they have unfurled their standards. 
 But, if your system of materialism should ever 
 unhappily prevail amongst men, (of which, how- 
 ever, I have little apprehension, for it is opposed 
 to the natural sentiments of the heart,) then fare- 
 
47 
 
 well to every noble and philanthropic attempt' 
 to extend these blessings without regard to cli- 
 mate or colour. Before we proceed to civilize, 
 we must determine the degree of latitude under 
 which they dwell, and whether they belong to a 
 Caucasian, Mongolian, or Ethiopian variety. 
 Yet these are the inquiries of which you confi- 
 dently assert,* " they afford the only light capable 
 " of directing us through the dark regions of 
 " metaphysics, and the only clue to direct our 
 " course through the intricate mazes of morals." 
 
 I remain, Sir, &c. 
 
 LETTER IX. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 IN your reply to the charges of Mr. Aber- 
 nethy,f you have endeavoured to ridicule that 
 gentleman for making a few elementary truths 
 in anatomy the medium of advancing against 
 you some serious, but, as you believe, un- 
 founded accusations. " Perhaps, however," you 
 say, " like the water in a medical prescription, 
 " they were meant only as an innocent vehicle 
 
 p. 574. fP. 3. 
 
48 
 
 *' for the more active ingredients." If you had 
 adopted an equally harmless method for amus. 
 ing your pupils during the course of your inves- 
 tigation on professional subjects, I should not 
 have presumed to trouble you with any remarks. 
 But, since you have blended these researches 
 with attacks on the foundations of natural and 
 revealed theology, and with sneers at the reli- 
 gious and civil institutions of your country, 
 I have felt it my duty, as a parent, an English- 
 man, and a Christian, to protest against the in- 
 troduction of such disorganizing principles into 
 Lectures delivered at the Royal College of Sur- 
 geons. 
 
 Your hatred and contempt of the clergy have 
 transported you beyond all decency of lan- 
 guage; as when you speak,* of the " vermin 
 " of priests and monks;" while such is your 
 abhorrence of the " worn out despotism of the 
 " old world," that you hint all the royal fami- 
 lies of Europe are becoming no better than so 
 many idiots.f I should really hope, Sir; that 
 they are not yet so far gone in this malady 
 as not to perceive the consequences of your 
 speculations. J " The legislature, in voting 
 " public money to purchase the rich collection 
 " of Mr. Hunter, and to prepare a suitable 
 " building for its safe deposit, and the rulers of 
 " the College" in appointing you to the office of 
 public Lecturer, never intended that the pur- 
 
 * P. 488. i P. 460. P. 575. 
 
49 
 
 suits of science should be perverted into beguil- 
 
 ments of our youth to the wilds of Irreligion or 
 
 Democracy. And yet, presuming on this idiotcy, 
 
 you confidently ask the following question 
 
 ."Can we hope to proceed safely in legislation, 
 
 " in public institutions, or in education, with- 
 
 " out that acquaintance with the physical and 
 
 " moral qualities of the subject which such in- 
 
 .** vestigations are calculated to supply ?" p. 574. 
 
 To be serious, Sir, you have entirely mistaken 
 the nature of that office to which you have been 
 elected. You were chosen, I presume, as " the 
 " Professor of Anatomy and Surgery " to in- 
 struct young men in those sciences which are 
 connected with the surgical profession: instead 
 of which, you are delivering your sentiments on 
 laws, and religion, and politics. To shew you 
 how incompetent you are to direct them in 
 these matters, I would now beg leave to recapi- 
 tulate a few contradictions which I have met 
 with in your Theologico-Politico-Physiologico 
 speculations. 
 
 In p. 271, you say, " that Zoology does 
 " not possess the means of solving the question, 
 " whether mankind have drawn their origin 
 " from one pair of human beings;" whereas, in 
 page 305, you assert " that, however unwilling 
 " the European may be to trace up his pedigree 
 " to the same Adam,*' yet that the differences of 
 colour, &c. are altogether insufficient to establish 
 diversity of species. 
 
 In p. 254, you represent ancient history as 
 D 
 
50 
 
 affording no data for tracing back the human 
 race to their first origin. " We cannot trace 
 " the branches of any such family, nor point 
 " out the time and manner in which they 
 " divided and spread over the face of the 
 " globe." But, in pages 260 and 529, you 
 assert that history and tradition point out the 
 elevated central table-land of Asia as the ori- 
 ginal seat from which they have spread in va- 
 rious directions. 
 
 In p. 351, you ridicule your friend BIu- 
 menbach for believing that the shape of the 
 cranium is sometimes affected by the savage 
 customs of barbarous nations, in tying bandages 
 round the heads of their children; but in p. 
 372, you entertain no doubt of the truth of such 
 representations, and you reply, " that if the fact 
 " can be established, the supposition on which 
 " any objection rests, must be unfounded." 
 
 In numberless parts of your work, you ridi- 
 cule the science of metaphysics, and the exist- 
 ence of " immaterial agencies;" but, at the 
 conclusion, you represent physiology <c as af- 
 " fording the only light capable of directing us 
 " through the mazes of this science ;" and, at 
 p. 4*77, you mention the New Hollanders, as 
 sunk in the lowest state of barbarism, " because 
 " they are destitute of religion, without any 
 " idea of a supreme Being, and with the feeblest 
 " notions of a future state." Query. How are 
 we to distinguish these savages from your philo- 
 sophical physician, who looks upon death as 
 
,51 
 
 " that awful moment, which constitutes the ter- 
 " mination of our existence?" p. 577. 
 
 It is the general tendency of your opinions to 
 represent the negroes as incapable of any ad- 
 vancement in arts and sciences, or in the mys- 
 teries of religion ; but at p. 560 you assert, 
 <c that they have the use of reason, and conse- 
 " quently of perfectibility /" It would be easy 
 for me, Sir, to adduce many other contradic- 
 tions, both in your arguments and your facts; 
 but these are sufficient, I trust, to convince you 
 that you are totally incompetent for the task 
 which you have undertaken, and that, if you 
 would preserve the reputation which you have 
 so justly acquired as a Professor of Anatomy 
 and Surgery, you must for the future confine 
 yourself to those inquiries which relate more 
 immediately to your own profession. 
 
 I have little hope that any thing which I can 
 say will reclaim a mind so far gone in scep- 
 tical opinions. I fear, Sir, that the vanity of 
 displaying your acquirements has rendered 
 you, like most infidel writers, too disdainful of 
 others to listen to any sober argument. Yet I 
 cannot part from you without this farewel re- 
 commendation : " Review your principles." 
 It is not probable that a man of your talents 
 and acquirements should have run into such 
 palpable contradictions, unless there had been 
 something radically bad in the first elements of 
 his reasonings. That foundation must be inse- 
 cure, on which a superstructure so tottering, 
 
52 
 
 so full of cracks and chinks, and crevices, has 
 been erected. It cannot be beneath even your 
 abilities, Sir, to look into the evidences of a 
 religion, in which Newton and Locke, and 
 Boerhaave and Haller, confidently believed ; 
 which has been the medium of science and ci- 
 vilization to thousands of mankind; and which, 
 if the hopes of philosophy shall ever be realized, 
 " must hereafter fill the earth with the know- 
 " ledge of the Lord, even as the waters cover 
 " the sea." 
 
 I remain, Sir, &c. 
 
 ONE OF THE PEOPLE CALLED CHRISTIANS. 
 
 TO THE PUPILS OF MR. LAWRENCE. 
 
 GENTLEMEN, 
 
 IT is my first object in. this address to as- 
 sure you, that I have not the smallest wish to 
 diminish your confidence or respect for Mr. 
 Lawrence, in his character as Professor of Ana- 
 tomy and Surgery at the Royal College. In com- 
 mon with the public at large, I regard him as a 
 very able and ingenious man in his own profes- 
 sion, and as perfectly competent to instruct 
 you in those sciences which relate to surgery 
 and medicine. It is only when he steps beyond 
 
53 
 
 his own department, that I would beg you to 
 suspend your opinions concerning his senti- 
 ments. You need not be informed that the 
 greatest learning and ability in one department 
 of human knowledge, by no means implies either 
 superior judgment or information when extend- 
 ed to others, with which it has little or no con- 
 nexion. 
 
 ; It is no reflection on the character of Mr. 
 Lawrence, as an accomplished surgeon, that he 
 is not deeply read in theology, nor very con- 
 versant with many of those subjects on which he 
 has incidentally given his opinion. But it is of 
 great importance that you should not transfer 
 that deference and respect, which he may justly 
 challenge as Professor of Anatomy, to his unau- 
 thoritative decisions on the laws and religion of 
 his country. In this respect, Gentlemen, I 
 trust that you will feel yourselves at liberty to 
 form a candid and unbiassed decision of your 
 own, uninfluenced by sneers or sarcasms, and 
 unaffected by objections which have been again 
 and again refuted. It is related of Newton, 
 that he replied to Halley, who was urging some 
 infidel arguments, " Mr. Halley, I am always 
 " glad to hear you discoursing on mathematical 
 <( subjects ; these y6u understand : but you are 
 " quite ignorant of theological matters." 
 
 In these Lectures, Mr. Lawrence has shewn 
 a very inquisitive and excursive turn of mind, 
 but the topics on which he treats are too mul- 
 tifarious to have allowed him to enter very 
 
54 
 
 deeply into any, but those connected with his 
 own profession. His erudition and eminence 
 as a surgeon and anatomist, have necessarily 
 confined his researches in ancient history, in 
 the science of legislation, and, above all, in the 
 study of natural and revealed Theology. 
 
 Under these circumstances, Gentlemen, you 
 should listen to him with very different degrees 
 of respect, when he is discoursing on his own 
 profession, and when he is interfering with the 
 professions of others. Thus when he smiles 
 " at those satisfactory tests of personal merit, 
 cc the stars and ribbons and orders, of which 
 " civilized men are so justly proud," we may 
 pardon him his ignorance of the nature and 
 constitution of society, on account of his ex- 
 cellence and acquirements as a professor of 
 surgery; but we are not obliged to acquiesce in 
 such Utopian and impracticable speculations. 
 Your natural good sense will inform you, that 
 some distinctions of this kind are necessary in 
 every polished community. Nor are you bound 
 to follow him in his preference of the Ante- 
 rican to the English government, nor to de- 
 cide in favor of a constitution which has not 
 lasted half a century, against one which has 
 survived the shocks of ages, and raised a little 
 island to be the mistress and admiration of the 
 world. 
 
 Above all, let me caution you against those 
 sceptical opinions and infidel prejudices, which, 
 I lament to observe, are so frequently blended 
 
65 
 
 with his reasonings on professional subjects. 
 It is one main object of these Lectures to es- 
 tablish, not only the connexion, but the iden- 
 tity of life with organization nay, I fear to 
 show, that we have no clear or certain assu- 
 rance of the immortality of the soul, and of its 
 existence in a future state. Now, before you 
 admit these conclusions, let me beg you to read 
 the " Natural Theology" of Paley, a work, 
 which I am sure will protect you against the 
 influence of this debasing materialism, and will 
 show, that the knowledge of your own profes- 
 sion may furnish you with the best defence 
 against these physiological perversions. 
 
 It is probable that many of you have re- 
 ceived a religious education, and that you are, 
 in some degree, acquainted with the doctrines 
 and evidences of the Christian religion. Now, 
 you need not be informed, that sneers at priests, 
 and ridicule of religious forms and ceremonies, 
 should not be allowed to destroy the force of 
 those habits of piety in which you have been 
 brought up. If you preserve the habit of at- 
 tending constantly at public worship on the 
 sabbath, you will possess a strong preservative 
 against the infection of these immoral and irre- 
 ligious principles. 
 
 I can, in some degree, sympathize in the 
 dangers with which you are surrounded, be- 
 cause I was once placed in a similar situation. 
 The metropolis affords many temptations to the 
 passions of youth, and your own profession 
 
56 
 
 has an involuntary tendency, perhaps, to dimi- 
 nish that modesty which is our natural guard 
 against the violence of sensual gratifications. 
 tJnder these circumstances, should you part 
 with your belief in Christianity, you will hardly 
 be restrained by the dictates of conscience, or 
 the considerations of expediency; but if you 
 can ever be persuaded to believe, that " death 
 <c is the termination of existence," then it would 
 be in vain to urge on you any of the arguments 
 even of natural religion, 
 
 In. a work which has lately appeared,* the 
 causes of a sceptical turn of mind are admirably 
 pointed out, and particularly as they relate to 
 the medical profession. What has been al- 
 ready so ably accomplished, I will not attempt 
 in an inferior manner. I have endeavoured to 
 refute the positions of Mr. Lawrence, by his 
 own authority : to exhibit the inconsistence of 
 bis principles by confronting the different parts 
 of his work, and by placing them together. If 
 I have succeeded, I may say in the language 
 of Terence, " suo slbi gladio hunc jugulo." 
 
 I remain, &c. 
 April 10th, 1819. 
 
 * " Remarks on Scepticism, as connected with the Subjects 
 of Organization and Life," by the Reverend T. Rennell, M. A. 
 
 To prevent mistakes, it may be proper to remark that this 
 able pamphlet was directed against a former and distinct 
 work of Mr. Lawrence's, from that which has been here re- 
 viewed. They are both suppressed ! 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 TO THE 
 
 SECOND EDITION, 
 
 TO W. LAWRENCE, ESQ. 
 
 May 22nd, 1819. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 ALLOW me, as an Englishman, and a 
 Christian, to congratulate you on the decisive 
 resolution which you have adopted. Since the 
 first Edition of this little pamphlet, you have 
 withdrawn from circulation the object of its 
 attack, and thus you have made all the atone- 
 ment in your power, for the injuries which the 
 dissemination of such principles may have in- 
 flicted on your pupils and the public. 
 
 I do not presume to enquire into your motives 
 on this occasion, whether they are founded on 
 private conviction or on public expediency; 
 whether they arise from a sense of deep con- 
 trition, or are the result of a mere prudential 
 
regard to professional interests. I would not 
 willingly believe, that the man who has so 
 lately informed us he would " see his gown 
 " stripped off his back," rather than sacrifice 
 his independence, could be terrified by a sus- 
 pension at Bethlehem, or an expulsion from St. 
 Bartholomew's. But whatever may be your 
 private motives for this sudden and unlooked- 
 for change of conduct, permit me to congra- 
 tulate you on behalf of society at large, and 
 your pupils in particular. You have checked, at 
 least for the moment, the torrent of medical infi- 
 delity ; " you have stepped between the dead 
 " and the living, and the plague is stayed." 
 Whatever mortification your feelings of per- 
 sonal pride may have sustained by this retreat, 
 will be amply recompensed by the remem- 
 brance of the benefits which you have conferred 
 on your profession and your country. 
 
 Indeed, Sir, you have taken this important 
 resolve at a most critical moment for your own 
 character, as well as for the interests of others. 
 The advocates of blasphemy and profaneness 
 were already beginning to boast of you as their ac- 
 knowledged Coryphaeus. Your name and talents 
 had conferred that splendor and reputation on an 
 execrable cause, to which it had no pretensions 
 from the ignorance and vulgarity of its ordinary 
 defenders. You have retired, Sir, just in time 
 to decline the compliments of " Do Wylke 
 " Edwinsforde, Esq. of Caermarthenshire," and 
 
59 
 
 to avoid the pestiferous embraces of Carlisle's 
 associates. By this sudden and avowed sup- 
 pression of your Lectures, infidelity is now de- 
 prived of the aids of science, and left to appear 
 in her native darkness and deformity. She may 
 still stalk abroad in the garb of obscurity, and 
 wave the dagger of the assassin ; she may utter 
 the ravings of democracy, and gain converts 
 amidst the outcasts of Society ; but, henceforth, 
 she will be excluded, I trust, from the schools of 
 science, and expelled from our hospitals and 
 colleges ; and thus this salutary truth will be in- 
 culcated on the Deist, that he must retain his 
 opinions within his own bosom, if he would pre- 
 serve the respect and admiration to which his 
 talents may, perhaps, justly aspire. 
 
 I am not so vain as to suppose that my short 
 and Cursory Observations on your Lectures, 
 can in any degree, have led to their suppression; 
 nor am 1 disposed to triumph in a victory which 
 may be attributed either to your own feelings of 
 propriety, or to the far abler exertions of others. 
 In a cause like ours, every sentiment of personal 
 exultation must be lost amidst joy and gratula- 
 tion at the event; for without any excessive 
 compliment to your talents, we may still address 
 you as the Hector of a vanquished Host. 
 
 Si Pergama dextra 
 Defend! possent, ctiarp hac defensa fuisicnt. 
 
60 
 
 And now permit me. Sir, as an ardent ad- 
 mirer of your genius and acquirements, to re- 
 commend to the attention of your leisure hours, 
 a serious enquiry into the Evidences of Natural 
 and Revealed Theology. Surely, it is not pro- 
 bable, that a Religion which combines amongst 
 its adherents, the learning, talents, and virtues 
 of this country, should be founded on impostures 
 which Ignorance may detect, or vulgarity ex- 
 pose. Let me beg you, as a man of science, to 
 prosecute this enquiry without prejudice or par- 
 tiality divest yourself of sneers and sarcasms 
 against priests and monks, and consider that 
 whether Christianity be true or false, its claims 
 are, at all events, deserving of a fair, candid, and 
 philosophic investigation. 
 
 Should you still unhappily persevere in your 
 opinions of its falsity, you will not deem it ne- 
 cessary to spread these opinions, nor attempt 
 directly or indirectly to diffuse your sentiments 
 amongst your pupils. This will be a great 
 point gained for the interests of religion and 
 morality; nor do I assert that the Public have 
 any right to interfere with your private opinions. 
 Yet would it give me the highest pleasure, as a 
 firm believer in Christianity, to learn hereafter 
 the positive change of your principles; and to 
 know that one who had been ic a blasphemer, 
 " a persecutor, and injurious/' had at length 
 enrolled his name, not only in scientific cele- 
 brity, but in religious belief, with the great phi- 
 
61 
 
 losopbers of his country. That such may be 
 the final result of your investigation, is the sub- 
 limest vow which I can indulge for your pros- 
 perity, and the ardent prayer of one who glories 
 in the name of a Christian. 
 
 I remain, Yours, &c. 
 
 E. W. GRINFIELD. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 J. M'Creery, Printer, Black Horse Court, 
 Fleet-Street, London. 
 
Lately Published, 
 BY THE SAME AUTHOR, 
 
 PRINTED FOR T. CADELL AND W. DAVIES, STRAND. 
 
 The CONNEXION OF NATURAL AND REVEALED 
 THEOLOGY, being an Attempt to illustrate the Evidences 
 and Doctrines of Christianity, by their Relation to the In- 
 ductive Philosophy of the Human Mind; with Notes and 
 authorities collected from the most eminent ancient and 
 modern writers. Svo. Price 12*. in boards. 
 
 SERMONS ON THE PARABLES AND MIRACLES 
 OF JESUS CHRIST. 8tro. Price 10*. in boards, 
 

RETURN BIOLOGY LIBRARY 
 
 3503 Life Sciences Bldq. 642-2531 
 
 LOAN PERIOD 1 : 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 /j. 
 
 5 
 
 5 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 Renewed books are subject to immediate recall 
 
 Dili: AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 
 
 
 l<n/\ 
 
 
 
 mwm, 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 wgKyEr 
 
 i^s 
 
 
 / j 
 
 V 
 
 
 DUI 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 APR f 1 *'"'* 
 
 
 
 "f ' 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 FORM NO. DD4, 7m, 477 BERKELEY, CA 94720 ^ 
 
. 
 
 1 I