development of brain, attended with a corresponding mental imbecility, although not so great as to amount to idiocy; secondly, hereditary or acquired habits of intoxication, which impair the mind by lowering the tone of the whole nervous system; thirdly, gross ignorance; and, fourthly, depression arising from commercial disasters, then the question whether the poor ought to be provided for, as a duty incumbent on society, is easily solved. To leave them destitute would not remove any one of these causes, but tend to increase them all. To allow our unhappy brethren, who thus appear to be as frequently the victims of evil influences, over which they have little or no control, as of their own misconduct, to perish, or to linger out a miserable existence unprotected and unprovided for, would not only be a direct infringement of the dictates of benevolence and conscientiousness, which should be our ruling feelings, and an outrage on veneration, (seeing that God has commanded us to succor and assist them); but it would tend directly to the injury of our own interests. The fact that the world is arranged by the creator on the principle of dispensing happiness to the community in proportion to their obedience to the moral law, is here beautifully exemplified. By neglecting the poor, the number of individuals possessing deficient brains and temperaments is increased; the number of drunkards is increased; and the number of the ignorant is increased; and as society carries these wretched beings habitually in its bosom; as they prowl about our houses, haunt our streets, and frequent our highways, and as we cannot get rid of them, it follows, that we must suffer in our property, and in our feelings, until we do our duty towards them. Nay, we must suffer in our health also, for their wretchedness is often the parent of epidemic diseases, which do not confine their ravages to them, but sweep away indiscriminately the good, and the selfish, the indolent, and the hard hearted,

6*

who have allowed the exciting causes to grow into magnitude beside them.

On the other hand, by applying vigorous measures not only to maintain the poor, but to remove the causes of pauperism, all these evils may be mitigated, if not entirely removed. If a practical knowledge of the organic laws were once generally diffused through society, and a sound, moral, religious, and intellectual education were added, I cannot doubt that the causes of pauperism would be unspeakably diminished. Phrenology conveys a striking conviction to the mind, that precepts or knowledge are not sufficient by themselves to insure correct conduct. The higher faculties of the mind must be brought into a state of sufficient vigor to be able practically to resist, not only the internal solicitations of the animal propensities, but the temptations presented by the external world, before sound precepts can be realized in practice. Now, a favorable state of the organs, on the condition of which mental strength or feebleness in this world depends, is an indispensable requisite towards the possession of this vigor; and as this fact has not hitherto been known, at least has not been attended to, it seems to me that society does not yet know a tithe of its own resources for mitigating the evils which afflict it. The temperance societies are extremely useful in this respect. The substitution of comfortable food for intoxicating beverages, has the direct tendency to benefit the whole nervous system, and to increase the vigor of the higher powers of the mind. Society at large should bend its whole energies, directed by sound knowledge, towards the accomplishment of this end.

Holding it then to be clearly both the duty and interest of society to provide for the poor, the next question is, how should this be done; by legal assessment, or by voluntary contributions? Phrenology enables us to answer this question also. The willingness of any individual to bestow

charity, depends not exclusively on the quantity of wealth which he possesses, but on this, and on the strength of the benevolent principles in relation to the selfish in his mind. Now, we discover by observation, that the organs of the benevolent and selfish feelings differ very widely in relative size in different individuals, and experience supports the conclusion which we draw from this fact, that their dispositions to act charitably, or the reverse, are as widely different. Not only so, but as the leading principle of our present social system is the pursuit of self-interest, it may be stated as a general rule, (allowance being always made for individual exceptions,) that those in whom the selfish feelings, with intellect and prudence, predominate, will possess most wealth; and yet this very combination of faculties will render them least willing to bestow. Their wealth and benevolence will in general be in the inverse ratio of each other. This inference, unfortunately, is also supported by facts. It has frequently been remarked that the humbler classes of society, and also the poorer members of these classes, bestow more charity in proportion to their incomes, than the very wealthy. To trust to voluntary contributions, therefore, would be to exempt thousands who are most able, but least willing, to bear the burden, and to double it on those who are most willing, but least able to support it.

It appears to me that while the present principles of social action enjoy the ascendency, compulsory assessment is indispensable, and I am inclined to carry it the length of assessing for the support of the poor in all their forms. There are voluntary societies for supporting the destitute sick, for maintaining a house of refuge, the deaf and dumb, and blind, the royal infirmary, and many other charitable institutions. I have been told that these, and all the other public charities of Edinburgh, are supported by about fifteen hundred benevolent individuals, many of whom subscribe to them all, and most of whom subscribe to several, while the

1

remaining twenty or thirty thousand of the adult population of the city and suburbs, never contribute a farthing to these objects. In a sound social system this ought not to be the case. It is a social duty incumbent on us all to alleviate the calamities of our unfortunate and even of our guilty brethren; and until our moral principles shall be so quickened, as to induce us all to discharge our shares of this duty voluntarily, we should be compelled to do so by law.

I regret to say that one of the most striking examples of the undisguised predominance of the selfish principles is afforded by the society to which I have the honor professionally to belong. The members of the college of justice are exempted, by an old act of parliament, from assessments for supporting the poor and providing for the clergy, in this city. I shall consider the question of the church at a subsequent stage of this course, but in the meantime remark, that not the shadow of a reason can be advanced for that exemption, in so far as regards the support of the poor; yet the society of writers to the signet have repeatedly refused, although urgently requested, to waive this privilege, and bear their proportion along with the other citizens, of this christian burden. It is encouraging, however, to the believers in the tendency of the moral sentiments to gain the ultimate ascendency, to learn, that although in the society to which I allude, the minority was only eleven, or some such small number, on the first division which took place for foregoing the exemption, yet that at every subsequent division, in consequence of discussion, it has increased, and is now equal to very nearly one half of the society; so that I have no doubt, that in time, it will be voluntarily relinquished.

On another point I am disposed to carry our social duties farther than is generally done. I regard the money applied to the maintenance of the poor as, at present, to a great extent wasted, in consequence of no efficient measures being

adopted by society, to check pauperism at its roots. If I am correct in ascribing it to a low temperament, imperfect development of brain, habits of intoxication, ignorance, and commercial fluctuations, efficient means must be used to remove these causes, before it can possibly either cease, or be effectually diminished; and as the removal of them would, in the end, be the best policy, both for the public and the poor, I am humbly of opinion that the community, if they were alive to their own interests, as well as to their duty, would supply the pecuniary means for laying the axe to the root of the tree, and by a thorough education and elevation of the physical and mental condition of the lower classes of society, would bring pauperism to a close, or at all events, diminish its present gigantic and increasing dimensions. Here the regret always occurs, that our senseless wars should have wasted so much capital that we must provide twenty-seven millions of pounds sterling, annually, forever, to pay the interest on it; a sum which, but for these wars, might have been applied to the moral advancement of society, and have spread a thousand blessings in its train. If our moral sentiments were once rendered as active as our propensities have been, and I fear still are, we should apply our public assessments to benevolent and beneficial objects, and render them liberal in proportion to the magnitude of the work to be accomplished, and pay them with a hearty. good-will, because they would all return to ourselves in social blessings.

The question is frequently asked, how are these principles, even supposing them to be founded in nature, ever to be carried into execution, seeing that the opinions of society are so much opposed to them that they are scarcely listened. to, even as speculative propositions, with patience. In answer, I appeal to the experience of the world. All new opinions are rejected, and their authors persecuted or ridiculed at first; but, in all instances in which they have been