study the relation of the constituent parts of the countenance: not having studied these, he has studied nothing.

He only is an accurate physiognomist, and has the true spirit of physiognomy, who possesses sense, feeling, and sympathetic proportion of the congeniality and harmony of nature; and who hath a similar sense and feeling for all emendations and additions of art and constraint. He is no physiognomist who doubts of the propriety, simplicity, and harmony of nature, or who has not this physiognomonical essential; who supposes nature selects members to form a whole, as a compositor in a printing-office does letters to make up a word; who can suppose the works of nature are the patch-work of a harlequin jacket. Not the most insignificant of insects is so compounded, much less man, the most perfect of organized beings. He respires not the breath of wisdom, who doubts of this progression, continuity, and simplicity of the structure of nature. He wants a general feeling for the works of nature; consequently of art, the imitator of nature. I shall be pardoned this warmth. It is necessary. The consequences are infinite, and extend to all things. He has the masterkey of truth, who has this sensation of the congeniality of nature, and, by necessary induction, of the human form.

All imperfection in works of art, productions of the mind, moral actions, errors in judgment; all scepticism, infidelity, and ridicule of religion,

naturally originate in the want of this knowledge and sensation. He soars above all doubt of the Divinity and Christ, who hath them, and who is conscious of this congeniality. He also, who at first sight, thoroughly understands and feels the congeniality of the human form, and that from the want of this congeniality arises the difference observed between the works of nature and of art, is superior to all doubt concerning the truth and divinity of the human countenance.

Those who have this sense, this feeling, call it which you please, will attribute that only, and nothing more, to each countenance, which it is capable of receiving. They will consider each according to its kind, and will as little seek to add a heterogeneous character as a heterogeneous nose to the face. Such will only unfold what nature is desirous of unfolding, give what nature is capable of receiving, and take away that with which nature would not be incumbered. They will perceive in the child, pupil, friend, or wife, when any discordant trait of character makes its appearance; and will endeavour to restore the original congeniality, the equilibrium of character and impulse, by acting upon the still remaining harmony, by co-operating with the yet unimpaired essential powers. They will consider each sin, each vice, as destructive of this harmony; will feel how much each departure from truth, in the human form, at least to eyes more penetrating than human eyes are, must be manifest, must distort, and must become displeasing

to the Creator, by rendering it unlike his image. Who, therefore, can judge better of the works and actions of man, who less offend or be offended, who more clearly develop cause and effect, than the physiognomist, possessed of a full portion of this knowledge and sensation?

CHAP. V.

Description of Plates I and II.

We shall occasionally introduce some figures, in order to support and elucidate those opinions and propositions which may be advanced. These plates refer to objects that have been already alluded to in the preceding pages.

Description of Plate I. Number 1. See the Frontispiece.

This is a boldly sketched portrait of ALBERT DURER. Whoever examines this countenance, cannot but perceive in it the traits of fortitude, deep penetration, determined perseverance, and inventive genius. At least, every one will acknowledge the truth of these observations, when made.

Number 2. MONCRIEF.

There are few men capable of observation, who will class this visage with the stupid. In the aspect, the eye, the nose especially, and the

mouth, are proofs, not to be mistaken, of the accomplished gentleman, and the man of taste.

Number 3. JOHNSON.

The most unpractised eye will easily discover, in this sketch of Johnson, the acute, the comprehensive, the capacious mind, not easily deceived, and rather inclined to suspicion than credulity.

Number 4. SHAKSPEARE.

How deficient must all outlines be! Among ten thousand can one be found that is exact? Where is the outline that can pourtray genius? Yet who does not read, in this outline, imperfect as it is, from pure physiognomonical sensation, the clear, the capacious, the rapid mind, all conceiving, all embracing, that, with equal swiftness and facility, imagines, creates, produces?

Number 5. STERNE.

The most unpractised reader in physiognomy will not deny to this countenance all the keen, the searching penetration of wit, the most original fancy, full of fire, and the powers of invention. Who is so dull as not to view, in this countenance, somewhat of the spirit of poor Yorick?

Number 6. S. CLARKE.

Perspicuity, benevolence, dignity, serenity, dispassionate meditation, the powers of conception

and perseverance, are the most apparent characteristics of this countenance. He who can hate such a face, must laboriously counteract all those physiognomonical sensations with which he was

born.

Description of Plate II.

Hitherto we have beheld nature in the most perfect of her productions; we must now view the reverse; we must proceed to contemplate her in her deformity. In this also, how intelligibly does she speak to the eyes of all, at the first glance!

Number 1.

Who does not here read reason debased, and stupidity almost sunken to brutality? This eye, these wrinkles of a lowering forehead, this projecting mouth, the whole position of the head, do they not all denote manifest dulness and debility?

Number 2. A Fool.

From the small eyes in this figure, the open mouth, particularly from the under part of the countenance, no man whatever will expect penetration, reasoning, or wisdom.

Number 3.

True or false, nature or caricature, this countenance will, to the common sensations of all men, depict an inhuman and brutal character. It is impossible that brutality should be over

E