Strictures on the conduct of Hewett Watson in his capacity of editor of the Phrenological Journal; with an appendix, containing a speculative analysis of the mental functions / by T. S. Prideaux.

  • Prideaux, T. S. (Thomas Symes)
Date:
1840
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Strictures on the conduct of Hewett Watson in his capacity of editor of the Phrenological Journal; with an appendix, containing a speculative analysis of the mental functions / by T. S. Prideaux. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    21/72 page 21
    I have a very few more observations to trouble Mr. Watson with, and I will then leave him to the enjoyment of his “ editorial cachinations” When are the phrenological public to be favoured with the “few cases quite corroborative” of his suggestion fthat loudness is appreciated by Comparison!!) which he tells them he has seen ? I can assure him that the bulk of the readers of the journal would deem its pages quite as profitably occupied in settling the function of Comparison, as in discussing the merits of his own portrait in the Naturalist—as in abusing Mr. Howitt* —or as in being made the vehicle of his ill-timed attempts to be facetious at the expense of his American brethren. The less Mr. Watson says about his “corroborative cases” the better; and, if he be wise, he will retrace his steps out of the mire and confess his errors; the latter, however, is too much to be expected from him, for “ there is in little minds a pertinacity which clings to opinions once expressed, because the credit of the individual appears to be involved in maintaining them.” * See new series, No. 7, page 288. Are these remarks on Mr. Howitt’s portrait intended as a specimen of the “cautious induction” so much insisted on by Mr. Watson ? Can it be possible that he has placed himself amongst those who, he informs us, “bring a temporary discredit upon the science by venturing rash conclusions nominally on phrenological data, which they are unable to support?” A source of mischief Mr. W. thinks will be gradually removed, by the diffusion of sound knowledge, “ increasing the number of competent persons, who will teach the public that a man is not necessarily acquainted with the subject, because he chooses to call himself a phrenologist,” (and I will add) nor even because he possesses duplicates of the casts and drawings used by Mr. Combe. [For the benefit of those who labour under the erroneous idea that miracles have ceased, I copy from Journal No. 3, new sei’ies, page 340, the following marvellous instance of the transfer of inspiration :—“ The editor of this journal is willing to lecture on phrenolagy in places where his lectures may be deemed likely to prove useful in diffusing a correct knowledge of the science. He has much pleasure in stating that Mr. Combe has enabled him to do this effectively, by kindly obtaining for him duplicates and copies of the casts and drawings used by himself in his own lectures.” If this law of inheritance should ever become general, how inestimable will be the value of the pencil of a Raphael, the violin of a Paganini, or the pen of a Byron. How will men strive for the possession of the telescope of a Herschel, or the voltaic battery of a Davy. How fiercely contest the right of succession to the wig of a Lord Chancellor, or the slipper of a Taglioni. Nothing parallel to the case of Mr. Watson has been known to occur since the servant of the Tishbite acquired a double portion of the spirit of his master from the possession of his mantle.]
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3