pious persons to be incompatible with the doctrines of the Christian Religion; and if I am not mistaken, your Lordship, on a late occasion, after having perused a work attempting to establish such principles, did incline, by "rational doubts," to suspect that these opinions were "directed against the truth of Scripture."

It is particularly fortunate that the arguments concerning the nature of unsoundness of mind and imbecility do not involve either of these presumptions:—if the most decided victory over their opponents were to be conceded to the fautors of organization, no advantage could be derived from

their philosophy by lawyer or physician, whose object is to ascertain the existing state of an individual's mind, and not to detect the morbid alterations of the cerebral structure by the scrutiny of dissection: nor is it necessary, for the elucidation of the present subject, to contend for the pre-eminence of the spiritual doctrine, as it would be extremely difficult, and perhaps irreverent, to suppose, that this immaterial property, this divine essence, that confers perception, reverts into memory, and elaborates thought, can be susceptible of unsoundness. These high attributes, proudly distinguished from perishable matter;—this sanctuary, which "neither moth nor rust doth corrupt," cannot undergo such subordinate changes, without an obvious degradation.

To the furtherance of that pure and substantial justice, which it has been the tenor of your Lordship's ministry to award, these metaphysical disquisitions will in no manner contribute; nor will they assist the medical practitioner in the attainment of his object, which is to ascertain the competence of an individual's MIND, to conduct himself in society, and to manage his affairs. By the abstract term MIND, is to be understood the aggregate

of the intellectual phenomena, which are manifested or displayed to the observer by conversation and conduct; and these are the only tests by which we can judge of an individual's mind. The boasted deciphering of the human capacities or moral propensities, by the appearances of the physiognomy, or by craniological surveys—the mysterious pastimes of anatomical prophets, will never be accredited in a court of justice while your Lordship guides the helm.

By conversation, is of course included the conveyance of thought by writing, which, on many occasions, is a more accurate criterion of the state of mind than oral expression.

Your Lordship seems to consider that we have derived some advantages by the issue of a commission to ascertain this unsoundness of mind, and without such due consideration, it is presumed you would not have adopted it; but the citation of your own accurate phraseology, as it appears in your judgment of 1815, on the Portsmouth petition, will best illustrate the subject. "It seems to have been a very long time before those who had the administration of justice in this depart

ment thought themselves at liberty to issue a commission, when the person was represented as not being idiot ex nativitate, as not being lunatic, but as being of UNSOUND MIND, importing, by these words, the notion, that the party was in some such state, as was to be contra-distinguished from idiotcy, and as was to be contra-distinguished from lunacy, and yet such as made him a proper object of a commission in the nature of a commission to inquire of idiotcy, or a commission to inquire of lunacy." These words clearly imply a morbid state of intellect, which is neither idiotcy nor lunacy, termed unsound mind, and yet the legal remedy for the protection of the person and property of the possessor of this unsound mind does not differ from that which is applied