two hundred pence, and then famished himself with the money in his pocket.-It is difficult to tell, however, although a person may unquestionably become insane in his avarice, whether this is actually the case in any given instance, or whether, notwithstanding its intensity, it falls in some degree short of alienation. The reader will be able, probably, by consulting the resources of his own recollection, to understand the applications of this subject. Nevertheless, we take the liberty to delay a moment upon the well known and somewhat singular case of Sir Harvey Elwes, of Stoke, in the county of Suffolk, England. Sir Harvey Elwes inherited from a miserly mother, and an uncle of the same parsimonious disposition, the large property of £350,000. This singular individual, as is sometimes the case with misers, is said to have punctually discharged his obligations towards others, and in some instances even to have conducted with liberality; but, in whatever concerned himself, his parsimony, notwithstanding his great riches, was extreme and unalterable. When travelling, he accustomed himself to great abstinence, that he might lessen the charge of his maintenance; and for the same reason, he supported his horse with the few blades of grass which he could gather by the sides of hedges and in the open commons. Like his predecessor Sir Harvey, from whom he seems to have derived his title, and who was hardly less miserly than his nephew, he wore the clothes of those who had gone before him; and when his best coat was beyond the ability of any further service, he refused to replace it at his own expense, but accepted one from a neighbour. He was so saving of fuel that he took advantage of the industry of the crows in pulling down their nests; and if any friend accidentally living with him were absent, he would carefully put out his fire and walk to a neighbour's house, in order that the same chimney might give out warmth to both. Although he never committed any of his transactions to writing, he could not have been ignorant of his immense wealth; but this did not prevent his being exceedingly apprehensive that he should at last die with want. "Sometimes hiding his gold in small parcels in different parts of his house, he would anxiously visit the spot to ascertain whether each remained as he had left it: arising from bed, he would hasten to his bureau to examine if its contents were in safety. In later life no other sentiment occupied his mind: at midnight he has been heard as if struggling with assailants, and crying out in agitation, 'I will keep my money, I will; nobody shall rob me of my property!' though no one was near to disturb him in its possession. At length this remarkable person died, in the year 1789, aged nearly eighty, and worth nearly a million."* § 311. Instances of the second kind or form of disordered action of the possessory principle. There are other instances of the disordered action of the principle of Acquisitiveness, which appear to be congenital or constitutional. In the case of the persons to whom we now have reference, the disposition to get possession of whatever can be regarded as property, whether of greater or less value, shows itself, not only in great strength, but at a very early period of life. There are a considerable number of cases of this kind to be found in the writings of Gall and Spurzheim; and there are some notices of similar cases in a few other writers. Dr. Rush, for instance, in his Medical Inquiries, mentions a woman who was entirely exemplary in her conduct except in one particular. "She could not refrain from stealing. What made this vice the more remarkable was, that she was in easy circumstances, and not addicted to extravagance in anything. Such was the propensity to this vice, that, when she could lay her hands on nothing more valuable, she would often, at the table of a friend, fill her pockets secretly with bread. She both confessed and lamented her crime;" which, however, a * Origin and Progress of the Passions (Anonymous), vol. i., p. 310. truer and better knowledge of the mind and its disorders would make us hesitate to call a crime. Some of the facts which are given by Dr. Gall are as follows: "Victor Amadeus I., king of Sardinia, was in the constant habit of stealing trifles. Saurin, pastor at Geneva, though possessing the strongest principles of reason and religion, frequently yielded to the propensity to steal. Another individual was from early youth a victim to this inclination. He • entered the military service on purpose that he might be restrained by the severity of the discipline; but, having continued his practices, he was on the point of being condemned to be hanged. Ever seeking to combat his ruling passion, he studied theology and became a Capuchin. But his propensity followed him even to the cloister. Here, however, as he found only trifles to tempt him, he indulged himself in his strange fancy with less scruple. He seized scissors, candlesticks, snuffers, cups, goblets, and conveyed them to his cell. An agent of the government at Vienna had the singular mania for stealing nothing but kitchen utensils. He hired two rooms as a place of deposite; he did not sell, and made no use of them. The wife of the famous physician Gaubius had such a propensity to pilfer, that when she made a purchase she always sought to take something. The Countesses M. at Wessel, and P. at Frankfort, had also this propensity. Madame de W. had been educated with peculiar care. Her wit and talents secured her a distinguished place in society. But neither her education nor her fortune saved her from the most decided propensity to theft. Lavater speaks of a physician who never left the room of his patients without robbing them of something, and who never thought of the matter afterward. In the evening his wife used to examine his pockets; she there found keys, scissors, thimbles, knives, spoons, buckles, cases, and sent them to their respective owners. * Gall's Works, vol. iv., Am. ed., p. 132. § 312. Disordered action of imitativeness, or the principle of imitation. The proof that there is in man a principle of IMITATION, appropriately called by phrenological writers Imitativeness, which impels him to do as others do, is so abundant as probably to leave no reasonable doubt upon the candid mind. This principle, as compared with its ordinary operation and character, is found in some individuals to exhibit an irregular or diseased action. M. Pinel, as he is quoted by Dr. Gall, speaks of an idiot woman "who had an irresistible propensity to imitate all that she saw done in her presence. She repeats instinctively all she hears, and imitates the gestures and actions of others with the greatest fidelity, and without troubling herself with any regard to propriety."*-Under the form of Sympathetic Imitation, the disordered action of this principle becomes very important; so much so that we shall leave the subject here, for the purpose of considering it, more at length than we could otherwise do, in a separate chapter. § 313. Disordered action of the principle of sociality. The principle of Sociality, obviously one of the implanted propensities of our nature, may exist with such a degree of intensity as justly to entitle its action to be called a disordered, and, in some cases, even an alienated action. In connexion with this remark, it may be proper to revert a moment to the precise idea which we attach to the term alienation, considered as expressive of a state or condition of the mind. There may be an imperfection of mental action, there may be a disorder of mental action, which is nevertheless not an alienation of mental action. The term alienation properly applies to those forms of mental action which are so much disordered as to set at defiance any efforts of the Will to control them; in a word, they are involuntary. So that, in accordance with this statement, there may be either a disordered state of the principle of sociality, or of any oth* Gall's Works, vol. i., Am. ed., p. 320. er principle (that is to say, one which is irregular, but still is susceptible of correction under the efforts of the will), or there may be, when this disorder is found to exist beyond certain limits, an alienated, an insane state. But, although this distinction should be fully understood, it is not necessary, in the remarks which, for the most part, we have occasion to make, that we should always keep it distinctly in view. But to return to our subject. An irregular action of the social principle, whether it be truly alienated or exist in some lighter form of disorder, may show itself in two aspects which are entirely diverse from each other, viz., either in a morbid aversion to society, or in a desire of society inordinately intense.-Persons to whom the first statement will apply are generally, and, for the most part, justly designated as Misanthropes. Under the influence of some sudden revulsion of the mind, of some great disappointment, of some ill treatment on the part of near relatives and supposed friends, or of some other powerful cause, the natural tie of brotherhood, which binds man to his fellow-man, is snapped asunder, and the soul flees to the rock and the desert never more to return. Such instances, the Timon of Athens of Shakspeare, the Black Dwarf of Walter Scott, and numerous others, are too frequently found, not only on the recorded annals of human nature, but in almost every one's personal experience, to require any minuteness of notice. § 314. Further remarks on the disordered action of the social pro pensity. There is another class of cases, which in their character appear to be directly the reverse of those which have just been mentioned. Individuals, when they are cut off from society, particularly the society of their friends, are sometimes the subjects of a misery inexpressibly intense. We have already had occasion to allude to the case of the young Foscari, who was banished from Venice, and who died apparently in |