or obliquity, of their beaks. And here again we find, where there is arching, there is a greater extent of docility and capacity.

c By the eyes, which appear to have an exact correspondence with the arching of the beak.

d Particularly, by the middle line, I cannot say of the mouth, but of what is analogous to the mouth, the beak; the obliquity of which is ever in a remarkable proportion with the outline of the profile of the head.

e And, likewise, by the angle which this line forms with the eye. How extremely obtuse is this angle in 1, 2, 4, of plate V ! How rectangular, if not acute, is it in the eagle 6! In this, also, the royal bird more resembles the monarch of the earth, notwithstanding their otherwise infinite difference, than all the rest of the feathered species; while the weakest of birds approaches, in this, as well as in other respects, to the rank of fish.

Who can behold this firm-built bird, ho vering in the air, this powerful lord of so many creatures, without perceiving the seal, the native star of royalty in his piercing round eye, the form of his head, his strong wings, his talons of brass; and, in his whole form, his victorious strength, his contemptuous arrogance, his fearful cruelty, and his

ravenous propensity? Consider the eyes of all living creatures, from the eagle to the mole; where else can be found that lightning glance which defies the rays of the sun? Where that capacity for the reception of light?-Where !-How truly, how emphatically, to all who will hear and understand, is the majesty of his kingly character visible; not alone in his burning eye, but, in the outline of what is analogous to the eyebone, and in the skin of his head, where anger and courage are seated! But throughout his whole form where are they not?

What a gradation from him to the English cock, with the arrogant proud look of impotent jealousy, and from the latter to the feeble lustful sparrow, plate VI!

How much might yet be added of the characteristics of birds! But all this we cannot add, for it must be remembered we do but write fragments.

Yet a word more.

Compare the vulture with the eagle, and who does not observe in his lengthened neck and beak, and in his more extended form, less power and nobility than in the eagle? In the head of the owl the ignoble greedy prey.

In the cassowary, what physiognomonical character, what rudeness, what effeminate rage, without sense or feeling!

In the dove, mild, humble, timidity.

And, in the swan, more nobility than in the goose, with less power than in the eagle, and tenderness than in the dove; more pliability than in the ostrich; and, in the wild duck, a more savage animal than in the swan, without the eagle's force.

VII.

FISH.

As is the power of perception, so is the expression. How different are these profiles from that of man! How much the reverse of human perpendicularity! How little is there of countenance, when compared to the lion! How visible is the want of mind, reflection, and cunning!

What little or no analogy to forehead! What an impossibility of covering, of half, or entirely closing, the eyes! The eye itself is merely circular, and prominent; has nothing of the lengthened form of the eye of the fox, or elephant.

A monster, 2. How infinitely distant from all that can be called graceful, lovely, or agreeable! The arched mouth, with the pointed teeth, how senseless, intractable, and void of passion or feeling; devouring without pleasure or satisfaction! How inexpressibly stupid is the mouth of 3, especially in its relative proportion to the eye!