1907.] on Dexterity and the Bend Sinister. 631 



been an attribute of his as far back as we have any knowledge of him, 

 and has V)een one of the main means of hfting him out of darkness 

 and barbarism into Hght and civilisation. Whenever he ceased to be 

 soUtary and become gregarious, it became essential that in all co- 

 operative work he should preferentially employ one fore-limb. 

 " Curious," exclaims Carlyle, " to consider the institution of the right 

 hand among universal mankind, probably the very oldest institution 

 that exists, indispensable to all human co-operation whatsoever ; he 

 that has seen three mowers, one of whom is left-handed, trying to 

 work together, has witnessed the simplest form of an impossibiUty 

 wliicli but for the distinction of right hand would have pervaded all 

 human things." 



And in this sentence of Carlyle lies really the quietus of ambi- 

 dexterity, for if the habitual priority in the use of the right hand 

 from a remote period has controlled industrial development, regulated 

 all systems of associated manual activity, the form of tools, the con- 

 struction of machinery, the organisation of sports and games, and 

 even of dress down to hooks and eyes, and buttons, it is obvious that 

 the general adoption of ambidexterity, if that were practicable, would 

 upset our whole social life, introduce hopeless confusion, and multiply 

 accidents of all kinds. And again : ii all nations and tribes and 

 races, civilised and savage, have in all time preferentially used the 

 same hand, it is obvious that the origin of the custom cannot be 

 looked for in any acquired habit that can be taken up or laid aside at 

 pleasure. In what other custom, rite, convention, institution, has 

 there been such world-wide consensus and uniformity ? We can con- 

 ceive that every tribe and community, finding the preferential use of 

 one hand convenient and profitable, would adopt one hand and give 

 it estal)lished precedence ; but we cannot conceive that all tribes and 

 communities should have adopted the same hand ; and the fact that 

 they have done so is an irrefragable proof that the source of right- 

 handedness is much deeper than voluntary selection and must be 

 sought in anatomical conformation. Had the selection of one hand 

 as preferential been adopted by any tribe or community as a conven- 

 tion, it is certain that love of change, the spirit of opposition, caprice 

 or pure cussedness would have set the convention at defiance and 

 rendered the use of one hand as common as the use of the other. 



And right-handedness is as prevalent to-day as it has ever been. 

 We have no instance of any tribe, community or people that has 

 grown out of it or l)roken away from it and found salvation in am])i- 

 dexterity. 



It has been alleged, on inadequate evidence, that in some races — 

 as, for instance, the Fijians — left-handedness is exceptionally common ; 

 and as regards the inhabitants of the Murray Islands, Dr. McDougall 

 has said : "I think the difference in the manipulative dexterity be- 

 tween the two hands, and also the preference for the use of the right 

 hand, was less marked than in ourselves." But he is careful to add : 



