Manchester Memoirs, Vol. l.xvi. (1922), No. 2 11 



Fig. B, it is slio-htly curved in Fig. A and straio-ht in Fig. C (i). 

 Tlie extents of the forms are not identical. 



The chief difference between the forms is that while Fig.C{i) 

 emphatically tri-dimensional, and for its possessor this is one 

 of its most important features. Fig. B is almost in one plane, 

 while concerning- Fig. A no relevant data on this point have 

 been given. Yet, having- pointed out these differences, it 

 seems' justifiable to hold the opinion that the degree of 

 resemblance betw^een these three compares very favourably 

 with that of most of the ' similar ' pairs adduced by Galton 

 in support of his belief. It might be emphasized that not 

 only has this trio been obtained from entirely unrelated people, 

 but that the coincidence is of three and not of two cases ; a 

 fact significant in itself. Moreover, a glance at Numbers 20^ 

 and 2 of the forms in Plate I of the Inquiries will show that 

 these two latter are not very unlike the three figured above; 

 and that No. 37 in Plate II, though an elaborate structure, 

 contains the essentials of these three forms.- 



The possessor of Fig. A in the above collection of three 

 forms definitely attributes the chief feature of his form to a 

 post-natal cause; the perception of a clock. He says : — 



'' I cannot explain the origin of the almost straight lines 

 between 12 and 20, but the curves came from the fact that I 

 learned to tell time before I learned to count, and when I 

 did learn, evervthing reverted to the picture of that old 

 clock.'* 



Pr<jf. Tattersall writes, after having read this explanation : — 



*' The semi-circles in my form are, I suppose, the remains 

 of the clock face, and this would explain why 6 is always 

 the lowest figure in a semi-circle. For instance, I told you 

 36 was the farthest away to my left. Well, of course, 36 is 

 the lowest figure in its semi-circle. 



'' I think my form is undoubtedly derived from the 

 clock-face, and I have always thought so. It is of course 

 a very simple number-form and might very reasonably be 



1. That of Mr. George Bidder. Q.C.. the son of a famous calculator, and 

 himself able to multiply mentally fifteen figures by another fifteen figures. 

 In the present connexion the gap in his form after 12 is interesting, as it 

 corresponds to those of Fic/s. B^and C (1), which have just been mentioned. 



2. Note, too, that it shows the gap after 12. 



