INDIRECT EQUILIBRATION. 541 



There are, however, some modifications in the sizes and 

 forms of parts, which cannot have been aided by natural 

 selection; but which must have resulted wholly from the 

 inheritance of functionally-caused alterations. The dwind 

 ling of organs of which the undue sizes entail no appreciable 

 evils, furnishes the best evidence of this. Take, for an 

 example, that diminution of the jaws and teeth which 

 characterizes the civilized races, as contrasted with the 

 savage races.* How can the civilized races have been bene- 



* I am indebted to Mr. [now Sir W.] Flower for the opportunity of ex 

 amining the many skulls in the Museum of the College of Surgeons for verifi 

 cation of this. Unfortunately the absence, in most cases, of some or many 

 teeth, prevented me from arriving at that specific result which would have 

 been given by weighing a number of the under jaws in each race. Simple 

 inspection, however, disclosed a sufficiently-conspicuous difference. The 

 under jaws of Australians and Negroes, when collated with those of English 

 men, were visibly larger, not only relatively but absolutely. One Australian 

 jaw only seemed about of the same size as an average English jaw; and 

 this (probably the jaw of a woman), belonging as it did to a smaller skull, 

 bore a greater ratio to the whole body of which it formed part, than did an 

 English jaw of the same actual size. In all the other cases, the under jaws 

 of these inferior races (containing larger teeth than our own) were absolutely 

 more massive than our own often exceeding them in all dimensions ; and 

 relative?// to their smaller skeletons were much more massive. Let me 

 add that the Australian and Negro jaws are thus strongly contrasted, not 

 with all British jaws, but only with the jaws of the civilized British. An 

 ancient British skull in the collection possesses a jaw almost or quite as 

 massive as those of the Australian skulls. All this is in harmony with the 

 alleged relation between greater size of jaws and greater action of jaws, 

 involved by the habits of savages. 



[In 1891 Mr. F. Howard Collins carefully investigated this matter: meas 

 uring ten Australian, ten Ancient British, and ten recent English skulls in the 

 College of Surgeons Museum. The result proved an absolute difference of the 

 kind above indicated, and a far greater relative difference. To ascertain this 

 last a common standard of comparison was established an equal size of skull 

 in all the cases ; and then when the relative masses or cubic sizes of the jaws 

 were calculated, the result which came out was this: Australian jaw, 1948; 

 Ancient British jaw, 1135; Recent English jaw, 1030. &quot;Hence,&quot; in the 

 words of Mr. Collins, &quot; the mass of the Recent English jaw is, roughly speak 

 ing, half that of the Australian relatively to that of the skull, and a ninth less 

 than that of the Ancient British.&quot; He adds verifying evidence from witnesses 

 who have no hypothesis to support members of the Odontological Society. 

 The Vice President, Mr. Mummery, remarks of the Australians that &quot;the 



