March 13, 1890] 



NATURE 



451 



sides, and upwards from a line between the eye and the ear. 

 The product of these three measurements is what is given in 

 the annexed tables as "head- volumes." It need hardly be said 

 that these numbers do not assi,c;n the actual magnitudes of the 

 heads ; but they do all that is wanted for our purpose, viz. they 

 are proportional to these magnitudes, on the assumption, of 

 course, that the average shape of the head is the same through- 

 out. (5) A test of the breathing capacity. The volume of air, 

 at ordinary pressure, that can be expired is measured by the 

 amount of water displaced from a vessel. The result is given 

 in cubic inches. (6) The height ; deducting, of course, the thick- 

 ness of the shoes. (7) The weight, in ordinary indoor clothing. 

 This is assigned, in our tables, in pounds. 



As regards the persons measured, they are exclusively students 

 — that is, undergraduates, with a small sprinkling of bachelors 

 and masters of arts. Nine-tenths of them were between the 

 ages of 19 and 24 inclusive. Statisticians will understand the 

 importance of this fact in its bearing upon the homogeneity of 

 our results ; since a comparatively small number of measure- 

 ments, in such cases, will outbalance in their trustworthiness a 

 very much larger number which deal with miscellaneous crowds. 

 But it is not so much to the above characteristics that I wish 

 to direct attention here as to one in respect of which our Uni- 

 versity offers an almost unique opportunity. No previous at- 

 tempt, it is believed, has ever been made to determine by actual 

 statistics the correlation between intellectual and physical capa- 

 cities. What, however, with the multiplicity of modern exa- 

 minations, and the intimate knowledge possessed by many tutors 

 about the character and attainments of their pupils, this could 

 here be effected to a degree which could not easily be attempted 

 anywhere else. By appeal to these sources of information, the 

 students were divided into three classes (here marked as A, B, 

 and C), embracing respectively (i) scholars of their College, and 

 those who have taken, or doubtless will take, a first class in any 

 tripos ; (2) those who go in for honours, but fall short of a first 

 class ; and (3) those who go in for in for an ordinary degree, to 

 which class also are assigned those who fail to pass. It is not 

 for a moment pretended that such a classification is perfect, even 

 within the modest limits which it hopes to attain. Very able 

 men may fail from indolence or ill-health, and very inferior ones 

 may succeed through luck or drudgery. But it must be remem- 

 bered that we only profess to deal with averages, and not with 

 individuals, and on average results such' influences have little 

 power. There are probably few cricket or football clubs in 

 which one or more men in the second eleven or fifteen are not 

 really better than some in the first, but no one supposes that the 

 second team would have much chance of beating the first. All 

 that is maintained here is that our A, B, C classes, as classes, 

 stand out indisputably distanced from each other in their intel- 

 lectual capacities. The average superiority of one over the 

 next is patent to all who know them, and would be disputed 

 by very few even of the men themselves. 



The plan adopted has been to classify the A, B, C men separ- 

 ately, arranging each of these in sub-classes according to their age. 

 On the last occasion about 1 100 were thus treated, and it is very 

 important to observe that the new batch (of about locxj) inde- 

 pendently confirms the conclusions based on the previous set. 

 Space can scarcely be afforded for these tables separately, so I 

 only give here the results of grouping the entire two sets toge- 

 ther. But as a matter of evidence, it must be insisted upon that 

 the two separate tables tell the same tale. 



The following, then, are the results of thus tabulating the 

 measurements of 2134 of our students : — 



Table I. 

 Class A (487). 



No. Age.'Eyes. Pull. Squeez-. He.id. Breath. 



75 '3 

 809 



83-5 

 82-8 

 87-1 

 84-2 

 84-0 

 827 



235-8 

 242-9 

 242-8 

 242' I 



2443 

 242-9 



245 '9 

 247-2 



244-0 



255-5 

 252 7 

 255-2 

 257-2 

 262-8 

 261-5 

 251-0 



Class B (913). 



235*0 



2498 



255-1 

 257-2 



257-2 

 259-0 

 261-5 



264-5 



68-92 

 68-78 

 69-08 

 68-84 

 69-17 

 69-31 



68-93 

 68-83 



148-5 

 1497 

 153-5 

 153-0 



153*3 

 154-0 



157-7 

 157-2 



254-9 69-00 152-8 



83-5 243-6 i 255-6 



These tables may be looked at from two points of view, which 

 would commonly be called the practical and the theoretical. By 

 the former, to speak in the more accurate language of statistics, 

 I understand any conclusions to be involved which do not re- 

 cognize distinctions of less than about 4 or 5 per cent, of the 

 totals in question. Looked at with this degree of nicety, the 

 main fact that the tables yield is, that there is no difference 

 whatever (with a single exception, to be presently noticed) be- 

 tween the physical characteristics of the different intellectual 

 grades. Whether in respect of height, weight, power of squeeze, 

 eyesight, breathing capacity, or head-dimensions, -there is no 

 perceptible distinction. There arc differences, of course, but 

 to say whether or not these are of any significance requires an 

 appeal to the theory of statistics and to tests beyond the reach 

 of the "practical" standard. 



The one exception is in the power of "pull." I called atten- 

 tion to this two years ago ; but, with the bulk of statistics at 

 that time at our command, I felt somewhat doubtful as to its 

 real significance. But there can scarcely be any doubt as to the 

 non-casual nature of a difference of power between the A and 

 C classes amounting to 4-6 per cent., when this difference dis- 

 plays itself between the averages of such large numbers as 487 

 and 734 respectively. At least, if there were any doubt, it 

 would be removed by another mode of displaying the results, to 

 explain which a brief digression must be made. In the preced- 

 ing tables the primary division into three classes was based on 

 intellectual differences. Let us make, instead, one based on 

 physical differences. Let the first class, in respect of each kind 

 of measurement, embrace "the best in ten" ; in other words, 

 select the top 200, or thereabouts, in each separate list. Such a 

 table will show, for one thing, the extent to which one kind of 

 physical superiority is correlated with another ; and also, by 

 reference to the triposes and tutors' information, it will show- 

 how these classes are composed in respect of their A, B, C con 

 stituents. The following is such a table, arranged to show how 

 such " first classes " in one physical department stand in relation 

 to the principal other such departments. 



Table II. 

 Comparative Excellence in Different Physical Capacities. 



Eyes. Pull. Squeeze. Breath. I Height. | Weight. 



Average student.. I 24-1 I 83-5 84-2 254-5 ! 68-94 j 153-4 



