254 



NA TURE 



{Jan. 



lo, r 



journal will stand the test of comparison with any of 

 its contemporaries, and the immediate promise of a 

 series of papers on the anatomy and embryology of 

 Amia augurs well for its future. 



Prof. Cope contributes a very characteristic paper on 

 the tritubercular molar, the leading deduction of which is 

 most interesting and suggestive: it reads (vol. ii. p. 21): 

 " The tritubercular molars of man constitute a reversion 

 to the dentition of the Lemurid^ of the Eocene period 

 of the family of Anaptomorphidas," and " this reversion 

 is principally seen among the Esquimaux, and the Slavic, 

 French, and American branches of the European race." 

 The senior editor, discussing, in the most philosophic 

 paper of the series, "The Seat of Formative and Regenera- 

 tive Energy," writes as follows : " These higher (biological) 

 units combine both atomic and molecular structure, but 

 they have, superadded to and including this, a structure 

 as a whole, which is entirely ignored in the expression, 

 ' molecular aggregates.' As they result from the union, 

 not of simple or complex molecules, but of complex mole- 

 cular groups, their structure may be said to be at least as 

 widely separated from the molecule as this is from the 

 atom"; and, further, "in claiming that 'physiological 

 units ' have something higher than molecular structure 

 and power, I am not treading on ultra-scientific ground, 

 but following the course already sanctioned by chemistry 

 and physics, and the only one which can ever recon- 

 cile physico-chemical and biological conceptions." We 

 heartily recommend this valuable essay to our readers, 

 for the author's contentions in defence of his belief that 

 " the organism as a whole controls the formative processes 

 going on in each part," are worthy of all the consideration 

 that can be given them. He appears to us to under- 

 estimate the importance of recent advance in organic 

 chemistry. The work of unravelling the constitution of 

 the more complex organic bodies — a work in which 

 certain of our own countrymen are playing a leading part 

 — gives us hope beyond that which he entertains. The 

 presence of the above-cited remarkable passages is, in 

 itself, sufficient to invest the early numbers of this journal 

 with a lasting interest. 



We congratulate the editors upon their enterprise ; 

 they are supported by influential friends and surrounded 

 by enthusiastic investigators ; they have, in turn, fulfilled, 

 thus far, the highest expectations of their most sincere 

 well-wishers, and merited the confidence and support of 

 the biological brotherhood throughout the world. 



G. B. H. 



THE BALD-HEADED CHIMPANZEE. 



'T^HERE is no longer any room for doubt amongst 

 -*- naturalists as to the complete distinctness of the 

 larger anthropoid ape of tropical Africa, the gorilla, from 

 its smaller brother, the chimpanzee. The differences are 

 amply sufficient for specific, if not for generic, distinction. 

 But, on the question whether there is only one chim- 

 panzee, spread over a great extent of the African continent, 

 or several species confounded under the same name, there 

 is still much difference of opinion. As long ago as 1853, 

 M. Duvernoy communicated to the Academy of Sciences 

 of Paris a short description of a second species of chim- 

 panzee (see Comptes rendus, vol. xxxvi. p. 927), based on 

 specimens obtained by Dr. Franquet in Gaboon in 1851. 

 M. Duvernoy subsequently published an elaborate memoir 

 on the same subject in the Archives du Museum (vol. 

 viii. p i). The distinctions insisted upon by Duver- 

 noy between his Troglodytes tschego and the ordinary 

 T. niger were chiefly osteological ; at the same time he 

 characterized the tschego (from M. Franquet's descrip- 

 tion) as having the " face black, and the ears small," while, 

 according to the same authority, the ordinary chimpanzee 

 has " very large ears, and its face flesh-coloured." 



In 1858, in a memoir also published in the Archives 

 du MiiSiUitn (vol. x. p. 94), on the specimens of anthropoid 

 apes in the Paris collection, M. Isidore GeofTroy St. 

 Hilaire published a letter from Dr. Franquet in which 

 the latter again insisted on the difTerences of the three 

 species of anthropoid apes observed by him in the district 

 of Gaboon. These were characterized as follows: — 



(i) The Chi)npan::ee, with the face flesh-coloured, the 

 ears red and large, and the fur black. 



(2) The Gorilla, with the face black, the ears small and 

 black, and the fur of a brownish chestnut, but varying in 

 tint in different parts of the body, and v/ith always a row 

 of reddish hair starting from the middle of the forehead 

 and following the line of the sagittal suture. 



(3) The N'tchego, with the face black and the ears 

 small, as in the gorilla. The hairs of this ape, he says, are 

 shorter and darker in colour, and it never attains the size 

 of the gorilla, or carries the red crest across the forehead. 



In i860, the well-known traveller Mr. P. B. Du Chaillu 

 gave his account of the anthropoid apes of the Gaboon to 

 the Boston Society of Natural History (see Proceedings 

 of that Society, vol. vii. p. 296). Mr. Du Chaillu described, 

 as a new species of chimpanzee. Troglodytes calvus, " with 

 the head entirely bald to the level of the middle of the ears 

 behind," and " having large ears," while he identified the 

 N'tchego of Dr. Franquet as being nothing but the adult 

 chimpanzee {T. niger). In a second communication to the 

 same Society {op. cit. p. 358), he described another new 

 species of chimpanzee, with a black face, but the forehead 

 not bald, which he called Troglodytes kooloo-kamba, from 

 its peculiar cry. 



In 1861, the late Dr. J. E. Gray examined Mr. Du 

 Chaillu's specimens of apes, and came to the conclusion 

 that both his supposed new species were only varieties of 

 the common chimpanzee (seeP.Z.S., 1861, p. 273). Such 

 also, as was stated by Dr. Gray, was my own opinion at 

 that time, and I have remained in a doubtful state of mind 

 ' on the subject until a recent period. But the acquisition 

 I of the fine female specimen of chimpanzee, generally 

 , known by the name of " Sally," by the Zoological Society 

 I in 1883, caused me to change my views very materially. 

 I There can be no doubt that this animal, when compared 

 j with specimens of the ordinary chimpanzee, presents 

 i very essential points of distinction. The uniform black 

 face and nearly naked forehead, which is only covered 

 with very short black hairs, together with the large size 

 of the ears, render " Sally " conspicuously different from 

 the many specimens of the common chimpanzee (at least 

 thirty in number) that the Society has previously re-' 

 ceived. I was at first inclined to believe that " Sally ' 

 j might be referable to the Troglodytes tschego oi Duvernoy. 

 I But nothing is said, in M. Duvernoy's description, of the 

 I bald forehead ; and the small ears attributed to the 

 ! N'tchego, are directly contrary to this hypothesis, as 

 in " Sally " these organs are exceedingly large and 

 prominent. On the whole, I was inclined to believe 

 that " Sally " might belong to the Troglodytes calvus of 

 Du Chaillu, and she was accordingly entered in the 

 Register of the Society's Menagerie as the Bald-headed 

 Chimpanzee {Atithropopithecus calvus^), which is cer- 

 tainly a very appropriate name, even if it be not 

 technically correct. 



In the beginning of the present month we purchased 



of Mr. Cross, of Liverpool (from whom we had also 



obtained "Sally"), a second specimen of the Bald-headed 



i Chimpanzee, likewise a female, which, although much 



smaller in size, closely resembles " Sally" in every other 



\ respect. 



'. Fortunately, there is now in the Gardens a young 

 ■ specimen of the Common Chimpanzee {Anthropopithecus 

 ^ troglodytes), presented to the Society in May last by 



1 I The term Troglodytes being more properly used for a genus of b'rds, 

 I it becimes necessary to employ fjr the chimpanzees the generic term 

 I " Anthropopithecus," of BkinviUe, a? suggested by Peters in 1S76. 



