Fan. 18, 1883] 
observable in the skulls of some of the gibbons, and in the lower 
monkeys, as, for instance the baboons. ? 
The distinction appears to me to be of the same kind as the 
erect position of man and the different order of the length of his 
toes as compared with the ape and many of the lower animals—as 
for instance the third toe in the lion, bear, dog, badger, and hare. 
It should be remembered that the nasal bones in man form 
merely a bridge or back to the osseous structure of the nose, 
which is mainly due to the upheaval laterally of the pre-maxillary 
bones. ‘These are less elevated in other animals, and there is 
no tilting of the nasals proper. In the chimpanzee and the 
orang the nasals are as flat as inthe hippopotamus. On referring 
to Prof. Mivart’s essay on the apes in the ‘‘ Encyclopedia 
Britannica,” I find he alludes to the transverse convexity of the 
bones of the nose, which he considers a marked character of 
man’s skull, entirely absent in the chimpanzee. He adds: the 
nasals in the orang are exceedingly small and flat, ‘‘ often even 
uniting in one bone.” 
In connection with the subject, it may be mentioned that in 
Quain’s ‘‘ Anatomy ” the external nose is said to be due to the 
development of the frontal lappets in the fifth or sixth week of 
the human embryo. It is represented in a woodcut in Balfour’s 
‘* Embryology ’’ as well-formed and prominent so early as in the 
ninth week. 
The existence of the nasal spine in the nostrils of man, but 
not in the ape or any of the lower animals, is a fact that bas to be 
accounted for. It appears to have been overlooked, but is of 
some importance in connection with the development of the 
human nose. J. PARK HARRISON 
January 14 
P.S.—The peculiarities of the human nose and the rationale 
of its formation are fully treated of in Prof. Humphry’s 
“‘Human Skeleton,” p, 220. 
THE COMET 
(ENS following communication from Dr. Gould of Cor- 
doba Observatory (Argentine Republic) appears in 
Astronomische Nachrichten, No. 2481 :— 
On September 6 I received information that a bright 
comet was visible in the east before sunrise. My in- 
formant had seen it on the morning of the 5th, and 
described it as being as bright as Venus and with a 
brilliant tail. Inquiry showed that it had been seen for 
several days by ewployés of the railroad and other persons 
whose duties required them to rise before daylight. 
Not only was the morning of September 7 cloudy, but 
the eastern sky was overcast on every morning for a 
whole week. On one occasion it seemed that a part of 
the comet’s tail could be distinguished, but not even an 
approximate position could be obtained for the head. On 
the morning of the 14th the comet was first seen at the 
Observatory, and an approximate position obtained from 
the circles of the equatorial telescope by pointings with 
the finder. It was then only 13’ south of the equator, 
and moving northwardly. 
The telescope was equipped with the photographic lens 
and apparatus, and as my series of stellar photographs 
was nearly completed and its continuance for a few weeks 
demanded constant attention, I was reluctant to change 
the adjustments. It has been my uniform policy in Cor- 
doba to confine our instrumental observations to the 
southern half of the sky, and, in general, to such regions 
as are not well visible from northern observatories. And 
as the comet had been conspicuous for more than a 
week, was on the equator, and the date of equinox was 
close at hand, it appeared unadvisable to saci ifice im- 
portant and unique observations for the sake of deter- 
“minations of the comet’s position which I could not 
doubt were making under more favourable circumstances 
in the north. Consequently no micrometric observations 
were undertaken; but rude determinations of position 
were repeatedly made, from that time on, by use of the 
finder and the graduated circles, in order to follow the 
comet’s course and deduce approximate elements and 
ephemeris, 
NATURE 
267 
On September 16 the brightness of the head was such, 
that it was visible with the finding-telescope throughout 
the day ; and I prepared to observe it on the meridian, 
having followed it with the equatorial until within half an 
hour of the time of transit. Its declination was about 
+ 0° 52’. But not more than five minutes before that 
moment a large cloud drifted across the meridian, making 
the observation impossible. 
September 17 the comet was very bright and easily 
found in the full sunlight. At 1oh. 4om. am. it was 
necessary to use a shade-glass, on account of its proximity 
to the sun; and at 11h. the sun : nd comet were in the 
same field of view. I again attempted to observe it upon 
the meridian, but was prevented by a new difficulty. The 
comet was hidden by the disc of the sun, and although I 
carefully scrutinised this and especially the preceding 
limb as it traversed the field of the meridian-circle, no 
token of the comet could be seen, nor could it be found 
during the afternoon. Although it must have passed in 
front of the sun, I then supposed it to have passed behind 
it and been occulted. 
On Monday the 18th the comet was again on the pre- 
ceding side of the sun and decreasing in declination at the 
rate of more than 2} hourly. Early in the day its bril- 
liancy attracted popular attention throughout the country, 
and the “blazing star near the sun’’ was the one topic of 
remark, Telegrams came to me from all parts of the 
country, as well as from Chile and Uruguay, calling 
attention to the phenomenon. In the small telescope it 
presented the aspect of a brilliant nebulous mass, having 
at each end curved appendages like horns or wings, nearly 
large as the central body, and at their base quite as 
brilliant ; the general form of the whole reminding one of 
the winged globes carved on ancient monuments. ‘1 his 
ay pearance, unquestionably due to the outrush of glowing 
vapour from the nucleus, was also exhibited, although to 
less extent, on the two following days, during both of 
which the comet remained visible to the naked eye. 
As soon as the elements of the orbit could be obtained, 
its similarity to that of the comet of 1843-1880 was mani- 
fest, and the suspicions regarding its identity and the 
hypotheses to which these gave rise presented them- 
selves forcibly, as I am sure they must have done to 
astronomers in the northern hemisphere, where I doubt 
not they have long since been a theme of discussion. The 
perihelion-distance, although small, seems clearly larger 
than that of the orbits of 1843 and 1880; but how 
far such discordance is consistent with the hypothesis 
of identity must be decided by future investigation. 
The comparatively small amount of study which I 
have been able to give to the que:tion leads me 
to think that the orbit deduced from observations 
before the perihelion may differ somewhat frcm that 
indicated by the observation since September 17; but as 
the Cordoba observations prior to that date were of a 
crude description, I have impatiently waited fcr tidings 
from other observatories. No. 2459 of the Astv. Nachr., 
which has just reached me, leads me to fear that micro- 
metric or meridian observations may not have been mace 
before perihelion. In such case the rough positions 
obtained here with the finder and circles of the equatorial 
may possess a value far greater than was supposed pos- 
sible at the time. Those previous to the perihelion are 
ten in number, and although I do not believe that their 
probable error can exceed a minute of arc in either co- 
ordinate, they are not represented within this limit by the 
elements deduced from observations made since tke peri- 
helion. Should no better positions have been obtained I 
will serd these to you; but I cannot yet abandon the 
hope that some belated astronomer may have seen this 
brilliant object in season to securea series of observations 
before the perihelion passage. 
Micrometric determinations have teen made here on 
various dates since Cctober 17, and have now begun 
