SCIENTIFIC AND LITERARY NOTES. SL 
I fear the history of such a discovery can be of little interest; but it seems 
necessary to give it, in order to show that, although I have not the slightest 
wish to deprive Dr. Wilson of the origin of the ‘‘ idea,” this idea proved of 
small moment in deducing the view I now entertain. Still, Dr. Wilson is justly 
entitled to the priority of its enunciation, and also to the credit of having led 
my mind to investigate the subject, if really and truly his “hint” was present to 
my mind in the iaquiry—a point upon which I am so uncertain as not to be able 
to give any direct testimony. All I can say is, that I do not know whether I 
availed myself of this “hint” or not. It seems most probable that I did not, 
as my investigation commenced from a different point—viz., parieto-occipital 
flatness. But, whether or not, it seems to me of small import, as I have not the 
least desire to deny to Dr. Wilson the credit of the priority of the “idea.” 
Whether the remark in Dr. Gosse’s ‘ Hssai sur les Déformations Artificielles 
du Crane,” 1855, p. 74, which I have quoted in the “ Note,” be an indication that 
the idea had previously occurred to some one else or not, I cannot tell, as he 
gives no further expianation. Again, in the late Mr. Bateman’s ‘Ten Years’ 
Diggings,’ under the date of discovery, 1851, the year in which Dr. Wilson’s 
attention appears first to have been calied to the subject, an ancient British 
skull is described in these words : “‘ The occiput flattened asif by artificial means 
during life” (181 T. p. 273). When the observation was made there is now no 
means of knowing; but it is so pointed as to lead to the query, whether the idea. 
of the true explanation may not have occurred to others as well as to Dr. 
Wilson even quite as early as to himself? 
Whether Dr. Wilson may still be able to quote me, as he says he has intended 
to do, as confirming the view he announced, must rest with his own judgment. 
I do not see any impediment to his doing so__If he shall please to add, that my 
investigations had a different point of departure, and yet arrived at the same 
conclusion, I believe he may make me of use in contributing to the establishment 
of his views. 
_ I trust that there is nothing in the tone or terms of this communication which 
can be otherwise than agreeable to Dr. Wilson. If there be, let me say before- 
hand, to prevent a misunderstanding I should deplore, that it was not intended, 
and that I gladly retract it. 
J. BarnarD Davis. 
——= 
No. 3. To the Editor of the Atheneum. 
“University College, Toronto, Dec. 2, 1862. 
“Tn the Atheneum of Sept. 20th, a letter of mine appeared, in which I laid 
claim to priority of publication on the subject of artificially-flattened occipital 
forms in British skulls, and complained of the publication by Dr. J. Barnard Davis 
of a paper on this subject in the Natural History Review, in which he claimed the 
origination of the idea, without noticing my previously-published views, which 
references in the ‘ Crania Britannica’ showed to have been previously known 
to him. I wrote at the same time a lengthened paper for the Canadian Journal 
entitled ‘Ethnical Forms and Undesigned Artificial Distortions of the Human 
Cranium,’ with a view to the more complete elucidation of my views: and ag 
Vou. VIII. G 
