982 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXVII. No. 965 



A HUMAN MONSTROSITY 



On May 1, 1912, at Fayette, Missouri, was 

 born a female child (colored) having two 

 heads and three arms. The monstrosity was 

 still-born, but had apparently completed its 

 intra-uterine development. It weighed about 

 fourteen pounds. 



The legs are two in number, properly placed, 

 and perfectly normal. The trunk as seen from 

 without is fully developed. Posteriorly it is 

 entirely normal, but the breadth increases 

 considerably toward the anterior end. The 

 chest region is at least one half again as broad 

 as it should be. Other than is suggested by 

 the breadth of the chest, however, there are 

 no signs of duplicity in the trunk. The 

 breasts are two in number and far separated, 

 being normally placed with reference to the 

 sides. The spinal column is single and cen- 

 tral as far as can be determined without dis- 

 section. 



Three arms are present. Two show no signs 

 of irregularity either in position or structure. 

 The third is somewhat dwarfed, and is located 

 on a level with the two normal arms and mid- 

 way between them. It extends upward and 

 backward, and is attached to an irregularly 

 developed scapula resting between the normal 

 ones. The structure of this third arm and its 

 hand is quite abnormal. Both upper and 

 lower arm bones are present, but reduced in 

 size. The wrist bones are not regular or at 

 least do not permit of normal movement. The 

 bones of the hand are not all present, there 

 being only the metacarpals and phalanges of 

 the thumb and first two fingers. The distal 

 segment in each case bears a thickened claw- 

 like nail. 



The most striking feature of this mons- 

 trosity is its two heads. Each is set at a slight 

 angle with the general axis of the body, and 

 rests close beside, but not crowding, the 

 other. As far as can be observed, there is no 

 abnormality of any sort in connection with 

 these heads except for the position. 



There are many problems of scientific in- 

 terest suggested by this specimen and no doubt 



many facts of interest and importance will be 

 brought to light upon its dissection. 



L. D. Peaslee 

 Public Museum, 

 Milwaukee, Wis. 



the omaha tribe 

 A REVIEW of " The Omaha Tribe," published 

 in Science, June 13, 1913, calls for a few 

 words from the authors, notwithstanding their 

 disinclination to respond to a criticism which 

 in some parts sounds more like vituperation. 

 The opening sentences of the reviewer sound 

 the keynote of his whole effort. He says : 



The most obvious thing about this monograph 

 is the authors' well-nigh complete neglect of the 

 work of their predecessors. It is their avowed 

 purpose (p. 30) to borrow nothing from other 

 observers and to present "only original material 

 gathered directly from the native people. ' ' Apart 

 from any consideration of historical justice this 

 principle is unjustifiable from the standpoint of 

 the student. 



Now, the paragraph in the preface in the 

 work from which the above is quoted, reads 

 as follows: 



When these studies were begun nothing had 

 been published on the Omaha tribe except short 

 accounts by passing travelers or comments made 

 by government officials. None of these writers 

 had sought to penetrate below the external aspects 

 of Indian life in search of the ideals or belief 

 which animated the acts of the natives. In the 

 account here offered nothing has been borrowed 

 from other observers, only original material gath- 

 ered directly from the native people has been 

 used and the writer has striven to make, so far 

 as possible, the Omaha his own interpreter. 



By comparison of the two quotations it will 

 be readily seen that the context has been will- 

 fully disjointed and that a segregated part of 

 it was used as if it were the whole, an unjusti- 

 fied and unscholarly procedure. 



The plan and purpose of the authors was 

 to present the results of independent and orig- 

 inal investigations on the Omaha, extending 

 for over thirty years, and, as stated on p. 30, 

 to avoid the criticism of other writers. The 

 final adoption of this plan was due in a large 

 degree to the regard which the authors felt for 



