646 
tive of the Pacific Slope. It differs greatly 
from the prehistoric basketry of either Eu- 
rope or the Atlantic Slope in that it is much 
finer and better made, but the stitches and 
plaiting are on the same general system and 
done in the same general style. While the 
difference is marked it is at last one of de- 
tail and may be explained. A theory by 
which the present difference may be ex- 
plained is that the art became perfected in 
California, not alone since the migrations 
from Europe, but since the establishment of 
the Indians on the Pacific Coast, while it 
has died out on the Atlantic Coast. 
Bronze found no lodgment in North 
America. <A good explanation is that the 
migration from Europe by which America 
was peopled, took place prior to the advent 
of the bronze there. There might have 
been more than one migration to America ; 
one during the Paleolithic and a later one 
during the Neolithic period; but it seems 
not to have been repeated after bronze be- 
came known in that country. 
The principles which underlie this argu- 
ment of similarity of industries as proving 
migration or communication or contact, do 
not depend alone upon the similarity of the 
objects, but also upon the difficulty of 
manufacture and performance, the intri- 
cacy of the operation required, the skill of 
the workmen ; and to these may be added 
the closeness of resemblance, the similarity 
of detail, and the number of repetitions. 
A single specimen, or a few specimens havy- 
ing only an insignificant or uncertain simi- 
larity, might be of no avail in establishing 
the proposition of migration or communica- 
tion of peoples between the countries ; 
while, as the resemblances are increased, 
and an increase in the intricacies of manu- 
facture, in the difficulties of performance, 
in the skill required to make or operate the 
tool or machine, would very materially in- 
crease the testimony in favor of migration, 
and add weight to the evidence. 
SCIENCE. 
[N. S. Vou. X. No. 253. 
The theory that the similarities of human 
thought account for the similarities of 
human culture in widely separated coun- 
tries and among peoples without prior com- 
munication, savors of gross materialism, 
and is to be rejected as erroneous. That 
there are similarities of human thought is 
to be admitted, but if these control man in 
his progress and compel his passage in a 
materialistic or predestined path, they rob 
him of his free will and make him only a 
creature of circumstances. The best illus- 
tration I can suggest proving the error of 
this theory, is the action of human thought 
as manifested in human speech or writing. 
We may assume that human emotions, feel- 
ings, desires and wishes are much the same 
among all people. Each human being loves 
weeps, pities, hates, envies, etc., much the, 
same as does every other. If they were to 
describe their feelings, one might expect to 
find it done in much the same language. 
Yet we know, for a fact, that this is not 
so. If so done, it is charged as plagia- 
rism. Of the thousands who have thus 
written, scarcely a ‘baker’s dozen’ have 
ever been thus charged. The reason most 
apparent is that with all the similarity of 
human emotions, feelings, desires and 
wishes, the expressions thereof are so differ- 
ent when emanating from different authors 
that none lay themselves open to such a 
charge. 
I am opposed to the theory advanced by 
certain anthropologists, that the similarity 
of human thought is a satisfactory explana- 
tion of the similarity of human culture in 
the case of widely separated peoples. That 
there is similarity of human thought be- 
tween peoples, however widely separated, 
is conceded ; but this theory is employed to 
account for the similarities of human cul- 
ture otherwise than by migration, contact or 
communication. I prefer to account for 
similarity of culture (especially industrial) 
among widely separated peoples by migra- 
