258 Proceedings of the British Association, 



World ; that the difference between the American tongues was not 

 so great as to make against the general unity of the human race ; 

 but that still it was so great as to render the processes by which 

 alliances were shown between them, convertible towards showing 

 alliances between any other languages whatever. He did not see 

 what sense Dr. Latham gave to the word affinity, and desired to see 

 the details by which the eight isolated classes were run into each 

 other, and the particular facts by which the current divisions were 

 broken down. The contrast between the grammatical analogy and the 

 glossarial differences of the American tongues was generally recog- 

 nized. Dr. Latham, however, instead of explaining it, denied its 

 existence. — Dr. Latham replied, that he had abstained from details 

 merely on the score of time ; that he would now enter on them but 

 briefly ; that he must be excused if he supposed that they were but 

 partially acquainted with the details of transatlantic scholars in this 

 department, but that he would now take up the subject in special 

 regard to the attention with which the Honourable Minister had paid 

 to his statements from the point where they had left it. He differed 

 with Gallatin and others, but he owned that he combated them with 

 weapons which they themselves supplied. He spoke with praise 

 upon the pains taken by the American War Department to procure 

 the Indian vocabularies. In respect to the Natchez, Uche, Attacapa, 

 Adaine, and Chetimacha vocabularies, he believed that Gallatin him- 

 self only meant his groups to be provisional. The division, however, 

 between the Algonquin and Iroquois groups was considered real. 

 This he broke down. Both were allied to third languages, e. g. the 

 Eskimo. Both could be shown allied to each other, if we dealt with 

 many dialects en masse. The Cherokee was Caddo, and as such 

 Catawba also. The question between the Creek and Choctah tongues, 

 was one of definitions only. Exceptions might be taken to his 

 modes of indirect and collective comparison, but he believed them to 

 be legitimate and recognized instruments of criticism. 



' On an Apparatus for Measuring and Registering two dimensions 

 of the Human Frame, the Height of the Body and the Space from 

 the extremity of the Fingers of one Hand, to the extremity of the 

 Fingers of the other, the arms being extended horizontally.' — The 

 adoption of the measurements proposed, the author contends will 



