A SKETCH OF HIS LIFE 
37 
other bones and fragments of bones. From these he was able 
to determine several of the more important physical characters 
of that ill-fated people who have left but a single monument, the 
word hammock." 
In the paper in question, which was read before the National 
Academy in November, 1887, Brooks gives a series of admirable 
plates artistically illustrating the skulls described, and reaches 
several conclusions, which may be summarized as follows: The 
bones are thick, massive and dense; the skulls are of good size. 
They are highly brachycepha^.ic but at the same time artifically de- 
formed in a way which would increase their brachy cephalic shape. 
There is no reason to think that the people were gigantic, though 
they were probably of large size. From certain similarities to the 
remains of the inhabitants of southern Florida, it is probable that 
the Lucayans belonged to the same race. 
Studies on Heredity. As early as 1876 in a paper entitled 
''A Provisional Hypothesis of Pangenesis" Brooks began to deal 
with questions of heredity and variation. His thinking in this 
direction took shape and led in 1883 to the publication of a volume 
under the title of '^The Law of Heredity." The central point in 
the theory here presented is the conviction that the reproductive 
elements are, contrary to the usual opinion, not alike in function. 
In support of this conclusion the author draws arguments from 
the facts that hybrid offspring resulting from reciprocal crossings 
are often very different; that the offspring of a male hybrid and 
the female of a pure species is much more variable than the off- 
spring of a female hybrid and the male of a pure species; that a 
structure which is m^ore developed or of more functional impor- 
tance in the male parent than it is in the female parent is very 
much more apt to vary in the offspring than a part which is more 
developed or more important in the mother than it is in the father. 
These and other facts convince Brooks that the ovum and sperm 
cell are not only different morphologically, but that they differ 
profoundly in function as well. 
^' Professor H. V. Wilson, University of North Carolina. 
