THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION. 
245 
African Negro and a European, between a Hindoo and a Chinese, and 
between an Australian and a Red American, as there is between the species 
of wolves, jackals, and foxes. 
Sir Charles Nicholson could not agree with Mr. Crawfurd’s conclusions. 
The variety of the human races, as they now are, has, doubtless, existed 
for a long time ; and tombs of very great antiquity showed this. But 
there is now in India a race of Jews perfectly black ; and in China, the 
Jews had long become the same in physiognomy with the Chinese, though 
the Jews never intermarry with them. Among the natives of America 
there is an evident approximation to the Red Indian in physiognomy, for 
they were assuming the hatchet-face, and losing the beard. The same 
effect could be discerned among the European population of Australia ; 
and Sir Charles stated his opinion that the question was to be settled on 
philological rather than on ethnological grounds. (The black Jews, to 
whom Sir C. Nicholson referred, are well known to be the descendants of 
Hindoo proselytes, and not of Jewish extraction, and they look up to 
white Jews as to a superior people.) 
The discussion of greatest interest in this Section was raised upon a 
paper, by Professor Owen, F.R.S., “ On the Zoological Significance of the 
Brain and Limb Characters of Man ; with Remarks on the Cast of the 
Brain of the Gorilla.” The Professor exhibited two casts ; one of a 
human brain hardened in spirits, the other taken from the interior of the 
cranium of a gorilla, — and described the peculiarities of each. He 
remarked that these were so marked as clearly to distinguish them 
generically. In the brain of man the posterior lobes of the cerebrum 
overlapped the cerebellum (or smaller brain) to a considerable extent, 
whereas, in the gorilla, these posterior lobes did not project beyond the 
lobes of the cerebellum ; that is to say, that in man the posterior lobes 
were prominent, whereas in the gorilla they were deficient. From long 
and close investigation into the characters of animals, he was convinced 
that the brain offered the most constant characters ; and he had, therefore, 
proposed, in a paper read before the Linmean Society, in 1858, to recast 
the mammalian groups — classifying them according to their cerebral 
development. Man, besides having a remarkable prominence of the 
posterior lobes, also possessed a part termed a posterior cornu , or horn, of 
the lateral ventricles, and another portion, termed the hippocampus minor, 
in this posterior cornu. The distinctions between this type of brain and 
that found in the other mammalia were so well marked that he had placed 
man in a distinct sub-kingdom. The brain he considered a far better 
guide in classification than the foot ; but, nevertheless, as great difference 
was observable in the latter as in the former. 
Professor Huxley said that the paper just read in no way appeared to repre- 
sent the real nature of the question under discussion, which he would state 
in another way. That question was twofold — one of facts, viz., What are 
the structural differences between man and the higher apes? and one of 
reasoning, viz., What is the systematic value of these facts? Professor 
Owen had now for several years made three distinct assertions respecting 
the first question of facts, — assertions which he had repeated in the 
present paper. These assertions he had reiterated without modification or 
