64 PROFESSOR MACALISTER, 
TABLE IT. 
RELATIVE Proportion of ForEARM to HuMERUS in length. 
_ Humerus, Forearm. 
Australian, . 3 1:00 ‘74 
Bushman, . ‘ 1:00 80 
Negro, . 5 : 1:00 ‘76 
European, . d 1:00 ‘79 
The decimal obtained in this table or antebrachial index is in= 
teresting, as it shows that this individual had a greater propor- 
tional length of forearm than the average of Europeans, a pithecoid 
character. 
TABLE III. 
RELATIVE PROPORTION of FEMuR to TIBIA. 
Femur. Tibia. 
Australian, . : 1:00 80 
European, . 5 1-00 "85 
Negro, . ; : 1:00 “89 
Bushman, .. ‘ 1:00 ‘78 
- From this table it appears that the crural index is rather 
shorter than usual. 
TABLE IV. 
RELATIVE PROPORTION of FoREARM and ARM to THIGH and Lzc«. 
Lower. Upper. 
Australian, . : 1:00 69 
Bushman, . : 1:00 ‘87 
European, . : 1:00 ‘70 
This intermembral index shows that in this Australian the 
proportion of the arm to the leg is smaller even than the European. 
The three methods of measurement adopted above are, I think, 
calculated to give us more definite results as to the relative 
regional developments of extremities than any other plans hither- 
to used. With many of the most interesting aboriginal tribes it 
is impossible to get whole skeletons, and when got, the spinal 
unit, so important a factor in Professor Humphry’s whole 
number, is rather a vague one, on account of the varying thick- 
nesses of intervertebral substance, unless the observer has obtained 
the skeleton while fresh. Limb bones, on the other hand, are 
easily obtained, and by a series of measurements like those given 
above and carried out on an extensive scale, we can easily formu- 
late in the simplest possible manner, the relative developments of 
ee eS ee 
