Page:The Zoologist, 4th series, vol 1 (1897).djvu/463

Rh to appear totally unlike the living animal—more caricatures than the real object—and I have never seen any drawing that correctly represented a Dik-Dik."

and Dr. John Beddoe have recently written a paper on the "Physical Anthropology of the Isle of Man," which is published in the last issue of the Journ. Anthrop. Instit. A "Descriptive Book" of the "Royal Manx Fencibles," which contains the names of about 1300 men who passed through the ranks between 1803 and 1810, affords material for the memoir. From this number have been subtracted "all those under eighteen years of age (chiefly drummers), and those not born in the island, also all those whose names are either not Manx, or are not known in the island for a generation before 1800, even though they were born in the island." The book describes the complexion, eyes, hair, and stature, and it mentions the parish where each man was born and the trade to which he was brought up.

The results of this study are thus summarized:—"Generally speaking, they distinctly confirm Dr. Beddoe's conclusions that the population of the Isle of Man is Scandio-Gaelic, and that there is no very great difference in the proportionate distribution of Norsemen and Gaels in the north and south. Our results, however, enable us to state further that there appears to be a decided preponderance of Norsemen in the parishes of Jurby, Ballaugh, and Michael, and of Gaels in the parishes of Maughold and Louan, while there are distinct traces of alien elements in the districts of Douglas, Castletown and Peel, especially in the latter, where the large proportion of dark eyes and fair hair is very remarkable.

seems to be now no longer a word of evil import. At the Catholic International Congress held at Fribourg in August, Dr. Zahm, of Indiana, and with the approval of the meeting, spoke as follows:—"As against the alternative theory of Creationism, the evidence, all must admit, is overwhelmingly in favour of evolution. I am quite willing to agree that as yet the theory is not proven by any demonstrative evidence. I freely grant that à priori Creationism is quite possible. But is it probable? Science answers 'No.' As to affording any positive evidence in favour of the special creation of species, it is absolutely mute; and the negative evidence is of such a character that there are few, if any, serious men of science who are willing to consider it as having any weight: à priori, Creationism is possible; à posteriori, it is so highly improbable as to be practically ruled out of court."