The Express.
London, England, 1855-02-12 00:00:00

ROYAL INSTITUTION.

At the evening meeting at the Royal Institution
lon Friday, Professor Owen delivered a lecture "on the orange
land chimpanzees, and their structural relations to man. '
Hassid that his immediate object was to show, by a com-
parative examination of the osteology of the orang outing,
the chimpanzee, and of man, that the assumed transmuta-
tion of monkeys into men lity gradual development is alto-
gether opposed to the facts which a careful consideration
of the subject presents. The popular and able manner in
which the notion of transmutation had been supported in
the "Vestiges of Creation," had given great extension to
that opinion, which was rnot, however, new, but had been
expressed two centuries ago, in a work by Henry Moore,
which passed greater scientific merit then most of those
that now profess to enlighten the world on matten of
science. Professor Owen said, that ti.e authors of that day
appeared to address a higher clue of readers than the po-
pular writers of the present time, and be intimated his
opinion that, with all our boasted enlighten-
ment, we have not advanced intellectually beyond the
age of Moore. It was said, indeed, in disparagement of
their judgment, that they believed in witches ; but have not
we ear ►elievers in clairvoyance ; and if it be thought folly to
suppose that a long cylindrical piece of wood, when stridden
across by certain old women, could rise in the' air, was it
less opposed to reason to conceive that a fiat circular piece
of wood, when touched with the fingers, could be moved
about without any effort, and rise in the air ? Having thus
ridiculed the superficial scientific knowledge which induces
persons to suppose themselves wiser than their forefathers,
and to take up any notion, however erroneous, without
sufficient investigation, it it be only supported by specious
arguments, Professor Owen proceeded to point out the dis-
tinguishing differences in the skeletons of the orang outang
and the chimp , of which there were full sized
drawings exhibited. He dwelt particularly on those parts
which could not be changed by muscular action, and,
among others, pointed to the projection of a bone over the
eye in the chimpanzee, which is peculiar to that animal-
He said that all the specimens of the orang and of
the chimpanzee which had arrived is this country were
quite young, and that they bad not shed their first
teeth. On comparing the bones of the head of those young
animals with the adult skeleton, a remarkable difference
was observed, the human-looking skull of the young being
rendered much more brutal by the development of the lower
jaw with the second set of teeth, which diminished the facial
angle to 28 degrees. The osteology of the orang and of the
chimpanzee proved that they could not maintain an erect
position. The shortness and comparative feebleness of the
r bind legs, the curvature of the spine, the point at which the
vertebrae of the neck were inserted into the skull, and the
formation of the felt, all indicate that it would be impossible
for suck an animal to maintain itself erect without painful
effort. The large projecting processes at the back of the bones
of the neck, for the attachment of muscles to bold up the head,
form one of the marked differences between the skeleton
both of the orang and of the chimpanzee, as compared with
man. The skeleton of man eabibits difference* from those
of the lower animals that approach n t to him in form
quite sufficient to show that it would be impossible by any
change or development to make them assimilate. This
difference in structure is apparent in every part, from the
formation of the great toe to that of the cranium. The
great toe, combined with the bones of the foot, is admirably
adapted to give the means of standing erect. The longer
length of the bones of the legs, the shortness of the arms,
the peculiar waving form of the spine, and the balanced
position of the skull, are all adapted to an erect position,
and such points tf difference could not be produced by
muscular action or gradual development. The larger
capacity of the brain case in man is also a characteristic
difference that is not gradual. The facial angle
of the full-grown chimpanzee never exceeds 30 degree',
whilst the facial angle of the lowest tribes of mankind is not
less than 70 degrees. In the formation of the teeth and of
the lower jaw also, Professor Owea said there are such
distinctive differences that it is impossible to conceive that
one could be transmuted into the other by any change of
circumstances. He pointed out several other structural
differences, and contended that though the hypothesis of
development may receive countenance from superficial
of tion, it cannot for a moment stand the test of mien-

tific investigation.
Among the objeeta of interest on the library tables were
several skeletons of monkeys, contributed by Mr. liighley,
to illustrate the lecture.