“The Classification of the Varieties of the Human Species” is the title of Flower’s Presidential Address to the Anniversary Meeting of the Anthropological Institute, held in January 1885. In this scheme the species was divided into three main stocks, or branches, namely (1) the Negroid, or black; (2) the Mongolian, or yellow; and (3) the Caucasian, or white. In the first were included the African or typical Negroes, the Hottentots and Bushmen, the Oceanic Negroes or Melanesians, and the Negritos of the Andaman Islands and other parts of Asia; the Australians being provisionally classed near the Melanesians. The second, or Mongolian, branch was taken to include the Eskimo, the typical Mongols of Central and Northern Asia, the brown Polynesians or “Kanakas,” and the so-called American Indians, from the great lakes of Canada to Patagonia and Tierra del Fuego. In the third, or Caucasian, group were classed, of course, all the remaining representatives of the human race, including Europeans, the ancient Egyptians, and the modern fellahin of the Nile delta, the natives of India, the Ainu of Japan, and the Veddas of Ceylon. In the main, this classification has been very generally accepted by anthropologists, although exception has naturally been taken to some of the items. The Australians, for instance, which differ markedly from all the undoubted representatives of the Negroid branch, form a case in point. Sir William was inclined to think that these people do not form a distinct race at all, but that they may be derived from a Melanesian stock, modified by a strong infusion of some other race, probably a low Caucasian type, more or less nearly allied to the Veddas of Ceylon or some of the Dravidian races of Southern or Central India. It is added, however, that the Australians may possibly be mainly sprung from a very primitive type, from which the frizzly-haired Negroes branched off; frizzly hair being probably a specialised feature not the common attribute of the ancestral man; confirmation of this last supposition being afforded, it may be mentioned, by the straight hair of the man-like apes. Neither of the above theories is, however, altogether satisfactory; and it has been suggested by some writers that the Australians, like the Veddas of Ceylon, and the Indian Dravidians, are a very primitive Caucasian type. Against this, is their scapular index, their large teeth, and projecting jaws (which must not be confused with protrusion of the lips alone). Until, however, we know which of the three great human branches was the one which traces its origin back to ape-like creatures, it is almost impossible to arrive at any satisfactory conclusion on this puzzling question. Another point in regard to which Flower’s classification has met with adverse criticism is the position assigned to the brown Polynesians, which some authorities believe to be mainly of Caucasian origin, and accordingly term Indonesians.