massive, the legs short and bowed, and the arms and hands disproportionately long, reaching to the ankle, but the thumb is very short. Except for the face, hands and feet, the animal is thickly clothed with coarse, reddish-brown hair, which is especially long on the arms, where it converges to the elbow, the thighs and the beard of the male. There are no ischial callosities and no tail. Cheek-pouches are absent, but old males have the face much broadened by the development of prominent fibrous warty protuberances and in this sex the canine teeth become much enlarged. In some respects this ape approaches man more closely than any other existing species, but in others it differs widely and resembles the lower apes. In size it is much inferior to the gorilla of equatorial Africa, seldom exceeding four feet in height, and it lacks the high sagittal crest, and particularly the prominent superciliary ridges, which give to the males of that species so ferocious an aspect. At the present time the orang is confined to the deep swampy forests of Borneo and Sumatra. It is arboreal in habit and builds nests of boughs and leaves among the branches of the trees. For this mode of life its structure is eminently adapted, its long arms, crooked legs and great strength enabling it to travel through the tree-tops with the greatest facility. To an equal degree these structures ill adapt it to terrestrial locomotion. It does not stand erect, as often represented, except now and then for a short time, and when supported, but in a semi-erect attitude, resting on the side of the inturned feet and on the knuckles of the hands, which, as a consequence, develop callossities. The orang lives exclusively upon a vegetable diet, consisting chiefly of fruits. The males especially have powerful voices, made possible by the great development of the larynx. Naturally they are sluggish and sullen, but the disposition is mild. Stories of their great ferocity, and particularly of their habit of lying concealed in the branches of trees above pathways, from which they reach down a foot to grasp men by the throat, are pure fables. In confinement one of their most interesting characteristics is their teachability and the changing expression of the face resulting from the great mobility of the lips. Consult Hartmann, Anthropoid Apes' (1886), in which many other authorities are given; Forbes, 'Allen's Natural History, Vol. I (1897); and the books of Wallace, Forbes, Hornaday and other scientific travelers in the Malayan region.

ORATION ON THE CROWN, The. This oration, like the speech of Achilles in the ninth book of the Iliad' and many of the finest speeches in the world, is a reply. It is Demosthenes' final vindication of his entire life and policy against the censure of his life-long rival and adversary, Eschines. In 336 B.C., two years after the Macedonian defeat of Athens and Greece at Charonea, Ctesiphon proposed in the senate the honor of a golden crown for Demosthenes in recognition of his services to the state as commissioner for the fortification of Athens and treasurer of certain public funds. The main purpose of the bill, however, was to affirm Athens' loyalty to the lost cause of democratic resistance to Macedonian imperialism. Eschines stopped the progress of the bill by an indictment analogous to a plea of unconstitu

tionality in our Supreme Court. For some six years while the success and the consolidation of Alexander's conquests in the East hung in the balance neither side ventured to bring the suit to trial. But in 330 the party of Demosthenes found courage to press for a decision. There was some force in the technical pleas that Demosthenes' accounts had not been audited at the time of the introduction of the bill and that the proposed proclamation of the Crown in the theatre was illegal. But everybody knew that the real issue was the charge that the allegation that Demosthenes had well served the state was false. It was to be a duel between the two greatest orators of Athens. A huge popular jury and a large audience attracted from all Greece were to pass judgment on the policy of Athens for the past 30 years. The logic of fact favored Eschines. The Macedonians had won. But Æschines was embarrassed by the narrow technicality of his strongest pleas and by the suspicion that his retrospective pacifism was the veiling camouflage of pro-Macedonian sympathies that verged on treason. His speech is very clever. But its effect is marred by these doubts of his sincerity and also by his strident insistence on the petty technicalities of his case and his tediously repeated demand that Demosthenes shall meet this issue first in his reply.

Demosthenes is too shrewd to fall into that trap. He merely animadverts on the unfairness of the attempt to prescribe to him the order of his topics, and postpones his plausible and contemptuous treatment of the two technical issues to a convenient place between two of_the strongest patriotic passages of the speech. This leaves him free to review his entire political career and the relation of Athenian democracy to Macedonian autocracy in the chronological division adopted by Eschines himself for that portion of his argument. There is no space here for this historical detail. Fully to appreciate the oration on the Crown one should come to it fresh from the perusal in chronological sequence of the Philippics' and Olynthiacs' and other public orations of Demosthenes in Kennedy's translation. Failing that the late Prof. S. H. Butcher's admirable little book, 'Demosthenes,' in the Classical Writers Series, or the chapters in Jebb's 'Attic Orators' or the historical introduction in Goodwin's edition of the 'Oration on the Crown' will serve. Even without this historic background the oration may be enjoyed as the supreme expression of the sentiment that in a righteous cause it is better to have fought and lost all save honor than never to have fought at all. This is the meaning of the famous oath by Marathon and Salamis which detached from the context may seem in a rough English rendering a mere flight of rhetoric: "They deceive you, men of Athens, they lie who tell you that it was a mistaken policy for you thus to imperil your city for the salvation and enfranchisement of all the Grecian world. It was no error; no, by our fathers, who first faced the barbarian at Marathon, who held the lines of Platæa and manned the ships of Salamis and Artemisium no, by the thousands who sleep in our national cemeteries, brave men all, all worthy of like memorial honors, not only those who succeeded, no not the victors alone." Only a professional student of Greek style can appreciate the