overspread."* Proceeding still further Mr. Eyre has very ingeniously
attempted to explain the gradual peopling of Australia, and even indicate
the probable routes taken by the first settlers during the long periods
of years which must have elapsed before the whole continent was overrun
by the tribes now collectively forming the Australian race. Dr. Prichard,
when alluding to the probable mode of dispersion of the black tribes of
the Indian Archipelago, conjectures that one of the branches during the
migratory march probably passed from Java to Timor, and from thence to
Australia.** Dr. Latham also inclines to the belief that Australia was
peopled from Timor and not from New Guinea, judging, in the absence of
positive proof, from the probability that "occupancy had begun in
Australia before migration across Torres Strait had commenced in New
Guinea," inferred "from the physical differences between the Australian
and the Papuan, taken with the fact that it is scarcely likely that the
Papuans of Torres Strait would have failed in extending themselves in
Australia had that island been unoccupied." Timor also is much nearer
than New Guinea to the REMOTE source--assumed to be the continent of
Asia--whence the Australians have been derived.***

(*Footnote. Journals of Expeditions of Discovery into Central Australia
etc. by E.J. Eyre Volume 2 page 405.)

(**Footnote. Researches into the Physical History of Mankind Volume 5
page 214.)

(***Footnote. Natural History of the Varieties of Man by R.G. Latham,
M.D. pages 257 and 253.)

The unity of the Australian race being admitted implies one common
origin, and that such was not derived from New Guinea, can scarcely, I