nouncements cannot fail to produce in most men's minds a strong apprehension, at the very least, that the two phenomena which he is laboring to connect have, after all, some close mutual interdependence. On the other hand, when we fairly consider the difficulties, some of which we have just seen, which lie in the way of demonstrating that the defect is not in many cases inherited, the extremely complicated character of the phenomena with which we have to deal, and, above all, the fact that on M. Boudin's own showing, the alleged cause is absent in an absolute majority of the cases in which the effect is seen to follow, we are once again compelled to suspend our judgment, and to look further for new facts before we can arrive at a conclusion.

we repeat, are known to happen among man- to the whole number of marriages, we feel kind, but from the length of human life, as that we are on different ground. Such ancompared with that of the domestic animals, it is among the latter that we find, as we might expect, that they have been most frequently observed, and in fact, the tendency to atavism is, we believe, habitually recognized and allowed for by the breeders of cattle. But though the fact is undoubted, no man can point out beforehand the individual case in which this reversion to the old type, this relapse, as we may call it, will take place, and many a time, doubtless, has its sudden occurrence frustrated the hopes of the breeder and wasted his labor and care. Now, if the known fact of atavism is fairly considered, it at once affords an answer to the objection of M. Boudin and Dr. Devay, that the various defects and diseases, the statistics of which they have collected, cannot be traced to the parents of those subject to them, and cannot therefore be looked upon as hereditary. The commonest acquaintance with the ordinary conditions of human life will enable any one to see that it is impossible for a medical man to investigate the family histories of any fifty of his patients, so far as to arrive at a clear notion of what has been the condition of health of even the four grandparents whom nature apportions to us all; and yet, without this, how can he pronounce with any certainty that a particular disease or infirmity is not inherited? It may be urged, no doubt with some force, that to bring into the discussion a phenomenon of which we know so little as we do of atavism is to appeal not to our knowledge, but to our ignorance; but the same is true, and true in a far higher degree, of consanguinity itself. So far as we have gone at present, it may be said that the two sides of the argument are on the whole pretty evenly balanced. The statistics of MM. Bemiss, Home, and Devay may be left to answer one another, and even if they be considered to fail in doing so, the number of instances collected by these gentlemen is insufficient to afford more than the feeblest presumption in favor of their conclusion. But when M. Boudin comes forward, counting his instances by thousands, and tells us that in France the number of deaf-mutes who are descendants of consanguineous marriages is from ten to fifteen times what it ought to be when compared with the proportion which such unions bear

So far, then, we might conclude that the imperfect condition of our knowledge of the phenomena of inheritance, including in that term variation and atavism, precludes our coming to any decision upon the subject, but that the general consent of mankind, together with the positive evidence which has been given, is sufficient at any rate to arouse in our minds some misgivings lest the "law of nature" which Dr. Devay and others contend for, should really be found to exist: but before we can fairly yield, even to this extent, to the arguments of these authors, we must provide an answer to the third query, viz., (3) Whether there are not some facts which are quite irreconcilable with the theory in question? Now, in the case of the human race, the difficulty of obtaining trustworthy evidence is so great, that we should despair of ever attaining even to an approximation to the truth, did we depend on it alone. It consists almost exclusively of the published opinions of certain observers, more or less competent, as to the hygienic condition of certain small communities who from their isolated position are either supposed or known to intermarry frequently among themselves; and their opinions are found to be as contradictory in character as they are scanty in number. Fortunately, however, the evidence derived from the breeding of animals, and the record of that evidence preserved in the "Herd-book" and the "Stud-book," is clear and decisive upon this point. Mr. J. H. Walsh, well known, under the nom-de

plume of Stonehenge, as an authority upon | longs, mere close breeding, independently of sporting matters, says distinctly in his re- the qualities of the animals bred from, can have cent work, that nearly all our thorough-bred no ill tendency at all. At once so obvious horses are bred inand in. M. Beaudouin also, in a memoir to be found in the Comptes Rendus of Aug. 5, 1862, gives some very interesting particulars of a flock of Merino sheep bred in and in, for a period of two-and-twenty years, without a single cross, and with perfectly successful results, there being no sign of decreased fertility, and the breed having in other respects improved.

and so forcible has this argument been felt to be, that the supporters of the opposite view have been at considerable pains to evade or destroy it. Four principal objections have been laid against either the admissibility or the value of the evidence derived from the lower animals. (1.) It has been said that prize-animals are not in fact perfect animals, but monsters, i.e., deviations from, or modiDr. Child, in the first of his two papers fications of, the natural type of the species, on this subject, gives the pedigree of the cel-induced by man with the object of fitting them ebrated bull "Comet," and of some other for special purposes of his own. (2.) That animals bred with a degree of closeness such pigs and other animals have been known to as no one who has not studied the subject die out altogether after being bred in and in would believe possible, and any approach to for several generations. (3.) That the eviwhich in the human race would be quite im- dence is valueless as applied to mankind, inpossible. In one of these cases the same an-asmuch as when animals are closely bred with imal appears as the sire in four successive generations. The pedigree of "Comet" is so striking that we are induced to insert it.

Now, bearing in mind the argument of MM. Boudin, Devay, etc., that it is nothing but the mere nearness of blood relationship, and not any ordinary inheritance of parental defects, which produces the ill-effects which they trace to consanguinity, such examples as these ought surely to have great weight. On the other hand, it is clear that even if it were established that such breeding as that from which "Comet " was descended had invariably led to degeneracy and disease, we should not be thereby warranted in arguing from it that an occasional marriage of cousins among mankind had even the slightest tendency to produce similar results. But, on the other hand, we may certainly allege with some fairness, that if at the end of such a pedigree there is produced a remarkably fine specimen of the species to which it be

success, the progenitors in such cases are carefully selected from among the stoutest and most healthy that the breeder can obtain. (4.) The last objection applies especially, or indeed, exclusively, to M. Boudin's attempt to prove the prevalence of deaf-mutism in the offspring of consanguineous marriages; it is that the defect is one from which man, "the talking animal," alone can suffer, and one therefore expressly designed by Providence to punish man for a breach of nature's law. The special ingenuity of this objection lies in the attempt which it makes to draw a broad distinction between man and the lower animals, and thus to discredit the evidence derived from the latter in its application to the former. Dr. Child meets it in his second paper with the remark" that deaf-dumbness means, as a rule, congenital deafness, and such a defect is almost as serious where it exists in the lower animals as in man.”

As the settlement of this question of the applicability to man of the evidence derived from the lower animals, seems to be of great importance to the thorough understanding of the whole subject before us, we will examine the above objections somewhat in detail.

(1.) The statement that prize animals are unnatural, and therefore not perfect animals, nor fair types of their several races, contains undeniably a certain amount of truth. Those mere quivering masses of fat which appear from time to time in Baker Street, under the title of prize-pigs, are doubtless no nearer an approach to the perfection of pig-nature than

was the celebrated Daniel Lambert to the no- | defect be induced upon a stock, there is no blest standard of corporeal humanity; but it doubt that it can be transmitted and intensiis nowise proved that they are in any intelli- fied to an indefinite degree by close breeding. gible sense degenerate. They are not only Just as a careful breeder can take advantage carefully bred, but also artificially fattened of any accidental variety produced in his for a special purpose; and there is no more stock, and perpetuate it, if it be desirable to reason to doubt that they would have been do so, so, by careless close breeding, may a quite different animals had they been differ- disease be perpetuated, however undesirable ently treated, than there is that the same or mischievous it be. man who is hard and active as a Newmarket (3.) That the selection which is always jockey, might become corpulent, pursy, and practised in the close breeding of animals dyspectic, if he entered on "the public line" | should ever have been brought forward at and spent his time dozing in his bar over all, as against the applicability of evidence rum-and-water and a pipe. This objection is thence derived to the case of the human race, therefore not proven even when most strongly is a fact both curious and significan. It is put, and when a fairer instance is taken will so inasmuch as it shows at once how combe found to break down utterly. Such an pletely the few persons who have been at the instance is to be found in the English thor- pains to consider this subject at all have ough-bred horse. Writers upon sporting looked upon it not as a question of scientific matters are pretty generally agreed that no physiology, but merely from a practical horse either bears fatigue so well or recovers point of view. The question which really from its effects so soon as the thorough-bred, has to be decided is not whether under any and it is a subject upon which such writers particular circumstances close breeding is deare the best of all authorities. Thus "Nim- sirable or not, but whether any evil effect, rod" concludes a comparison between the or specific effects of any kind, are traceable thorough-bred and the half-bred hunter in to close breeding in itself and independently the following words: "As for his powers of of the condition, health, and perfection of endurance under equal sufferings, they doubt- the animals in whose case it is practised. less would exceed those of the cocktail,' and We have seen this distinctly affirmed by Dr. being by his nature what is termed a better Devay in the passage already quoted; if, doer in the stable, he is sooner at his work therefore, we take his statement as it stands, again than the other. Indeed, there is scarcely it is quite clear that selection does not affect a limit to the work of full-bred hunters of good the question in the slightest degree. Dr. form and constitution and temper; " and yet Devay states that the evils which he charges these, as we have seen, are almost all close- upon marriages of consanguinity are simply bred. and solely due to the non-renewal of the blood, as he terms it, independently of any previous taint in the progenitors, which, he even ventures to assert, where it exists adds nothing to the chances of degeneration in the offspring. Now the non-renewal of the blood is manifestly just as complete, if the degree of close breeding be the same, when the most careful selection has been exercised, as where none has, and if, as in some of the instances which we have cited (the bull "Comet,” for example), close breeding, with selection, has been carried to an extent inconceivably greater than is possible in the human race, with no ill-consequences whatever, this constitutes a simple demonstration that mere non-renewal of the blood does not necessarily cause degeneracy, and that Dr. Devay's theory is therefore utterly untenable. point of fact, what we may really learn by

(2) With regard to the allegation that some animals have been known to die out after being closely interbred through a long series of generations, while we do not dispute the fact that such may have been the case, we are not aware of any instance of which the particulars have been noted in a satisfactory or really scientific form. We know neither after how many generations this result was produced, what was the degree of close breeding, nor what were the other conditions under which the animals were placed. All these particulars it is necessary to know before we admit the efficiency of mere close breeding as a cause of degeneracy, in the face of the evidence above adduced. The last, viz., the conditions under which the creatures were placed, is a matter of the greatest importance, inasmuch as if once any particular disease or

In

studying the effect of selection is that no law | together the progeny produced are deaf. of nature, whatever, is infringed by close The observer in this case would almost cerbreeding, to whatever extent it be carried, but that precisely the same laws of inheritance obtain in it as in other cases.

tainly conclude that the deafness was a result of the consanguinity of the parents, whereas, had he known more of the antecedents of the The distinction which is now drawn be- case, he would have seen that the blue, eyes tween the study of this subject as a question of the parents indicated a strong tendency to of scientific physiology, and as a matter af-deafness, and that this being the case in both, fecting practical life, is one of some impor- deafness had actually resulted in the offspring tance. The consideration of it from the latter by the action of the ordinary laws of inheripoint of view might, if a sufficient num- tance. Or, to give another example, which ber of trustworthy facts could be collected, will be unhappily more familiar to many of be of some value, at least as a guide to indi- our readers, and which deals more with accate the direction in which investigation of tual and less with hypothetical facts than a more scientific character could be carried the above, let us take the case of hydrocephon with the best prospect of success. Thus, alus, or water on the brain, as it occurs in the fact which M. Boudin has brought for- infants. This disease is now well known to ward might profitably induce any one who be in one of its two forms a manifestation of should have the means of doing it, to investi- the same constitutional disorder which progate what are really the causes of congenital duces consumption and other forms of scrofdeafness. It is impossible to believe that ula; but this knowledge is a comparatively mere non-renewal of blood is the cause, since recent acquisition of pathological science. the phenomenon is met with where the sup- Had Dr. Devay then been conductiug reposed cause is absent, and is itself absent in searches into the question of consanguinity, the great majority of cases in which it is in he might doubtless have discovered in certain operation. The next step, therefore, should regions where consumption was very prevabe to endeavor to learn what are all the an- lent, that the children of cousins were unutecedents in a mass of cases of deaf-mutism, sually subject to hydrocephalus, and not with the view of discovering any one which knowing of any connection between two disis common to them all. When this is care- eases superficially so different, would doubtfully done, it may not improbably be found less have announced that this was a special that some other and quite dissimilar phenom- provision of Providence to restrain mankind enon has existed in the progenitors, having a from consanguineous marriages, with as tendency to bring about deafness in their much confidence as he has now declared the offspring, and that this tendency has been de- same of deaf-dumbness, deformity, etc. veloped with additional force by the marriage with the same family, exactly as is the case with other taints of disease. In order to illustrate our meaning, let us take, for example, one of those cases of correlation of growth brought forward by Mr. Darwin. He finds that all cats having blue eyes are deaf. Now, it has been found, and cases in proof of it have been published, that this is not absolutely true, though approximately so. It is evident that there is some casual connection between these two phenomena, though which it may be is entirely unknown. Let generalizations act more often than not as us suppose, then, that previously to the announcement of this fact by Mr. Darwin, any one holding Dr. Devay's views on consanguinity had been making observations upon it on certain cats. He chances to have two cats with blue eyes, but not deaf, brother and sister we will suppose: upon these two breeding

It is only by some really scientific investigation of the facts, some investigation, that is, which shall reduce them under the operation of a recognized, or at least recognizable law, that we can hope to obtain even such a knowledge of this subject as shall serve for a guide in practical life; and mere empirical generalization such as those of Dr. Devay and M. Boudin, are of little or no value even for this purpose, so long at least as the exceptional cases continue far more numerous than those which can be brought under the law. Such

mere hindrances to the progress of science, or help it on only in so far as they provoke discussion, and thus, in the very process of being themselves overthrown, contribute to increase or correct our knowledge of the facts upon which they profess to be founded.

We have now then arrived at the end of an

observed and recorded the phenomena of nature, the clearness of his descriptions, and above all, the admirable candor with which he has admitted the full force and cogency of some of the objections, which lie against his views. We confine ourselves at present to

how far the inferences which he has drawn, in the very small portion of his subject which affects the question before us, are really borne out by the facts which he has adduced in their support, and whether there are not other facts of a precisely similar character which cannot be reconciled with them.

other stage of our inquiry, and must consider the marvellous diligence with which he has that the question which was left in doubt by the near balance of the evidence obtained from the study of mankind, is settled decisively against the theory which attributes ill effects to the mere non-renewal of the blood by the much more extensive and less equivocal evidence which we derive from experiment the very much narrower consideration of upon the lower animals. And in this position we might have been content to leave the subject, had not Mr. Darwin recently entered arena as a champion in the same cause as Dr. Devay. The whole of Mr. Darwin's most interesting and valuable volume upon the Fertilization of Orchids" was written, as he tells us at the outset, in order to substantiate the assertion that" it is apparently a universal law of nature that organic beings require an occasional cross with another individual." This supposed law of nature is very ingeniously used in Mr. Darwin's previous work to serve as a support to the theory there advanced as to the origin of species, and at the end of the volume from which we quote, the author sums up his views upon the point in the following words, which will no doubt be fresh in the memory of many of our readers :—

Mr. Darwin's argument, stated in a succinct form, appears to be as follows. If we examine the class of orchids, we find that the stigma and the pollinia, in most cases, exist in the same flower, and are in very close juxtaposition. We find also various indications that the pollen of orchids is precious, that is to say, it exists in small quantities, and various precautions, as we may call them, are taken by nature to prevent its waste. These facts, taken together, would naturally lead us to suppose that orchids would be self-fertiliz

"Considering how precious the pollen of ing, but we find, on the contrary, that in by orchids evidently is, and what care has been far the greater number of species the most bestowed on its organization, and on the ac- curious and elaborate contrivances exist, cessory parts; considering that the anther whereby the fertilization of one flower by the always stands close behind or above the pollen of another almost invariably occurs, stigma, self-fertilization, would have been an through the medium of insects, and that if the incomparably safer process, than the trans-visits of insects are artificially prevented, no portal of the pollen from flower to flower. It fertilization takes place. We may hence conis an astonishing fact that self-fertalization

should not have been an habitual occurrence. clude that some evil must result to the speIt apparently demonstrates to us, that there cies from the perpetual recurrence of self-fermust be something injurious in the process.tilization, and may extend our inference so Nature thus tells us, in the most emphatic far as to suppose that close breeding of any manner, that she abhors perpetual self-fertili- kind, even in so diluted a form as that praczation. This conclusion seems to be of high tised among civilized mankind by the marimportance, and perhaps justifies the lengthy riage of cousins, is in some unknown way indetails given in this volume. For may we

not further infer as probable, in accordance jurious, and, in fact, that within certain with the belief of the vast majority of the limits, the more remote is the connection bebreeders of our domestic productions, that tween two individuals who are to breed tomarriage between near relations is likewise gether, the better will it be for their offin some way injurious-that some unknown spring. great good is derived from the union of individuals which have been kept distinct for many generations?"-pp. 259, 60.

It is certainly curious that this should be the doctrine of one whose main theory leads directly to the conclusion that all organic beings are the lineal descendants of some one primeval monad. We do not mean for a moment to say that more than a mere appar

It is not our present purpose to enter into any general discussion of the theory popularly known as Darwinism, nor do we for one moment wish to withhold from its author his well-ent and superficial contradiction is here sugdeserved tribute of praise and admiration for gested, for intercrossing is merely one among