With Compliments of**Author. 
HEREDITARY GENIUS: 
AN ANALYTICAL REVIEW. 
{FROM THE JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE. APRIL, 1370.] 
NEW YORK: 
I). APPLETON & COMPANY, 
9 0, 9 2 & 94 GRAND STREET. 
1870. TWO IMPORTANT NEW MEDICAL BOOKS. 
D. APPLETON & CO., New York, 
Have just published : 
‘ I. 
A TEXT-BOOK OF PEACTICAL MEDICINE, 
With Particnlar Reference to Physiology and Pathological Anatomy. 
By Dr. FELIX VON NIEMEYEE, 
Prof, of Pathology and Therapeutics; Director of Med. Clinic of University of Tubingen. 
Translated from the Seventh German Edition, by special permission of the Author, 
By GEO. II. HUMPHREYS, M. D„ and CHAS. E. HACKLEY", M. D. 
In two volumes, octavo. 1,500 pp. Price, in cloth, $9.00; in sheep, $10.50. 
“ The sciences of Pathology and Therapeutics have made vast strides within the last ten 
years ; and, for very many important researches and discoveries in both these branches of 
medicine, we are indebted to Germany. Professor Niemeyer’s volumes present a concise 
and well-digested epitome of the results of ten years of carefully-recorded clinical observa- 
tion by (he most illustrious medical authorities of Europe, together with many valuable and 
practical deductions regarding the causes of disease and the application of remedies, such 
as we believe have not yet been assembled in any single work.” 
Extract from the Author's Preface to the Seventh German Edition. 
“ Nearly ten years have elapsed since the first appearance of my text-book. Meanwhile, 
clinical medicine owes a rich accession of knowledge to investigations made, not only in 
her own province, but in the provinces of physiology, pathological anatomy, and physio- 
logical and pathological chemistry. Important questions have been settled ; obscure points 
rendered clear; false theories corrected, and errors recognized In the present 
edition, but few portions of the work remain unaltered ; and even those few have nearly all 
undergone revision on previous occasions. Most parts of it have received valuable emen- 
dations, and have been enriched by copious additions. 
II. 
ELECTRICITY 
In its Relations to Practical Medicine. 
By Dr. MORITZ MEYER, Royal Counsellor of Health, etc. 
First English, from the Third German Edition ; translated, with Notes and Additions, by 
WILLIAM A. HAMMOND, M. D., Professor of Diseases of the Mind and Nervous Sys- 
tem, and of Clinical Medicine, in the Bellevue Hospital Medical College ; Vice-President 
of the Academy of Medicai Sciences; late Surgeon-General of the IT. S. Army, etc., etc. 
In one volume, octavo. 500 pp. In cloth. Price, $4.50. 
“ The general practitioner must have this book. . . . Prof. Hammond, by this faith- 
ful translation, with additions, has conferred a blessing on his professional countrymen, 
and through them upon the American people ; indeed, upon those everywhere who speak 
the English language. The translation, we are assured, is faithful, and the paper, type, and 
binding are all beautiful, making the volume sightly and elegant.”—Nashville Medical Jour- 
nal, Oit., 180'J. 
“A complete, concise, and practical treatise upon this subject has long been a desidera- 
tum, and we are much mistaken if the work before us is not just the one the profession 
needs. It is by far the best we have yet seen upon the subject, and we can cordially recom 
mend it to any who wish to be up in the latest advances in medical electricity.”—Leaven 
worth Medical Herald, Oct., 1869. 
“ On the intricate subject of Electro-therapeutics, no higher authority exists than Dr. 
Moritz Meyer, nor could a better exponent of his researches and views be found than Dr. 
Hammond, whose own investigations in this field have developed many valuable results. 
The product of their joint labor, now before us, is an exhaustive treatise, the importance of 
which, to every practitioner who would deal intelligently with what is in many cases the 
most potent, if not the only, remedial agent, can hardly be overestimated. . . . Of 
especial interest is the section on ‘ Electricity in its application to Anatomy, Physiology, 
and Pathology,’ in which the beautiful experiments of Duchenne are cited ; and that on the 
aid afforded by electricity in the diagnosis and prognosis of paralytic affections. The most 
important addition made by the editor is an elaborate article on ‘ Organic Infantile Paraly- 
sis,’ as careful and complete as are most of his productions. As a whole, the work is one 
which no one wTho wishes to do his duty to patients suffering from nervous maladies can 
afford to be without, and one which will be referred to oftener than most books in a physi- 
cian’s libra ry.”—Medical Gazette (New York), Sept. 18,1869. HEREDITARY GENIUS. 
tFROM PILE JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE, APRIL, 1870.] 
Montaigne, in one of his most characteristic essays—the one 
in which he avows his instinctive antipathy to medicine, because 
its doctrines are more intricate and fantastic than disease it- 
self, and owns his small liking to physicians, who change 
health into distemper, and more afflict men than do their mala- 
dies—writes: “ What a wonderful thing it is, that that from 
which we are produced shoidd carry in itself the impression 
not only of the bodily form, hut even of the thoughts and in- 
clinations of our fathers! And how do they carry on these 
resemblances with so precipitant and irregular a progress that 
the grandson shall be like his great-grandfather, the nephew 
like his uncle ? ” 
In Macmillan’s Magazine for June and August, 1863, two 
articles appeared, written by a well-known ethnologist, whose 
purpose was to quicken an hypothesis which, though often be- 
fore brought forward, had never found much favor, namely, the 
hereditary transmission of genius. The question was handled 
statistically; a vast amount of biographical data was laid 
under contribution; and the theory was cleverly and inge- 
niously tried from several points of view. The magazine 
papers have grown into a volume,1 where the subject is treated 
on a greatly-enlarged basis of induction, and after a thoughtful 
manner, which, if not perfectly satisfying, are at least highly 
suggestive. The postulate on which Mr. Galton builds his 
book is: 
That man’s natural abilities are derived by inheritance, 
under the same limitations as are the form and physical 
features of the whole organic world. As, in spite of these 
limitations, it is easy to get by careful selection a permanent 
breed of dogs or horses gifted with special powers of running, 
so it is quite practicable to produce a highly-gifted race of 
men by judicious marriages during several consecutive gener- 
1 Hereditary Genius; an Inquiry into its Laws and Consequences. By 
Francis Galton, F. R. S. New York: I). Appleton & Co., 1870. 8vo, pp. 
890. 2 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
ations. It Is held by the supporters of these views that each 
generation lias enormous power over the natural gifts of those 
that follow, and it is therefore due to humanity to inves- 
tigate the range of that power, and to exercise it in a way 
which, without being unwise toward ourselves, shall be most 
advantageous to future inhabitants of the earth. 
The general plan of the argument is, to show that high 
reputation is a pretty accurate test of high ability; next, to 
discuss the relationships of a large body of fairly eminent men, 
and to obtain from these a general survey of the laws of 
heredity in respect to genius; then to examine in order the 
kindred of several groups of illustrious men, with relation to 
their intellectual gifts; and, finally, to collate results, and 
draw legitimate inferences. 
Hence, more than one grade of ability is dealt with. Those 
men with whom we are most concerned, and on wdiose kinships 
the argument Is most securely based, have had the general re- 
pute of extraordinary genius. But there are so few of these 
that, although they are scattered throughout the whole his- 
torical period of human existence, their number does not 
amount to more than four hundred,and yet a large proportion 
of them will be found interrelated. 
Another grade of ability includes many highly-eminent 
men, and all the illustrious names of modern English history, 
whose immediate descendants are living, and whose relation- 
ships may be easily traced. 
A third and lower grade includes the English judges from 
1660 to 1868, massed together as a whole, for the purpose of 
prefatory statistical inquiry. 
Little notice is taken of modern names of note not English 
from the difficulty of hunting out the kindred of foreigners, 
and the risk of error. 
In endeavoring to prove that genius is hereditary, by show- 
ing how Large is the number of instances "where men who are 
more or less illustrious have eminent kinsfolk, there should 
be: first, a clear idea of the value of the terms “ illustrious ” 
and “ eminent,” and the measure of selection they Imply— 
whether the foremost man in one hundred or one thousand 3 
COJSTTEMPOEAEY LITEEATUEE. 
men, or more; and, second, the degree to which reputation 
may be accepted as a test of ability. 
It is essential, to a right understanding of the terms “ emi- 
nent ” and the like, that a minimum standard should be settled, 
and the sense in which they are used strictly defined. We 
should ascertain, too, the proportion that men who have 
achieved such reputations bear to the whole community. In 
the scale adopted, an “ eminent ” man will mean one who has 
gained a position and reputation, by the common judgment of 
the leaders of opinion, which are reached by only two hundred 
and fifty persons in each million of men, or by one person in 
each four thousand. This will be the narrowest limit of selec- 
tion, and no name in the list of kinsmen will be introduced that 
is less distinguished. The term “illustrious” will be still 
more rigidly applied, including many who are as one in a 
million, and a few as one in many millions. 
The doctrine of the pretensions of natural equality in intel- 
lect, which teaches that the sole agencies in creating differ- 
ences between boy and boy, and man and man, are steady 
application and moral effort, is daily contradicted by the ex- 
periences of the nursery, schools, universities, and professional 
careers. There is a definite limit to the muscular powers of 
every man, which he cannot by any training or exertion over- 
pass. It is only the novice gymnast who, noting his rapid 
daily gain of strength and skill, believes in illimitable develop- 
ment ; but he learns in time that his maximum performance 
becomes a rigidly-determinate quantity. The same is true of 
the experience of the student in the working of his mental 
powers. The eager boy at the outset of his career is astonished 
at his rapid progress; he thinks for awhile that every thing is 
within his grasp; but he too soon finds his place among his fel - 
lows ; he can beat such and such of his mates, and run on equal 
terms with others, wdiile there will be always some whose in- 
tellectual and physical feats he cannot approach. The same 
experience awaits him when he enters a larger field of com- 
petition in the battle of life; let him work with all his dili- 
gence, he cannot reach his object; let him have opportunities, 
he cannot profit by them; he tries and is tried, and he finally CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
learns liis gauge—wliat lie can do, and wliat lies beyond Ids 
capacity. He lias been taught the hard lesson of Ids weakness 
and his strength ; he conies to rate himself as the world rates 
him; and he salves his wounded ambition with the conviction 
that he is doing all his nature allows him. An evidence of the 
enormous inequality between the intellectual capacity of men 
is shown in the prodigious differences in the number of marks 
obtained by those who gain mathematical honors at the Uni- 
versity of Cambridge, England. Of the four hundred or four 
hundred and fifty students who take their degrees each year, 
about one hundred succeed in gaining honors in mathematics, 
and these are ranged in strict order of merit. Forty of them 
have the title of “ wrangler,” and to be even a low wrangler 
is a creditable thing. The distinction of being the first in this 
list of honors, or “ senior wrangler ” of the year, means a great 
deal more than being the foremost mathematician of four hun- 
dred or four hundred and fifty men taken at haphazard. Fully 
one-lialf the wranglers have been boys of mark at their schools. 
The senior wrangler of the year is the chief of these as regards 
mathematics. The youths start on their three-years’ race 
fairly, and their run is stimulated by powerful inducements; 
at the end they are examined rigorously for five and a half 
hours a day for eight days. The marks are then added up, 
and the candidates strictly rated in a scale of merit. The 
precise number of marks got by the senior wrangler, in one of 
the three years given by Mr. Galton, is 7,634; by the second 
wrangler, 4,123; and by the lowest man in the list of honors, 
237. The senior wrangler, consequently, had nearly twice as 
many marks as the second, and more than thirty-two times as 
many as the lowest man. In the other examinations given, 
the results do not materially differ. The senior wrangler may, 
therefore, be set down as having thirty-two times the ability 
of the lowest men on the lists; or, as Mr. Galton puts it, 
“lie would be able to grapple with problems more than 
tliirty-twTo times as difficult; or, when dealing with subjects of 
the same difficulty, but intelligible to all, would comprehend 
them more rapidly in, perhaps, the square-root of that propor- 
tion.” But the mathematical powers of the ultimate man on 
the honors-list, which are so low when compared with those of CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
the foremost man, are above mediocrity when compared with 
the gifts of Englishmen generally ; for, though the examina- 
tion places one hundred honor-men above him, it puts no less 
than three hundred “ poll-men ” below him. Admitting that 
two hundred out of the three hundred have refused to work 
hard enougli to earn honors, there will remain one hundred 
whom, had they done their possible, never could have got 
them. 
The same striking intellectual differences between man 
and man are found in whatever way ability may be tested, 
whether in statesmanship, generalship, literature, science, po- 
etry, art. The evidence furnished by Mr. Galton’s book goes 
to show in how small degree eminence in any class of intel- 
lectual powers can be considered as due to purely special 
faculties. It is the result of concentrated efforts made by men 
widely gifted—of grand human animals; of natures born to 
achieve greatness. 
How far is reputation a fair test of natural ability ?—the 
term natural ability meaning the possession of those qualities 
of intellect and character which urge and qualify a man to do 
acts which secure the distinction of eminence among his fel- 
lows. According to Mr. Galton, few or no men have won 
high reputations without being peculiarly gifted with high 
ability, combined with zeal, together with an adequate power 
of doing a good deal of very laborious work. Yast intellectual 
ability without zeal, or zeal without vast intellectual ability, 
or a combination of both of them without capacity of great 
work, will profit little. He believes that any one of these 
three elements, as well as the triple concrete element, are gifts 
of inheritance. FewT who possess these exceptional endow- 
ments can fail in winning eminence. It follows that the men 
who achieve high reputations, and those who are naturally 
capable, are to a large extent identical, and that a high reputa- 
tion may be accepted as a fair test of high ability. 
I. The Judges of England, since the restoration of the 
monarchy in 1660, form a group well adapted to give a general 
outline of the extent and limitations of heredity in respect to 
genius. A judgeship in England is a guarantee of its pos- 
sessor having exceptional ability; it is a prize to be won by the 6 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
best men at tlie bar; and tlie judges are among tlie foremost 
of the vast body (3,000) of barristers, who are themselves a 
selected body. Two hundred and eighty-six judges are in- 
cluded in the inquiry, and 109 of these have one or more 
eminent relatives. Of the 30 lord-chancellors, 24, or 80 per 
cent., have highly-gifted kinsmen; while the (280 to 30) 256 
other judges can number only (114 to 24) 90, or 36 per cent. 
Of the more remarkable cases of relations to the lord- 
chancellors, there are: 1. Earl Bathurst and his daughter’s 
son, Sir F. Buller; 2. Earl Camden and his father, Chief- 
Justice Pratt; 3. Earl Clarendon and the remarkable family 
of Hyde, in which were two uncles and one cousin, all English 
judges, besides one Welsh judge, and many other men of dis- 
tinction ; 4. Earl Cowper, his brother the judge, and his great- 
nephew the poet; 5. Earl Eldon and his brother Lord Stowell; 
6. Lord Erskine, his eminent legal brother the Lord Advocate 
of Scotland, and his son the judge ; 7. Earl Nottingham and 
the most remarkable family of Finch; 8, 9, 10. Earl Ilard- 
wicke and his son, also a lord-chancellor, and that son’s great- 
uncle, Lord Somers, also lord-chancellor; 11. Lord Herbert, 
his son a judge, his cousins Lord Herbert of Cherbury, and 
George the poet and divine; 12. Lord King and his uncle, 
John Locke, the philosopher; 13. The infamous but able 
Lord Jeffreys had a cousin just like him, Sir J. Trevor, Master 
of the Bolls; 14. Lord Guilford, member of a family linked 
with connections of marvellous ability, and containing thirty 
first-class men in near kinship, including Montagus, Sydneys, 
Herberts, Dudleys, and others eminent as judges and statesmen; 
15. Lord Truro had two able legal brothers, one of whom was 
chief justice at the Cape of Good Hope; and a nephew, Lord 
Penzance, an English judge. Lord Lyttleton, lord keeper of 
Charles I., may be mentioned too; his father was Chief Justice 
of North Wales, and his brother Sir Timothy, a judge. 
Among the Judges there are nearly as many instances of 
two or three eminent relations as of one. 
The characteristics that distinguish a judge ought to be 
frequently transmitted to his descendants, for the majority of 
judges belong to a strongly-marked type; “they are vigorous, 
shrewd, practical, helpful men, glorying in the rough-and- CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
7 
tumble of public life, tougli in constitution and strong in 
digestion, valuing what money brings, aiming at position and 
influence, and desiring to found families.” Their vigor is 
shown by the average age of their appointment, which in the 
last three reigns has been fifty-seven. Though the labors 
and responsibilities of their office are enormous, they continue 
to work with ease for many more years, their average age at 
death being seventy-five, and they commonly die in harness. 
Out of the 286 judges, more than one in every nine of them 
has been either father, son, or brother to another judge ; and 
other high legal relationships have been even more numer- 
ous. The near relations of the judges are far richer in ability 
than the more remote; thus in the first degree of kinship the 
percentage is about 28; in the second, about 7; and in the 
third, After three successive dilutions of the blood, the 
descendants of the judges appear incapable of rising to emi- 
nence. 
There are some curious facts concerning the natural history 
of judges. Their parentage, since the accession of George I., 
is as follows, reckoning in percentages: noble, honorable, or 
baronet (but not judges), 9; landed gentlemen, 35; judge, 
barrister, or attorney, 15; bishop or clergyman, 8 ; medical, 7; 
merchants and various, unclassed, 10; tradesmen, 7; unknown, 
9. It is worth while to note the order in which they stood 
in their several families, to see whether the eldest was better 
gifted than the youngest; we find that, in 72 judges, the judge 
was an only son in 11 cases; eldest in 17; second in 38; third 
in 22; fourth in 9 ; fifth in 1; and of a yet later birth in 2. 
II. In discussing the relationships of modern English 
Statesmen, two selections have been made as best worthy of 
confidence. One is that of the Premiers, begun, for con- 
venience’ sake, with the reign of George III.; their number is 
25, and the proportion of them who cannot claim to be much 
more than “ eminently ” gifted is very small. The other selec 
tion is Lord Brougham’s “ Statesmen of the Reign of George 
III.,” including but 55 names, as comprising the foremost states- 
men in that long reign. Of these 11 are judges, and 7 of them 
have been comprised in the preceding class. The total of the 
two selections, omitting the judges, is 57. The average natural 8 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
ability of these men may be stated as superior to Mr. Galton’s 
class F, which contains 1 in every 4,800 (or 233 in each mill- 
ion of men) endowed with superior intellect, and many of 
them, as Canning, Fox, the two Pitts, Eomilly, the Marquis 
of Wellesley, and the Duke of Wellington, probably exceed G, 
or 1 in 79,000 (14 in one million of men). The relationships 
of some of these families are extraordinary. The kinship of 
the two Pitts—the Earl of Chatham and his son—is a remarka- 
ble instance of high genius being hereditary; but the kinships 
of the younger Pitt are still more wonderful, from their wide 
diffusion. He was not only the son of a premier, but nephew 
of another, George Grenville, and cousin of a third, Lord 
Grenville; and he besides had the Temple blood. The Fox pedi- 
gree is notable in its collection with the Hollands and Napiers. 
Fox’s grandfather was a statesman ; his father, created Lord 
Holland, was Secretary of War; his uncle, the Duke of Eicli- 
mond, was a cabinet minister; his aunt, sister of the latter, 
was the mother of the famous Napier family ; and his nephew 
was the well-known Lord Holland of the present century. 
The Marquis of Wellesley, one of the most eminent statesmen 
of the age, was a brother of the Duke of Wellington, and had 
remarkable gifts as a scholar, which descended to his son, the 
Principal of New Inn Hall, at Oxford. The ability of the 
second Earl Grey has been intensified in his son, the present 
earl, one of the best intellects of England, and one of the 
most unpopular of men and statesmen. George Grenville, the 
premier (1763), had mixed relationships with the Temple race, 
the celebrated Earl of Chatham on the one hand, and the 
Wyndham family on the other. Sir Kobert Peel was the son 
of a cotton-manufacturer of vast ability ; one brother was Sec- 
retary of War, and another Chief Justice of the Supreme Court 
of Calcutta. The second Marquis Lansdowne, a statesman 
and man of letters, and one of the founders of the Edinburgh 
Review, was the son of Earl Shelburne, the supportor of Chat- 
ham and the friend of America. Viscount Goderich (Earl of 
Kipon), premier (1827-28), was a grandson of Charles Yorke, 
lord-chancellor, and a great-nepliew of Lord Ilardwicke, 
another lord-chancellor. Sir Samuel Eomilly, one of the 
most eminent jurists of his time, the reformer of criminal laws CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
9 
and a statesman, had a son, the present Lord Rom illy, who 
became successively Attorney-General and Master of the Rolls. 
Sheridan’s mother was a very clever woman, who wrote 
comedies; and among his descendants may be named Mrs. 
Morton, the poetess, and Lord Dufferin, late Secretary for 
Ireland. We may mention also the two Disraelis, and the 
two Earls Derby. The present Bishop of Winchester (better 
known as Bishop of Oxford), one of the foremost prelates of 
the English Church and a possible primate, is a son of William 
Wilberforce, the statesman and philanthropist; and his two 
brothers are also men of remarkable abilities. Lord Palmer- 
ston was of the Temple blood. If we glance over a supple- 
mentary list of great statesmen of various periods and countries, 
we find the two Cecils, father and son; the Guise family, in 
which there were four generations of notable men ; the tribune 
Mirabeau, who, St. Beuve tells us, combined the paternal quali- 
ties with those of his mother, and among whose ancestors, it is 
said, were to be found men of large mental vigor and char- 
acter for many generations. The father of the great Cardinal 
Richelieu was a soldier and diplomatist of mark; and of the 
descendants of a brother, who had given promise before an 
early death, may be mentioned the notorious Marshal, and the 
duke who was chief minister under Louis XVIII. The 
amusing Comte de Grammont, wit and courtier, was a grand- 
nephew of the cardinal. In the United States, the transmitted 
intellectual ability of the Adams family, now in the fourth 
generation, is very noteworthy. 
From Mr. Gabon’s tables we gather that the ablest states- 
men would seem to have the largest number of able relatives; 
that ability is not distributed at haphazard, but that it affects 
certain families; and that the statesman’s type of ability—high 
intellectual gifts, tact in dealing with men, power of expression 
in debate, and capacity to endure exceedingly hard work—is 
largely hereditary. 
It lias been truthfully remarked that the families of great 
men are apt to die out, and that highly-gifted individuals are 
unprolific. We may stop a moment here to say something 
about the causes of failure of issue of judges and statesmen ; 
and, as many of the English statesmen are either peers by 10 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
inheritance or elevation, and all the chancellors, and some of 
the other judges, were raised to the peerage, we may extend 
the inquiry into the influence of British peerages upon race. 
Lord Campbell says that when a barrister is elevated to 
the bench, it is understood that he shall marry his mistress or 
put her away, and that one-lialf the judges had so married. 
Xow, this must necessarily interfere with a large average of 
legitimate children, if we consider the advanced period of life 
at which they were appointed judges. Let us examine into 
the descendants of those judges who gained peerages previous 
to the close of the reign of George IY. There are thirty-one 
of them; nineteen of the peerages remain, and twelve are 
extinct. Under what conditions did these twelve become 
extinct \ When we come to learn the particulars of the 
alliances of the children and grandchildren, we are met by a 
circumstance which serve as a correct explanation of the com- 
mon cause of extinction of peerages—a large portion of the 
sons and grandsons of new peers marry heiresses; and Mr. 
Galton’s statistical lists show, with unmistakable emphasis, 
that these marriages are peculiarly unprolific, and the title 
and family are brought to an end. The result of a large 
array of facts is very striking: 1. Out of thirty-one peerages, 
there were no less than seventeen in which the hereditary in- 
fluence of an heiress or coheiress affected the first or second 
generation; this influence was a sensible agent in producing 
infecundity in sixteen out of seventeen peerages, and it was 
sometimes shown in two, three, or more cases in one peerage. 
2. The direct male line of no less than eight peerages was 
actually extinguished through the influence of the heiresses, 
and six others had very narrow escapes from extinction owing 
to the same cause. There is but one case, that of Lord 
Kenyon, where the race-destroying influence of lieiress-blood 
was not felt. 3. Out of twelve peerages that have failed in 
the direct male line, no less than eight failures are accounted 
for by heiress-marriages. Kow, of the four that remain, two 
died unmarried; and there are only two out of the ten who 
married, and whose titles have since become extinct, where 
the extinction may not be accounted for by heiress-marriages. CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
11 
A careful analysis of tlie facts sliows that there are no grounds 
tor imputing exceptional sterility to the race of judges. 
Turning to the Statesmen of George III., and the premiers 
since his accession, we find twenty-one, who, treated by the 
same method as the judges, give fourteen leaving no male 
descendants; and, of these fourteen, seven of them, or their 
sons, married heiresses. On the other hand, there are only 
three cases of peers marrying heiresses without failure of issue. 
In seven, the male line became extinct from other causes; 
and, of the remaining five, none were allied to or descended 
from heiress-blood, and they all left descendants. 
The important fact, that intermarriage with heiresses is a 
positive agent in the extinction of families, is confirmed by 
more extended inquiries. Mr. Galton examined the extant 
and the extinct peerages. He first tried the marriages made 
by the second peers of each extant title. It seemed reason- 
able to expect that the eldest son of the first peer, the founder 
of the title, would marry pretty frequently an heiress; and so 
it proved, and with terrible destruction to their race. One- 
seventh part of the peerage, leaving out co-lieiresses, shows 
these results : in a total of fourteen cases out of seventy peers, 
there were eight instances of absolute unproductiveness, and 
two of only one son. Trying the question from another side, 
by taking the marriages of the last peers, and comparing the 
numbers of the children when the mother was an heiress, 
with those when she was not, we find that among the wives 
of peers— 
100 who are heiresses have 208 sons and 206 daughters; 
100 who are not heiresses have 336 sons and 284 daughters. 
Every advancement in dignity is a fresh inducement to the 
introduction of another heiress into the family; dukes have 
consequently a greater impregnation of heiress-blood than 
earls ; and the fact is, that dukedoms are more frequently ex- 
tinguished than earldoms, and earldoms are more apt to go 
than baronies. All the English dukedoms created from the 
commencement of the order down to the beginning of Charles 
II. are gone, excepting three merged in royalty, and only 
eleven earldoms remain out of the many created by the Nor- 
mans, Plantagenets, and Tudors.—(B. Bukke.) 12 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
III. —The list of great Commanders, though small, contains 
some of the most illustrious names recorded in history. Many 
who were mere striplings were eminent for political capacity. 
Their peculiar type of ability would seem to he largely trans- 
mitted ; there are several notable families of generals. Wil- 
liam the Silent had Maurice of Nassau for a son, Turenne for 
a grandson, and William III. of England for a great-grand- 
son. Another instance of hereditary gifts is shown in the 
family of Charlemagne: first, Pepin de Ileristhal, virtual sov- 
erign of France; then his son, Charles Martel; afterward his 
grandson, Pepin le Bref,» the founder of the Carlovingian 
dynasty; and lastly, his great-grandson, Charlemagne. Alex- 
ander the Great had for father Philip of Macedon; Hanni- 
bal’s father and brothers were celebrated; and the kinships 
of the Scipios, and of Raleigh, are instances of hereditary 
special aptitudes. The family of the Napiers, already referred 
to, and the naval race of Hyde Parker, may also be quoted 
in support of the argument. Admiral Coligny, the famous 
Huguenot leader, was the son of Marshal and Constable de 
Coligny, distinguished in the Italian wars of Charles YIII., 
Louis XI., and Francis I. Turenne was the son of the Duke 
de Bouillon, one of the ablest soldiers of Henry IV. of France. 
The distribution of ability among the different degrees of 
kinship of the commanders follows much the same order that 
it does in the judges and statesmen. 
IV. —An analysis of the kinsfolk of literary men proves 
literary genius to be as fully an inheritance as any of the kinds 
of ability already discussed. A summary of relationships of 
fifty-two men of letters, grouped into thirty-three families, 
shows : twelve with one relation, or two in a family; fourteen 
with two or three, or three or four in a family; and eleven 
with four or more, or five or more in a family, gifted with 
literary lalent. , 
The Rev. Archibald Alison, author of a standard w'ork on 
Taste, had for sons the historian of Europe, and Dr. William 
Alison, an eminent Scotch physician; and their uncle was the 
celebrated Prof. James Gregory, of Edinburgh. The sons of 
the Rev. Thomas Arnold, of Rugby, have inherited much of 
the ability of their father. The three Bronte sisters were CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
13 
highly gifted. Maria Edgeworth’s father was a writer, and a 
man of great mental activity. The son of Hallam, the histo- 
rian, the subject of Tennyson’s “ In Memoriam,” who died at 
the age of twenty-three, was already distinguished by the bright- 
ness of his genius; a second son gave almost equal promise; 
and a sister had marked ability; both dying young. John 
Stuart Mill is the son of an eminent parent. The three 
sons of Roscoe, the historian and poet, won literary distinc- 
tion ; Madame de Stael was the daughter of the great finance 
minister of Louis XYI.; and the two sons of Sir James Stephen 
are clever contributors to periodical literature, whilst his 
brother was an eminent legal writer. Great hereditary liter- 
ary ability is shown in the history of the families of the Tay- 
lors of Norwich, and of Ongar, and of Sydney. Two sons of 
Mrs. Trollope, the novelist, have inherited her talents; and 
the father of Benjamin Disraeli was the well-known author of 
“ The Curiosities of Literature.” 
Y.—The lists of kinsmen of Men of Science, while in a 
general way confirming the deductions made from the histo- 
ries of other distinguished men, show an exceptional factor, 
namely, the unusual power of the maternal influence; and it 
would appear to be important to success in science, that a man 
should have an able mother; the fathers of the most famous 
men in science have frequently had no scientific bent. In eight 
cases out of forty-three the mother was the abler of the two pa- 
rents ; these were Bacon, BufFon, Condorcet, Cuvier, D’Alem- 
bert, Forbes, Gregory, and Watt. Both Brodie and Jussieu 
had remarkable grandmothers; and the eminent relations of 
Newton were connected with him by female links. The fathers 
of Cassini and Gmelin were men of science, and, in a lesser 
degree, were those of Iluyghens, of Napier, of Murchison ; but 
those of Bacon, Boyle, De Candolle, Galileo, and Leibnitz, 
were either statesmen or literary men. There was a good 
deal of talent in the families of Bacon, Arago, Bernouilli, 
Boyle, Darwin, Franklin, ILerschel, Hunter, the Gregorys, 
etc. George Stephenson’s son was Robert, the foremost en- 
gineer of his day. Sir John Ilerschel’s father was the renowned 
astronomer, and president of the Royal Society, who came to 
England with the band of the Hanoverian Guards. The num- 14 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
her of individuals in tlie Darwin family who have followed 
some branch of natural history is remarkable. Sir Benjamin 
Brodie says of his grandfather: “ He had the reputation of 
being a person of very considerable abilities,” and of his father, 
that “ he was altogether remarkable for his talents and ac- 
quirements;” his elder brother was a lawyer, and gained “ the 
highest place in his profession as a conveyancing barrister.” 
The family of Hapier, the inventor of logarithms, wras exceed- 
ingly able. 
ArI.—If we except the kindred of Coleridge and Words- 
worth, those relations of the Poets who have shown various 
kinds of ability have been almost all in the first degree. Poets 
are clearly not founders of families. Fontenelle, the cele- 
brated secretary of the French Academy for nearly forty years, 
was the nephew of Corneille, whose brother Thomas was also 
a dramatic poet. Goethe’s mother was a remarkable woman, 
and is spoken of as one of the pleasantest figures in German 
literature. Dean Milman was the son of an eminent London 
physician; Tasso’s mother was a gifted woman. 
VII. —The fact of the inheritance of musical taste and 
talent is undoubted; but it is difficult to ascertain its distri- 
bution among families. About one in five among celebrated 
musicians appears to have had eminent kinsmen. Sebastian 
Bach, Haydn, Mendelssohn, and Mozart, are instances, of 
hereditary genius. 
VIII. —Artistic eminence is, in some degree, hereditary, 
and many modern names might be quoted to show that it is 
frequently shared by kinsmen, and among them the Landseer 
and Bonlieur families. In taking forty-two illustrious painters 
—old masters—especially of Italy and the Low Countries, 
whose natural gifts are unquestionably more than eminent, we 
find about one-lialf of them with eminent relations. The rare- 
ness with which artistic talent passes through more than two 
degrees of kinship is as noticeable as in the cases of musicians 
and poets. 
IX. —A suitable selection of Divines for the prosecution of 
an inquiry into the transmissibility of ancestral piety is not 
easy. The names contained in Middleton’s “Biograpliia 
Evangelica ” have been chosen. There are one hundred and 15 
CONTE31PORAEY LITERATURE. 
ninety-six Evangelical worthies, taken from the whole of Eu- 
rope, and who, with the exception of the first four—Wickliffe, 
Huss, Jerome of Prague, and John of Wesalia—died between 
1527 and 1785, a period of two hundred and fifty-eight years. 
Of these, twenty-two were martyrs, mostly by fire; others, in- 
cluding many of the martyrs, were active leaders in the Refor- 
mation ; some were eminent administrators; a few were thor- 
ough-going Puritans; a larger number were men of an extreme 
but pleasing form of piety, as Bunyan, Baxter, Watts, etc.; the 
rest, and the majority of the whole list, may be described as 
pious scholars. As a general rule, the men in Middleton’s 
selection had considerable intellectual capacity and natural 
eagerness for study, both of which qualities were commonly 
manifested in boyhood. Most of them wrote voluminously. 
The summary of the results concerning the divines may 
be stated thus: They are not founders of families who have 
exercised a notable influence in history, whether derived 
from the abilities, wealth, or social position of any of their 
members. They are a moderately-prolific race, rather under 
than above the medium. Their average age at death is a 
trifle less than that of the eminent men comprised in the other 
groups. They commonly sutler from overwork, and have 
usually wretched constitutions: those whose constitutions 
are vigorous, were mostly wild in their youth; and, con- 
versely, most of those who had been wild in their youth and 
did not become pious till later in life, were men of vigorous 
constitutions. A pious disposition is decidedly heredi- 
tary. And the children of very religious parents occasion- 
ally turn out very badly. In connection with this latter 
proposition, Mr. Galton attempts to show that the chief pecu- 
liarity in the moral nature of the pious man is its conscious 
instability. Tie is liable to extremes—now swinging forward 
into enthusiasm, adoration, and self-sacrifice; now backward 
into sensuality and selfishness. The amplitude of the moral 
oscillations of religious men is greater than that of others 
wdiose average moral position is the same. These views, he 
thinks, will explain why their offspring are often unworthy. 
The parents are naturally gifted with high moral characters, 
combined with instability of disposition; but these peculiari- 16 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
ties are in no way correlated. It must, therefore, often hap- 
pen that the child will inherit the one and not the other. If 
his heritage consist of the moral gifts without great instability, 
lie will not feel the need of extreme piety; if he inherits great 
instability without morality, he will be very likely to disgrace 
his name. 
We will now bring the results of Mr. Galton’s inquiries 
side by side for the purpose of comparison, and to ascertain 
how far they are self-supporting, and in what degree they es- 
tablish the fact of a decided law of distribution of genius in 
families. He has dealt statistically with a large body of ex- 
amples, and included no less than three hundred families, con- 
taining between them nearly one thousand eminent men, of 
whom four hundred and fifteen are illustrious. In comparing 
the results obtained from the different groups of celebrated 
men, it will be convenient to compare the columns in the 
several tables, giving the number of kinsmen in various de- 
grees, which are constructed in the supposition that the num- 
ber of families in the group is one hundred, which gives there- 
fore a common measure—all percentages—and admits of direct 
intercomparison. (See table, p. 
The general uniformity in the distribution of ability among 
the kinsmen in the several groups is strikingly manifest. The 
eminent sons are almost invariably more numerous than the 
eminent brothers, and these are a trifle more numerous than 
the eminent fathers. On proceeding further down the table, 
we come to a sudden dropping off of the numbers at the second 
grade of kinship, namely, at the grandfathers, uncles, nephews, 
and grandsons. On reaching the third grade of kinship, 
another abrupt dropping off is again met with, but the first- 
cousins are found to occupy a decidedly better position than 
other relations within the third grade. 
In contrasting the columns of the different groups, some 
variations may be noted. The number of the sons of com- 
manders is small. It should be remembered that these mostly 
began their active careers in youth, and that they were separated 
from their wives for long periods; and that with others there 
are exceptional circumstances which hindered them from 
having issue. The number of their eminent grandsons will be CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
Separate Groups. 
All Groups 
TOGETHER. 
Number of families,"1 
each containing 1 
more than one f 
85 
39 
21 
33 
43 
20 
28 
25 
300 
eminent man... j 
Total number of 1 
eminent men in V 
all the families.. ) 
262 
130 
89 
119 
148 
51 
97 
15 
911 
Judges, p. 61. 
Statesmen, 
p. 109. 
Commanders, 
p. 148. 
Literary, 
p. 171. 
Scientific, 
p. 195. 
Poets, p. 227. 
05 
P,"t3 
4S'S 
•J8 
<1 
Divines, 
p. 275. 
Illustrious and 
eminent men of 
all classes. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
B. 
C. 
D. 
Father 
26 
33 
41 
48 
26 
20 
32 
28 
31 
100 
31 
Brother 
35 
39 
50 
42 
41 
40 
50 
36 
41 
150 
21 
Son 
36 
49 
31 
51 
60 
45 
89 
40 
48 
100 
48 
Grandfather 
15 
28 
16 
24 
14 
5 
1 
20 
11 
200 
8 
Uncle 
18 
18 
8 
24 
16 
5 
14 
40 
18 
400 
5 
Nephew 
19 
18 
35 
24 
23 
50 
18 
4 
22 
400 
5 
Grandson 
19 
10 
12 
9 
14 
5 
18 
16 
14 
200 
1 
Great-grandfather ... 
2 
8 
8 
3 
4 
3 
400 
1 
Great-uncle 
4 
5 
8 
6 
5 
5 
1 
4 
5 
800 
1 
First cousin 
11 
21 
20 
18 
16 
1 
8 
13 
800 
2 
Great-nephew 
11 
5 
8- 
6 
16 
io 
10 
800 
1 
6 
3 
1 
3 
400 
1 
All more remote .... 
14 
SI 
44 
15 
23 
5 
18 
16 
1 
31 
9 
found as great as in the other groups. Another exceptional 
entry in the table is, the number of eminent fathers of the 
great scientific men as compared with that of their sons, there 
being only twenty-six of the former to sixty of the latter, 
whereas the average of all the groups gives thirty-one and 
forty-eight. The attempt is made to show that scientific men 
owe much to the training and to the blood of their mothers, 
and that the first in a family who has scientific gifts is not so 
likely to achieve eminence as the descendant who follows 
science as a profession. There are few distinguished fathers 
among the poets. The number of the eminent sons of the 
artists is enormous and disproportionate, being eighty-nine in 
only twenty-eight families, whereas the average of all the 
groups is only forty-eight. This testifies to the strongly here- 
ditary character of their peculiar ability. What has been said 18 
CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE. 
of the greater chance of the descendant of a great scientific 
man becoming celebrated in science, applies also to the artist. 
• The final and most important result to be worked out is 
this : If we know nothing else about a person than that he is 
a father, brother, son, grandson, or other relation of an illus- 
trious man, what is the chance that he is or will be eminent ? 
In combining the data given, we find the general result to be, 
that exactly one-lialf of the illustrious men have one or more 
eminent relations; lord-chancellors, 24 in 30; statesmen of 
George III., 33 in 53; premiers, not included in the “ states- 
men,” 8 in 16 ; commanders, 32 in 59; literary men, 37 in 
56; scientific men, 65 in 83 ; poets, 40 in 100; musicians, 26 
in 100; painters, 18 in 42; divines, 33 in 196; scholars, 14 in 
36. These proportions reduced to decimals are .8, .6, and .5, 
.5, .7, .8, .4, .3, .4, .2, .4; giving a general average of .5 or one- 
lialf. 
In contrasting the power of the male and female lines of 
kinship in the transmission of ability, the difference against 
the female is very marked. 
JUDGES. 
fc* 
w 
S 
m 
p 
H 
< 
H 
cc 
COMMANDERS. 
LITERARY. 
SCIENTIFIC. 
POETS. 
ARTISTS. 
DIVINES. 
TOTAL. 
Total of Male Lines 
74 
64 
68 
74 
71 
94 
85 
27 
70 
Total by Female 
26 
36 
32 
26 
29 
6 
15 
73 
30 
Male and Female 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
There is a common opinion that great men have remark- 
able mothers, but statistics show that popular belief ascribes an 
undue share to maternal influences. 
An interesting question yet unsolved is, whether, and how 
far, men and women who are prodigies of genius, are infertile ? 
There are many difficulties in the way of arriving at a right 
judgment of the matter; and as yet no trustworthy data have 
been given to warrant an expression of opinion. 
Another prevalent notion is, that men of genius are phys- 
ically weak and unhealthy—all brain and no muscle. There 
is no evidence to support this belief. University facts would COISTTEMPOEAEY LITEEATUEE. 
19 
sliow that second and third rate students are apt to be weakly, 
but that first wranglers and high classics have as much muscle 
as brain. Mr. Gallon’s investigations of the law of mortality 
of his different groups lead him to conclude that, among gifted 
men, there is a small class who have weak and excitable con- 
stitutions, but that the remainder are men likely to enjoy a 
vigorous old age. 
We have endeavored to present a clear summary of Mr. 
Gallon’s data, reasonings, and conclusions, in his attempt to 
establish the theory that high intellectual endowments come 
by inheritance. Ilis volume is an able contribution to the 
Darwinian doctrine of Natural Selection. It is brightly and 
attractively written, and there is a good deal of vigor in the 
argument. Facts are hunted down with diligence, and in- 
geniously, and, in the main, fairly used. The author is 
thoroughly in earnest in his belief, and as thoroughly honest 
in his treatment; if he is not always convincing, it is more 
owing to the inherent difficulties which beset the subject, than 
from any lack of research, zeal, or talent, on the part of the 
advocate. A larger induction is necessary before any final de- 
cision can be had on the merits of the question. A mine has 
been opened whose further digging may prove very profitable. 
Meeeditii Clymeb. 
135 Lexington Aye., New York. Elliot’s Obstetric Clinic. 
A Practical Contribution to the Study of Obstetrics and the Dis- 
eases of Women and Children. By George T. Elliot, Jr., 
A. M., M. D., Prof, of Obstetrics and the Diseases of Women 
and Children in the Bellevue Hospital Medical College, Physi- 
cian to Bellevue Hospital and to the New York Lying-in Hos- 
pital, etc., etc. 8vo, pp. 468. . . Cloth, $4.50 
This volume, by Dr. Elliot, is based upon a largj experience, including fourteen 
years of service in the lying-in department of Bellevue Hospital of this city. The 
book has attracted marked attention, and has elicited from the medical press, both 
of this country and Europe, the most flattering commendations. It is justly be- 
lieved that the work is one of the most valuable contributions to obstetric literature 
that has appeared for many years, and, being eminently practical in its character, 
cannot fail to be of great service to obstetricians. 
“ The volume by Dr. Elliot has scarcely less value, although in a different direction, than 
that of the Edinburgh physician (Dr. Duncan, Researcher, in Obstetrics). The materials com- 
prising' it have been principally gathered through a service of fourteen years in the Bellevue 
Hospital, New York, during the whole of which time the author has been engaged in clini- 
cal teaching. The cases now collected into a handsome volume illustrate faithfully the anx- 
ieties and disappointments, as well as the fatigues and successes, which are inseparable 
from the responsible practice of obstetrics—a line of practice which, under difficulties, de- 
mands the greatest moral courage, the highest skill, and the power of acting promptly on a 
sudden emergency. Dr. Elliot’s favorite subject appears to be operative midwifery; but 
the chapters on the relations of albuminuria to pregnancy, ante-partum haemorrhage, the in- 
duction of labor, and the dangers which arise from compression of the funis, are all deserving 
of careful perusal. The pleasure we feel at being able to speak so favorably of Dr. Elliot’s 
volume is enhanced by the circumstance that he was a pupil at the Dublin Lying-in Hospital 
when Dr. Shekelton was master. We can certainly say that his teachings reflect great cedit 
upon his Alma Mater.”—London Lancet, April 11,1868. 
“ This may be said to belong to a class of books ‘ after the practitioner’s own heart.’ in 
them he finds a wider range of cases than comes under his observation in ordinary practice; 
in them he learns the application of the most recent improvements of his art; in them he 
finds the counterpart of cases which have caused him the deepest anxiety; in them, too, he 
may find consolation, for the regret—the offspring of limited experience, which has always 
cast a shadow on the remembrance of some of his fatal cases—will pass away as he reads of 
similar ones in which far greater resources of every kind failed to avert a fatal termination. 
“There are not many books of this kind in our language; they can probably all be num- 
bered on the fingers of a single hand. * * * Many-circumstances concur, therefore, to influ- 
ence us to extend to this work a cheerful welcome, and to commend it as fully as possible. 
We do thus welcome it; as the production of a gentleman of great experience, acknowledged 
ability, and high position—as an emanation from one of the leading schools of our country, 
and as an honorable addition to our national medical literature. —American Journal of 
Medical Science, April, 1868. 
“As the book now stands, it is invaluable for the practitioner of obstetrics, for he will 
hardly ever in practice find himself in a tight place, the counterpart of which he will not 
find in Dr. Elliot’s book.”—New York Medical Journal, February, 1863. 
“The book has the freshness of hospital practice throughout, in reference to diagnosis, 
pathology, therapeutical and operative proceedings. It will be found to possess a great 
amount of valuable information in the department of obstetrics, in an attractive and easy 
style, according to the most modern and improved views of the profession.”—Cincinnati 
Lancet and Observer, April, 1868. 
“ As a whole, we know of no similar work which has issned from the American press, 
which can be compared with it. It ought to be in the hands of every practitioner of mid 
wifery in the country.”—Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. 
“ One of the most attractive as well as forcibly instructive works we have had the 
pleasure of reading. In conclusion, we recommend it as one having no equal in the English 
language, as regards clinical instruction in obstetrics.”—Am. Jour, of Obstetrics, Aug., 1868. 
Many ripe, elderly practitioners might, but few young could, write a book so distin- 
guished by candor, want of prejudice, kindly feeling, soundness of judgment, and extent of 
erudition. While we do not say the book is faultless, we say there is no book in American 
obstetrical literature that surpasses this one. * * * * The work new under review is 
his first-born book or volume, and shows how fine opportunities he has had, chiefly at Belle- 
vue Hospital, for acquiring experience, and how diligently he has availed himself of them. 
But his book shows much more. It is the work of a physician of high education, a qualifi- 
cation in which obstetric authors are often deficient—it shows qualities of mind and skil. 
of hand rarelv attained by so young a man."—Edinburgh Medical Journal, Feb., 1868. TIIE 
NEW YORK 
MEDICAL JOURNAL 
IS THE 
LARGEST AND BEST MEDICAL MONTHLY PUBLISHED. 
TERMS: $4 .00 per annum. Specimen Copies, 25 cents. 
THE JOUKHAL 
OP 
PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE: 
A QUARTERLY REVIEW OF 
DISEASES OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM, MEDICAL JURISPRU- 
DENCE, AND ANTHROPOLOGY. 
TERMS: $5.00 per annum. Specimen Numbers, $1.00. 
PREMIUM PORTRAIT. 
To every new subscriber to either of our Medical Journals, will be mailed, 
free, a magnificent line and stipple engraving, 19x24 inches, of the celebrated 
physician, the late Dr. John W. Francis. This portrait is dedicated to the 
Medical Profession, and is admirably adapted to adorn the office or parlor of the 
physician. As a work of art, it is fully worth the price of subscription. The 
price of the engraving alone is $3.00, for which amount it will be mailed, free, to 
any part of the United States. 
Remittances should be made by postal money order or draft, to 
D. APPLETON & CO., Publishers. 
90, 92 and 94 Grand St., New York.