1 66 THE DOCTRINE OF DESCENT. 



entirely neglected by naturalists in former days. And 

 indeed what comparison in organic nature can be made 

 so frequently and universally as the resemblance of 

 the offspring to the parent ? An anatomist, it is true, 

 quaintly attempted to work out the proposition that the 

 resemblance in the children is not dependent on heredity, 

 but is the result of identical and similar influences, cus- 

 toms, and habits, prevalent in families. But this para- 

 doxical theory requires no special refutation. It is 

 quite true that similar habits and similar external im- 

 pulses elicit a certain similarity of demeanour and 

 appearance ; but if the little son of the pompous mil- 

 lionaire apes his father, it cannot be said that he has 

 likewise mimicked his large or small nose, &c., or has 

 acquired it by a similar call for adaptation. We have 

 only cursorily alluded to this quibble, in flagrant contra- 

 diction as it is with every experience; and, in conformity 

 with general opinion, we corroborate the transmission of 

 the parental characteristics to the offspring. The breeders 

 of animals in particular has occasion to observe these 

 transmissions specially, and to evolve their astounding 

 progress from the combination and reciprocal influence 

 of the various forms and degrees of heredity. 



It is well known that not only are normal conditions 

 transmitted, but monstrosities are also reproduced through 

 several generations, and, as we have seen in the instance 

 of the crook-legged sheep of Massachusetts, may even be 

 established as the characters of a race. A mere reference 

 to the inheritability of morbid tendencies, bodily and 

 mental, will enable us to realize this intrinsic connection 

 of the offspring to the ancestors. Only since the theory 

 of selection has rendered the modalities of the transmis- 



