RELATIVE INFLUENCE OF PARENTS. 245 



in general form, in the head, the mane, the back, the 

 tail, the legs, and the feet ; the hinny (bardeau) that, 

 on the whole, differs but little from the mule, resem- 

 bles the ass, its mother, in the large number of its 

 points, the head and the mane excepted. If, then, it 

 is true that the first (the mule) derives its form from 

 its father, it is equally true that the second (the hinny) 

 derives its form from the mother, and, if the parents 

 transmit their form to the anterior part of the body, 

 they do the same for the posterior part. Consequent- 

 ly what the father gives to the mule, the mother, with 

 but slight variation, gives to the hinny. 



"In the second place, if the mule derives from 

 the ass, its father, its constitution, strength, hardiness, 

 and disposition, the hinny derives the same characters 

 from the ass, its mother, as there is a stronger resem- 

 blance of the two hybrids in these characters than 

 there is even in external conformation ; and, finally, 

 if the mule derives its size from the mother, why is it 

 not her equal in this respect ? and, if the hinny derives 

 its size from the mother, why does it exceed her in 

 size?" 1 



Some of the advocates of the theory under review 

 admit that, so far as size of the offspring is concerned, 

 a preponderating influence cannot be exclusively at- 

 tributed to either parent. Mr. Spooner says : " How 

 often do we find that, in the by no means infrequent 

 case of the union of a tall man with a short woman, 

 the result in some instances is that all the children are 

 tall, and in others all short ; or, sometimes, that some 

 of the family are short and others tall ! Within our 



1 Colin, loc. ctt. y p. 639. 



