WHAT IT MEANS 61 



Environment does indeed receive some support from 

 three cases in our chart. On Chart II, two children 

 of Martin Jr. and Rhoda were normal, while all the 

 rest were feeble-minded. It is true that here one parent 

 was normal, and we have the right to expect some nor- 

 mal children. At the same time, these were the two 

 children that were adopted into good families and 

 brought up under good surroundings. They proved 

 to be normal and their descendants normal. Again, 

 on Chart IX-a, we have one child of two feeble-minded 

 parents who proves to be normal the only one 

 among the children. This child was also taken into a 

 good family and brought up carefully. Another sister 

 (Chart IX-b) was also taken into a good family and, 

 while not determined, yet "showed none of the traits 

 that are usually indicative of feeble-mindedness." It 

 may be claimed that environment is responsible for 

 this good result. It is certainly significant that the 

 only children in these families that were normal, or at 

 least better than the rest, were brought up in good 

 families. 



However, it would seem to be rather dangerous to 

 base any very positive hope on environment in the 

 light of these charts, taken as a whole. There are too 

 many other possible explanations of the anomaly, e.g. 



