37 8 Heredity. 



thought mere nonsense. The consequence is that all civilized 

 peoples either have abolished hereditary power as is the case in 

 republics ; or only admit it as a part of the machinery of govern- 

 ment as is the case in parliamentary monarchies. And in this 

 latter case the thing accepted is not the permanence of inherit- 

 ance, but the usefulness of machinery. 



The question of heredity as a political institution has been fully 

 discussed. Its partisans and its opponents have never been able to 

 agree, for the simple reason that they have never looked at it from 

 the same side. It is very easy to attack heredity as a natural fact, 

 and it is very easy to defend heredity as an institution. 



Facts prove, say its opponents, that neither genius, nor talent, 

 nor even uprightness and rectitude are hereditary; why then allow 

 power to fall into unworthy hands ? Besides, this sovereignty by 

 right of birth tends to make princes proud, indolent, ignorant, and 

 incapable. They might have added that, as we have seen, it is 

 proved by facts that even among the most highly-gifted races 

 heredity tends to enfeeblement, and that in the struggle for life, 

 and while battling with difficulties, it crumbles away, so to speak? 

 in its course. We must also bear in mind what has already been 

 said concerning the extinction of noble and royal families, their 

 ascending movement towards their apogee, and their subsequent 

 inevitable decay. 



Its partisans make answer : Though mind may not be trans- 

 mitted, traditions are, and this is a sufficient social result. The 

 object of heredity is to introduce into the state an element of 

 conservatism and stability. Without it, talents, time, and strength 

 are wasted, simply in winning place ; with the aid of institutional 

 heredity, a man is placed at once in the rank he deserves. Take 

 the case of the Earl of Chatham, a simple cornet in a regiment, 

 and the son of a widow who had but a very scanty income : he 

 attained to power only at the age of forty-eight. But his son, the 

 illustrious Pitt, had the advantage of a very careful education, and 

 was considered a prodigy at the age of twelve. He entered Par- 

 liament as early as the law allowed, when he spoke gained the 

 ear of the house, and at twenty-three became Prime Minister. 

 This is the history of every great family, and this perpetuation of 

 honours is of advantage as well to the state as to the individual. 



