MAN 235 



where the capital letters represent the desirable factors, 

 must be much more common than the individual who by 

 linkage breaks receives the inheritance ABC D -abed; 

 yet the latter is the one who has the greatest power of 

 transmitting his endowments. Of the influence of the 

 individual in heredity, much has been w^ritten, particu- 

 larly by those who, great themselves, have founded great 

 families in American history. Elizabeth Tuttle through 

 Jonathan Edwards, William Fitzhugh, the three Lees — 

 sons of Eiehard Lee, and the various lines established by 

 John Preston — Venable, Payne, Wooley and Breckin- 

 ridge — are' examples. It seems most reasonable to sup- 

 pose that such prepotency for good comes about by the 

 gathering together of groups of significant factors in the 

 manner outlined above. Can one object to the concentra- 

 tion of such worth by relatively strict inbreeding despite 

 its possibilities for ill! In fact, if we examine carefully 

 the geneological records of such families, marriage of 

 near relatives is found to be a common occurrence. AVould 

 it not be wise to do away with statutes against the mar- 

 riage of first cousins such as are laid doAvn in the laws of 

 nearly half our States, even though the argument on the 

 other side, as we shall show, is just as great ? If such laws 

 had been followed in every mating the world would have 

 lost an Abraham Lincoln and have been compelled to 

 punish a Charles Darwin. 



The mention of the name of the great Civil War Presi- 

 dent doubtless brings the question : How does one account 

 for his capacity on this hypothesis? The question is well 

 placed. Such geniuses as Lincoln, Dalton, Faraday, 

 Franklin, Pasteur — scions of the coimiion people, simple 

 examples of greatness standing among the commonplace — 



