Nov. 17, 1881 | 
NATURE 
57 
difficulties at the time of birth, There can be no doubt that 
rickety conditions of town children, and the sedentary or per- 
sistent standing occupations of young girls in shops, &c., will 
tend to distort the pelvis, and thus act injuriously on the race by 
reducing both the physical and mental standard of their children, 
With regard to the progressive degeneracy of our population 
referred to by Mr. Hyde Clarke, I think something more 
definite than personal recollections is required to prove it. We 
all know how we are daily compelled to recognise the fal- 
lacy of our earlier recollections, If we go down to a country 
town or village, which we knew well a few years ago, 
we find the houses smaller, the streets narrower, and the 
whole place shrunken in its proportions, and it would be the 
same with the inhabitants alto if they had stood still as the 
inanimate objects have done around them. There can be no 
doubt that our large towns are, as it were, the graves of the 
physique of our race, but it is not because town life is so very 
injurious, but because the feeble, the halt, and the blind gravi- 
tate towards them in search of work suitable to their capacities. 
So far from admitting the degeneracy of our population as a 
whole, I am satisfied that it is improving in physique, and is 
better now than at any former period of our history. The skill 
and care which saves the weak child to the community, gives 
health and strength to the strong, and the physique of the whole 
is raised to a higher level. It is difficult to find direct evidence 
of this improvement, but some statistics of the stature and 
weight of factory children (where we might expect degeneracy 
if anywhere), recorded in 1833 and in 1873, show that the 
children of the latter period were a whole year in advance of 
the former—children of ten or eleven years of age in 1873 
being as tall and heavy as those of eleven and twelve fifty years 
previously. CHARLES ROBERTS 
Bolton Row, Mayfair, November 11 
IN a letter on the above subject in NATURE, vol. xxy. p. 8, 
Dr. W. B. Kesteven asks for information or opinions on the 
statement that English heads have diminished in size during the 
dast twenty-five or thirty years. My own opinion is that this is 
really the case, On the cause of this diminution I am not at 
present prepared to give a decided opinion. In the course of 
some investigations on heredity, commenced many years ago, I 
discovered that in some instances the average size of the heads 
of the sons and daughters was less than the average of those of 
the two parents. In each case the former had arrived at maturity 
before the comparison was made, and in every instance the 
children had had the advantage of a much Jarger amount of in- 
tellectual training than the parents had enjoyed. This discovery, 
So contrary to all the generally accepted opinions, surprised me 
considerably, and caused me to make inquiries from one of the 
leading hat-makers in this city as to what had been his experience 
in the increase or diminution in the sizes of hats sold. The facts 
furnished to me fully confirm the statements made in Dr, Kes- 
teven’s letter, and as the hat manufacturer to whom I refer has 
been more than forty-five years in the business he has had ample 
opportunity for collecting trustworthy information, From an 
article subsequently published by him ina trade journal (Umbrella 
and Portmanteau Trades Review, July, 1880) I take the following: 
“There is another feature in connection with heads which is 
singular in this district, and that is the decrease in sizes. It 
used to be considered sufficient to make one to each dozen ; we 
now make, on an average, three or four of these sizes, which 
we are now obliged to keep in stock to meet our requirements, 
T allude to such sizes as 64 and 63, which formerly were only 
necessary in boys’ hats. This decrease in the size of heads has 
been going on for the last twenty-five years to my certain know- 
ledge.” In the letter appended to Dr. Kesteven’s letter Prof, 
Flower asks the important question, ‘‘Doesit [the statement] 
refer to any particular class of men, and does it refer to the same 
class of men?” In answer to this I have to say that the classes 
to which the figures in my quotation refer are, and have always 
been, much the same, namely, the upper and middle classes ; 
and the individuals included in these two classes have had as 
much variety in their occupations as any large city, such as Man- 
chester, can furnish, Ano’her important question is also asked 
by Prof. Flower, namely, ‘‘ May it (the decrease in the size of 
hat) not arise from some change of fashion, . . . such as hats 
being worn more on the top of the head than formerly.” In some 
few instances this might possibly account for the difference, but 
in the majority of case:, and especially in those belonging to the 
dolichocephalic class of head:, it will be found that it requires 
quite as large a size of hat when worn more on the back part 
of the head as it does when worn on the top. The data already 
collected are probably not sufficient to base any settled opinion 
upon ; but if more exteaded investigation should confirm the 
statements made above, it will then be a matter of some import- 
ance to us to endeavour to discover the cause of this diminution 
in the size of English heads. It will also be interesting to know 
if any such phenomenon has occurred in any other country. 
Old Trafford, Manchester CHARLES H, BLACKLEY 
SurELy Mr. Hyde Clarke’s arguments in favour of the hatters, 
statements are somewhat defective. Even if the survival of 
human weakling; be granted, it by no means follows that a being 
with a weakly body must needs have a small head. Indeed the 
exact conve se is usually accepted ; for big-chested athletes are 
generally supposed to be the men in possession of the smaller 
heads, and persons of weakly constitution the possessors of the 
larger heads. A weakly condition of body and health is often 
associated with great mental activity. Besides, at birth, the 
conditions, if favourable for the survival of weaklings, are surely 
equally favourable for the strong and well-made; under ordinary 
circumstances then these latter individuals should show an in- 
crease in the size of the head. It cannot be imagined that the 
weaklings are surviving at the expense of the strong and hearty, 
such a case would be, as some one has said, a survival of the 
unfittest. It would be interesting if Mr. Hyde Clarke would 
tell us something more about the ‘‘old standard” in ears, when 
he observed ears begin to fall below this old standard, and how 
the old standard in ears is to be recognised. My business as an 
artist has caused me to particularly notice heads and faces for 
many years past, and from ten to thirty portraits (old and new) 
pass through my hands every week. My opinion, founded on 
this experience, entirely agrees with the statements made by 
some of the speakers at the meeting of the Anthropological In- 
stitute mentioned by Mr. Clarke. The alleged diminution in 
size of men’s heads is I think due to a misinterpretation on the 
part of the hatters of the fact that the hair is worn much shorter 
now than formerly, and the hat is now worn more on the crown 
of the head than in the past generation. The brim of the hat 
brought close down over the brows and the long hair in men is 
a very marked feature in old portraits. W. G. SMITH 
125, Grosvenor Road, Highbury, N. 
I SHALL not enter into the question of the relative sizes of the 
heads of our generation and of that of our fathers or grand- 
fathers, beyond stating my general agreement with the expla- 
nation suggested by Prof. Flower, viz, that we carry our hats 
perched on the top of our heads instead of bringing them down 
as they did over occiput and ears, and that many of us, myself 
included, wear what hair we have so short that brushes and 
combs become superfluities. But I must express my surprise at so 
eminent a reasoner and statistician as Dr, Hyde Clark giving 
his support to a notion that to every medical statist seems a 
transparent fallacy—that a reduced infant mortality implies a 
deterioration of the race. If the deaths of children were owing 
solely to expo-ure to the elements, there might be a survival of 
the fittest, and such was the case among the Highlanders in 
former days, as it is perhaps still among Red Indians and the 
like ; but we know that disease does not strike or weed out the 
feeble ones, or the people of Liverpool and Manchester, among 
whom 60 to 7o per cent. die before attaining their fifth year, 
ought to be a more stalwart race than the Scandinavians, who 
lose only about 16. No! infant mortality in civilised (?) and 
urban populations is due to two great causes, zymotic diseases 
and parental neglect, including insanitary surroundings. Now 
scarlatina, diphtheria, &c., d> not show any preference, but cut 
off healthy and weakly alike ; and improper food, foul air, over- 
crowding, bad drainage, though they may kill the feebler out- 
right, tend to deteriorate the survivors ; the weak die, the strong 
are made weak ; those who do not die of scrofula, or diarrhza, 
or rickets in infancy grow up puny or consumptive—‘‘ Mox 
daturos prozeniem vitiosorem.’’ I maintain that just as each 
death regi-tered represe ts two whole years of sickness, so each 
infant’s life saved implies two who would have been feeble 
rendered healthy and valuable members of society. The oppo- 
site view would strike at the root of all sanitary reform. 
76, Marquess Road, N. EDWARD F. WILLOUGHBY 
MONO ISLAND, TRINIDAD 
HE following extract from the log of the R.Y.S. Vorth- 
umbria has been sent us for publication by Dr. G, 
H. Kingsley ; it is dated February 28, 1881 :— 
