March i8, 1892.] 



SCIENCE. 



157 



also possessed ia commoD certain temperamental peculiari- 

 ties, and their voices would instantly remind the hearer of 

 each other. 



Now to go back to our friend's chart, where the perpen- 

 dicular line represents nine successive male Does. If every 

 one of these eight male Does was a first child of each succes- 

 sive marriage, the Doe influence would be at a minimum 

 and the transmission of the peculiar traits of the Does most 

 feeble and uncertain. If each one of the eight was the 

 youngest child in a family of six, the persistency of Doe 

 traits would become more intense with each successive gen- 

 eration. For some purposes the tradition of the seventh son 

 of the seventh son becomes something more than a mere su- 

 perstition. If, however, in the third or fourth generation 

 the surname was transmitted by a son whose father was the 

 second husband of a widow who had borne children by a 

 former husband, the family traits of the Does would doubt- 

 less be conspicuous by their absence. There have been no 

 such marriages in the line of Does above mentioned for eight 

 generations. 



Too little is known concerning this subtle and intricate 

 question to enable one to venture an estimate of the percen- 

 tage of tendency towards family traits along the line of nine 

 Does as compared with any other line from any given indi- 

 vidual of the two hundred and fifty of the first generation 

 from the ninth ; but we think the challenge of our friend 

 has been accepted and met, and suiHcient proof has been 

 submitted to show to any candid mind that a vastly greater 

 proportion than one two hundred and fiftieth may be ex- 

 pected to flow along the line represented by the eight indi- 

 viduals who transmit the surname from the first to the ninth 

 generations. Indeed, we think we are treading on solid 

 ground when we assert that in the letters written by the Doe 

 who was an ecclesiastic of the thirteenth century, and which 

 have come down through six hundred years to the present 

 time, the " Doe traits" are strikingly evident. 



We should be gratified to learn if others familiar with 

 other families than the Does are not fully satisfied that 

 "family traits" are very persistent along the line of the 

 surname. An Enquirer. 



"SCIENTIFIC" GENEALOGY — A REJOINDER. 



From the commencement of interest in the history of old 

 American families the marked tendency has been, and is, 

 for the chronicler to depart from the strict records, and 

 attempt to trace reputed traits and oftentimes marked physi- 

 cal characteristics of the original emigrant ancestor and 

 founder of the family through eight and nine generations, 

 and connect the aforesaid qualities with the persons now 

 bearing the surname descended from him. Andapridein one's 

 ancestry is not reprehensible so far as these ancestors were 

 healthy, energetic, honorable citizens, not less as honoring 

 them than as taking satisfaction in the probably clear minds 

 and strong constitutions we inherit, barring an untoward 

 environment. But where the historian, considering a living 

 person's little tricks of habit, peculiarities of appearance, and 

 the like, ascribes these as in fact undoubtedly inherited from 

 the original ancestor of nine generations previous, it becomes 

 necessary to direct the attention of the sincere seeker for 

 truth to certain self-evident truths, which are none the less 

 patent and far-reaching, if comparatively unheeded and little 

 studied in the past. To instance an average case: John 

 Brown is a living person of the ninth generation from the 

 first James Brown, who, we will suppose, came to this coun- 



try about 1630. A simple mathematical computation shows 

 that John Brown has had 510 distinct ancestors in these 

 generations, of whom, at a liberal estimate, 50 may be dupli- 

 cates owing to intermarriage of relatives. If there is a per- 

 son in New England who can state his ancestry since 1630 

 completely with proofs, the writer, after some years careful 

 research and acquaintance with men pursuing such study, 

 has failed to discover him. As a matter of fact, the genealo- 

 gist who has discovered and proved half his grandparents is 

 exceedingly uncommon, and probably not one-twentieth of 

 the persons who have chronicled the genealogy of a surname 

 have known over 50 of their ancestors. They have paid, 

 usually, almost their entire attention to the one surname in 

 which they were interested and which filled their mind to 

 the exclusion of the greater number. 



In the writer's opinion he probably inherits from the 256 

 emigrant ancestors such a blending of qualities and physical 

 characteristics, that to ascribe peculiar traits of any particular 

 one of them to a living descendant is a fallacy, unsupported 

 by reliable circumstantial evidence and persisted in in spite 

 of the fact that the 255 other ancestors of the first American 

 generation had qualities and traits of which he knows noth- 

 ing, nor even the names of most; and probably, as far as the 

 historian can surmise, each of the other 255 were fully as 

 instrumental in bequeathing peculiar qualities, etc., as the 

 one whose surname sexual distinction has given him. How 

 does the matter look faced in the following manner ? James 

 Brown was one of 256 of John Brown's original American 

 ancestors; is it likely or probable or a desirable thing for a 

 genealogist to prove that j^ part of the whole, when, as far 

 as mortal can tell, all had probably much the same influence 

 on the descendant, that this j-^ part has determiried in a 

 prominent and noticeable way the identity of the descendant ? 

 If one of the 256 were a person of color, an African, in the 

 fourth generation, much more the ninth, the scientists tell 

 us the color trace is well-nigh obliterated as far as discovera- 

 ble. The writer does not for a moment combat the well 

 exhibited inheritance of peculiar appearance and traits of a 

 man from his father or mother, his grandparents or great- 

 grandparents, or in rare cases from greatgreatgrandparents, 

 but beyond these limits the historian has little to encourage 

 him in his attempt beyond uncertain and traditionary tales. 



The writer is descended from two ancestors, for both of 

 whom the respective historians have claimed qualities and 

 pronounced appearances of person, and remarked them 

 prominently in all the living descendants; and the writer as 

 yet fails to discover, after a candid if somewhat anxious self- 

 examination, any of these characteristics. How often the 

 mother's relatives fondly see clearly her look, her habits and 

 character in a child for whom the father's family claim the 

 self-same points; and the writer is familiar with the facts in 

 a case where well-meaning friends have told parents of the 

 strong likeness a child bore them, not knowing the child to 

 be of entirely foreign parentage — adopted. My experience 

 has been that a good part of the grounds for tlie side of the 

 question I disbelieve in are as insecure as those just instanced. 

 It is an old saying that one finds what he seeks for: that is, 

 he thinks he finds it, which answers the same purpose for 

 him.' 



To compare the human race to any of the brute creation 

 as regards this question is unjust and mistaken, as in selec- 

 tion, cohabitation, and kindred vital processes, the cow — 

 for instance, of Jersey or other strain — has the advantage 

 of carefvil and long-continued selected inbreeding, wliere the 

 human being is the result (even for nine generations) of over 



