SCIENCE 



[Vol. XVI. No. 404 



6. Of the five colors, blue, red, green, brown, white, blue and 

 xed were most attractive, and about equally so, as measured in 

 terms of voluntary exertion in reaching for them. 



7. The fact mentioned above under Paragraph 3 furnishes 

 another item of evidence for the presence of efferent feelings of 

 innervation. Why did the child prefer the right hand uniformly 

 for effort, if not under the feeling of stronger outward nervous 

 pressure in the case of that hand? Professor James, no doubt, 

 can explain it with his " kinaesthetic memories," — that sword 

 with whicli he decapitates so many points of evidence in his 

 '■Principles of Psychology," — but he does not succeed iu convin- 

 cing many of us, any more than Bastian did in the first place. If 

 memories of former movements with effort give " the cue," then 

 how do you know that there are no memories of "innervation" 

 among them? But memories of movement without effort cannot 

 give the "cue," for my child used both hands equally in move- 

 ments without effort; and the motor force of such memories 

 would be neuti'al as regards hand preference. How simple the 

 explanation from the point of view of "innervation"! Memories 

 of effortless movement are all of efferent sensations: hence either 

 hand responds, or both. Memories of movements with effort are 

 the same memories plus memory of an afferent feeling of effort: 

 hence the right hand moves, perhaps followed by the left ; that is, 

 a memory of feeling of innervation in foruier cases is re-enforced 

 by the same feeling now. Perhaps Professor James or some other 

 ■"afferentist" will explain this case. The child is now (thirteenth 

 month) a confirmed right-hander, so to speak. 



I have cited only points which have their own value, — points 

 on which observations on one child are as valuable as on many, — 

 ■determinations concerning the order of development of the men- 

 tal functions with the physical, not determinations merely of the 

 time of development, which may vary. Observations on single 

 children may also be valuable as showing that an event may hap- 

 pen, as opposed to theories according to which such an event may 

 not happen, under given circumstances. 



J. Maek Baldwin. 



University of Toronto, Oct. 18. 



Deaf-Mutes. 



Professor Alex-ajjder Gr.4bam Bell, in a recent number of 

 Science (Sept. 5) correctly quotes me as saying, "I do not dis- 

 courage the intermarriages of the deaf, as they are usually more 

 happily mated thus than where one of the parties only is deaf. 

 The deaf need the companionship of married life more than those 

 who hear, and it is a gross wrong to discourage it." And he adds 

 the following statement and inquiry: "Dr. Gillett is probably the 

 oldest teacher in America, — not oldest in years, but oldest in ser- 

 vice, — and he is looked up to as a guide by very many in the 

 profession. Much good might arise from a comparison of views 

 between Dr. Gillett and those scientific gentlemen who have given 

 most attention to the subject of heredity. May I ask him, through 

 the columns of Science, what would he his advice in such a case 

 as the following? A young man (not a deaf-mute) became deaf 

 in childhood while attending public school. He has one brother 

 who is a deaf-mute, and another who can hear. Two others of 

 the family (believed to be hearing) died young. The father of 

 this young man was born deaf in one ear, and lost the hearing 

 of the other subsequently from illness. He had a congenitally 

 deaf brother who married a congenital deaf-mute and had four 

 children (three of them congenital deaf-mutes). The mother of 

 the young man was a congenital deaf-mute, and she also had a 

 'brother born deaf. The paternal grandmother of the young man 

 was a congenital deaf-mute, and she had a brother who was born 

 -deal. This brother married a congenital deaf-mute, and had one 

 son born deaf. The great-grandfather of this young man (father 

 of his paternal grandmother) was a congenital deaf-mute; and he 

 was, so far as known, the first deaf-mute in the family. Thus 

 deafness has come down to this young man through four succes- 

 sive generations, and he now wants to marry a congenital deaf- 

 mute. The young lady has seven hearing brothers and sisters, 

 and there was no deafness in her ancestry, but she herself is be- 

 lieved hy her family to have been born deaf. Dr. Gillett must 



not think that this is a purely hypothetical case, for it is not. The 

 parties are engaged, but the marriage has not yet been consum- 

 mated, and I know that Dr. Gillett's advice would have weight 

 with the young people. The teacher of the young lady has been 

 consulted, and she feels the responsibility deeply. Her heart is 

 with the young couple, and she desii-es their happiness, and yet 

 her judgment is opposed to the union. Will Dr. Gillett tell us 

 what his advice would be in such a case^" 



My advice in such a case as this would be for the young people 

 to examine themselves carefully as to what their motives are in 

 contemplating matrimony. If they have no higher thought than 

 the animal impulse, I would advise them by no means to enter 

 into that sacred relation; hut if they are already so united in heart 

 that each is needful to the happiness of the other, I would advise 

 them as soon as their circumstances are such as to enable them to 

 maintain a family in comfort, whether the children should hear 

 or be deaf, to follow the promptings of their higher nature, with 

 a determination to rear their children to respectability and useful- 

 ness, which they can do in one case almost as effectually as in the 

 other. Thus one happy union will certainly be effected; while, if 

 prevented, not only would this be estopped, but probably two 

 unhappy, because uncongenial, ones would ensue. If deafness 

 were a crime, or a disgrace, or entailed suffering, I would certainly 

 discourage it; but since it does not, I deem it wise to en- 

 courage such a marriage, it the parties most interested believe, 

 after reflection, that their own happiness will be promoted 

 thereby. 



That there are some deaf persons sprung from deaf parents is 

 admitted, but their number is very small. There has been much 

 discussion of late years about the advisability of deaf-mutes mar- 

 rying, lest the infirmity of deafness may descend to their off- 

 spring, and a deaf variety of the human race be formed. Until a 

 few sparrows will make spring, this hobgoblin will never mate- 

 rialize. Deafness is not continued by hereditary transmission in 

 a direct line, except in rare instances. Not two per cent of the 

 deaf and dumb are the children of deaf parents, tliougli it cannot 

 be denied that a susceptibility to the infirmity inheres in certain 

 kindreds ; so that we find it true, that, while a deaf pair seldom 

 have deaf children, they have numerous other relations — as un- 

 cles; aunts; first, second, and third cousins; nephews; and nieces 

 — who are thus afflicted. Hence, if some philanthropist is more 

 concerned for the happiness of those who as yet are not, and may 

 never be, than of those who now are and will for years continue 

 with us, let him not discourage the marriage of those who are 

 deaf, but that of their kinsmen; as, these being able to hear, and 

 having all social advantages, the deprivation will not be so serious 

 a matter to them as to their deaf relatives. The truth of this matter 

 is, that, after laying all maudlin sentiment aside, there is no other 

 class of people who so greatly need the companionship of the con- 

 jugal relation as the deaf and dumb. Shut out from church 

 privileges, as preaching of the Word, prayer-meetings, socials, 

 receptions, lectures, concerts, parties, what remains to them of 

 all that makes life pleasurable to us? The deprivation of their 

 hearing has not diminished their social instincts. For compan- 

 ionship, fan\ily ties, and festive associations, they have as strong 

 aflSnities as any one. The isolation caused by deafness, I be- 

 lieve, makes the marital impulse stronger in them than in others. 

 To forbid them, as some would, matrimony, the one remaining 

 but most helpful and enjoyable of all social and family relations, 

 is a monstrous cruelty with very little reason. For these reasons, 

 after many years of observation, in which I have known hundreds 

 of instances of deaf-mute unions, and after closely studying my 

 more than two thousand pupils, one of my highest pleasures and 

 satisfactions is to see them judiciously and happily mated in the 

 conjugal relation. For the foregoing reasons I have long ap- 

 proved, and still do, of the marriage of the deaf; and I believe 

 that, as a general rule, their intermarriage is more congenial, and 

 productive of more happiness, than the marriage of deaf with 

 hearing persons, though I have known most beautiful and happy 

 unions of the latter kind. " Be ye not unequally yoked together," 

 is a Scripture injunction that bears with as much force upon the 

 deaf as upon any others. That it would be possible in process of 

 time to generate families who would all be deaf, I fully believe. 



