ir 



SCIEN 



[Entered at the Post-Offlce of New York, N.Y., as Second-Class Matter.J 



A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER OF ALL THE ARTS AND SCIENCES. 



Eighth Yeak. 

 Vol. XVI. No. 408. 



NEW YOEK, NovEiiBEE 38, 1890. 



Single Copies, Ten Cents. 

 $3.50 Per Yeab, in Advance. 



THE INTERMAERIAGE OF THE DEAF, AND THEIR 

 EDUCATION. 



An inlimate acquaintance with deaf-mutes for more than 

 fifty years, and active labors among them as a teacher for 

 nearly thirty five years, may, perhaps, Justify me in asking 

 to be allowed to take part in the discussion concerning the 

 deaf to which Science has recently opened its columns; and 

 the two points on which I have a word to say are (1) the 

 intermarriage of the deaf, and (2) their education. 



I think that in considering the first point an important fact 

 has been overlooked ; namely, that with a large proportion of 

 the persons commonly spoken of as " deaf-mutes " there is no 

 more likelihood of giving the legacy of deafness to offspring 

 than with perfectly normal people. Prof essor Bell, who stands 

 as the most pronounced opponent of deaf-mute inteimarriages, 

 makes this clear in his testimony before the Royal Commis- 

 sion {Minutes of Evidence, p. 817). "No one," he says, 

 "desires to bring misfortune on his offspring, and, if the 

 deaf were so classified as to distinguish those who would be 

 likely to transmit their defect from those who would not, 

 many of the more intelligent of our pupils might avoid 

 forming unions that would increase the chances of their 

 having deaf children." Dr. Bell then gives in a footnote 

 the following classification: — 



Classification of the Deaf into Four Groups as a Guide to 

 Marriage. 



And he says, very truly, that "persons belonging to Class 1 

 do not manifest a tendency to transmit the defect to their 

 children." This class consists of those who, born normal in- 

 fants, and having no deaf-mute relatives, are made deaf by 

 some one of the many diseases which affect the auditory 

 organs, or become deaf through accident. It is not easy to 

 determine absolutely the proportion this class bears to the 

 whole number of deaf-mutes, but it is undoubtedly over fifty 

 per cent; for our statistics show that sixty per cent of the 

 whole number of deaf-mutes are known to have lost hearing 

 from disease or accident, and there is a strong ijresumption 

 that many reported as born deaf became so after birth at so 

 early an age as to lead parents to suppose erroneously that 



they were born deaf. Making due allowance, then, for the 

 cases believed to be comparatively few in number, classified 

 by Dr. Bell under "Family Deafness after Birth," which 

 could not be regarded as normal, it is safe to say that fully 

 one-half of the deaf and dumb (to use a term now regarded 

 as old-fashioned by many), have, according to Dr. Bell him- 

 self, no tendency to transmit their defect to their children. 

 Among this half, therefore, intermarriages may occur with- 

 out fear that deaf offspring will appear in any greater pro- 

 portion than in the community at large; and those who 

 oppose the marriage of the deaf among themselves should 

 give due consideration to this very important fact. On the 

 other hand, those who favor the unrestricted intermarriage of 

 the deaf, most prominent among whom is your latest contribu- 

 tor in this discussion. Dr. Gillett of Illinois, should, I think, 

 give more weight than they seem disposed to do to the ac- 

 knowledged facts that marriages between two persons be- 

 longing to Dr. Bell's Class 4 are likely to result in a very 

 large proportion of deaf children; that in marriages between 

 persons belonging to Classes 2, 3, and 4 this tendency is de- 

 cided ; and that even in a marriage of persons belonging to 

 Classes 1 and 2 this tendency is greater than among the 

 general population. With many of Dr. Gillett's views, re- 

 cently expressed in Science, I agree, and I honor him as one 

 who has given a life of effective and unselfish labor to the 

 cause of the deaf; but I think he errs radically in character- 

 izing total deafness as " only a serious inconvenience;" and 

 I am sure few ha'rd-of-hearing persons even, much less those 

 absolutely without hearing, will allow him to classify their 

 infirmity with baldness or near-sightedness. ^ 



Deafness is certainly a grave misfortune, and those in 

 whose person or in whose family it inheres are bound by 

 altruistic considerations to take care that by no selfish act or 

 course of theirs the aggregate of this misfortune in the world 

 shall be increased. The deaf-mutes resident in the vicinity 

 of Boston have lately discussed the subject of marriage, and 

 have protested publicly against the attitude taken by Dr. 

 Bell. They have disputed his claim that among the offspring 

 of such marriages a large proportion of deaf children will be 

 found ; and one of their number, Mr. E. W. Frisbee, — an 

 intelligent and worthy young man, — has taken pains to 

 gather and publish statistics which he thinks sustain the 

 views held by the Boston deaf-mutes. But unfortunately 

 Mr. Frisbee is "hoist with his own petard:" for he says (in 

 the Deaf-Mute's Journal. New York, Nov. 6), that, "among 

 103 children born of deaf-mute parents in Boston and vicin- 

 ity, 07ily 14 are deaf-mutes," naively ignorant that he is 

 giving Dr. Bell heavy and effective ammunition. 



