1 66 THE DOCTRINE OF DESCENT. 



entirely neglected by naturalists in former clays. And 

 indeed what comparison in organic nature can be made 

 so frequently and universally as the resemblance of the 

 offspring to the parent? An anatomist, it is true, quaintly 

 attempted to work out the proposition that the resem- 

 blance in the children is not dependent on heredity, but 

 is the result of identical and similar influences, customs, 

 and habits, prevalent in families. But this paradoxical 

 theory requires no special refutation. It is quite true 

 that similar habits and similar external impulses elicit a 

 certain similarity of demeanour and appearance; but if 

 the little son of the pompous millionaire apes his father, 

 it cannot be said that he has likewise mimicked his large 

 or small nose, &c., or has acquired it by a similar call 

 for adaptation. We have only cursorily alluded to this 

 quibble, in flagrant contradiction as it is with every ex- 

 perience; and, in conformity with general opinion, we 

 corroborate the transmission of the parental characteris- 

 tics to the offspring. The breeders of animals in particu- 

 lar has occasion to observe these transmissions spe- 

 cially, and to evolve their astounding progress from the 

 combination and reciprocal influence of the various forms 

 and degrees of heredity. 



It is well known that not only are normal conditions 

 transmitted, but monstrosities are also reproduced 

 through several generations, and, as we have seen in the 

 instance of the crooked-legged sheep of Massachusetts, 

 may even be established as the characters of a race. A 

 mere reference to the inheritability of morbid tendencies, 

 bodily and mental, will enable us to realize this intrinsic 

 connection of the offspring to the ancestors. Only since 

 the theory of selection has rendered the modalities of the 



