SEQUEL TO “THE JUKES ” 297 
who could not be called feeble-minded, their history 
seems to have varied mainly—as does that of most 
of us—with the opportunities of social “ nurture.” 
But all this is too vague: let us take more precise 
acts. In 1915 there were 43 male Jukes between 
the ages of 15 and 18; out of 29, whose histories 
are adequately known, “18 are anti-social, doing 
poorly in the world at large; 2 are criminal, while 
7 are so obviously mentally defective as to be 
noticeable to the general community.” It may be 
noted that all the Juke criminals were or are feeble- 
minded. Of the 43 lads referred to above, 19 are 
industrious. The number of males over 19 and 
females over 15 was 705 in 1915, and 305 (or 43 
per cent.) of these are “inimical to the general 
welfare of the community,” 41 are criminal, 
103 mentally deficient, 83 intemperate. But 152 
are industrious, and 65 are classed as “ good citi- 
zens.” Of these good citizens, we are told that 
“the bad traits which have held down their 
brothers and sisters have become lost, and they are 
the fountainheads of new families of socially good 
strain.” The word “lost” is arresting. It may be 
that some of the bad traits illustrate Mendelian in- 
heritance, and may, in the case of marriage into good 
stock, be entirely absent in a certain proportion of 
the grandchildren and subsequent descendants. 
On his laborious study of the Jukes, Dr. Esta- 
brook bases some general conclusions: cousin-mat- 
ings in radically-defective stock produce defective 
offspring, even when the parents make a passable 
