vii.] DISCUSSION OF THE DATA OF STATURE. 95 



Anthropological Committee to the British Association 

 in 1880, and published in its Journal. 



I concluded after carefully studying the chart upon 

 which each of the individual observations from which 

 Table 11 was constructed, had been entered separately 

 in their appropriate places, and not clubbed into groups 

 as in the Tables, that the value of Q in each Co- 

 Fraternal group was roughly the same, whatever their 

 Mid-Parental value might have been. It was not quite 

 the same, being a trifle larger when the Mid-Parents 

 were tall than when they were short. This justifies 

 what will be said in Appendix E about the Geometric 

 Mean ; it also justifies neglect in the present inquiry of 

 the method founded upon it, because the improvement 

 in the results to which it might lead, would be insignifi- 

 cant, while its use would have added to the difficulty 

 of explanation, and introduced extra trouble through- 

 out, to the reader more than to myself. The value that 

 I adopt for Q in every Co-Fraternal group, is 1*5 inch. 



Regression. — a. Filial : However paradoxical it may 

 appear at first sight, it is theoretically a necessary fact, 

 and one that is clearly confirmed by observation, that 

 the Stature of the adult offspring must on the whole, 

 be more mediocre than the stature of their Parents ; 

 that is to say, more near to the M of the general 

 Population. Table 11 enables us to compare the 

 values of the M in different Co-Fraternal groups 

 with the Statures of their respective Mid-Parents. 

 Fig. 10 is a graphical representation of the meaning of 



