The true Democrat., 1856-09-23
Inheritance of Talent.

A cotemporary says that great men usually inherit their talents from the mother This is a popular belief, but not the less erroneous.- The mistake has arison from attending only to those cases in which the mother had superior mind, to the neglect of the equally numerous examples where the father possessed remarka- be abilities. Every body quotes the fact that Napoleon derived his genius from his mother. Nobody mentions that Burns owed his vast abilities to his father traveller would con- init similar blunder who should describe all Americans as light-haired or say that every Philadel phian was Quaker.
 The rule, for rule there is, lies deeper Great abilities, in word, arise from such fortunate union of the mental characteristics of the pa rents as renders the progeny genius, though neither father nor mother, perhaps, were sucll The catalogue of eminent men, if carefully made up and honestly scrutinsed with view to elucidating the truth. would establish this, we have no doubt, beyond controversy. For it is already known that the child takes its men, tai nature in about equal portions from its pa rents and this fact at once leads to our conclu sion, as we'll as explains why brilliant parents often have dunces among their offspring
 Let us illustrate this. A man has the pure- iy intellectual characteristics in great force, but Is wanting in will; he is consequently dreamy philosopher, or visionary speculator. He marries woman, who, with ordinary intellect, has immense energy. One child of this pair may combine the weakness of both parents; and will be in that event all irreclamabIe fool. But another may inherit the mothers will with the fathers intellect; and this child unless rulned by bad education, is certain to become distinguished. Or take another example, A woman of no remarkable abilities, but with a hne moral nature, Is married to a man without principle, but possessing shining abilities One child of this pair may have the good qualities ot both parents, and become a Bunyan, a Nes- ter, or even Washington. But another may inherit the deficiencies of both, and grow up, unless carefully guarded, to become a brilliant villain. Or take third instance One parent may have much imagination, but little else, and the other nothing remarkable but great perceptye faculties. The union of these two characteristics in child will produce a poet- The transmission of either to excess, unless halanced by strong reasoning powers, may make only human monkey or romantic fool.
 The law explains also why so few eminent men belong to one family. There have rarely been two distinguished poets, painters, generals or even statesmen, who were even father and SOi, VI NCi DiOtilClS ue clueT ana younger Pitt though both prime ministers, and both famous speakers, were strikingy dissimar in their mental constitutions, so that this exam pie which seems at first to oppose cur theory, in reality sussains it. In fact when we consi- der that the mind has so many and so dissimi- lar ingredients, ideality, casualty, benevolence reverence, destructiveness, constructiveness and that these are combined in millions of va rletes in as many million persons, the wonder Is not that two individuals, even of the same family, resemble each other so little, but that they resemble each other so much. Given the score and odd of separate bumps into which phrenology divides the brain, and take the child of any two persons whatever-and who shall say in what exact proportions out of the ten thousand possible ones, these qualities ought to unite?
 There is too much falsity taught for truth on this and similar subjects, not only in newspa- pers but even elaborate books The reason is that few persons think soundly, or dare to deny preconceived or popular ideas. We would have every man, however, reflect for himself Prove all things; hold fast to the good."- Philadelphia EUening Bulletin.