Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1875-08-24
COUSINS IN wEDLoCK.

The las. number of the Fortnightly Review
contains an article by Mr. George Darwin, on mar
risges between first cousins giving the results o.
some researches be has recently made among ane
hrSE-cousin marriages Of the upper classes OF Ing
iand.1 There are incidentally brought out some
statistics worth repeating, such as Una, ~
IS marriages in England one is smith IN '9, 20
Jones in 1l5, Williams; in l4S, Taylor IN iGI,
Davis; in ia, Brown; in oZs' ofi f thn com.
fact it is upon this proportion of fifty OF the COM
monest names he bases all his succeeding cslcu-
lations. Having found 10 per cent oil marllsees
between people Of the same name nc ueeeI ni s.
what per cent. ofthese are MARRIAGES s
cousins and what proportion these bear TO those De-
!, tween 6rst cousins OF different names.
His investigations he confines to Burke's peer
age" and landed gentry Of England and Ireland
and discovers 5Sper cent. OF same name flrst'
in marriages. which is his first factor. lis second
BE esr;;res through circulars mailed to the same
classes, provided with blanks to be filled, taking
care to avoid receiving the same information
through different channels; and the statistics he
received manifeatly must have been incomplete, he
feels warranted intaking 23-4 per cent as the pro-
portion Of diherent-name first cousin marriages.
From these he determines that the prorpoton OF FIRST
cousin marriages TO all other marriages is l-Zper
cent, . percentage slightly increased among the
upper classes and lowered among the common peo-
pie. ,....
He than proceeds to the asylums to discover
whether such marriages were injurious. In ms
inquiry he seems to have been ably seconded oy
the physicians, but his tables OF observations aP-
pended are not very satisfactory. The testimony
of the physicians VARIES but preponderates against
the popular belief. DIR. Howden goes so far as to
say: Neither in insanity nor in any abnormal pro-
pensty do two plus two make four there Is Always
another factor at work neutralizing intensicat1on
and bringing things back TO the normal" On the
other hand DR.. Crichton Brown says that two plus
two make mere than four, and that even persons
Of similar temperaments should not marry. The
= Investigation, Mr.. Darwin thinks, showed that, IN
l,,v,a and NJ avtu y
and per cent of the patients are the children OF
first cousins and in the case of deaf mutes there s
., evidence that the percentage is any greater
than that Of the general population
Concerning the death-rate of the children Of hr:t
marriages Mr. Darwin turns again to the "Peerage,
and in careful examination of thiriy-seven, TOO
small total upon which to base satisfactory sta
tistics there remained but the shadow OF evidence
that the children of first cousin marriages possess
. slightly lowered vitality, which under favorable
circumstances would show no ill effects. Tn nc
SAID is in accordance with his fathers experiments
with inbred plants, which suffer no deterioration
when allowed plenty Of good soil and room, but
perish or become stunted in competition with other
plants Finally, his opinion is that while certain
maladiss do take hold more easily of the offspring
of first cousin marriages. the evil has been vastly
overrated.
81 While Mr. Darwin has written an article, Mr.
Z HUH. undeterred by the difficulties which have
beset marriage with even the deceased wlfe's
sisters, has written book, Marriage OF Near Kin
Considered with Respect to the Laws Of Nations; )
the Results Of Experience the Teachings OF Biol
ogy," with = view directly to legislation. In this
gcntleman's opinion existing prohibitions are but
relics Of asceticism The first part OF the work Is
historical. He quotes Jeremy Taylor, who says
the earlier the times the more liberty there was OF
! marriage with kin, and passes in review Egypt,
where . man might marry his sister; Persia where
it WAS honorable to marry his mother, and the Isle
Of Wight where . man is permitted to marry his
niece. Ofthe general theory that the marriages OF
blood relatives are injurious, it is his opinion that
evils have been hastily accounted for in that way
because they could not be satisfactorily explained
otherwise. Mr.. HUH follows Mr.. Darwin's exper-
riments with the lower animals, but arrives at dif
rent conclusions. The benefit of crosses he re-
CARDS rather as removing inherited diseases lit is
negative, not positive. In his view there is no
grounds for believing consanguineous marriages
injurious, while the tendency Of restriction on
general grounds is hurtful and he insists that it is
not advisable 70 extend the prohibition against
marriage beyond the third collateral degree and to
permit Ill marriages Of affinity except in the direct
ascending sud descending lines.