Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1881-11-24
INHERITANCE OF TALENT.

| ly inherit their talents from the mother
This is popular belief, but not the less er
roneous The mistake has arisen from at
tending only to those cases in which the moth
er had superior mind, to the neglect O.
the equally numerous examples where tht
father possessed remarkable abilities. Ev
cry bod y quotes the fact that Napoleon de
rived bis genius from bis mother. Nobody
mentions that Burns owed his vast abilities
to his father A traveller would commit q
similar bluuder who should describe all
Americans as light.haired, or say that every
Philadelphia was Quaker.
The rule, for rule there is, lies deeper
Great abilities in word, arise from such q
fortunate union of the mental characteristics
of the parents as renders the progeny &C.
MUS, though neither father nor mother per.
haps, were such. The catalogue of eminent
men, if carefully made up and honestly scru.
tinized with view to calculating the truth,
would establish this, we have no doubt, be.
yond controversy. For it is already known
that the child takes its mental nature in
about equal portions from its parents, and
this fact at once leads to our conclusion, as
we'll as explains why brilliant parents often
have ounces among their offspring. 49,
Let US illustrate this. A man has the
purely intellectual characteristices in great
force, but is wanting in will; he is eonse.
quently dreamy philosopher, or visiona.
~ speculator. He marries woman, who,
with but ordinary intellect, has immense en-
ergy. One child OF this pair may combine
the weakness of both parents and will be,
in that event, an irreclaimable fool. But
another may inherit the mothers will, with
the fathers intellect and this child, unless
ruined by bad education, is certain to be-
come distinguished. Or take another exam.
pie. A woman of no remarkable abilities
but with fine moral nature, is married to q
man without principle, but possessing shining
abilities. One child of this pair may have
the good qualities of both parents, and be-
come Bunyan, Nestor, or even Wash.
ington. But another may inherit the def
ciencies of both, and grow up, unless care
fully guarded, to become brilliant villain
Or take third instance. One parent may
haye much imagination, but little else, and
the other remarkable, but great perceptive
faculties. The union of these two character
istics in child will produce a poet. The
transmission of either, in excess, unless bal
anced by strong reasoning powers, may make
only a human monkey or a romantic fool.
This law explains also why so few eminent
men belong to one family. There have rare
ly been two distinguished poets, painters, gen
erals, or even statesmen, who were father and
son or even brothers. The elder and younger
Pitt, though both prime ministers, and both
famous speakers, were strikingly dissimilar in
their mental constitution, so that this exam
pie which seems at first to oppose our theory
really sustains it. In fact, when we conside,
that the mind has so many and so dissimila,
ingredients, ideality, casualty, benevolence
reverence, destructiveness, constructiveness
aud that these are combined in millions Of
varieties in as many million persons, the
wonder is not that two individuals even o.
the same family, resemble each other 80 little
but that they resemble each other so much
Given the score and odd of separate bumps
into which phrenology divides the brain, anc
take the child Of any two persons whatever
and who shall say in what exact proportions
out of the ten thousand possible one those
qualities ought to unite
There is too much falsity taught for truth
on this and similar subjects, not only. in
newspapers, but even in elaborate books
The reason is that few persons think sound
ly, 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"