Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1888-08-15
MARRIAGE OF COUSINS.

Deep Seated Prejudice Against the
Praceice-Darwin's Opinion
These questions relate to subject
about which We are often>consulted, and
yerv naturally, because, though mar
RACES between first COUSINS are OF fire.
ouent occurrence, there is general and
deep seated prejudice against them:
81. Is it proper from religious stand
point for first cousins to-marryf
..e. Is it not posittre sin to know
ingiy enter into such marriage!
s'3. Is it not PROBABLE that the or
spring Of such parents viii become in
sane, idiouc, OF weak persons, both
mentally and physicallyS
The marriage of first cousins is not
contrary to the Protestant canon law
that relationship not coming within the
prohibited degrees of consangrnnhy as
defined by the Church of England, and
as set forth in the table drawn up by
Archbishop Parker in 1868. In the
Roman Catholic church such marriages
are as a rule forbidden, yet they may e
permitted by special dnpensation. As 8
Catholic writer expresses 1t, ''in cases
where the alternative Is marriage or mis-
ery, the church. as thoughtful mother.
grants her dispensation.
According to the Protestant theory,
therefore, the marriage OF first COUSINS Is
..proper from a religious standpoint" or,
more correctly, religious point of view,
and according to the Roman Catnotc
rule it is permissible unller certain CIR
cumstances, and therefore cannot-be de-
scribed as positive SIN"
If we turn to the Bible for our au-
thority we find that before the period OF
Moses there was no prohibition at all
against marriage on the ground OF con-
sanguinity, and the prejudice vas rather
against marrying out OF the circle OF
kinship. Adams sons married their own
sisters: Abraham his half sister; his
brother Nahor his niece, and daughter OF
another brother; Jacob married at the
same time two sisters who were MS
cousins; Esans wife was hls cousin, Am
rams his aunt, and Judah s Msdaugnter-
in-law, the widow of his own son. The
aversion in those days was not to the
marriage of relatives, no matter now
near, but to intermarriage with foyelgn-
ers. or those far removed in blood.
But the Mosaic law forbade fifteen
marriages within specified degrees,
though among them those OF cousins
were not included In the New Testa-
ment we find few directions as to mar
rage, and those chiefly concerning mar
riages with unbeiievers; and Gregory the
Great, in writing Of marriages OF own
cousins, put his objection to them on
physiological grounds, saying that I've
have learned from experience that from
such a marriage offspring cannot grow
The physiological argument, the one
most commonly advanced, has beencare-
fully examined of late years by men OF
science, and more especially by NE.
George II. Darwin, son OF the great
Darwin, and himself distinguished ol-
ologist. He went through a very labor1-
Gus inquiry and statistical study on the
subject, and found that the facts CON-
pletely upset Pope Gregory's theory as to
the sterility Of first cousin marriages, sta-
tistics showing slight balance In favor
of the fertility of the first COUSINS" as
compared with ordinary marriage. his
circumstance, he suggests, may be ex-
planned by inference that marriages be-
tween cousins are more likely 70 occur
where there is large group OF persons
bearing that relationship to one another,
and who therefore belong to families IN
which fertility is hereditary. But he
found "a shade of evidence that the
death rate of offspring is higher than
among the families of non-sangulneous
marriages"
AS 10 insanity and idiocy among the
offspring of first cousin marriages, hr.
Darwin's Investigations led him to the
conclusion that the facts did not justify
the popular impression, he finding that
1.-The percentage of such offspring IL asy-
lums Is not greater than that in the gen
eral population to such an extent as to
enable one to say positively that the
marriage of first cousins has any effect
on the production of insanity and
idiocy." With respect to deaf mntes he
discovered no difference.
AS the result of the whole inquiry, he
came to the conclusion THAT the evil
has been often much exaggerated, but
that there are, nevertheless, grounds for
asserting that various maladies take an
easy hold of the offspring OF conssu-
guneous marriages" He is also dis
posed to give some weight TO the popu-
lar prejudice against such marriages. as
probably grounded in actual experience,
little as the attainable facts seem to JUS
tify it, except to the slight extent be de-
scribes. Yet there can be no doubt
about the danger Of the marriage Of
man and a woman both Of whom in
herit from a common progenitor de-
cided tendency to some serious constitu-
tional disease or weakness. New York
Sun.