Griggs courier., 1897-10-15
our ooMes oe 1HoueA1.

OUR ooMEs OF THOUGHT.
Are lacreasiag Ia sise - We Frog.
Fess In Knowledge.
According to Prof. John H. Francis,
Of New England Terrace, Orange, n. j..
chronological statistician, as the world
progresses in knowledge the human
grows larger and larger. AS conse-
quence the men of to-day carry on their
shoulders q dome of thought" beside
which the occiputs of the ancient he
roes were small almost to insigniti-
canoe. In q recent interview he said:
"As civilization increases education
becomes moSe and more general among
men. The brain begins its training
at an earlier age than ever before, and
as our modern intelligence is subjected
to greater activity the brain develops
accordingly. Consequently the size OF
the head expands. This is thoroughly
consistent with Darwin's. theory of evo-
luton. as well us with every principle
of science that know of.
"Such men as Caesar and Shakes
peare were prodigies, and must be con-
sidered apart by their very genius.
While admitting that the size of the
brain among ancients must have been
much less than that of q man living
to-day, am forced to this double con-
clusion with respect to such man as
Caesar-namely, that what brain he
had must have been of the higheast pos
sible quality, and moreover, that if he
lived to-day, with a brain of such rare
quality added to the enlarged size of it,
such as nature equips men with now,
his genius would have been proper
tionately magnifled.
"Julius Caesar was a mighty man
for his times. If he lived to-day doubt
if he would be much larger than Tom
Thumb. BY careful system of cal
culation I figure out that the great
Caesar would have worn 5H hat, and
as for Shakespeare, colossal, figurative-
ly speaking, us was his brain, have not
the slightest doubt that he carried it
about without crowding in a 6A hat
and that's figuring on him generously,
too.
Il have been told that Napoleon wore
6ss hat in the latter years of his life,
and from one to two sizes smaller when
he was simply an officer in the army.
If Napoleon Bonaparte had ever been
able to put on the hat of Gen. Grant
it would have hidden him from sight
from the crown to the shoulders.
Washington was good-sized man,
yet he wore hat ~. sizes smaller than
McKinley's, whose immediate prede-
cessors, Presidents Harrison and Cleve-
land, wore still larger hats-7h. Let
me give you further illustration. A
census of the United States congress,
taken in the time of President Taylor,
so years ago, shows that our legislators
of that time only wore on the average
a 6H hat. 1 doubt If there is a single
man in either house to-day who wears
SO small size.
Webster, of course, had phenom-
cnally big head. OF his colleagues and
predecessors, however, there was not
one who wore q size as large as that
of the present secretary of state. John
Sherman wears ia hat. Foster wore
a z, Blaine ~ large size, and Bayartl
III close.
LET me conclude with further il
lustration of my theory. Old Commo-
dore Vanderbilt wore 6N. His son,
William H., took hat shade larger,
which the hatters mark at 6N and 1-16.
Willie X. Vanderbilt and his brother
Cornelius wear ~: and one of the boys
of the fourth generation takes hat
still larger than his father, uncle, grand
father or great-grandfather - which
doesn't necessarily prove that the
youngest scion is the brainiest.
'It is the same way with the Goulds.
Jay Gould wore a 6A hat, while his
sons, George and Eddie, each require a
6A. The probability is that the next
generation of boys will go their illus
trious progenitor at least three full
sizes better.'--N. Y. Journal.