THE MARRIAGE OF NEAR KIN. There is
were
not to accept
we are
induced to believe in Some
ence.
a more
physic and in other gospel truth," all we juvenile period of our exist"
as
has observed that
body
doubt at least "
of evidence both in
plenty
matters, that
a
clever
man
needs
must
in his life, all that he had hitherto learnt. Unrest" is indeed a portentous sign of the times, and we once
called upon to
believe without question standing still in aid of Joshua, than we are to place implicit confidence in the old-established theory To of malaria, which Dr. Oldham did his best to upset. believe either one or the other, would, in the opinion of many, are
no
now
more
the story of the
sun
be little less absurd than to accept the assertions of advertisers that all our tea is from China, that there is no starch in
ground rice, no pyroligneous acid in our vinegar, no barytes in our calomel, that the bark of the alder tree is never decocted into quinine, and that all the wine made in England is labelled British." Neither can it be denied that this prevailing unrest," or unbelief, has at least cleared the scientific atmosphere of much opacity, formerly obscuring the view as it should be observed. But, to use an Americanism, which, although perhaps vulgar, is nevertheless expressive, there is such a thing as, " heaping it up a little too mountainous." And this of late years has frequently been accomplished under a pseudo-scientific and popular garb, which, to say the least, is calculated to carry conviction to the minds of those only investigating one side of the subject, and which is also fraught with mischief, not only to the individual, but to the general public as well. Periodical literature abounds in such instan-
our
"
"
but
ces ;
volume devoted to the upset of established ideas, particularly when such ideas and customs are
a
and customs,
unobjectionable, is comparatively rarely met with. We have recently perused a newly published Alfred Henry Hutli, entitled?" The Marriage
work of
by near
kin considered with respect to the laws of nations, the results of experience, and the teachings of biology," which we feel
compelled
to
class
add to that
which,
cannot
we
desirable. there is
as
a
prevalent
Every
book "
likely
unbelief in
a
and to
matter in
but think, the status quo would be most knows that in life, as in backgammon,
one
cruel satisfaction in
a
produce harm,
to
unrest" and
hitting
a
blot in
our
neighbour's
game, and doubtless the author of the work referred to is
stranger to this very general feeling, for he says he hopes show
that the
reason
is not because
marriages
many nations have
they
prohibited
no
to
these
have observed any evil result ; crosses and without
that many communities has lived without any as
ot
excess
yet is
disease ; that the statistical evidence
worse
the animal
than worthless ; that
we
assertions
can,
in
seriatim,
It is of course
"
near
marriage
of
because our fathers believed
close an observer
manifestly impossi-
these
it is said, have lived without on
possess in
experiment
article of this kind, take up the author's otherwise we imagine it would not be
tions to the
But
we
an
diflioult to prove that
disease.
as
marriages,
ficial and often harmful.
ble, that
far
goes the evidence tends to confirm the that crosses are seldom bene-
kingdom
harmlessness of these
as
this head as
we
theories"?meaning the objecare no longer believed in in them." Many communities
kin?"
and without any excess of Darwin, who at least is as
crosses
find
Hutli, Btating
as
regards animals,?" Close
THE INDIAN MEDICAL GAZETTE.
106
interbreeding has perhaps been continued longer with sheep with cattle, but perhaps the nearest relations have not been so frequently matched,We have placed this sentence in italics, because it is important, and shows why numerous instances of particular flocks and herds may be cited cite them, as apparently in favour so as Hutk does of his argument. From animals passing to human beings, we find the Ptolemies referred to, who habitually practised incest by marrying their sisters, their neices, their mothers, and their cousins, and he attempts to show that these Ptolemies were singularly sharp-witted and not more subject to disease than would be expected from their luxurious habits. Cleopatra, Berenice, and others of the era are especially referred to. Then the Cambyses and Semiramis are brought on the carpet, and the Magians who habitually married their mothers! We cannot but consider these examples and the than
arguments deduced therefrom
as
somewhat
"
but
far fetched
throughout the book the reader is led into discussions and by references, which, like the shirt of Nessus, raise one continuous blister?over one's common sense epidermis. Of recent instances of the kind, the mutineers of the bounty are cited. But the fact of these mutineers increasing at a tolerably rapid rate when matched with native women appears to support the view that crosses are extraordinarily fertile; Irish localities, English villages, an idea which Huth denies. and Scotch glens, are also named, where the populations have irritated
years, and where no deterioration of race is with flocks and herds, so with these people ;
intermarried for visible.
But
as
it does not appear that near relatives have matched; and doubtless further enquiry would show, that matches are gener-
amongst such isolated communities, between the most distantly related families. Huth says there is no
ally made,
even
innate antipathy to marriage of very near kin, and the Ptolemies, the Cambyses, and various savage tribes are mentioned in support of the assertion. "The sole reason why we now prohibit these marriages, is that our fathers did so, and their fathers did so, before them." lized nations in which
by
law, and
it
some
seems
to
barrier us
Yet there ar?
against
no
incest is not
civi-
placed
that considerable force must be
attached to
a consensus so general. Custom is certainly sufficiently powerful, but we do not think that custom alone is sufficient to explain why the greater portion of the population of the world regard incest with something very like horror. It may be at once confessed, that the statistical evidence on worse than worththe results of marriage of near kin, if not less." is certainly not satisfactoi-y. But the same remark is applicable to both sides of question, and we fancy there are few medical men who will not be opposed to Huth's opinions. Fortunately we have no experience of the results of marriage between any more nearly related persons than cousins; but even at this distance the effects on offspring are not satisfactory. Beviewing the literature cf goitre and cretinism, of idiocy, epilepsy, and insanity, rickets, hydrocephalus, tubercular meningitis, and other diseases generally supposed to be of near relatives, Huth more prevalent among the offspring "
endeavours to
account
for these diseases
as
due to other causes.
We have not space, (neither is ifc necessary for our readers) to quote the opinions of medical authors on the origin of
such maladies, but it will be doubtless recollected that very
[Atoil 1, 1876.
acute medical observers do not
forget to add intermarriage as predisposing causes. Hutli seems to lose sight of the fact, that a predisposing cause is not an exciting cause ; and, because he cannot find direct and positive facts showing that, for instance, marriage of cousins excites idiocy, he refuses of the
one
believe that it exerts any influence. This is not a process reasoning which "will find favour in the medical world,
to
of
where
we are
accustomed to attach
its share in the But Huth the
marrying
to
each agency or influence,
to disease.
predisposition altogether loses sight of
near
kin.
of the great argument
It, is not
even
mentioned
against in
the
book.
And this is the intensification which almost any kind of perversion of nutrition derives from being common to both
parents.
Granted that two first cousins may marry, and botli
being healthy, may beget healthy offspring. is unhealthy of course that result would be both cousins
are
deny
one
cousin
likely.
If
tainted, there would be little chance of a But, it may be said, the same rule applies
healthy progeny. to others than cousins, and this is will not
If less
that disease of many
the common
again granted. Even Huth descriptions is hereditary,
"
expression is, runs in families." Therefore probability of cousins marrying being both tainted, is greater than the probability of the double taint in peonle who are not or,
as
the
cousins.
cousins, are
There may be tainted, and there may be non-tainted as
there may be tainted, and non-tainted persons, who But when one cousin is tainted, it will be
not cousins.
likely that the other cousin participates in the family failing, whatever that error may be. Even going no further than this, there is ample reason why the intermarriage of near re-
very
latives should be interdicted.
But our most accomplished proceed a great deal further. Possibly the opinions of the physiologist Carpenter will carry at least as much weight as those of the savant Huth, and Carpenter says,? It does not seem requisite for the production of very imperfect offspring from the intermarriage of near relatives that medical authors
"
any decided taint should exist in both parents, for the author's observations and enquiries lead him to conclude that the
own
personal or through the members (both male and female) of a particular family, causing them to be at once recognized as belonging to it, by those who
same
when there is any strong as is often seen to run
danger results idiosyncracy,
such
mental
have
been familiar with
other members.
This
liability
does
degree where the parents, although nearly related, differ widely in physical and in psychical characters through the predominance of elements which have been introduced by their non-related parents: as for example when a man strongly resembles his father rather than his mother, marries the daughter of his mother's brother, who on her part not exist to nearly the
resembles her
own
same
mother, rather than her father.
But the
previously cited gives warning that even here the family idiosyncracy may exist in a powerful degree, though in a latent form, and may seriously affect the constitution of the offspring.. It is quite as common to meet with atavism in the transmission of hereditary disease, as in the reproduction of family likeness." A most lamentable instance of the kind in a family, well known to the author, is quoted ; two first cousins possessing a strong family idiosyncracy, but no definite taint, having married, four children were born, each of which was distinguished by some marked defect of organization or perversion of function ; case
April 1,
THE CHOLERA OUTBREAK IN GO A BAG AN.
1876.]
being deaf and dumb, another scrofulous, a third idiotic, a epileptic. Howe in America, Bowdin in France, Mitchell in Scotland, Bemiss and Dally in England, investigators of the subject, are in accord with Carpenter, and it may be doubted one
fourth
if Huth's book will upset the conclusions of these authors. said
We have
enough
to show that Huth's book?" The
kin"?is worth attention, and we cannot even touch upon the thousand and one interesting subjects which
marriage
bear
on
of
near
the
subject.
We
will, however, give
the most
important
conclusion at which the author arrives, and which will probably be regarded as somewhat lame and impotent, and as
scarcely expended on the subject. It runs as follows That seeing the doubt, to say the least of it, which exists concerning the effects for harm of marriages between near kin, and on the other hand the certainty that, whenever and wherever marriage is impeded, a direct and proportionate impulse is given to immorality, it is advisable not to extend the prohibitions against marriage beyond the third collateral degree, and to permit all marriages of affinity, excepting those in the direct ascending or descending line." From the time of Solon and Lycurgus the wisest legislators have been sensible that it was of the highest consequence not to deify the caprices of Monarchs, and so we have escaped the example set us of old, by the Ptolemies and Cambyses referred to above. We now consider it unjust to render the felicity and feelings of thousands dependent on the whim of one. The King who should attempt it would soon assume the role of an exiled Emperor with his carpet bag, taking refuge in a London cab. Neither do we think it at all likely, that what the King would not be permitted to accomplish, will be carried by a pseudo-scientifio argument. If Hath be really in earnest when he strikes at the very roots of society, as the roots are The marriage of near kin," we are almost disassailed in that the confines of great ability and thankful feel to posed insanity are not always very far apart. Perhaps the author does not know that amongst some nations, the father, not the mother, is doctored when a baby is born ! And for this procedure we undertake to say we would bring arguments quite of near kin. The as good as are produced for the marriage to permit be advisable would it only reason we can see, why one which, strange to say, the author is of affinity, marriage does not give. It is only after the honeymoon, that we descend to the regions of fact, and confess that Lesbia is a slattern, and Angelina a scold. For although, as Milton asserts, the labor
warranting
"
"
love may refine the thoughts, and enlarge the heart, still the little teacher rather blinds the eyes. Marriage certainly, only too often takes the bloom off romance, and has been defined
going home by daylight after courtship's masquerade. Now marriages of close affinity would alter all this, and be clearly
as
in the favour of the male sex, who would be better able to
judge
what the fair enslaver
then be
quite
zed svstem.
such
a
leap
really
was.
in the dark,
as
Marriage it is under
We commend this argument to Huth's
would not our
civili-
disciples.
Cholera.?Severe outbreaks have recently been reported from the districts surrounding C alcutta, Bancoorah, Ranecguuge, Goalundo, Moorshetlnbad, and Serampore. One sharp outbreak I he has taken place in the town which we notice elsewhere. 3rd regiment of native infantry has had a serious attack en route from Cachar to Dinapore, the late showers of rain which all over Bengal seem to have have fallen
given
pretty generally
rise to these
epidemics.
107
were
not to accept
we are
induced to believe in Some
ence.
a more
physic and in other gospel truth," all we juvenile period of our exist"
as
has observed that
body
doubt at least "
of evidence both in
plenty
matters, that
a
clever
man
needs
must
in his life, all that he had hitherto learnt. Unrest" is indeed a portentous sign of the times, and we once
called upon to
believe without question standing still in aid of Joshua, than we are to place implicit confidence in the old-established theory To of malaria, which Dr. Oldham did his best to upset. believe either one or the other, would, in the opinion of many, are
no
now
more
the story of the
sun
be little less absurd than to accept the assertions of advertisers that all our tea is from China, that there is no starch in
ground rice, no pyroligneous acid in our vinegar, no barytes in our calomel, that the bark of the alder tree is never decocted into quinine, and that all the wine made in England is labelled British." Neither can it be denied that this prevailing unrest," or unbelief, has at least cleared the scientific atmosphere of much opacity, formerly obscuring the view as it should be observed. But, to use an Americanism, which, although perhaps vulgar, is nevertheless expressive, there is such a thing as, " heaping it up a little too mountainous." And this of late years has frequently been accomplished under a pseudo-scientific and popular garb, which, to say the least, is calculated to carry conviction to the minds of those only investigating one side of the subject, and which is also fraught with mischief, not only to the individual, but to the general public as well. Periodical literature abounds in such instan-
our
"
"
but
ces ;
volume devoted to the upset of established ideas, particularly when such ideas and customs are
a
and customs,
unobjectionable, is comparatively rarely met with. We have recently perused a newly published Alfred Henry Hutli, entitled?" The Marriage
work of
by near
kin considered with respect to the laws of nations, the results of experience, and the teachings of biology," which we feel
compelled
to
class
add to that
which,
cannot
we
desirable. there is
as
a
prevalent
Every
book "
likely
unbelief in
a
and to
matter in
but think, the status quo would be most knows that in life, as in backgammon,
one
cruel satisfaction in
a
produce harm,
to
unrest" and
hitting
a
blot in
our
neighbour's
game, and doubtless the author of the work referred to is
stranger to this very general feeling, for he says he hopes show
that the
reason
is not because
marriages
many nations have
they
prohibited
no
to
these
have observed any evil result ; crosses and without
that many communities has lived without any as
ot
excess
yet is
disease ; that the statistical evidence
worse
the animal
than worthless ; that
we
assertions
can,
in
seriatim,
It is of course
"
near
marriage
of
because our fathers believed
close an observer
manifestly impossi-
these
it is said, have lived without on
possess in
experiment
article of this kind, take up the author's otherwise we imagine it would not be
tions to the
But
we
an
diflioult to prove that
disease.
as
marriages,
ficial and often harmful.
ble, that
far
goes the evidence tends to confirm the that crosses are seldom bene-
kingdom
harmlessness of these
as
this head as
we
theories"?meaning the objecare no longer believed in in them." Many communities
kin?"
and without any excess of Darwin, who at least is as
crosses
find
Hutli, Btating
as
regards animals,?" Close
THE INDIAN MEDICAL GAZETTE.
106
interbreeding has perhaps been continued longer with sheep with cattle, but perhaps the nearest relations have not been so frequently matched,We have placed this sentence in italics, because it is important, and shows why numerous instances of particular flocks and herds may be cited cite them, as apparently in favour so as Hutk does of his argument. From animals passing to human beings, we find the Ptolemies referred to, who habitually practised incest by marrying their sisters, their neices, their mothers, and their cousins, and he attempts to show that these Ptolemies were singularly sharp-witted and not more subject to disease than would be expected from their luxurious habits. Cleopatra, Berenice, and others of the era are especially referred to. Then the Cambyses and Semiramis are brought on the carpet, and the Magians who habitually married their mothers! We cannot but consider these examples and the than
arguments deduced therefrom
as
somewhat
"
but
far fetched
throughout the book the reader is led into discussions and by references, which, like the shirt of Nessus, raise one continuous blister?over one's common sense epidermis. Of recent instances of the kind, the mutineers of the bounty are cited. But the fact of these mutineers increasing at a tolerably rapid rate when matched with native women appears to support the view that crosses are extraordinarily fertile; Irish localities, English villages, an idea which Huth denies. and Scotch glens, are also named, where the populations have irritated
years, and where no deterioration of race is with flocks and herds, so with these people ;
intermarried for visible.
But
as
it does not appear that near relatives have matched; and doubtless further enquiry would show, that matches are gener-
amongst such isolated communities, between the most distantly related families. Huth says there is no
ally made,
even
innate antipathy to marriage of very near kin, and the Ptolemies, the Cambyses, and various savage tribes are mentioned in support of the assertion. "The sole reason why we now prohibit these marriages, is that our fathers did so, and their fathers did so, before them." lized nations in which
by
law, and
it
some
seems
to
barrier us
Yet there ar?
against
no
incest is not
civi-
placed
that considerable force must be
attached to
a consensus so general. Custom is certainly sufficiently powerful, but we do not think that custom alone is sufficient to explain why the greater portion of the population of the world regard incest with something very like horror. It may be at once confessed, that the statistical evidence on worse than worththe results of marriage of near kin, if not less." is certainly not satisfactoi-y. But the same remark is applicable to both sides of question, and we fancy there are few medical men who will not be opposed to Huth's opinions. Fortunately we have no experience of the results of marriage between any more nearly related persons than cousins; but even at this distance the effects on offspring are not satisfactory. Beviewing the literature cf goitre and cretinism, of idiocy, epilepsy, and insanity, rickets, hydrocephalus, tubercular meningitis, and other diseases generally supposed to be of near relatives, Huth more prevalent among the offspring "
endeavours to
account
for these diseases
as
due to other causes.
We have not space, (neither is ifc necessary for our readers) to quote the opinions of medical authors on the origin of
such maladies, but it will be doubtless recollected that very
[Atoil 1, 1876.
acute medical observers do not
forget to add intermarriage as predisposing causes. Hutli seems to lose sight of the fact, that a predisposing cause is not an exciting cause ; and, because he cannot find direct and positive facts showing that, for instance, marriage of cousins excites idiocy, he refuses of the
one
believe that it exerts any influence. This is not a process reasoning which "will find favour in the medical world,
to
of
where
we are
accustomed to attach
its share in the But Huth the
marrying
to
each agency or influence,
to disease.
predisposition altogether loses sight of
near
kin.
of the great argument
It, is not
even
mentioned
against in
the
book.
And this is the intensification which almost any kind of perversion of nutrition derives from being common to both
parents.
Granted that two first cousins may marry, and botli
being healthy, may beget healthy offspring. is unhealthy of course that result would be both cousins
are
deny
one
cousin
likely.
If
tainted, there would be little chance of a But, it may be said, the same rule applies
healthy progeny. to others than cousins, and this is will not
If less
that disease of many
the common
again granted. Even Huth descriptions is hereditary,
"
expression is, runs in families." Therefore probability of cousins marrying being both tainted, is greater than the probability of the double taint in peonle who are not or,
as
the
cousins.
cousins, are
There may be tainted, and there may be non-tainted as
there may be tainted, and non-tainted persons, who But when one cousin is tainted, it will be
not cousins.
likely that the other cousin participates in the family failing, whatever that error may be. Even going no further than this, there is ample reason why the intermarriage of near re-
very
latives should be interdicted.
But our most accomplished proceed a great deal further. Possibly the opinions of the physiologist Carpenter will carry at least as much weight as those of the savant Huth, and Carpenter says,? It does not seem requisite for the production of very imperfect offspring from the intermarriage of near relatives that medical authors
"
any decided taint should exist in both parents, for the author's observations and enquiries lead him to conclude that the
own
personal or through the members (both male and female) of a particular family, causing them to be at once recognized as belonging to it, by those who
same
when there is any strong as is often seen to run
danger results idiosyncracy,
such
mental
have
been familiar with
other members.
This
liability
does
degree where the parents, although nearly related, differ widely in physical and in psychical characters through the predominance of elements which have been introduced by their non-related parents: as for example when a man strongly resembles his father rather than his mother, marries the daughter of his mother's brother, who on her part not exist to nearly the
resembles her
own
same
mother, rather than her father.
But the
previously cited gives warning that even here the family idiosyncracy may exist in a powerful degree, though in a latent form, and may seriously affect the constitution of the offspring.. It is quite as common to meet with atavism in the transmission of hereditary disease, as in the reproduction of family likeness." A most lamentable instance of the kind in a family, well known to the author, is quoted ; two first cousins possessing a strong family idiosyncracy, but no definite taint, having married, four children were born, each of which was distinguished by some marked defect of organization or perversion of function ; case
April 1,
THE CHOLERA OUTBREAK IN GO A BAG AN.
1876.]
being deaf and dumb, another scrofulous, a third idiotic, a epileptic. Howe in America, Bowdin in France, Mitchell in Scotland, Bemiss and Dally in England, investigators of the subject, are in accord with Carpenter, and it may be doubted one
fourth
if Huth's book will upset the conclusions of these authors. said
We have
enough
to show that Huth's book?" The
kin"?is worth attention, and we cannot even touch upon the thousand and one interesting subjects which
marriage
bear
on
of
near
the
subject.
We
will, however, give
the most
important
conclusion at which the author arrives, and which will probably be regarded as somewhat lame and impotent, and as
scarcely expended on the subject. It runs as follows That seeing the doubt, to say the least of it, which exists concerning the effects for harm of marriages between near kin, and on the other hand the certainty that, whenever and wherever marriage is impeded, a direct and proportionate impulse is given to immorality, it is advisable not to extend the prohibitions against marriage beyond the third collateral degree, and to permit all marriages of affinity, excepting those in the direct ascending or descending line." From the time of Solon and Lycurgus the wisest legislators have been sensible that it was of the highest consequence not to deify the caprices of Monarchs, and so we have escaped the example set us of old, by the Ptolemies and Cambyses referred to above. We now consider it unjust to render the felicity and feelings of thousands dependent on the whim of one. The King who should attempt it would soon assume the role of an exiled Emperor with his carpet bag, taking refuge in a London cab. Neither do we think it at all likely, that what the King would not be permitted to accomplish, will be carried by a pseudo-scientifio argument. If Hath be really in earnest when he strikes at the very roots of society, as the roots are The marriage of near kin," we are almost disassailed in that the confines of great ability and thankful feel to posed insanity are not always very far apart. Perhaps the author does not know that amongst some nations, the father, not the mother, is doctored when a baby is born ! And for this procedure we undertake to say we would bring arguments quite of near kin. The as good as are produced for the marriage to permit be advisable would it only reason we can see, why one which, strange to say, the author is of affinity, marriage does not give. It is only after the honeymoon, that we descend to the regions of fact, and confess that Lesbia is a slattern, and Angelina a scold. For although, as Milton asserts, the labor
warranting
"
"
love may refine the thoughts, and enlarge the heart, still the little teacher rather blinds the eyes. Marriage certainly, only too often takes the bloom off romance, and has been defined
going home by daylight after courtship's masquerade. Now marriages of close affinity would alter all this, and be clearly
as
in the favour of the male sex, who would be better able to
judge
what the fair enslaver
then be
quite
zed svstem.
such
a
leap
really
was.
in the dark,
as
Marriage it is under
We commend this argument to Huth's
would not our
civili-
disciples.
Cholera.?Severe outbreaks have recently been reported from the districts surrounding C alcutta, Bancoorah, Ranecguuge, Goalundo, Moorshetlnbad, and Serampore. One sharp outbreak I he has taken place in the town which we notice elsewhere. 3rd regiment of native infantry has had a serious attack en route from Cachar to Dinapore, the late showers of rain which all over Bengal seem to have have fallen
given
pretty generally
rise to these
epidemics.
107
