record should exist in print of the general averages, I give them, together with a brief account of the details of the experiment, in Appendix I to the present memoir. After the lecture had been published, it occurred to me that the grounds of my misgivings might be urged as objections to the general conclusions. I did not think them of moment, but as the inquiry had been surrounded with many small difficulties and matters of detail, it would be scarcely possible to give a brief and yet a full and adequate answer to such objections. Also, I was then blind to what I now perceive to be the simple explanation of the phenomenon, so I thought it better to say no more upon the subject until I should obtain independent evidence. It was anthropological evidence that I desired, caring only for the seeds as means of throwing light on heredity in man. I tried in vain for a long and weary time to obtain it in sufficient abundance, and my failure was a cogent motive, together with others, in inducing me to make an offer of prizes for Family Records, which was largely responded to, and furnished me last year with what I wanted. I especially guarded myself against making any allusion to this particular inquiry in my prospectus, lest a bias should be given to the returns. I now can securely contemplate the possibility of the records of height having been frequently drawn up in a careless fashion, because no amount of unbiassed inaccuracy can account for the results, contrasted in their values but concurrent in their significance, that are derived from comparisons between different groups of the returns. An analysis of the Records fully confirms and goes far beyond the conclusions I obtained from the seeds. It gives the numerical value of the regression towards mediocrity in the case of human stature, as from 1 to with unexpected coherence and precision [see Plate IX, fig. (a)], and it supplies me with the class of facts I wanted to investigate-the degrees of family likeness in different degrees of kinship, and the steps through which special family peculiarities become merged into the typical characteristics of the race at large. My data consisted of the heights of 930 adult children and of their respective parentages, 205 in number. In every case I transmuted the female statures to their corresponding male equivalents and used them in their transmuted form, so that no objection grounded on the sexual difference of stature need be raised when I speak of averages. The factor I used was 1.08, which is equivalent to adding a little less than one-twelfth to each female height. It differs a very little from the factors employed by other anthropologists, who, moreover, differ a trifle between themselves; anyhow, it suits my data better than 107 or 109. The final result is not of a kind to be affected by these minute details, for it happened that, owing to a mistaken direction, the computer to whom I first entrusted the figures used a somewhat different factor, yet the result came out closely the same. I shall now explain with fulness why I chose stature for the TABLE I. NUMBER OF ADULT CHILDREN OF VARIOUS STATURES BORN OF 205 MID-PARENTS OF VARIOUS STATURES. (All Female heights have been multiplied by 1·08). Heights of the Adult Children. Total Number of Medians. Below 62.2 63.2 642 65.2 66.2 67.2 68.2 69.2 70.2 71.2 72.2 73.2 Above 5 1 2 1 14 1 : 32 59 48 117 138 120 167 99 64 41 17 14 928 205 66.3 67 8 67.9 67.7 67.9 68 3 68.5 69.0 69.0 70.0 70-0 Heights of the Midparents in inches. Above : NOTE. In calculating the Medians, the entries have been taken as referring to the middle of the squares in which they stand. The reason why the headings run 62:2, 632, &c., instead of 625, 635, &c., is that the observations are unequally distributed between 62 and 63, 63 and 64, &c., there being a strong bias in favour of integral inches. After careful consideration, I concluded that the headings, as adopted, best satisfied the conditions. This inequality was not apparent in the case of the Mid-parents. 72.5 71.5 70.5 69.5 shortness or tallness. There are undoubtedly sexual preferences for moderate contrast in height, but the marriage choice is guided by so many and more important considerations that questions of stature appears to exert no perceptible influence upon it. This is by no means my only inquiry into this subject, but, as regards the present data, my test lay in dividing the 205 male parents and the 205 female parents each into three groups-T, M, and S-that is, tall, medium, and short (medium male measurement being taken as 67 inches and upwards to 70 inches), and in counting the number of marriages in each possible combination between them (see Table III). The result was that men and women of contrasted heights, short and tall or tall and short, married just about as frequently as men and women of similar heights, both tall or both short; there were 32 cases of the one to 27 of the other. In applying the law of probabilities to investigations into heredity of stature, we may therefore regard the married folk as couples picked out of the general population at haphazard. The advantages of stature as a subject in which the simple laws of heredity may be studied will now be understood. It is a nearly constant value that is frequently measured and recorded, and its discussion is little entangled with considerations of nurture, of the survival of the fittest, or of marriage selection. We have only to consider the mid-parentage and not to trouble ourselves about the parents separately. The statistical variations of stature are extremely regular, so much so that their general conformity with the results of calculations based on the abstract law of frequency of error is an accepted fact by anthropologists. I have made much use of the properties of that law in cross-testing my various conclusions, and always with success. For example, the measure of variability (say the "probable error") of the system of midparental heights, ought, on the suppositions justified in the preceding paragraphs, to be equal to that of the system of adult male heights, multiplied into the square root of 2; this inference is shown to be correct by direct observation. The only drawback to the use of stature is its small variability. One-half of the population with whom I dealt, varied less than 1·7 inch from the average of all of them, and one-half of the offspring of similar mid-parentages varied less than 1.5 inch from the average of their own heights. On the other hand, the precision of my data is so small, partly due to the uncertainty in many cases whether the height was measured with the shoes on or off, that I find by means of an independent inquiry that each observation, taking one with another, is liable to an error that as often as not exceeds of an inch. The law that I wish to establish refers primarily to the inheritance of different degrees of tallness and shortness, and only secondarily to that of absolute stature. That is to say, it refers to measurements made from the crown of the head to the level of mediocrity, upwards or downwards as the case may be, and not from the crown of the head to the ground. In the population with which I deal the level of mediocrity is 68 inches (without shoes). The same law applying with sufficient closeness both to tallness and shortness, we may include both under the single head of deviations, and I shall call any particular deviation a "deviate." By the use of this word and that of "mid-parentage" we can define the law of regression very briefly. It is that the height-deviate of the offspring is, on the average, two-thirds of the height-deviate of its mid-parentage. Plate IX, fig. a, gives a graphic expression of the data upon which this law is founded. It will there be seen that the relations between the statures of the children and their mid-parents, which are perfectly simple when referred to the scale of deviates at the right hand of the plate, do not admit of being briefly phrased when they are referred to the scale of statures at its left. If this remarkable law had been based only on experiments on the diameters of the seeds, it might well be distrusted until confirmed by other inquiries. If it were corroborated merely by a comparatively small number of observations on human stature, some hesitation might be expected before its truth could be recognised in opposition to the current belief that the child tends to resemble its parents. But more can be urged than this. It is easily to be shown that we ought to expect filial regression, and that it should amount to some constant fractional part of the value of the mid-parental deviation. It is because this explanation confirms the previous observations made both on seeds and on men that I feel justified on the present occasion in drawing attention to this elementary law. The explanation of it is as follows. The child inherits partly from his parents, partly from his ancestry. Speaking generally. the further his genealogy goes back, the more numerous and varied will his ancestry become, until they cease to differ from any equally numerous sample taken at haphazard from the race at large. Their mean stature will then be the same as that of the race; in other words, it will be mediocre. Or, to put the same fact into another form, the most probable value of the mid-ancestral deviates in any remote generation is zero. For the moment let us confine our attention to the remote ancestry and to the mid-parentages, and ignore the intermediate generations. The combination of the zero of the ancestry with the deviate of the mid-parentage is the combination of nothing with something, and the result resembles that of pouring a uniform proportion of pure water into a vessel of wine. It dilutes the wine to a constant fraction of its original alcoholic strength, whatever that strength may have been. The intermediate generations will each in their degree do the same. The mid-deviate in any one of them will have a value intermediate between that of the mid-parentage and the zero value of the ancestry. Its combination with the mid-parental deviate will be as if, not pure water, but a mixture of wine and water in some definite proportion, had been poured into the wine. The process throughout is one of proportionate dilutions, and therefore the joint effect of all of them is to weaken the original wine in a constant ratio. We have no word to express the form of that ideal and composite progenitor, whom the offspring of similar mid-parentages most nearly resemble, and from whose stature their own respective heights diverge evenly, above and below. If he, she, or it, is styled the "generant" of the group, then the law of regression makes it clear that parents are not identical with the generants of their own offspring. The average regression of the offspring to a constant fraction of their respective mid-parental deviations, which was first observed in the diameters of seeds, and then confirmed by observations on human stature, is now shown to be a perfectly reasonable law which might have been deductively foreseen. It is of so simple a character that I have made an arrangement with pulleys and weights by which the probable average height of the children of known parents can be mechanically reckoned (see Plate IX, fig. b). This law tells heavily against the full hereditary transmission of any gift, as only a few of many children would resemble their midparentage. The more exceptional the amount of the gift, the more exceptional will be the good fortune of a parent who has a son who equals, and still more if he has a son who overpasses him in that respect. The law is even-handed; it levies the same heavy succession-tax on the transmission of badness as well as of goodness. If it discourages the extravagant expectations of gifted parents that their children will inherit all their powers, it no less discountenances extravagant fears that they will inherit all their weaknesses and diseases. The converse of this law is very far from being its numerical opposite. Because the most probable deviate of the son is only two-thirds that of his mid-parentage, it does not in the least follow that the most probable deviate of the mid-parentage is, or 11 that of the son. The number of individuals in a population who |