THE CROSS-BREEDING OF RACES
We have seen that there is no simple rule as to the "mating" of
individuals of a species with individuals of another closely allied
but distinct species. Such mating very rarely comes about in natural
conditions, but man by his interference sometimes succeeds in procuring
"hybrids" between allied species. Hybrids between species belonging to
groups so different as to be distinguished by zoologists as distinct
"families" or "orders" are quite unknown under any circumstances.
Such remoteness of natural character and structure as is indicated by
the two great divisions of hoofed mammals–the even-toed (including
sheep, cattle, deer, antelopes, giraffes, pigs and camels), and the
odd-toed (including tapirs, rhinoceroses, horses, asses and zebras)
is an absolute bar to inter-breeding. So, too, the carnivora (cats,
dogs, bears and seals, and smaller kinds) are so remote in their nature
from the rabbits, hares and rats–called "the rodents"–that no mating
between members of the one and the other of these groups has ever been
observed, either in nature or under artificial conditions.
Even when individuals of closely allied species mate with one another
it is a very rare occurrence that the hybrids so produced ripen their
ova and sperms so as to be capable of carrying on the hybrid race,
though sometimes they do ripen them and breed. The great naturalist
Alfred Wallace, in his most valuable and readable book called
"Darwinism," expressed the opinion that the apparent failure of hybrid
races to perpetuate themselves by breeding was to a large extent due
to the small number of individuals used in experiments on this matter,
and the in-and-in breeding which was the consequence. One of the great
generalizations established by Darwin is that in-and-in breeding is,
as a rule, resisted in all animals and plants, and leads when it
occurs to a dying-out of the inbred race by resulting feebleness and
infertility. A large part of Darwin's work consisted in demonstrating
the devices existing in the natural structure and qualities of plants
and animals for securing cross-fertilization among individuals of the
same species but of different stock. Both extremes seem to be barred
in nature–namely, the inter-breeding of stocks so diverse in structure
and quality as to be what we call "distinct species," and again the
inter-breeding of individuals of the same immediate parentage or near
cousinship. What seems to be favoured by the natural structure and
qualities of the plant or the animal is that it shall only breed within
a certain group–the species–and shall within that group avoid constant
self-fertilization or fertilization by near cousins. Thus we find
numerous cases in which, though the same flower has both pollen and
ovules, and might fertilize itself, the visits of insects (specially
made use of by mechanisms in the flower) carry the pollen of one flower
to the ovules of another and to flowers on separate plants growing
at a distance. It is necessary to note that there are, nevertheless,
self-fertilizing flowers, and also self-fertilizing lower animals,
the special conditions of which require and have received careful
examination and consideration, upon which I cannot now enter.
In relation to the question of the possibility of establishing hybrids
between various species experimentally, I must (before going on to the
cognate question of "mongrels") tell of an interesting suggestion made
to me by my friend Professor Alphonse Milne-Edwards not long before he
died, and never published by him. He was director of the Jardin des
Plantes in Paris, where there is a menagerie of living beasts as well
as a botanic garden and great museum collections and laboratories.
He held it to be probable, as many physiologists would agree, that
the fertilization of the egg of one species by the sperm of another,
even a remotely related one, is ultimately prevented by a chemical
incompatibility–chemical in the sense that the highly complex molecular
constitution of such bodies as the anti-toxins and serums with which
physiologists are beginning to deal is "chemical"–and that all the
other and secondary obstacles to fertilization can be overcome or
evaded in the course of experiment. He proposed to inject one species
by "serums" extracted from the other, in such a way as seemed most
likely to bring the chemical state of their reproductive elements into
harmony, that is to say, into a condition in which they should not
be actively antagonistic but admit of fusion and union. He proposed,
by the exchange of living or highly organized fluids (by means of
injection or transfusion) between a male and female of separate
species, to assimilate the chemical constitution of one to that of the
other, and thus possibly so to affect their reproductive elements that
the one could tolerate and fertilize the other. The suggestion is not
unreasonable, but would require a long series of experiments in which
the possibility of producing such "assimilation," even to a small
extent and in respect of less complex processes than those ultimately
aimed at, would have to be, first of all, established. My friend did
not live to commence this investigation, but it is possible that some
day we may see the obstacle to the union of ovum and sperm of species,
which are to some extent allied, removed in this way by transfusion or
injection of important fluids from the one into the other.
We must not lose sight of the fact, in the midst of these various
and diverging observations about the fertilization of the ova of one
species by sperms of another species, that there is such a thing as
"parthenogenesis," or virgin-birth. In some of the insects and lower
forms of animals the egg-cell habitually and regularly develops and
gives rise to a new individual without being fertilized at all. And in
other cases by special treatment, such as rubbing with a brush, or in
the case of marine animals by addition of certain salts to the water
in which the eggs are floating–or, again, in the case of the eggs of
the common frog by gently scratching them with a needle–the eggs which
usually and regularly require to be penetrated by and fused with a
spermatozoon or sperm-filament before they will develop, proceed to
develop into complete new individuals without the action upon them
of any spermatozoon. In such marine animals as the sea-urchins or
sea-eggs it has been found that the eggs deposited in pure sea-water,
though they would die and decompose if left there alone, can be made to
develop and proceed on their growth by the addition to the sea-water of
the sperm filaments of a star-fish (the feather star or comatula). The
spermatozoa or sperm-filaments do not, however, in this case fuse with
the egg-cells. They mechanically pierce the egg-coat, but contribute no
substance to the embryo into which the egg develops. They have merely
served, like the scratch of a needle on the frog's egg and the brushing
of insects' eggs, to start the egg on its growth, to "stimulate" it and
set changes going. It appears thus that the fertilizing sperm-filaments
of organisms generally have two separate and very important influences
upon the egg-cells with which they fuse. The one is to stimulate
the egg and start the changes of embryonic growth; the other is
to contribute some living material from the male parent to the new
individual arising from the growth and shaping of the egg-cell. The
first influence can be exercised without the second, as is seen in
the case of the eggs of some sea-urchins stimulated to growth by the
spermatozoa of some star-fishes. It happens that these marine animals
are convenient for study and experiment because their eggs are small
and transparent and that they and the spermatozoa are freely passed
into the sea-water at the breeding season, in which the fertilization
of the eggs takes place.
When these facts are considered we have to admit that in the mating
of two species which will not regularly and naturally breed together,
there may be a limited action of the spermatic element which may
stimulate the egg to development without contributing by fusion in
the regular way to the actual substance of the young so produced,
or only contributing an amount insufficient to produce a full and
normal development of the hybrid young. Such cases not improbably
sometimes occur in higher animals, though they have not been, as yet,
shown to exist except in the experiments with sea-urchins' eggs and
feather-star's sperm.
In all animals and plants, but especially in domesticated and
cultivated stocks or strains, varieties arise which, by natural or
artificial separation, breed apart, and give rise to what are called
"races." Such races in natural conditions may become species. Species
are races or groups of individuals, which, by long estrangement (not
necessarily local isolation) from the parent stock and by adaptation
to special conditions of life, have become more or less "stable"–that
is, permanent and unchanging in the conditions to which they have
become adapted. They acquire by one device or another the habit of
not breeding with the stock from which they originally diverged–a
repugnance which may be overcome by human contrivance or by natural
accident, but is, nevertheless, an effective and real quality.
Distinct forms, which have not arrived at the stability and separation
characteristic of species, are spoken of as "races," or "varieties."
It is very generally the case that the "races" of one species can
inter-breed freely with one another, and with the original stock, when
it still exists. Comparatively little is known as to the behaviour
of wild or naturally-produced "races." Practically all our views on
the subject of "races" and their inter-breeding are derived from our
observation of the immense number and range of "races" and "breeds"
produced by man–as farmer, fancier, and horticulturist. It has been
generally received as a rule, that the various races produced in the
farm or garden by breeding from a species, will inter-breed freely, and
produce offspring which are fertile. A special and important series of
races, in which human purpose and voluntary selection necessarily have
a leading part, are the races of man.
The offspring of parents of two different races is called a mongrel,
whilst the term "hybrid" has been of late limited, for the sake of
convenience, to the offspring of parents of two different species.
Mongrels, it has been generally held, are fertile–often more fertile
than pure-bred individuals whose parents are both of the same race,
whilst "hybrids" are contrasted with them, in being infertile. We have
seen that infertility is not an absolute rule in the case of hybrids,
and it appears that there is also a source of error in the observations
which lead to the notion that "mongrels" are always fertile. The fact
is that observations on this matter have nearly always been made with
domesticated animals and plants which are, of course, selected and
bred by man on account of their fertility, and thus are exceptionally
characterized by fertility, which is transmitted in an exceptional
degree to the races or varieties which are experimentally inter-bred,
and, consequently, may be expected to produce fertile mongrels. Alfred
Russel Wallace insisted upon this fact, and pointed out that in a few
cases colour varieties of a given species of plant have been found to
be incapable of inter-breeding, or only produce very few "mongrels."
This has been established in the case of two dissimilarly-coloured
varieties of mullein. Also the red and the blue pimpernel (the poor
man's weather-glass, Anagallis), which are classed by botanists as two
varieties of one species, have been found after repeated trials to
be definitely incapable of inter-breeding. Wallace insists in regard
to crossing, that some degree of difference favours fertility, but a
little more tends to infertility. We must remember that the fertility
of both plants and animals is very easily upset. Changed conditions of
life–such as domestication–may lead (we do not know why) to complete
or nearly complete infertility; and, again, "change of air," or of
locality, has an extraordinary and not-as-yet-explained effect on
fertility.
"Oh, the little more and how much it is!
And the little less, and what worlds away!"
Infertile horses sent from their native home to a different climate
(as, for instance, from Scotland to Newmarket) become fertile. A
judicious crossing of varieties or races threatened with infertility
will often lead to increased vigour and fertility in the new
generation, just as change of locality will produce such a result.
Physiological processes which are not obvious and cannot be exactly
estimated or measured are then, we must conclude, largely connected
with the question of sterility and fertility. Mr. Darwin has collected
facts which go far to prove that colour (as in the case of the black
pigs of Virginia, which I cited in Chapter X.), instead of being
a trifling and unimportant character, as was supposed by the older
naturalists, is really one of great significance, often correlated
with important constitutional differences. It is pointed out by Alfred
Wallace that in all the recorded cases in which a decided infertility
occurs between varieties (or races) of the same species of plants (such
as those just cited), those varieties are distinguished by a difference
of colour. He gives reasons for thinking that the correlation of colour
with infertility which has been detected in several cases in plants may
also extend to animals in a state of nature. The constant preference
of animals–even mere varieties of dog, sheep, horses, and pigeons–for
their like, has been well established by observation. Colour is one of
the readiest appeals to the eye in guiding animals in such selection
and association, and is connected with deep-seated constitutional
qualities. "Birds of a feather flock together" is a popular statement
confirmed by the careful observation of naturalists. Thus we arrive at
some indication of features which may determine the inter-breeding, or
the abstention from inter-breeding, of diverse races sprung from one
original stock. The "colour bar" is not merely the invention of human
prejudice, but already exists in wild plants and animals.
We now come to the questions, the assertions, the beliefs, and the acts
concerning the inter-breeding of human races, to the consideration of
which I have been preparing the way. The dog-fancier has generally a
great contempt for "mongrels." Breeders generally dislike accidental
crosses, because they interfere with the purpose which the breeder
has in view of producing animals or plants of a quality, form, and
character which he has determined on before-hand. This interference
with his purpose seems to be the explanation of beliefs and statements,
to the prejudice of "mongrels." Really, as is well known to great
breeders and horticulturists, a determined and selective crossing of
breeds is the very foundation of the breeder's art, and there is no
reason to suppose that a "mongrel" is necessarily, or even probably,
inferior in vigour or in qualities which are advantageous in the
struggle for life in "natural"–that is to say, "larger"–conditions
of an animal's or plant's life; not those limited conditions for
which the breeder intends his products. Indeed, the very opposite
is the case. In nature, as Mr. Darwin showed, there are innumerable
contrivances to ensure the cross-breeding of allied but distinct
strains. Dog-owners who are not exclusively bent upon possessing a
dog which shows in a perfect way the "points" of a breed favoured by
the fashion of the moment, or fitting it for some special employment,
know very well that a "mongrel" may often exhibit finer qualities
of intelligence, or endurance, than those exhibited by a dog of
pure-bred "race." And the very "races" which are spoken of to-day as
"pure-bred," or "thoroughbred," have (as is well known) been produced
as "mongrels"–that is to say, by crossing or mating individuals of
previously-existing distinct and pure breeds. The history of many such
"mongrel breeds," now spoken of as "thoroughbred," is well known.
The English racehorse was gradually produced by the "mongrelizing,"
or cross-breeding, of several breeds or races–the English warhorse,
the Arab, the Barb. A very fine mongrel stock having at last been
obtained, it was found, or, at any rate, was considered to be
demonstrated, that no further improvement (for the purposes aimed
at, namely, flat-racing) could be effected by introducing the blood
of other stock. The offspring of the "mongrels" Herod, Matchem, and
Eclipse accordingly became established as "the" English racehorse, and
thenceforward was mated only within its own race or stock, and was kept
pure or "thoroughbred." Another well-known mongrel breed which is now
kept pure, or nearly so, is that of the St. Bernard's dog, a blend of
Newfoundland, Bloodhound, and English Mastiff.
Often the word "mongrel" is limited in its use to signify an
undesired or undesirable result of the cross-breeding of individuals
of established races. But this is not quite fair to mongrels in
general, since, as we have seen, the name really refers only to the
fact they are crosses between two breeds. When they happen to suit
some artificial and arbitrary requirement they are favoured, and made
the starting-point of a new breed, and kept pure in their own line;
but when they do not fit some capricious demand of the breeder they
are sneered at and condemned, although they may be fine and capable
animals. No doubt some mongrels between races differing greatly from
one another, or having some peculiar mixture of incompatible qualities
the exact nature of which we have not ascertained, are wanting in
vigour, and cannot be readily established as a new breed. In nature
the success of the mongrel depends on whether or not its mixture of
qualities makes it fitter than others to the actual conditions of its
life, and able to survive in the competition for food and place. In
man's breeding operations with varieties of domesticated animals and
"cultivated" plants, the survival of the mongrel depends upon its
fitting some arbitrary standard applied by man, who destroys those
which do not suit his fancy, and selects for survival and continued
breeding those which do.
What is called "miscegenation," or the inter-breeding of human races,
must be looked at from both these points of view. We require to know
how far, if at all, the mixed or mongrel offspring of a human race A
with a human race B is really inferior to either of the original stocks
A and B, judged by general capacity and life-preserving qualities in
the varied conditions of the great area of the habitable globe. And
how far an arbitrary or fanciful standard is set up by human races,
similar to that set up by the "fancier" or cultivator of breeds of
domestic animals. The matter is complicated by the fact that what we
loosely speak of as "races" of man are of very various degrees of
consanguinity or nearness to one another in blood, that is, in stock or
in ultimate ancestry. It is also complicated by the fact that we cannot
place any reliance upon the antipathies or preferences shown by the
general sentiment of a race in this (or other matters) as necessarily
indicating what is beneficial for humanity in general or for the
immediate future of any section of it. Nor have we any assurance that
what is called "sexual selection"–the preference or taste in the matter
of choosing a mate–is among human beings necessarily anything of
greater importance–so far as the prosperity of a race or of humanity in
general is concerned–than a mere caprice or a meaningless persistence
of the human mind in favouring a choice which is habitual and
traditional. I have referred to this point again in the last paragraph
of this chapter.
In regard to marriage between individuals of different European
nationalities, a certain amount of unwillingness exists on the part of
both men and women which cannot be ascribed to any deep-seated inborn
antipathy, but is due to a mistrust of the unknown "foreigner," which
very readily disappears on acquaintance, or may arise from dislike
of the laws and customs of a foreign people. English, French, Dutch,
Scandinavians, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Italians and Spaniards have
no deep-rooted prejudices on the subject, and readily intermarry when
circumstances bring them into association. Though the Jews by their
present traditional practice are opposed to marriage with those not
of their faith, there is no effective aversion of a racial kind to
such unions, and in early times they have been very frequent. During
the "captivity" in Babylon and again after the "dispersal" by the
Romans, the original Jewish race was practically swamped by mixture
with cognate Oriental races who adopted the Jewish faith. So far from
there being inborn prejudice against intermarriage of the peoples above
cited, it is very generally admitted that such "miscegenation" leads
frequently to the foundation of families of fine quality. The blend is
successful, as may be seen in the number of prominent Englishmen who
have Huguenot, German, Dutch, or Jewish blood in their veins.
But when we come to the intermarriage of members of the white race of
Europe with members of either the negroid (black) race or of the yellow
and red mongoloid race, a much greater and more deeply-rooted aversion
is found, and this is extended even to members of the Caucasian race
who, possibly by prehistoric mixture with negro-like races, are very
dark-skinned, as is the case with the Aryan population in India and
Polynesia. It is a very difficult matter; in fact, it seems to me not
possible in our present knowledge of the facts, to decide whether
there is a natural inborn or congenital disinclination to the marriage
of the white race, especially of the Anglo-Saxon branch of it, with
"coloured" people, or whether the whole attitude (as I am inclined to
think) is one of "pride of race," an attitude which can be defended
on the highest grounds, though it may lead to erroneous beliefs as to
the immediate evil results of such unions, and to an unreasonable and
cruel treatment both of the individuals so intermarrying and of their
offspring. There is little or no evidence of objection to mixed unions
on the part of the coloured people with whites, no evidence of physical
dislike to the white man or white woman, but, on the contrary, ready
acquiescence.
A curious aversion to marriages with whites on the part both of North
American Indians and of negroes is, however, recorded from time to
time in the official reports of the United States Government.
Two beliefs about such unions are more or less prevalent among white
men in the regions where they not infrequently occur. Neither of these
beliefs is supported by anything like conclusive evidence. The one
is that such unions lead to the production of relatively infertile
offspring; the mixed breed or stock is said to die out after a few
(some seven or eight) generations. It is, however, the fact that the
circumstances under which this occurs suggest that it is not due to
a natural and necessary infertility. The other assertion is that the
offspring of parents–one of white race and the other of black, yellow
or brown–tend by some strange fatality to inherit the bad qualities of
both races and the good qualities of neither. This is a case to which
must be applied the saying, "Give a dog a bad name and hang him."
The white man in North America, in India, and in New Zealand desires
the increase and prosperity of his own race. Like the fancier set on
the production of certain breeds of domesticated animals, he has no
toleration for a "mongrel." In so far as it is true that miscegenation
(marriage of white and coloured race) produces a stock which rapidly
dies out–this is due to the adverse conditions, the opposition and
hostility to which the mixed race is exposed by the attitude of the
dominant white race. To the same cause is due the development of
ignoble and possibly dangerous characteristics in the unfortunate
offspring of these marriages more frequently than in those who find
their natural place and healthy up-bringing either in the white or
the coloured sections of the community. The "half-breed" is in some
countries inexorably rejected by the race of his or her white parent
and forced to take up an equivocal association with the coloured race.
That some, at any rate, of the evils attributed to "miscegenation" are
due to the baneful influence of "pride of race" is evident from the
fact that the Portuguese (with the exception of a small aristocratic
class) have not since the early days of the fourteenth century,
perhaps in consequence of established association with the Moorish
and other North African races, shown that pride of race and aversion
to mixture with dark-skinned races which is so strong a feature in
the Anglo-Saxons, their successors and rivals as colonists. The
long-standing admixture of black blood in the Portuguese population
before the colonization of South America, has led to a toleration on
the part of the Portuguese colonists of "miscegenation," both with
Indians and the liberated descendants of imported negro slaves. The
consequence is that in Brazil there is no condemnation of black blood;
children of mixed parentage and of coloured race attend the same
schools as those of European blood, and freely associate with them.
There is no notion that that portion of the population which is of
mixed negro, Indian, and white blood is less vigorous or fertile than
the unmixed, nor that vice and feebleness are the characteristics of
the former, whilst virtue and capacity belong to the latter.
The determined hostility of the Anglo-Saxon race in North America and
in British India to "miscegenation" is in the case of the United States
to be explained by the peculiar relation of a large slave population
in the Southern States to a pure white slave-owning race: whilst in
India we have a handful of white men temporarily stationed as rulers
of millions of "natives," but never accepting India as their home. The
attitude of the Anglo-Saxon race to the North American Indians, and
also to the Maoris of New Zealand, has never been so extreme in the
matter of miscegenation as it has been to negroid people and to the
very different though dark-skinned people of the East. In support of
that opinion may be cited the fact that some of "the first families of
Virginia" are proud of their descent from Pocahontes, the Algonkian
"Princess" who married the Englishman Rolfe. In New Zealand there are
many families of mixed Anglo-Saxon and Maori blood. Though they are not
ostracized, as are the half-breeds of negro blood in the United States,
there is a firm tendency to relegate the half-breeds in New Zealand
to the Maori section of the population, which it must be remembered
includes some of the richest and most prosperous landowners in the
colony.
It may be questioned whether there is in this matter a greater "pride
of race" among Anglo-Saxons than among other Northern European peoples.
Neither the French nor the Germans have established great colonies
like the English, nor undertaken the administration of a huge Eastern
Empire, and have, therefore, not shown what attitude they would adopt
under such circumstances. The tolerance and easy-going humanitarianism
of the French in relation to "miscegenation" in their dependencies in
past times has never had the significance or practical importance which
it would have possessed in the English Colonies and in the great Indian
Empire.
There is, on account of the sporadic and exceptional occurrence of
modern instances, no information of any value as to the results of
mixture of other races of man. In early times and among more primitive
or less civilized peoples there appears to have been, when immigration
or conquest gave the opportunity, no obstacle to a free intermixture of
an incoming race with the natives of an invaded territory. The "pride
of race" has, nevertheless, throughout historic time been a frequent
factor in the adjustment of populations of diverse races, and though
"colour" has been a frequent "test" or symbol of the superior and
exclusive race, it has not been the only characteristic exalted to such
importance. Such "pride of race" has frequently excluded the members of
a closely allied but conquered racial group from intermarriage with the
conquerors, and has only disappeared after centuries of persistence.
The term "blue blood" is interesting in this connection. It is the
"saing d'azure" of the Gothic invaders, the conquerors of the Iberian
and Moorish people of Spain. It refers not to any "blueness" of the
blood itself, such as distinguishes veinous from arterial blood, but
to the blue colour of the veins as seen through the colourless skin of
a northern race (the Goths), as compared with the invisibility of the
veins when the skin is rendered more or less opaque by a brown pigment,
as in the Moors and the swarthy Iberians.
Among the people of Western Europe marriage has assumed more and more
a character which is almost unknown in the rest of the world. Whatever
the future may be in regard to this matter, there is no doubt possible
that the place given to women in Western Europe by the ideals of
chivalry and the practice of the northern race (which has so largely
displaced the traditions of the Roman Empire) has established a
relation of the sexes in which marriage and consequent parentage have
ceased to be regarded as a mere regularization of animal desire and
appetite. The accepted, but not always consciously recognized, view
of marriage in Western Europe is that the union so sanctioned and the
families thereby produced should be the result not of the mere physical
necessity of irresponsible victims of an impulse common to all animals,
but the outcome of the deliberate choice of man and woman attracted to
one another by sympathy, understanding and reciprocal admiration, based
upon knowledge of character, mental gifts and aspirations, as well as
upon bodily charm. A rarely-expressed but none the less deeply-seated
conviction exists that from such unions children of the finest nature,
nurtured in circumstances most likely to make them worthy members of
the community, will be born and reared. It is this conviction which
leads to, or at any rate endorses, the exclusiveness which is described
as "pride of race." The Anglo-Saxon man and equally the Anglo-Saxon
woman (as well as the allied races of neighbouring nationalities)
recognize a responsibility, a race duty, resulting from accumulated
tradition, the heirloom of long ages of family life, which causes the
man to be ashamed of, and the woman to shrink with instinctive horror
from, union with an individual of a remote race with whom there can be
no real sympathy, no intimate understanding. That seems to me to be the
explanation and the justification of the "colour bar."
In relation to the probable effectiveness of sexual selection among
uncivilized peoples in favouring and maintaining a particular type or
form of features, hair, etc., characteristic of the race, independently
of the life-preserving value of such qualities, I may mention, before
quitting this difficult but strangely fascinating subject, a fact
observed by a traveller in Africa, and related to me by him. Other
similar facts are on record. Among the negroes employed as "porters"
by my friend, some thirty in number, was one who had a narrow aquiline
nose and thin lips. He was as black and as woolly-haired as any of
them, but would if of fair complexion have been regarded by Europeans
as a very handsome, fine-featured man. Such cases are not uncommon
in parts of Africa, where probably an unrecognized mixture with Arab
or Hamite blood has occurred. My friend expected this man to be a
favourite, on account of what to him appeared to be "good looks," with
the girls of the villages at which he camped during a three months'
journey. At every such village, as they journeyed on, the travellers
were received with joy and good nature. The negro porters were fêted
and made much of by the young women. But one alone was unpopular and
regarded with ridicule and dislike. This was the handsome negro with
the fine, well-modelled nose and beautiful European lips. The black
beauties turned their backs on him, in spite of his amiable character
and kindly overtures. They invariably and by open confession preferred
the men with the thickest lips, the broadest noses, and the most
thoroughly (as we should say) degraded prognathous appearance and
disgusting expression. Hence no doubt the young negresses were likely
to perpetuate in their offspring the features which are characteristic
of their race, and hence it is probable that mere capricious sexual
selection of individuals most completely conforming to a preferred
type–irrespective of the value of the features preferred–may have great
effect in both the selection and the maintenance of the peculiarities
of the type. Dark skin may thus have been selected, until it became
actually black; a slight curling of the hair, until it became woolly;
thickish lips and broadish nose, until they became excessive in
thickness and breadth.