If another proof were necessary of the facility with which human
groups intercross, it might be found in one of those testimonies the
value of which is undisputed because they give the result of a daily
experience. In 1861, the Californian legislature declared that any
white person convicted of having cohabited with or married a Negro,
Mulatto, Chinese or Indian, had forfeited all his rights, and became
subject to all the constitutional incapacities imposed upon men of
colour. The local press announced very plainly that the object of
this measure was the prevention of the fusion and amalgamation of the
races.
The Californian legislature acted on this occasion like the
proprietor of a flock of pure breed which he is anxious to keep
free from all mixture. It was even more severe, ejecting from
legal society, not only the offspring of the cross, but also the
transgressing parents of the white race.
Do not our breeders take similar precautions in the case of races
only, and not in the case of species?
Far from being sterile, unions between human groups apparently
the most distinct are sometimes more fertile than those between
individuals taken from the same group. “Hottentot women,” says
Le Vaillant, “with husbands of their own race have three or four
children. With Negroes this number is tripled, and it is still
further increased with Whites.” M. Hombron, during four years which
he spent in Brazil, Chili and Peru, studied this phenomenon in a
large number of families. “I am able to state,” he says, “that unions
of Whites with American women have given the highest average of
births. Next come the Negro and Negress. And thirdly the Negro and
the American woman.” Unions between Americans themselves gave the
lowest average.
Thus, the maximum of fertility is here presented in a case which
would constitute a hybridism in the opinion of polygenists; the
minimum is exhibited between individuals of the same group, and it is
with the woman belonging to the latter, that, owing to the cross, the
maximum is obtained.
These facts are significant. In no case of crossing between species
has fertility been observed to increase; on the contrary it is almost
always diminished, and often, as we have seen above, in an immense
proportion. Crossings between races have alone presented facts
analogous to those mentioned by Hombron and Le Vaillant.
III. Thus, in every case crossings between human groups exhibit the
phenomena characteristic of mongrels and never those of hybrids.
Therefore, these human groups, however different they may be, or
appear to be, are only _races of one and the same species_ and not
_distinct species_.
Therefore, there is but _one human species_, taking this term species
in the acceptation employed when speaking of animals and plants.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account