NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
FOURTH MEMOIR. 
UPON THE FORMATON OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
BY 
ALEXANDER GRAHAM BELL 
111 
S. Mis. 110 23 
177 UPON THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
A PAPER PRESENTED TO THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AT NEW HAVEN, NOVEMBER 13, 1883., 
Introductory Remarks. 
The influence of selection in modifying our breeds of domestic animals is most marked, and it 
is reasonable to suppose that if we could apply selection to the human race we could also produce 
modifications or varieties of men. 
But how can we ascertain the susceptibility of the human race to variation produced by selec- 
tion? We cannot dictate to men and women whom they shall marry, and natural selection no 
longer influences mankind to any great extent. 
We can see around us everywhere evidences of the transmission by heredity of characteristics, 
both desirable and undesirable, but at first sight no general selective influence appears to be at 
work to bring about the union in marriage of persons possessing the same congenital peculiarities* 
On the contrary, sexual attraction often appears to operate after the manner of magnetical attrac- 
tion-" unlike poles attract, like poles repel." Strong, vigorous, and robust men naturally feel 
a tenderness for weak, delicate, and fragile women, and are generally repelled by physical strength 
and masculine traits in one of the opposite sex. Even in such characteristics as the color of the 
hair and eyes, it often appears that unlikes attract. 
Certain diseases are known to be liable to transmission by heredity. But we do not find epi- 
leptics marrying epileptics, or consumptives knowingly marrying consumptives. Even though 
persons afflicted with the same hereditary disease were to intermarry for a number of successive 
generations, it is doubtful whether any permanent variety of the race could be formed in this way, 
for the increased tendency to disease inherited by the offspring would probably cause a greater 
tendency to premature death and ultimately occasion the extinction of the variety. 
On the other hand, it is reasonable to suppose that the continuous intermarriage of persons 
possessing congenital defects not associated with diminished vitality or vigor of constitution would 
result after a number of generations in the production of a vigorous but defective variety of the 
race. For instance, the absence of coloring matter from the skin and hair is a defect occasionally 
found among human beings, and we may learn from the success of attempts to propagate Albinism 
among animals, that we would probably produce a pink-eyed, white-haired variety of the human 
race by causing Albinos to marry one another; but this is only speculation. We cannot control 
the marriages of men as we can the breeding of animals, and at first sight there seems to be no 
way of ascertaining how far human beings are susceptible of variation by selection. 
179 180 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Such a conclusion, however, would be incorrect; and I desire to direct attention to the fac} 
that in this country deaf-mutes marry deaf-mutes. 
An examination of the records of some of our institutions for the deaf and dumb reveals the 
fact that such marriages are not the exception, but the rule. For the last fifty years there has been 
some selective influence at work which has caused, and is still causing, the continuous selection of 
the deaf by the deaf in marriage. 
If the laws of heredity that are known to hold in the case of animals also apply to man, the 
intermarriage of congenital deaf-mutes through a number of successive generations should result 
in the formation of a deaf variety of the human race. 
On the other hand, if it can be shown that congenitally deaf persons marry one another 
without any greater liability to the production of deaf offspring than is to be found among the 
people at large, then it will be evident that we cannot safely apply to man the deductions that 
have been drawn from experiments upon animals. 
There are good grounds for the belief that a thorough investigation of the marriages of the 
deaf and the influence of these marriages upon the offspring will afford a solution of the problem, 
"To what extent is the human race susceptible of variation by selection?" 
Although the statistics I have been able to collect are very incomplete, I have ventured to 
bring the subject to the attention of the Academy, in the hope that the publication of the results 
so far obtained may lead to the completion of the statistics. Chapter I. 
UPON THE MATERIALS FOR THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE AT 
PRESENT EXISTING IN AMERICA. 
The first difficulty encountered in the inquiry is that the published reports of our institutions 
for the deaf and dumb contain very little information bearing upon the subject, but, judging from 
the questions that are asked of the parents or guardians of the pupils, there must be among the 
unpublished records of our institutions an immense collection of valuable facts relating to heredity 
at present inaccessible to the public. Many of the reports of the institutions contain little more 
of interest in this connection than a catalogue of the pupils. The mere lists of names, however, 
become of value by directing attention to the fact that among the pupils who have been admitted 
to many of our institutions, numerous groups of deaf-mutes are to be found who have the same 
surname. 
No one would be surprised by the moderate recurrence of such common names as " Smith" or 
"Brown" or "Johnson"-as the recurrences might be accidental, and have no other significance 
than to indicate the prevalence of these names in the community at large. But can it be acci- 
dental that there should have been admitted into one institution eleven deaf-mutes of the name of 
"Lovejoy," seven of the name of "Derby," and six of the name of "Mayhew." What interpreta- 
tion shall we place upon the fact that groups of deaf mutes are to be found having such names as 
" Blizzard," " Fahy," " Hulett," " Closson," " Brasher," " Copher," " Gortschalg," &c. 1 Such names 
are by no means common in the community at large, and the inference is irresistible that in many 
cases the recurrences indicate blood-relationship among the pupils. 
An examination of a number of institution reports shows that these recurrences are altogether 
too numerous to be entirely accidental, and we are forced to conclude, (1) that deafness runs in 
certain families, (2) that these families are very numerous, and (3) that they are to be found in all 
parts of the United States. 
The following list of recurring surnames, taken from the 1877 report of the American Asylum 
for the Education of the Deaf and Dumb (Hartford, Conn.), will show how numerous these recur- 
rences are among the pupils of our older institutions : 
181 182 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table I.-Recurrence of surnames among 2,106 pupils admitted between the years 1817 and 1877. 
American Asylum for the education of deaf-mutes, Hartford, Conn. 
Names occurring 25 times : Smith. 
Names occurring 20 times: Allen. 
Names occurring 17 times: Brown. 
Names occurring 13 times: Campbell, Davis. 
Names occurring 12 times : White. 
Names occurring 11 times: Clarke, Johnson, Lovejoy. 
Names occurring 10 times : Small. 
Names occurring 9 times: Fuller, Green, West, Williams, Wood. 
Names occurring 8 times: Bailey, Bartlett, Perkins, Richardson, Rogers, Wright. 
Names occurring 7 times: Derby, Jack, Marsh, Martin, Merrill, Thomas. 
Names occurring 6 times: Berry, Butler, Hawley, Marshall, Mayhew, Morse, O'Brien, Rowe, Rus- 
sell, Stevens, Swett, Taylor, Tripp. 
Names occurring 5 times: Andrews, Ball, Barnard, Blizzard, Chapman, Cook, Curtis, Dennison, 
Fisk, French, Holmes, Howe, Jackson, Kimball, Meacham, New- 
combe, Packer, Parker, Pease, Porter, Reed, Slocum, Sullivan, Til- 
ton, Webster, Wilson, Young. 
Names occurring 4 times: Baker, Bennett, Bigelow, Bishop, Burbee, Chandler, Ellis, Emerson, 
Fahy, Fisher, Foster, Gilbert, Hammond, Hill, Holt, Hulett, Hull, 
Jellison, Jones, Kendall, Kennedy, Ladd, Luce, Marr, Mayberry, 
Miller, Morgan, O'Neill, Page, Parsons, Prior, Quinn, Robbins, 
Ryan, Scovell, Stone, Strong, Stuart, Thompson, Turner, Wake 
field, Ward, Welch, Wells, Wiswell. 
Names occurring 3 times: Abbott, Acheson, Allard, Atkins, Badger, Baldwin, Barnes, Barrett, 
x Blakely, Bliss, Boardwin, Briggs, Bruce, Burnham, Caution, Car- 
penter, Carter, Clossen, Clough, Cobb, Cummins, Daniels, Dennison, 
Drown, Dudley, Edwards, Fish, Frank, Goodrich, Gray, Haley, 
Haskell, Holden, Hunter, Ingraham, Jordan, Lafferty, Lambert, 
Larabee, Livingston, Lombard, Lyman, Macomber, Mahoney, Mann, 
McCarty, Mitchell, Moore, Morrison, Mowry, Murphy, Nelson, New- 
ton, Noyes, Osgood, Palmer, Perry, Platt, Pratt, Prescott, Randall, 
Reynolds, Robertson, Sage, Sawyer, Sherman, Sloane, Stebbins, 
Stevenson, Taft, Titcombe, Town, Trask, Wardman, Watson, 
Wentworth, Wheeler, Whitcomb, Wilkins, Winslow, Woodward. 
Names occurring 2 times: These are too numerous to be quoted here. There are two hundred and 
fourteen of them. 
The following tables show that the pupils referred to above constitute more than 63 per cent 
of the total number of pupils admitted: 
Table II.-Recurrence of surnames among the pupils of the American Asylum for deaf-mutes, Hart 
ford, Conn. (1877 Report.) 
No. of pupils 
represented. 
764 names occur 1 time . 764 
214 names occur 2 times 428 
81 names occur 3 times 243 
45 names occur 4 times 180 
27 names occur 5 times 135 
13 names occur 6 times 78 
6 names occur 7 times 42 
6 names occur 8 times 48 
5 names occur 9 times 45 
1 name occurs 10 times 10 
3 names occur 11 times 33 
1 name occurs 12 times 12 
2 names occur 13 times 26 
1 name occurs 17 times 17 
1 name occurs 20 times 20 
1 name occurs 25 times 25 
1,171 2,106 THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
183 
Table III.-Showing recurrence of surnames and percentages of the whole. 
(American Asylum, 1877 Report.) 
Number of surnames. 
Number of pupils 
represented. 
Percentage of the 
whole. 
764 names occur once 
764 
36.3 
214 names occur.twice 
428 
20.3 
193 names occur three or more times .... 
914 
43. 4 
1,171 
2,106 
100.0 
The American Asylum, at Hartford, Conn., was established in 1817, under the patronage of 
Congress, as a school to be open to all the deaf-mutes of the United States. As new centers of 
instruction sprang up the supply of pupils from the more distant States was practically cut off, 
and the institution is more representative of the New England States than of the whole country. 
This will be obvious from the following table (Table IV), which gives a synopsis of 2,109 cases 
admitted to the asylum before May, 1877, classified according to residence. 
Table IV.- Classification of pupils in respect to residence. 
(American Asylum, 1877 Report.) 
Where from. No. 
Maine... 336 
New Hampshire 211 
Vermont 233 
Massachusetts 731 
Rhode Island 67 
New Jersey 7 
District of Columbia 2 
Virginia 11 
North Carolina 4 
South Carolina 19 
Georgia 27 
Alabama 4 
Louisiana 1 
Texas 1 
Indiana 1 
Where from. No. 
Connecticut 362 
California ..... 2 
Pennsylvania 14 
Maryland 5 
New York 34 
Illinois 2 
Michigan 1 
Wisconsin. 1 
Ohio 6 
British Provinces 25 
West Indies 1 
West Virginia 1 
2,109 
In order to show that the numerous recurrence of surnames is not confined to the deaf-mutes 
of the New England States nor to the pupils of our oldest institutions, I give a list of recurring 
surnames taken from the 1882 report of the Illinois Institution. 
This institution, although only opened in 1846, is now the largest of its kind in the world, and 
it may fairly be taken as representative of a large section of country in the West.* 
Table V.-Recurrence of surnames among 1,620 pupils admitted between the years 1846 and 1882. 
(Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, Ill.) 
Names occurring 18 times: Smith. 
Names occurring 16 times: Brown. 
Names occurring 10 times: Anderson, Miller. 
Names occurring 9 times: Edwards, Wilson. 
Names occurring 8 times: Johnson. 
* As the American Asylum and Illinois Institution may be taken as representative institutions, I present in an 
appendix a critical analysis of all the cases recorded in the reports referred to. (See Tables A to N, in the appendix.) 
For this analysis I am indebted to Mr. Franck Z. Maguire, of Washington, D. C., and I have personally verified 
his results. 184 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Names occurring 7 times: Davis, Jones. 
Names occurring 6 times: Kelly, Mitchell, Moore, Welch, White, Williams, Wright. 
Names occurring 5 times: Adams, Allen, Clark, Hall, Lee, Long, Stephens, Taylor, Thompson, Wolf. 
Names occurring 4 times: Bailey, Barnes, Berry, Cox, Gunn, Harris, Hixon, Huffman, Jacoby, James 
McCllelland, Murphy, Sturgeon, Sullivan, Townsend, Walker. 
Names occurring 3 times: Ammons, Baker, Ballard, Boyd, Brasher, Brooks, Buckley, Campbell, Carroll, 
Chamberlain, Conn, Copher, Crawford, Darnell, Doyer, Ford, Fuller, Gibson, 
Goodner, Goodwin, Gortschalg, Gray, Harper, Hill, Keil, Kennedy, Laughlin, 
McFarland, McGary, McLean, McNeal, Merrill, Morgan, Neilson, Nichols, 
Simmonds, Sterling, Stewart, Stout. 
Names occurring 2 times: These are too numerous to be quoted here. There are 150 of them. 
The following tables show that the pupils referred to above constitute more than 41 per cent, 
of the whole number of pupils admitted: 
Table VI.-Recurrence of surnames among the pupils of the Illinois Institution for the Deaj and 
Dumb. 
(1882 Report.) 
No. of pupils 
represented. 
953 names occur 1 time 953 
150 names occur 2 times 1 300 
39 names occur 3 times 117 
16 names occur 4 times 64 
10 names occur 5 times 50 
7 names occur 6 times 42 
2 names occur 7 times 14 
1 name occurs 8 times 8 
2 names occur 9 times..... 18 
2 names occur 10 times 20 
1 name occurs 16 times . - 16 
1 name occurs 18 times 18 
1,184 1,620 
Table VII.- 
■Recurrence of surnames and percentages of the whole. 
(Illinois Institution, 1882 Report. ) 
Number of surnames. 
Number of pupils 
represented. 
Percentage of the 
whole. 
953 names occur once 
953 
58.8 
150 names occur twice 
300 
18.5 
81 names occur three or more times ... 
367 
22.7 
1,184 
1, 620 
100.0 
The recurrence of numerous surnames among the pupils of very many of our institutions for 
the deaf and dumb renders it highly probable that a considerable proportion of the deaf-mutes of the 
country belong to families containing more than one deaf-mute, and hence possess hereditary tendencies 
to deafness. 
The same conclusion is still more forcibly suggested to the mind by a perusal of the few insti- 
tution reports that record the deaf-mute relatives of the pupils. The following tables (Tables 
VIII, IX, X, XI, XII) bearing upon this subject have been compiled from the 1877 Report of the THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
185 
American Asylum.* They show that of 2,106 pupils admitted to that institution, 693, or nearly 
33 per cent., were known to have deaf-mute relatives. The significance of this becomes more 
apparent when we find that in the majority of these cases the pupils have more than one rela- 
tive deaf and dumb, while in a few cases as many as fifteen deaf-mute relatives are recorded. 
Table VIII.-Deaf and dumb relatives of the pupils of the American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes, from 
the 1877 Report. 
Pupils having deaf and 
dumb relatives. 
Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils 
Pupils having deaf and 
dumb relatives. 
Deaf and dumb relativ espu p ils. 
1 
1 great grandfather. 
31 
2 sisters. 
1 
1 grandfather. 
3 
3 sisters. 
1 
1 grandfather, father, mother and other relatives. 
1 
4 sisters. 
1 
1 grandfather, father, 3 children, and other rela- 
7 
1 sister and I cousin. 
tives. 
1 
1 sister, 1 cousin, and 1 uncle. 
1 
1 grandfather, father, and brother. 
1 
1 sister and 3 cousins. 
1 
1 grandfather, father, and sister. 
2 
1 sister, 3 cousins, and 1 uncle. 
6 
father and mother. 
1 
1 sister and 4 cousins. 
1 
father, mother, and 1 brother. 
1 
1 sister, 6 cousins, and 1 uncle. 
2 
father, mother, and 2 brothers. 
1 
1 sister and 1 uncle. 
1 
father, mother, and 2 sisters. 
1 
1 sister and 1 aunt. 
4 
father, mother, 1 brother, and 1 sister. 
1 
1 sister, 2 aunts and other relatives. 
1 
father, mother, 2 brothers, and 1 sister. 
2 
1 sister and other relatives. 
1 
father, mother, 1 brother, and 2 sisters. 
1 
1 sister and 4 other relatives. 
1 
father, mother, 1 brother, and 5 uncles and 
2 
1 sister and 14 other relatives. 
aunts. 
1 
1 sister and 7 other relatives. 
2 
father, mother, 1 sister, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt. 
7 
2 sisters and 1 cousin. 
2 
father, mother, 2 brothers, and 2 uncles. 
1 
2 sisters and 2 cousins. 
1 
father, mother, 2 sisters, and 1 uncle. 
1 
2 sisters and 3 cousins. 
2 
father, mother, 1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 uncle. 
3 
2 sisters and 1 second-cousin. 
1 
father, mother, and 1 cousin. 
141 
1 brother. 
1 
father, son, 1 sister, 2 nephews, and 5 other rela- 
47 
1 brother and 1 sister. 
tives. 
12 
1 brother and 2 sisters. 
1 
father, 2 sisters, and other relatives. 
8 
1 brother and 3 sisters. 
1 
father, 1 brother, and 1 sister. 
6 
1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 cousin. 
3 
father, 1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 cousin. 
2 
1 brother, 2 sisters, and 2 cousins. 
2 
father, 4 brothers, 1 sister, and 1 cousin. 
1 
1 brother, 1 sister, and 3 cousins. 
1 
father, 3 brothers, 2 sisters, and 1 cousin. 
1 
1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 second-cousin. 
1 
mother and 1 brother. 
2 
1 brother, 1 sister, 1 cousin, and 1 uncle. 
1 
mother and 2 sisters. 
4 
1 brother and 1 cousin. 
2 
mother, 1 brother, and 1 sister. 
1 
1 brother and 3 cousins. 
1 
mother, 1 brother, 2 sisters, and 1 cousin. 
1 
1 brother and 4 cousins. 
1 
mother, 2 brothers, 1 sister, and 1 cousin. 
1 
1 brother, 4 cousins, and other relatives. 
2 
mother and 1 uncle. 
1 
1 brother and 1 aunt. 
1 
mother and 2 uncles. 
1 
1 brother and 1 niece. 
6 
1 child. 
. 2 
1 brother and 2 nephews. 
2 
1 child and 1 brother. 
1 
1 brother and other relatives. 
3 
1 child and 1 sister. 
1 
1 brother and 7 other relatives. 
1 
1 child and 2 sisters. 
1 
1 brother, 1 sister, and 1 second-cousin. 
1 
1 child and 1 cousin. 
26 
2 brothers. 
1 
2 children and 1 brother. 
34 
2 brothers and 1 sister. 
1 
2 children, 1 brother, and 2 sisters. 
11 
2 brothers and 2 sisters. 
4 
3 children. 
4 
2 brothers and 1 cousin. 
1 
3 children and 1 brother. 
2 
2 brothers, 2 cousins, and 2 uncles. 
1 
3 children, 1 brother, and 1 cousin. 
2 
2 brothers, 1 sister, and 2 cousins. 
1 
3 children and 1 cousin. 
1 
2 brothers, 2 sisters, 1 uncle, and 1 aunt. 
1 
3 children and other relatives. 
1 
2 brothers, 2 sisters, and 11 other relatives. 
1 
4 children. 
6 
3 brothers. 
1 
5 children and 1 brother. 
10 
3 brothers and 1 sister. 
1 
5 children and 2 brothers. 
2 
3 brothers and 3 sisters. 
1 
5 children, 1 brother, and 2 sisters. 
1 
3 brothers, 1 sister, and 2 second-cousins. 
129 
1 sister. 
3 
4 brothers. 
* See " The sixty-first annual report of the directors and officers of the American Asylum, at Hartford, for the 
education and instruction of the deaf and dumb," presented to the asylum May 15, 1877, pp. 42-98. 
S. Mis. 110 24 186 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table VIII.-Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils of American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes, Ac.-Continued. 
ving deaf and 
relatives. 
Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils. 
ving deaf and 
relatives. 
Deaf and dumb relatives of pupils. 
Pupils ha 
dumb 
Pupils ha 
dumb 
7 
4 brothers and 2 sisters. 
1 
1 uncle and 1 aunt. 
1 
5 brothers. 
1 
2 uncles. 
2 
5 brothers and 1 sister. 
1 
1 niece. 
22 
1 
1 cousin. 
1 cousin and 1 uncle. 
1 
1 
1 nephew. 
2 nephews, 2 nieces, and lother relative. 
4 
2 cousins. 
6 
1 second-cousin. 
1 
2 cousins and 1 aunt. 
4 
2 second-cousins. 
4 
3 cousins. 
1 
1 third-cousin. 
1 
3 cousins and 3 great-uncles. 
1 
1 relative. 
1 
3 cousins and 2 uncles. 
2 
2 relatives. 
1 
3 cousins and 2 other relatives. 
1 
Relatives. 
2 
4 cousins. 
1 
4 relatives. 
2 
Cousins. 
1 
4 remote relatives. 
1 
Several cousins. 
1 
6 relatives. 
3 
6 
1 aunt. 
1 uncle. 
693 
Pupils having deaf-mute relatives • 693 
Pupils recorded as sporadic cases 1,413 
Total..., 2,106 
Table IX.-Deaf-mute relatives of the pupils. 
(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.) 
1 pupil had one or more great-grandparents deaf and dumb. 
5 pupils had one or more grandparents deaf and dumb. 
47 pupils had one or more parents deaf and dumb. 
29 pupils had one or more children deaf and dumb. 
593 pupils had one or more brothers or sisters deaf and dumb. 
100 pupils had one or more cousins deaf and dumb. 
38 pupils had one or more uncles or aunts deaf and dumb. 
1 pupil had one or more great-uncles or aunts deaf and dumb. 
48 pupils had one or more distant relatives deaf and dumb. 
Table X.-Deaf-mute children of the pupils. 
(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.) 
29 pupils had 1 or more children deaf and dumb. 
15 pupils had 2 or more children deaf and dumb. 
13 pupils had 3 or more children deaf and dumb. 
4 pupils had 4 or more children deaf and dumb. 
3 pupils had 5 or more children deaf and dumb. 
Table XI.-Deaf-mute brothers and sisters of the pupils. 
(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.) 
593 pupils bad 1 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
271 pupils had 2 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
116 pupils had 3 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
51 pupils had 4 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
15 pupils had 5 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
11 pupils had 6 or more brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
187 
Table XII.-Showing number of pupils having one or more deaf-mute relatives. 
"(American Asylum for Deaf-Mutes. Report for 1877.) 
693 pupils had 1 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
374 pupils had 2 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
224 pupils had 3 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
120 pupils had 4 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
65 pupils had 5 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
35 pupils had 6 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
15 pupils had 7 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
9 pupils had 8 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
4 pupils had 10 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
3 pupils had 15 or more relatives deaf and dumb. 
Without going into detail, the results may be noted of an examination of a few other institution 
reports* where the deaf-mute relatives are recorded. 
Table XIII.-Proportion of the deaf and dumb having deaf-mute relatives 
Institutions. 
Total number 
of pupils. 
Number of 
pupils hav- 
ing d e a f- 
mute rela- 
tives. 
Percentage of 
pupils hav- 
ing d e a f - 
mute rela- 
tives. 
• 
American Asylum 
New York Institution 
2,106 
1,165 
560 
283 
1,620 
89 
693 
380 
166 
103 
356 
21 
32.9 
32.6 
29.6 
. 36.4 
21.7 
23.6 
Ohio Institution - 
Indiana Institution 
Illinois Institution.. ... .... ... 
Texas Institution ? 
Total 
5,823 
1,719 
29.5 
The above table shows us that out of 5,823 deaf-mutes taken from different parts of the country 
no less than 1,719, or 29J per cent., were known to have relatives deaf and dumb. 
If this proportion holds for the whole country, we must have in the United States about 10,000 
deaf-mutes who belong to families containing more than one deaf-mute.t 
It is to be feared that the intermarriage of such persons would be attended by calamitous results 
to their offspring. 
These are not, however, the only cases in which we would anticipate that the deafness of the 
parents might be transmitted to the children. The lessons we have learned from the lower animals 
concerning heredity teach us that a certain physical peculiarity, which may normally make its 
appearance only sporadically here and there, maybe perpetuated and rendered hereditary, by suit- 
able selection, during a number of generations, of those individuals that happen to possess the 
peculiarity from birth. 
*The tables relating to the deaf-mutes of Ohio, Indiana, New York, Texas, and Illinois have been compiled from 
tho following sources: 
1. Ohio. " List of pupils admitted to the Ohio Asylum previously to January, 1854." American Annals of the Deaf 
and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 101-116. 
2. Indiana. " Catalogue of the pupils of the Indiana Institution from its commencement in 1843 to November 1, 
1853." American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 162-169. 
3. New York. "List of pupils of the New York Institution, &c., complete from May, 1818, to January, 1854.'' 
American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, pp. 195-225. 
4. Texas. " List of pupils in attendance at the Texas Institution (1881)." See Exhibit A, twenty-fifth annua] 
report of the superintendent of the Texas Institution for the Deaf and Dumb. Austin, Tex., November 1, 1881. 
5. Illinois. " List of pupils of the Illinois Institution admitted between 1846 and 18s2." Twenty-first biennial 
report of the trustees, superintendent, and treasurer of the Illinois Institution for the Education of the Deaf and 
Dumb. Jacksonville, Ill., October 1,1882. 
t The number is probably greater, even exceeding twelve thousand, as will be seen further on. (See Table XVII). 188 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
We have good reason, therefore, to fear that the intermarriage of congenital deaf-mutes, even 
though the deafness in both cases might be sporadic, would result in many cases in the production 
of deaf offspring. It is important, then, to arrive at some idea of the numbers of the deaf and 
dumb who are deaf from birth. 
The Compendium of the Tenth Census of the United States shows us that there were living in 
this country on the 1st of June, 1880, no less than 33,878 deaf-mutes, and that " more than one- 
half" were congenitally deaf.* 
The proportion can be obtained more exactly from an address delivered in Jacksonville, Ill., 
on the 29th day of August, 1882, before the tenth convention of American instructors of the deaf 
and dumb, by the Rev. Fred. H. Wines,f who had charge of the department of the census relating 
to the deaf and dumb. Pending the full publication of the census returns, the statements of Mr. 
Wines concerning the census of the deaf and dumb must evidently be received as authoritative. 
In the address referred to Mr. Wines gave the results of an analysis of 22,472 cases from the 
census, from which it appears that of these deaf-mutes 12,154, or 54.1 per cent., were reported as 
congenitally deaf, and 10,318, or 45.9 per cent., were stated to have lost their hearing after birth. 
If we apply these figures to the total mentioned in the Compendium of the Census (33,878) 
we find that there are probably 18,328 congenital and 15,550 non-congenital deaf-mutes in the 
United States. 
Deductions drawn from the breeding of animals would lead us to expect that the congenitally 
deaf would be more likely than those who became deaf from accidental causes to transmit their 
defect to their offspring. Another indication pointing in the same direction is to be found in the 
fact that the proportion of the deaf and dumb who have deaf-mute relatives is very much greater 
among the congenital than among the non-congenital deaf-mutes. 
The following tables (Tables XIV, XV, and XVI) have been compiled from the reports of 
the American institutions for the deaf and dumb already referred to: 
Table XIV. 
Name of institution. 
Date of opening. 
Pupils were admitted or were in at- 
tendance during the years- 
Total number of pupils. 
Cause of deafness. 
Pupils recorded to have 
deaf-mute relatives. 
Congenital. 
Disease or accident. 
Not stated. 
Total number admitted or in 
attendance. 
Cause of deafness. 
I Congenital. 
Disease or accident. 
1 
Not stated. 
American Asvlum 
1817 
1817-1877 
2,106 
1,165 
560 
973 
1,040 
432 
93 
693 
552 
131 
10 
New York Institution 
1818 
1818-1853 
488 
245 
380 
287 
74 
19 
Ohio Institution .. 
1829 
1829-1853 
208 
268 
84 
166 
118 
32 
16 
Indiana, Institution 
1844 
1844-1853 
283 
149 
124 
10 
103 
72 
31 
Illinois Institution 
1846 
1846-1882 
1,620 
89 
418 
947 
255 
356 
194 
120 
42 
Texas Institution 
1857 
1881 
26 
53 
10 
21 
11 
8 
2 
Total 
5,823 
2, 262 
2,864 
697 
1,719 
1,234 
396 
89 
* Compendium of the Tenth Census, Part II, page 1664. 
+ See Proceedings of the Tenth Convention of American Instructors of the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, Ill., 
August, 1882, pp. 122-128, published by the Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Jacksonville, Ill., with the 
twenty-first biennial report of that Institution. 189 
THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
Table XV.-Proportion of the non-congenitally deaf who have deaf-mute relatives. 
Institutions. 
Number of 
non-congenital 
deaf-mutes. 
Number having 
deaf-mute rel- 
atives. 
Percentage 
having deaf-mute 
relatives. 
American Asylum 
1,040 
432 
131 
12. 6 
New York Institution 
74 
32 
17.1 
Ohio Institution 
268 
11. 9 
Indiana Institution 
124 
31 
25. 0 
Illinois Institution. . 
987 
120 
12. 7 
Texas Institution 
53 
8 
15.0 
Total 
2,864 
396 
13.8 
Table XVI.-Proportion of the congenitally deaf who have deaf-mute relatives. 
Institutions. 
Number 
of congenitally 
deaf pupils. 
Number having 
deaf-mute rel- 
atives. 
Percentage 
having deaf-mute 
relatives. 
American Asylum 
New York Institution 
Ohio Institution 
Indiana Institution 
Illinois Institution 
Texas Institution 
973 
488 
208 
149 
418 
26 
552 
287 
118 
72 
194 
11 
56.7 
58.8 
56.7 
48.3 
46.4 
42.3 
Total 
2,262 
1,234 
54.5 
The above tables (Tables XIV, XV, and XVI) show that of 2,262 congenital deaf-mutes, more 
than one-half- or 54.5 per cent.-had deaf-mute relatives ; and that even in the case of those pupils 
who became deaf from apparently accidental causes, 13.8 per cent, had other members of their families 
deaf and dumb. 
If we apply these results to the total returned by the Tenth Census, we obtain the following 
figures (Table XVII) as a probable approximation to the number of sporadic and non-sporadic 
cases of deafness among the deaf-mutes of the country. 
Table XVII.-Estimate of the probable number of sporadic and non-sporadic cases of deafness among 
the deaf-mutes of the United States in the year 1880. 
Cause of deafness. 
Number who 
have relatives 
deaf and dumb. 
Sporadic cases. 
Total. 
Congenital 
9,989 
8,339 
18,328 
Disease or accident 
2,146 
13,404 
15,550 
Total 
12,135 
21,743 
33,878 
If to the estimated number of deaf-mutes who have relatives deaf and dumb we add the pre- 
sumed number of sporadic cases among the congenital deaf-mutes we reach a total of 20,474 cases 
where the deafness would probably tend to become hereditary by intermarriage. But these are 190 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
not all the cases in which we would anticipate that intermarriage might be productive of deaf off- 
spring. The late Dr. Harvey L. Peet states, as the result of his researches,* that the hearing 
brothers and sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to have deaf children as the deaf-mute himself. 
It is only reasonable to assume that a tendency towards deafness exists in a family containing 
more than one deaf-mute, so that if hearing persons belonging to such families were to intermarry, 
or were to marry deaf-mutes-or if a consanguineous marriage were to take place in such a family- 
we would not be surprised if some of the offspring should be deaf. In addition therefore to the 
20,474 deaf-mutes referred to above, we must include the hearing and speaking members of their families 
before ice can form an adequate conception of the number of persons who possess a predisposition towards 
deafness. 
It will thus be seen that we have abundant materials in the United States for the formation 
of a deaf variety of the human race by selection in marriage. 
* American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. VI, p. 235. Chapter II. 
MARRIAGES OF THE DEAF. 
Having shown that a large proportion of the deaf and dumb possess hereditary tendencies 
toward deafness, the question naturally arises: "Do many of the deaf and dumb marry?" 
It is the custom in some of our institutions to hold periodical reunions of former pupils, and in 
some cases advantage has been taken of the opportunities thus presented to obtain information con- 
cerning the marriages of the pupils, &c. An examination of the reports of the American Asylum, 
New York, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois institutions, yields the following results: 
Table XVIII. 
Name of institution. 
Date of 
opening. 
Date of 
report. 
Total number 
of pupils 
admitted.* 
Total number 
recorded to 
have mar- 
ried. 
Percent- 
age. 
American Asylum 
1817 
1877 
2,106 
1,165 
642 
30.5 
New York Institution 
1818 
1854 
191 
16.4 
Ohio Institution 
1829 
1854 
560 
56 
10.0 
Indiana Institution 
1844 
1854 
287 
26 
9.1 
Illinois Institution 
1846 
1882 
1,620 
174 
10.7 
Total 
5,738 
1,089 
19.0 
* The total number of pupils noted includes the children who were in attendance at the dates of the reports. 
In the Appendix I have presented in tabular form a critical analysis of all the cases mentioned 
in the reports of the American Asylum and Illinois Institution, classifying the pupils according to 
the decades in which they were born. The labor involved has deterred me from making a similar 
examination of the pupils of the New York, Ohio, and Indiana institutions until more complete 
materials can be obtained than are to be found in reports published in 1854. The American 
Asylum and Illinois Institution, however, as I have stated before, may be may be taken as repre 
sentative institutions, and an examination of the tables in the Appendix leads to the conclusion that 
a very considerable proportion of the deaf children admitted to our institutions marry. This will be ob- 
vious, from the following considerations: 
Pupils of the American Asylum, born in the year 1840, were 37 years of age in 1877 (the date 
of the report), and the pupils of the Illinois Institution, born in 1840, were 42 years of age in 1882 
(the date of the Illinois report), hence we may safely assume that, of the pupils of these institutions 
who were born before 1840, all, or nearly all, who intended to marry had married before the dates 
of the reports; and in most cases it is probable that the fact of marriage had been recorded. If, 
191 192 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
then, we eliminate from the totals given in the above table, all the pupils of these institutions who 
were born since the year 1839, we obtain the following results: 
Table XIX.-Proportion of the pupils of our institutions for the deaf and dumb who marry 
Name of institution. 
Date of 
opening. 
Dhte of 
report. 
Total number 
of pupils 
born before 
1840. 
Total number 
of these re- 
corded to 
have mar- 
ried. 
Percent- 
age. 
American Asylum 
Illinois Institution 
Total 
1817 
1846 
1877 
1882 
1,100 
159 
522 
49 
47.4 
30.8 
1,259 
571 
45.4 
Whatever may be the exact percentage for the whole country, the indications are that a 
considerable proportion of the adult deaf-mutes of the United States are married. 
INTERMARRIAGES OF THE DEAF AND DUMB. 
When we attempt to form an idea of the extent to which intermarriage takes place among 
deaf-mutes, we are met by the difficulty of the imperfection of the institution records. In very 
few cases is it specifically stated that a deaf-mute has married a hearing person.* The record 
usually stands that the pupil has "married a deaf-mute," or that he is simply "married," leaving 
it uncertain whether the marriage was contracted with another deaf-mute or with a hearing person. 
When we eliminate all the uncertain cases we obtain from the institution reports the following 
results: 
Table XX.-Proportion of the deaf and dumb who marry deaf-mutes 
Name of institution. 
• 
Date of 
opening. 
Date of 
report. 
Total number 
of pupils re- 
corded to 
have mar- 
ried. 
Total number 
. recorded to 
have mar- 
ried deaf- 
mutes. 
Percent- 
age. 
American Asylum 
1817 
1877 
642 
502 
78.2 
New York Institution 
1818 
1854 
191 
142 
74.3 
Ohio Institution 
1829 
1854 
56 
39 
69.6 
Indiana Institution 
1844 
1854 
26 
21 
80.8 
Illinois Institution. 
1846 
1882 
174 
152 
87.3 
Total 
1,089 
856 
78.6 
The large percentage of marriages with deaf-mutes reported from Indiana and Illinois suggests 
the explanation that intermarriages among the deaf and dumb may perhaps have become more common 
of late years. Both institutions are of comparatively recent origin (the one founded in 1844, the 
other in 1846); and the report of the Illinois Institution, which exhibits the largest proportion of 
deaf-mute intermarriages, contains the record of much later marriages than those mentioned in the 
Indiana report, for the Indiana record stops at 1854, .whereas the Illinois report gives the statistics 
of the institution to October, 1882. 
Unfortunately we are unable to ascertain from the reports the dates of the marriages. If we 
assume, however, that as a general rule the older deaf-mutes were married before the younger, we 
* Only one case in the American Asylum and ten in the Illinois Institution. It is probable, however, that in 
most cases where the pupil is simply recorded as "married" the record means marriage with a hearing person. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
193 
may be able to approximate to the order of the marriages by classifying the pupils according to 
their period of birth. Although I have not attempted a minute classification, excepting in the 
cases shown in the Appendix, it is comparatively easy to arrange all the married pupils referred to 
above into four classes: (1) those born before 1810; (2) those born in the period 1810-1839; (3) those 
born in the period 1840-1859; (4) those born since the commencement of 1860. The results are 
shown in the following table: 
Table XXI. 
Period of birth. 
Total 
recorded 
to have 
married. 
Total 
recorded 
to have 
married 
deaf-mutes. 
Percent- 
age. 
Before 1810 
129 
72 
55.8 
1810 to 1839 
715 
577 
80. 7 
1840 to 1859 
233 
196 
84.1 
1860 and after 
12 
11 
91.7 
The number married who were born since 1859 is too small to be relied upon for a percentage. 
It is only to be hoped that the percentage given above is excessive. The indications are very 
clear, however, that of the deaf and dumb who marry, the proportion who marry deaf-mutes has 
steadily increased. This conclusion is strengthened when we find that the above result, which has 
been deduced from a summation of all the cases recorded in the reports of the American Asylum, 
New York, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois institutions, is also true of the cases recorded in each report 
taken separately. This will be obvious from the following table: 
Table XXII. 
Name of institution, with date of opening 
and of report. 
Period of birth. 
Total 
recorded to 
have mar- 
ried. 
Total 
recorded to 
have mar- 
ried deaf- 
mutes. 
Percent- 
age. 
American Asylum 
Date of opening, 1817. Date of report, 
1877. 
Before 1810 
1810 to 1839 
1840 to 1859 
100 
422 
120 
55 
350 
97 
55.0 
82.9 
80.8 
New York Institution 
Date of opening, 1818. Date of report, 
1854. 
Before 1810 
1810 to 1839 
29 
162 
17 
125 
58.6 
77.2 
Ohio Institution 
Date of opening, 1829. Date of report, 
1854. 
1810 to 1832 
56 
39 
69.6 
Indiana Institution .. 
Date of opening, 1844. Date of report, 
1854. • 
1822 to 1836 
26 
21 
80.8 
Illinois Institution 
Date of opening, 1846. Date of report, 
1882. 
1810 to 1839 
1840 to 1859 
1860 and after .. 
49 
113 
12 
42 
99 
11 
85.7 
87.6 
91.7 
The only institution that .gives any indication of a decrease in the proportion of pupils mar- 
ried to deaf-mutes is the American Asylum. The pupils born in 1859 were only 18 years of age 
S. Mis. 110 25 194 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
in 1877, the date of the report, so that it is certain that a considerable number of the pupils born 
between 1810 and 1859 were married after the date of the report, and so escaped enumeration. It 
is questionable, however, whether this could affect the proportion who were married to deaf-mutes. 
It is more reasonable to suppose that in this case the apparent decrease is real, for an entirely 
different method of investigation leads to a similar result. In the years 1843, 1857, 1867, and 1877 
the directors of the American Asylum published in their reports the statistics of the institution, 
giving the names of those pupils who had married. If we assume that the pupils who were not 
recorded as married in the 1843 report, but who were recorded as married in the 1857 report, were 
married between the years 1843 and 1857, &c., we can divide the marriages reported from the 
American Asylum into four classes: (1) Marriages contracted before 1843, (2) marriages contracted 
between 1843 and 1857, (3) marriages contracted between 1857 and 1867, and (4) marriages con- 
tracted between 1867 and 1877. The results are shown in the following table: 
Table XXIII.-Marriages of the pupils of the American Asylum. 
Presumed date of marriage. 
Total 
recorded as 
married. 
Total 
recorded 
to have 
married 
deaf-mutes. 
Percentage. 
Before 1843 
143 
95 
66.4 
Between 1843 and 1857 .. ...... 
217 
175 
80.6 
Between 1857 and 1867 ... 
131 
110 
84.0 
Between 1867 and 1877 
151 
122 
80.8 
In this case we find that although the number of pupils presumed to have married between 
1867 and 1877 is greater than the number who married in the preceding decade, the proportion 
who married deaf-mutes is less. 
It is evident from a comparison of all the tables that of the deaf-mutes who marry at the present 
time not less than 80 per cent, marry deaf -mutes, while of those who married during the early half of 
the present century the proportion who married deaf-mutes was much smaller. 
It is of course a matter of importance to ascertain to what extent congenital deaf-mutes 
intermarry, but unfortunately the institution records are too imperfect to allow us to draw con- 
clusions on this point. Six hundred and fifty-four pupils of the American Asylum and Illinois 
Institution are each recorded simply to have "married a deaf-mute," without one word of expla. 
nation as to the name of the deaf-mute or the cause of deafness.* 
It will thus be understood that the records of deaf-mute marriages are very imperfect, and it 
is to be hoped that some of our large institutions may publish fuller information concerning them. 
In the case of a deaf-mute partner it should be stated whether the deafness was congenital or not. 
* Since the reading of this paper it occurred to me that some light might be thrown upon the subject by the 
theory of Probabilities. I therefore submitted the question to Prof. Simon Newcomb, who not only agreed with me 
in this idea, but was kind enough to present a solution of the problem deduced from the data given in this paper. 
He thinks the most probable conclusion to be this: 
1. Of the congenitally deaf who married deaf-mutes one-half married congenitally deaf and one-half non-con- 
genitally deaf. 
2. Of the non-cougenitally deaf who married deaf-mutes three-sevenths married congenitally deaf and four- 
sevenths non-congenitally deaf. 
The full text of Professor Newcomb's letters will be found in Appendix Z. THE FOBMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
195 
I would also suggest that, wherever possible, the names of the husbands and wives of the pupils 
should be given, and the fact recorded as to whether they belong to families containing more than 
one deaf-mute or not. This is important even in the case of marriage with a hearing person, for 
in most of the cases of such marriages that have come under my personal observation the hearing 
partner belonged to a family containing deaf-mutes. 
However imperfect may be the records of the marriages of the deaf it is abundantly evident, 
(1) that there is a tendency among deaf-mutes to select deaf-mutes as their partners in marriage ; (2) 
that this tendency has been continuously exhibited during the past forty or fifty years, and (3) that there- 
fore there is every probability that the selection of the deaf by the deaf in marriage will continue in the 
future. 
It is evident, then, that we have here to consider, not an ephemeral phenomenon, but a case of 
continuous selection. For instance, should it appear that there are in this country any considerable 
number of deaf-mutes who are themselves the offspring of deaf-mutes the indications are that a 
large proportion of these persons will marry, and that of those who marry, the majority will marry 
deaf-mutes. Thus, there is every indication that in the case of the deaf and dumb the work of 
selection will go on from generation to generation. Chapter III. 
DEAF-MUTE OFFSPRING OF DEAF-MUTE MARRIAGES. 
In a paper upon " Hereditary Deafness "* (published in 1868), Rev. W. W. Turner, then prin- 
cipal of the American Asylum, said that " statistics, carefully collated from records kept of deaf- 
mutes as they have met in conventions at Hartford, show that in 86 families with one parent a 
congenital deaf-mute, one-tenth of the children were deaf; and in 24 families with both parents congenital 
deaf-mutes, about one-third were born deaf. 
In support of this conclusion he presented the following table : 
Table XXIV 
Class. 
Parents. 
Number of 
families. 
Number of 
children 
deaf. 
Number of 
children 
hearing. 
Total. 
1 
One hearing and 1 congenitally deaf 
30 
15 
77 
92 
2 
One incidentally and 1 congenitally deaf 
56 
6 
120 
126 
3 
Both congenitally deaf 
24 
17 
40 
57 
Total 
110 
38 
237 
275 
Dr. Turner cited in connection with his subject the case of one woman who lived to see great 
grandchildren, and of these no less than sixteen were deaf-mutes. 
Regarding intermarriage, he said : " It is a well-known fact that among domestic animals cer- 
tain unusual variations of form or color which sometimes occur among their offspring, may, by a 
careful selection of others similar and by a continued breeding of like with like, be rendered per- 
manent, so as to constitute a distinct variety. The same course adopted and pursued in the human 
race would undoubtedly lead to the same result." He concluded with the remark, " that every 
consideration of philanthropy as well as the interests of congenitally deaf persons themselves should 
induce their teachers and friends to urge upon them the impropriety of intermarriage." 
It is reasonable to suppose that, whatever influence Dr. Turner's statements may have exerted 
upon the marriages of the deaf throughout the country, his conclusions and beliefs must have had 
considerable weight with the pupils of his own institution, and this may perhaps have been the 
cause of the decrease in the proportion of intermarriages noted among the pupils of his institution 
since the date of his paper. (See Table XXIII.) 
In the report of the New York Institution, published in the American Annals of the Deaf and 
Dumb, July, 1854 (vol. vi, pp. 193 to 241), Dr. Harvey L. Peet gave the following table, showing 
the number of pupils of the New York Institution married, as compared with the married pupils 
of other American institutions, and compared with the marriages of the deaf in Europe, no distinc- 
tion being made between those who were congenitally deaf and those who became deaf from acci- 
dental causes. 
* See Proceedings National Conference of Principals of Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb, Washington, D. C., 
1868 ; see, also, American Annals for the Deaf and Dumb, 1868, Vol. XIII, pp. 244-246 ; also article " Deaf and Dumb" 
Encyclopaedia Britannica. 
196 THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
197 
Dr. Peet stated that of all the families embraced in the table " about one in twenty have 
deaf-mute children where both parents are deaf-mutes, and about one in one hundred and thirty-five 
where only one is a deaf-mute; and that the brothers and sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to 
have deaf-mute children as the deaf-mute himself, supposing each to marry into families that have or 
or each into families that have not shown a predisposition toward deaf dumbness." 
Table XXV. 
Name of institution. 
Married hearing 
persons. 
Married deaf-mutes. 
Males. 
Females. 
Males. 
Females. 
Pupils of the New York Institution* 
19 
29 . 
66 
77 
Pupils of the Hartford Asylum* 
43 
25 
104 
89 
Pupils of the Ohio Asylum... 
13 
4 
18 
21 
Pupils of the Gronningen Institution (Holland) 
28 
8 
6 
6 
City of Paris 
14 
4 
15 
15 
Belgium (census of 1835) 
7 
1 
1 
Ireland (census of 1851) 
45 
32 
5 
5 
Yorkshire Institution (England) 
1 
2 
Leipsic Institution (Germany) 
4 
1 
Prague Institution (Bohemia) 
6 
2 
2 
Luxemburg Institution (Netherlands) 
2 
Lyons Institution (France) 
2 
Geneva Institution (Switzerland) 
1 
Russia Institution (incidental notices) 
2 
1 
1 
Bavaria Institution (incidental notices) 
1 
Total 
188 
106 
218 
217 
Deduct the three American institutions 
75 
58 
188 
187 
Remains for Europe 
113 
48 
30 
30 
*Some marriages have been deducted from the Hartford list that appear also in the New York 
list. There have also been marriages between educated and uneducated mutes, or between deaf- 
mutes of our schools and semi-mutes not pupils. 
From this table it appears that at the time of the investigation (1854) marriages of deaf-mutes 
and especially between two deaf mutes, were far more common in America than in Europe ; and that, 
except among the pupils of the Neic York Institution, there were twice as many deaf-mute men with 
hearing wives, as deaf-mute women with hearing husbands. 
Principals of institutions for the deaf and dumb have personal knowledge of their pupils, and 
may therefore be able to arrive at correct conclusions regarding the results of intermarriage. 
It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for others to arrive at an independent conclusion 
from the data published in the institution reports. It is even impossible to ascertain from these 
reports the mere number of the deaf offspring recorded as born to the pupils. The nature of the 
difficulty will be understood by an example. From the 1877 report of the American Asylum we 
find that- 
George W. A (born about 1803) "married a deaf-mute" and had 3 deaf children. 
Mary R (born about 1808) "married a deaf-mute" and had 3 deaf children. 
Jonathan M (born about 1814) "married a deaf-mute" and had 3 deaf children. 
Paulina B (born about 1817) "married a deaf-mute" and had 3 deaf children. 
Now the query presents itself, "how many deaf children were born to these pupils ?" Perhaps 
Mary R was the wife of George W. A , and Paulina B the wife of Jonathan M , 
in which case there are only 6 deaf children in all. It is possible, however, that in such cases the 
males and females were not related in marriage, and upon this supposition there were 12 deaf 
children. 198 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
There is generally nothing in the institution reports to guide us to a solution of the problem. 
If the names of the husbands and wives of the pupils were recorded it would be possible to arrive 
at some conclusion. As it is, the most we can do is to ascertain the number of deaf children recorded 
as the offspring of the male pupils and those noted as born to the female pupils. Even though it 
were possible to arrive at a correct conclusion regarding the total number of deaf offspring recorded 
in the reports, still we would not be able to ascertain the actual number of deaf children born to 
the pupils. For it is obvious, from the following considerations, that the number recorded is so 
much less than the number born as to lead to the inference that in a considerable proportion of 
cases the deaf offspring are not recorded at all until some of the children make their appearance 
in the institution as pupils. This means that they may not be recorded until 10, 20, or even 25 
years after the date of their .birth. I may be wrong in such a supposition, but I do not know how 
otherwise to account for the imperfection of the records: 
(1) In the 1877 report of the American Asylum the married male pupils were recorded to have 
had 36 deaf children born to them and the married female pupils 28. Whereas 57 children of 
deaf-mute marriages have already been admitted into the institution as pupils (November, 1883*), 
all of whom were born before the 1877 report was issued. This does not include a number of deaf- 
mutes who have been admitted into other institutions in New England whose parents were pupils 
of the American Asylum, nor does it include children too young to be sent from home. 
(2) In the 1882 report of the Illinois Institution the married male pupils were recorded to have 
had 10 deaf children born to them anti the married female pupils 8. Whereas 14 children have 
already been admitted into the Illinois Institution (November, 1883t) one or both of whose parents 
were deaf. 
(3) A comparison of the four reports of the American Asylum containing the statistics of the 
institution shows that only a small proportion of the deaf offspring of the later marriages are 
recorded in the 1877 report. This will be obvious from the following table: 
Table XXVI.-Congenitally deaf pupils who married deaf-mutes. 
Presumed date of mar- 
riage.* 
Number of males 
married. 
Recorded number of 
deaf children born 
to the males. 
Number of females 
married. 
Recorded number of 
deaf children born 
to the females. 
Before 1843 
18 
4 
17 
11 
Between 1843 and 1857. 
42 
13 
46 
5 
Between 1857 and 1867. 
22 
30 
1 
Between 1867 and 1877. 
38 
-- 
26 
.. 
* Deduced from a comparison of the four reports of the American Asylum. (See Introduction to Table XXIII.) 
From this table it appears that 116 congenital deaf-mutes (males and females) have married 
deaf-mutes since the 1857 report was issued and that only one deaf child resulted from these 
marriages (!). This is most extraordinary, in view of the results obtained by Dr. Turner, which 
were based upon the marriages of the pupils of the same institution, and we must conclude that 
the records of the later marriages are defective so far as the deaf offspring are concerned. 
An examination of the tables in the appendix shows that of all the pupils of the American 
Asylum and Illinois Institution 445 males and 371 females are recorded to have married. In the 
445 families formed by the males there were (according to the reports) 46 deaf children, or 10.3 
deaf children for every 100 families; and in the 371 families formed by the females there were 36 
deaf children, or 9.7 in 100 families. 
* Reported to the writer by Mr. Williams, the present principal of the institution, 
t Reported to the writer by Dr. Gillett, the present principal of Illinois Institution THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
199 
If we add together the total number of males and females reported to have married and the 
total number of deaf children stated to have been born to them, we obtain the following figures: 
816 individuals married, and 82 deaf offspring. We cannot conclude from this that the records 
indicate that 82 deaf children were born to the 816 pupils referred to, for many of the male pupils 
mentioned had undoubtedly married female deaf-mutes educated in the same institution with 
themselves. In such cases the deaf offspring were probably recorded twice-once under the name 
of the father and once under the name of the mother. If we desire to obtain, not the actual 
number of deaf children recorded to have been born to the pupils, but the proportionate number, 
we may safely add together the children recorded to have been born to the male and female pupils; 
for, if 816 families have 82 deaf children, the proportionate number of deaf children (10 for every 
100 families) is a mean between the results obtained from the marriages of the males and females 
considered separately, and is more reliable than either from being based on larger numbers. 
In the following tables this plan of addition has been adopted, and it must be remembered that 
the number of families noted and the number of deaf children born, as deduced from the reports 
of the American Asylum and Illinois Institution, must not be taken to indicate the actual number 
of families formed by the pupils of these institutions, nor the actual number of deaf children born 
to them. They simply indicate a proportion, which is expressed in the third column by a percentage. 
If none of the males married females recorded in the same reports, then the figures in the 
following tables would indicate actual as well as proportionate numbers; but this is not the case. 
Table XXVII.-Proportion of deaf offspring resulting from the marriages of deaf-mutes. 
[Deduced from the reports of the American Asylum and Illinois Institution.] 
Married couples. 
Number of families. 
Number of deaf 
childreu. 
Percentage (number 
of deaf children to 
every 100 families). 
Both parties deaf-mutes 
One party a deaf-mute 
654 
162 
66 
16 
10.1 
9.9 
One or both parties deaf-mutes.... 
816 
82 
10.0 
The following tables enable us to compare the above results with those obtained from each 
institution, considered separately: 
Table XXVIII.-Proportion of deaf offspring as deduced from reports of Illinois Institution and 
American Asylum. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION 
Married couples. 
Number of families. 
Number of deaf 
children. 
Percentage (number 
of deaf children to 
every 100 families). 
Both parties deaf-mutes 
One party a deaf-mute 2 
152 
22 
17 
1 
11.2 
4.5 
One or both parties deaf-mutes.... 
174 
18 
10.3 
Both parties deaf-mutes 
One party a deaf-mute 
502 
140 
49 
15 
- 9.8 
10.1 
One or both parties deaf-mutes.... 
642 
64 
10.0 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 200 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
The percentages obtained indicate, of course, the number of deaf children for every 100 fam- 
ilies as recorded in the reports, and not the actual number of deaf children for every 100 families 
(which is known to be greater). 
The general results obtained from the two institution reports are remarkably concordant. 
In the case of the American Asylum, however, it appears that the pupils who married hearing 
persons had a larger proportion of deaf children than those who married deaf-mutes (!) Such a 
remarkable result requires explanation. The pupils assumed to have married hearing persons are 
simply recorded in the report as " married," but from private correspondence with the present 
principal (Mr. Williams) I find that in most, if not in all, cases so recorded the record is really 
intended to indicate marriage with a hearing person. 
Even in the case of the congenitally deaf pupils of the American Asylum it appears that 
those who married hearing persons had a larger proportion of deaf offspring than those who mar- 
ried deaf-mutes. The following table shows that this result can be deduced not only from the 
tables in the appendix, but from the table quoted above from Dr. Turner's paper on Hereditary 
Deafness: 
Class. 
Marriages of the congenitally deaf. 
Dr. Turner's results (1868) 
for pupils of the Ameri- 
can Asvlum. 
• 
Results from 1877 report of 
American Asvlum. 
Number of families. 
Number of deaf chil- 
dren 
Percentage (number of 
deaf children for every 
100 families). 
Number of families. 
Number of deaf chil- 
dren. 
Percentage (number of 
deaf children for every 
100 families). 
1 
One parent congenitally deaf and the 
other a^hearing person 
30 
15 
50.0 
57 
14 
24.6 
2 
Both parents deaf-mutes (one congen- 
itally deaf and the other inciden- 
tally deaf) 
56 
6 
10.7 
(?) 
(?) 
(?) 
3 
Both parents deaf-mutes (both con- 
genitally deaf) 
24 
17 
70.9 
(?) 
(?) 
(?) 
4* 
Both parents deaf-mutes (one or both 
congenitally deaf) 
80 
23 
28.7 
239 
34 
14.2 
Table XXIX. 
* Class 4 gives summation of classes 2 and 3. 
I have already stated that in the majority of the cases that have fallen under my personal 
observation where a deaf-mute was married to a hearing person that the hearing person belonged 
to a family containing deaf-mutes, and this is significant in the light of the results deduced above, 
especially when we remember that the late Dr. Harvey L. Peet found that "the brothers and 
sisters of a deaf-mute are about as liable to havedeaf-mute children as the deaf-mute himself, suppos- 
ing each to marry into families that have or each into families that have not shown a predisposition 
toward deaf-dumbness." If we examine the cases of the pupils who are presumed to have married 
hearing persons in the light of this idea, separating the sporadic cases from those who have deaf- 
mute relations, we obtain the following results: 
We find from the tables in the appendix that 162 deaf-mutes were "married," presumably, to 
hearing persons. Of these deaf-mutes 55 are stated to have had deaf-mute relatives, and they are 
recorded to have had 15 deaf children, or more than 27 deaf children for every 100 families; on 
the other hand, 107 of these deaf mutes were noted as sporadic cases, and only one deaf child is 
recorded as the offspring of the marriages ! THE FOBMATION OF A DEAF VABIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
201 
We have here a clear indication that a hereditary tendency towards deafness, as indicated by the 
possession of deaf relatives, is a most important element in determining the production of deaf off- 
spring. The following table shows that it may even be a more important element than the mere fact of 
congenital deafness in one or both of the parents. 
Table XXX.-Deaf-mute offspring of deaf-mute marriages. 
[Results deduced from the tables in the appendix, combining the figures obtained from the reports of the American 
Asylum and Illinois Institution. ] 
Description of married couples. 
Number of families. 
Number of deaf chil- 
dren. 
Percentage* (number 
of deaf children to 
every 100 families). 
(1) Father known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause of 
father's deafness is stated): 
(«) Father recorded to be congenitally deaf 
187 
13.3 
(l») Father recorded to be non-congenitally deaf 
237 
18 
7.6 
(2) Mother known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause of 
mother's deafness is stated): 
(a) Mother recorded to be congenitally deaf 
173 
31 
17.9 
(b) Mother recorded to be non-congenitally deaf 
179 
4 
2.9 
(3) Father known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all such cases): 
(a) Father known to have deaf-mute relatives 
132 
23 
17.4 
(b) Father recorded as a sporadic case 
313 
23 
7.3 
(4) Mother known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all such cases): 
(a) Mother known to have deaf-mute relatives 
153 
25 
16.3 
(b) Mother recorded as a sporadic case 
218 
11 
5.0 
(5) One parent known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases where the cause 
of deafness was stated): 
(a) Deaf-mute parent recorded to be congenitally deaf 
360 
56 
15.5 
(&) Deaf-mute parent recorded to be non-congenitally deaf 
416 
22 
5.3 
(6) One parent known to be a deaf-mute (summation of all cases): 
(a) Deaf-mute parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
285 
48 
16.8 
(b) Deaf-mute parent recorded as a sporadic case, 
531 
34 
6.4 
(7) One parent recorded to be congenitally deaf (summation of all cases): 
(a) Congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
230 
41 
17.8 
(b) Congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case 
130 
15 
11.5 
(8) One parent recorded to be non-congenitally deaf (summation of all cases): 
(a) Non-congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
53 
5 
9.4 
(It) Non-congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case 
363 
17 
4.7 
(9) Both parents known to be deaf-mutes (summation of all cases): 
(a) One parent known to have deaf-mute relatives ........................ 
2*0 
33 
14.7 
(b) Oue parent recorded as a sporadic case 
424 
33 
7.8 
(10) Both parents known to be deaf-mutes and one recorded as congenitally 
deaf: 
(a) Congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
186 
27 
14.5 
(b) Congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case 
112 
15 
13.4 
(11) Both parents known to be deaf-mutes, and one recorded as non-congenitally 
deaf: 
(a) Non-congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
43 
4 
9.3 
(b) Non-congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case 
288 
16 
Q f) 
(12) Oue parent known to be a deaf-mute and the other presumed to be a hear- 
ing person (summation of all cases): 
(a) The deaf-mute parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
15 
27.3 
(&) The deaf-mute parent, recorded as a sporadic case 
107 
1 
0.9 
(13) One parent recorded to be a congenital deaf-mute, the other presumed to be 
a hearing person: 
(a) Congenitally deaf parent known to have deaf-mute relatives 
44 
14 
31.8 
(&) Congenitally deaf parent recorded as a sporadic case 
18 
None. 
(?) 
(14) One parent recorded to be a non-congenital deaf-mute, the other presumed 
to be a hearing person: 
(a) Non-congenital deaf-mute parent known to have deaf-mute relatives.... 
10 
1 
10.0 
(b) Non-congenital deaf-mute parent recorded as a sporadic case 
75 
1 
1.3 
(15) General results (summation of all eases of marriage recorded): 
Average.... 
816 
82 
10.0 
"The percentages are given as deduced from the institution reports. The true percentages are probably much 
greater, but proportionally greater. 
S. Mis. 110 26 202 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
(a) The large proportion of deaf offspring resulting from marriages where the father was 
known to have deaf-mute relatives, and from those where the mother was known to have deaf- 
mute relatives, and the comimratively small proportion where either parent appeared to be free 
from hereditary taint, seem to point to the conclusion that in a large proportion of cases in which 
the marriages were productive of deaf offspring both parents had deaf-mute relatives (even in the case 
where one parent was a hearing person). 
(b) A similar process of reasoning leads to the conclusion that in a large proportion of 
marriages where deaf offspring resulted both parents were probably congenitally deaf where both u-ere 
deaf-mutes, and one parent congenitally deaf where only one was a deaf-mute. 
(c) It is thus highly probable that a large proportion of the deaf offspring of deaf-mute mar- 
riages had parents who ivere both congenitally deaf and who also both had deaf-mute relatives. 
(d) Non-congenital deafness, if sporadic, seems little likely to be inherited. 
(e) Another deduction we may make is that more of the deaf offspring whose parents had deaj 
relatives will marry than of those whose parents were recorded as sporadic cases, for there are more of 
them; and they will have a greater tendency than the others to transmit their defect to the grandchil- 
dren. 
These results are in close accordance with the experience of the venerable principal of the 
Pennsylvania Institution, as expressed in the following letter: 
Pennsylvania Institution for Deaf and Dumb, 
Philadelphia, November 14, 1S83. 
A. Graham Bell, Esq.: 
Dear Sir: Continued ill health has prevented an earlier compliance with your request of October 15. The list 
I now send is full and accurate, according to the records of the institution and my recollection. In regard to most 
of the cases, I know of no place where fuller information can be obtained than our books furnish. 
A residence of more than forty years in this institution has afforded me abundant opportunity for observation 
in regard to the subject of your research. A statement of the conclusions I have arrived at may be of some interest 
and use to you. 
In regard to the marriage of deaf mutes with each other, if both the man and the woman are deaf from birth, 
there is very great danger-I should say a strong probability-that some of the offspring will be born deaf. I know 
a family, however, where the mother is one of three congenitally deaf children and the father one of five, and the 
seven children they have had are all without defect. In the list sent you all the parents, except in two cases, were 
born deaf. In one of these two cases the father could hear; in the other the mother is a semi-mute. 
Where both parents became deaf adventitiously, there seems to be no more probability of the offspring being born 
deaf than there is where both parents hear. 
Where only one of tie parents is congenitally deaf, the children almost always hear. 
Any further information I can give will be furnished willingly. 
Yours, respectfully, 
JOSHUA FOSTER. 
My attempts to deduce from the records of the marriages of the deaf the influences that 
cause the production of deaf offspring have met with only partial success. Valuable indications 
have been obtained, but precise and accurate results are unattainable, on account of imperfect 
data. It occurred to me some time ago that a different method might lead to an exhaustive exam- 
ination of the subject. It is known that few of the deaf and dumb married before the establish- 
ment of educational institutions in this country, and nearly 78 per cent, of all the marriages re- 
corded in the reports of the American Asylum (the oldest institution in the country), seem to have 
been contracted since the year 1843. The probabilities are, therefore, that the vast majority of the 
deaf offspring born are still living, and from them may be obtained an accurate account of their 
ancestry. It also appeared probable that the majority of these deaf-mutes would at some period THE FORMATION OF A HEAP VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
203 
of their lives, make their appearance in institutions for the deaf and dumb, and from the institution 
records might be obtained their mimes and addresses. Such considerations as the above led me 
to send to all the institutions in the country a circular letter of inquiry requesting the names and 
addresses of all the pupils who had been admitted who had deaf-mute parents, and returns have 
been received from a number of institutions.* 
A starting point has thus been gained for a new investigation of the subject. The cases re 
turned are sufficient in number to throw some light upon the proportion of deaf offspring born to 
deaf-mutes as compared with the proportion born to the community at large. The total number 
of deaf-mutes in the country, according to the recent census, is 33,878, which gives us a proportion 
of one deaf mute for every 1,500 of the population. If, then, the proportion of deaf-mutes, origi- 
nating among the deaf-mutes themselves, were no greater than in the community at large, they 
should constitute only 1 in 1,500 of the deaf-mute population. In other words, we should not 
have more than 23 deaf-mutes in the United States who are themselves the children of deaf-mutes. 
The returns received from the institutions, however, show that no less than 215 such children have 
already been admitted as pupils into 35 of the 58 institutions of the country (23 institutions not re- 
plying to my queries). Pupils are rarely admitted before they are 10 or 12 years of age and many 
do not reach the institution until they are much older. Hence it is evident that this number does 
not at all express the total number of such cases in the United States. Even if we suppose that no 
more than 230 such cases are to be found in the country, the proportion is ten times greater than in 
the community at large, or 1 in 150. But when we consider that nearly all of these children were 
born deaf, whereas nearly half of the deaf mutes of the country (45.9 per cent.) became deaf from 
accidental causes, we realize that the liability to the production of congenital deaf-mutes is more 
nearly twenty times that of the population at large than ten times. It is evident that whatever 
may be the actual number of deaf-mutes in the country who have one or both parents deaf, the true 
number is much greater than that assumed above. From which it follows that the liability to the 
production of deaf offspring is also greater. While, then, we cannot at present arrive at any per. 
centage, it is certain that the proportion of deaf-mute offspring born to deaf-mutes is many times greater 
than the proportion born to the people at large. 
* See Tables 8, T, U, and W of the Appendix. My best thanks are due to the principals and superintendents for 
their assistance in this investigation. Chapter IV. 
FAMILIES OF DEAF-MUTES. 
The reports of the American Asylum, New York, Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois Institutions 
show that in each institution deaf-mutes have been received who belong to families containing 
five, six, or even more deaf-mutes ; and there is abundance of evidence to indicate that such fam- 
ilies are very numerous in the United States. In cases where there are five or six children of one 
family deaf and dumb some of them marry when they grow up, and in many cases they marry 
persons who belong, like themselves, to families containing several deaf-mutes. Thus it happens 
that we have here and there, scattered over the country, groups of deaf-mute families connected 
together by blood and marriage. 
The probability is very strong that the deaf mute children of deaf-mute marriages will at 
some time or other make their appearance in the educational institutions of the country, and we 
might reasonably hope to be able to trace the family relations from the published reports of the 
institutions. Unfortunately, in the majority of cases, the information that can be gleaned in this 
way is very fragmentary and uncertain, for the names of the husbands and wives of the pupils are 
rarely quoted, so that it is impossible in the great majority of cases to trace the connections. A 
female deaf-mute, when she marries, changes her name to that of her husband; the new name is 
not recorded in the institution reports, and we lose track of her branch of the family. Should she 
have deaf offspring they make their appearance in the institution under another family name, and 
the connection is not obvious. So far as my researches have gone they indicate the probability 
of a connection by blood or marriage between many of the largest of the deaf-mute families of 
the New England States. 
In the following diagram (Fig. 1) I exhibit the results of an attempt to trace the connections 
of the Brown family, of Henniker, N. H., in which there are known to be at least four generations 
of deaf-mutes. 
O Indicates a hearing and speaking person. 
Indicates a deaf-mute. 
= Indicates marriage. 
204 
Fig. 1.-The Brown family of Henniker, N. H., and a few of its connections. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
205 
The Brown family, of Henniker, N. H.-The ancestor of this family was one of the early 
pioneers of New Hampshire. He left Stowe, in Massachusetts, somewhere about the year 1787, 
and settled in Henniker, N. H. 
His deaf-mute son Nahum (born in 1772) married a hearing lady, by whom he had a son and 
daughter, both deaf and dumb. His son Thomas, when he entered the American Asylum as a 
pupil, was recorded to have had "an aunt and two cousins deaf and dumb." (This branch of the 
family has not yet been certainly identified.) Thomas married a deaf-mute (Mary Smith, of Chil- 
mark, Mass.), by whom he had two children, Thomas L. (a deaf-mute) and a hearing daughter who 
died young. The sou Thomas L. married a hearing lady (Almira G. Harte, of Burlington, Vt.), and 
removed to Michigan, where he became one of the teachers of the Michigan Institution for the Deaf 
and Dumb. I have no information concerning his descendants. 
The deaf mute daughter of Nahum married a hearing gentleman, Mr. Bela M. Swett, of Hen- 
niker, N. H., by whom she had three sons (Thomas B., William B., and Nahum). The eldest son, 
Thomas, was born deaf; the second son, William, was born deaf in one ear, and lost the hearing 
of the other in childhood from measles; and the third son, Nahum, could hear. The eldest son, 
Thomas, married a deaf-mute, and his three children (Mitchell, Charlotte E., and Mary S.) are 
deaf-mutes. The second son, William, married a deaf-mute (Margaret Harrington) by whom he 
had five children, all of whom could hear at birth, but two of them (Persia H. and Lucy Maria) 
lost their hearing so early in life as to necessitate their education in institutions for the deaf and 
dumb. Two others died young and one has retained her hearing into adult life. The eldest 
daughter (Persis, born 1852) has married a deaf-mute. It will thus be seen that three families 
of deaf-mutes have sprung from Nahum Brown, and in two of these the deafness has descended 
to the fourth generation. In the other family it descended to the third generation, beyond which 
I have been unable to trace the family. The deaf-mute connections of the Brown family have only 
been partially worked out. 
1. The wife of William B. Swett was Margaret Harrington, who had a deaf-mute brother, 
Patrick, who married a deaf-mute (Sarah Worcester), who had a twin deaf-mute brother (Frank), who 
married a deaf-mute (Almira Huntington), who had a deaf-mute sister (Sophia M.), who married a 
deaf-mute (James R. Hines).* Frank Worcester, one of the twin deaf-mutes has a deaf-mute son- 
the other twin (Susan) has a child who hears. 
2. On the other side of the family, the wife of Thomas Brown (Mary Smith, of Chilmark, 
Martha's Vineyard) had a hearing brother (Capt. Austin Smith), who had two deaf-mute children 
(a son and a daughter). The son (Freeman N.) married a deaf-mute (Deidama West).! Mrs. Brown 
also had a deaf-mute sister (Sally), who "married a hearing man of Martha's Vineyard (Hariff 
Mayhew) who had 5 deaf-mute brothers and sisters." 
The Lovejoy family.-This is another New England family in which deafness has been handed 
down through four generations. Benjamin Lovejoy, a deaf-mute, of Sidney, Me., is recorded in 
* The father and mother of James R. Hines (Isaac and Sophia) were both deaf-mutes, and he has a deaf-mute 
son (Eddie), and a cousin deaf and dumb. His mother (Sophia Rowley) also has a deaf-mute cousin. 
t They had a deaf-mute daughter (Lovina). Deidama West had a deaf-mute mother, Deidama (Tilton) West, and two 
maternal uncles deaf and dumb (Frankliu and Zeno Tilton) who married deaf-mutes. She also had three brothers and 
one sister deaf and dumb (George, Benjamin, Joseph L., and Rebecca). George married a deaf-mute (Sabrina Rogers), 
and has a deaf-mute child (Eva S. West). Benjamin married a hearing lady (Mary Hathaway). I have no informa- 
tion concerning their offspring. Rebecca married a deaf-mute (Eugene Trask), who had a deaf-mute brother (John 
Trask) who married a deaf-mute. George Trask, a deaf-mute, born about 1880, is probably the son of Eugene 
Trask and Rebecca West. 206 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
the reports of the American Asylum to have had " a grandfather, father, and 3 children deaf and 
dumb." There are other families of deaf-mutes of the same name which are obviously connected. 
(See Fig. 7.) 
The Ouat family, of Illinois.-Two members of this family entered the Illinois Institution in 
1859 and 1862. It was recorded of them in the 1882 report that there had been deafness in the 
family for five generations. No particulars, however, are given. 
O Indicates a hearing person, 
© Indicates a deaf-mnte. 
= Indicates marriage. 
Fig. 2.-The Hoagland family of Kentucky. 
The Hoagland family, of Kentucky (Fig. 2.)-This is one of the most remarkable of the deaf-mute 
families of America. In the above diagram I have attempted to show the family connections 
so far as they are known to me. In 1853 this family was stated to consist of a father, himself deaf 
and dumb, with 7 deaf mute children. He had 2 deaf-mute nephews, one of whom was married 
and had two deaf-mute children. He also had a hearing s'ster who had two deaf-mute sons, one 
of whom had 3 children, all deaf-mutes.* 
The principal of the Kentucky Institution has kindly furnished me with the following addi- 
tional particulars concerning this family. He says: 
"In 1822 two brothers, Thomas and William Hoagland, entered our institution. Thomas 
never married, but William married a deaf mute. He had a son and two daughters, all of whom 
were mutes and married mutes. Jesse, the son, has five children, all of whom can hear. Mrs. 
Blount, the eldest daughter, has one son, a mute; Clara, the other daughter, is childless. This 
may be called the Lexington branch, as their home was there. Another, the Gallatin County 
branch, contained seven deaf-mutes. In another branch, the Reeds, the father and his three 
children are mutes. Only a part of all these mutes have been at school, and it is difficult to trace 
n the scanty records the exact relationship between the different branches." 
The Adkins family, of Kentucky.-This family was stated in 1853 to contain nine deaf-mutes.t 
The Grisson family, of Kentucky.-I am indebted to the principal of the Kentucky Institution 
for the following very instructive particulars concerning this family: 
"There were three or four deaf-mute brothers and sisters of this family who were pupils here 
(Kentucky Institution) about the year 1828; one of them, William, married a deaf-mute lady and 
* American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. vi, p. 255. 
t American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. vi, p. 256. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
207 
had a numerous family, all of whom could hear. One of his sons married his cousin, also a hearing 
person, and all of their five children are deaf-mutes." 
In 1870 Mr. Benjamin Talbot, then principal of the Iowa Institution, published in the American 
Annals of the Deaf and Dumb (vol. xv, p. 118) an account of some families of deaf-mutes residing 
in his State. One or two of the most remarkable cases may be noted which are of a particularly 
suggestive character. 
O Indicates a hearing person, 
e Indicates a deaf-mute. 
Fig. 3.-The Lurber family of Iowa. 
The Lurber family^ of Iowa (Fig. 3).-"The father is a deaf-mute, without education, who came 
to Iowa from Indiana, where there are, or have been, several deaf-mute relatives. Of twelve 
children in this family only one, and she the eighth, was born deaf. Four others, the fourth, fifth, 
sixth, and ninth, have lost their hearing in whole or in part, and have been sent to school here 
(Iowa Institution)." 
Q Indicates a hearing person. 
Ct Indicates a partially deaf person. 
© Indicates a deaf-mute. 
= Indicates marriage. 
Fig. 4.-The Huston family of Iowa. 
The Huston family. of Iowa (Fig. 4).-"There have been ten children in this family, of whom 
the third and eighth lost their hearing by disease, while the sixth, ninth, and tenth were born deaf. 208 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Mr. Huston's grandmothers were sisters, and the grandfather and grandmother of this family were 
first cousins. Mr. Huston's brothers, like himself, were healthy and long lived, but, like him, they 
all became deaf, or at least hard of hearing, comparatively e trly in life." 
® Indicates a deaf-mute. 
= Indicates marriage. 
Fig. 5.-The Fullerton family of Hebron, N. Y. 
The Fullerton family, of Hebron, N. Y. (Fig. 5).-Sayles Works, born 1806 (a presumed con- 
genital deaf-mute of the New York Institution), married Jane Fullerton, born 1806 (a congenital 
deaf-mute educated in the same institution), who had six brothers and sisters deaf and dumb. 
All of their six children were deaf and dumb. There were thus fourteen deaf-mutes in this family. 
I have no information concerning the descendants. 
Q Indicates a hearing person. 
@ Indicates a deaf-mute. 
= Indicates marriage. 
Fig. 6.-A family indicated in the 1854 report of the New York institution. 
A remarkable family reported from the New York Institution for the Deaf and Dumb.-The 
particulars of this family, as gleaned from the 1854 report of the New York Institution, are shown 
in the above diagram (Fig. 6): As the descent is in the female line, this genealogical table could 
not have been made had it not been for the fact that the New York report gives the names of the 
husbands and wives of some of the pupils. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
209 
The Allen Fa truly, 
of Hartford, Me. 
Rebecca Allen, admitted to American Asylum in 1825, aged 21 years. 
She is recorded as having "two brothers, two sisters, and eleven other 
relatives deaf and dumb," and to have "married a deaf-mute." 
The Lovejoy Family, 
of Fayette, Me. 
The Lovejoy Family, 
of Sidney, Me. 
The Lovejoy Family, 
of Concord, N.H. 
The Lovejoys of New Hampshire are here grouped with the Lovejoys 
of Maine, although we have no certain evidence that they are connected. 
The Rowe Family, 
of Ne w Gloucester, NEe, 
The Curtis Family, 
of Leeds, Me. 
(7 deaf-mutes in a family. 5 married to deaf- mules 
(5 deaf-mutes in the family^ 
■I married to deaf-mutes, / 
The Hoyers Family, 
of Freeport, Me. 
I? 
The Wakefield Family, 
of Gw diner,Me. 
The Small Family, 
of West Danville,Me. 
Esther Wakefield, admitted 1848, 
aged 11 years; had "one sister, one 
uncle, three cousins, and other rela- 
tives deaf and dumb." 
The Seiders Family, 
of WaHoboro fMe. 
The Williamson, Family, 
of Northport,Me. 
The ■Jack Family, 
ofJackson-, He- • 
Emma Seiders, admitted 1858, aged 
9 years,- had ' one sister, one brother, 
one uncle, one cousin, deaf and dumb. " 
Etta J. Williamson, admitted 1859, 
aged 11 years; had "two uncles and 
three cousins deaf and dumb," and she 
married a deaf-mute. 
Dunbar Jack, admitted 1858, 
aged 8 yrs; had "two brothers, 
two uncles, and two cousins 
deaf and dumb." 
Fig. 7.-A group of deaf-mute families from Maine. 
s. Mis. 110 27 210 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
A group of deaf-mute families from Maine.-Members of the deaf-mute families shown in Fig. 
7 have been admitted into the American Asylum at Hartford, Conn. There is no record showing 
any relationship between the families, but their close proximity to one another is extremely sug- 
gestive. The fact that there are four generations of deaf mutes in the Lovejoy family suggests 
the idea that some of the other families may perhaps be descended from it through the female line. 
Whatever the explanation, it is at all events remarkable that so many large deaf-mute families 
should have originated in small places within a few miles of one another. 
It must not be supposed that I have attempted to give an exhaustive list of the large deaf- 
mute families. I have simply given specimen cases to prove that in many different parts oi the 
country deafness has been transmitted by heredity. There are many more large families known 
to me which are not alluded to above. Chapter V. 
UPON THE GROWTH OF THE DEAF-MUTE POPULATION. 
The full returns of the 1880 census, so far as regards the deaf and dumb, have not yet been 
published; but, as stated before, Rev. Frederick H. Wines, who had charge of this department of 
the census, presented to the tenth convention of American instructors of the deaf and dumb the 
results of an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes reported in the census returns. The tables 
presented by Mr. Wines have been reproduced in the Appendix. (See Tables N, O, P, Q.) 
It will be observed that the cases are classified according to the period when deafness occurred 
and according to the cause of deafness (whether congenital or not). I have rearranged these cases 
into decades, so as to correspond with the classification of the pupils of the American Asylum 
and Illinois Institution, and have represented the results graphically in the following diagram : 
Fig. 8.-Relation between the congenital and non-congenital deaf-mutes of the country, according to the Rev. r red. U. Wines. 
The congenital deaf-mutes are indicated by the dark line; the non-congenital, by the light line. 
211 212 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
The ordinates of the curves represent, respectively, the number of congenital and non-con- 
genital deaf-mutes who became deaf in the decades indicated by the abscissae. In the case of the 
congenital deaf-mutes the ordinates also represent the number who were born in the decades given, 
but this is not true of the non-congenitals. It will be observed that the number of deaf-mutes re- 
turned who became deaf in the last decade, 1871-80, is less than the number who became deaf in 
the preceding decade. This does not necessarily mean that the number actually was less, but more 
probably indicates that the returns for the last decade are imperfect. Mr. Wines says that "In 
proportion to the degree of their youth the younger deaf-mutes are not enumerated. Fewer deaf- 
mutes who are babes in arms are enumerated than at the age of three years, and fewer at three 
years than at seven. The apparent maximum at seven is not the actual maximum; the actual 
maximum is at some younger age not yet ascertained." 
In the above diagram those portions of the curves that are believed to be unreliable from this 
cause are indicated by dotted lines. 
It will be observed that among the older deaf-mutes the congenitals are more numerous than 
the non-congenitals; whereas among the younger the reverse appears to be the case. There is no 
apparent diminution in the numbers of the congenitally deaf born of late years; and the reversal 
of the relation between the two classes must be attributed to an abnormal increase in the number 
of those who became deaf from disease or accident. It looks as if a wave of deafness-producing 
disease had swept over the continent about the time of the late civil war. 
Fig. 9.-The dark lines indicate those pupils who were born deaf, and the light lines those who became deaf from disease or accident. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
213 
There are indications also of a similar though less disturbance in the numbers of those who 
lost their hearing from disease during the decade 1811 to 1820. An examination of the reports of 
the American Asylum and Illinois institution may throw light upon the nature of these disturb- 
ances. By classifying the pupils of these institutions according to their period of birth, we obtain 
the results that are exhibited graphically in the foregoing diagram (Fig. 9). 
The apparent decrease in the number of pupils born in the last two decades is susceptible of 
simple explanation. Very few pupils are received into institutions for the deaf and dumb before 
they are ten or twelve years of age, while it is not uncommon for pupils to be admitted at twenty 
or twenty-five years of age or even older. 
A pupil born in the year 1869 would only be 13 years of age in 1882 (the date of the Illinois 
report). It is evident, therefore, that of those deaf mutes who were born in the decade 1860 to 
1869 who will ultimately make their appearance in the Illinois institution all had not been received 
at the date of the report. 
A similar explanation can be given in the case of the American Asylum. The dotted lines 
indicate those portions of the curves which are known to be inaccurate on this account. 
In regard to the American Asylum the abnormal increase in the number of pupils who became 
deaf from disease or accident who were born during the decade 1810-'19 is very marked. Another 
abnormal increase is observable in the number of those who became deaf in the decade 1860-'69. 
Indeed, the relations of the congenital and non congenital deaf-mutes are reversed in a similar 
manner to that shown in Fig. 8. In regard to the Illinois pupils (see Fig. 9) it will be observed 
that the increase in the numbers of the non-congenitally deaf is so enormous, that of the pupils who 
were born in the decade 1860-'69 there were more than three times as many non-congenitally deaf 
as there were congenitally deaf, and of those born in 1870-'79 more than four times, whereas the 
census returns show that more than half of all the deaf-mutes living in this country (1880) were 
born deaf. 
In the reports of the American Asylum and Illinois institutions the year when each pupil was 
admitted and his age when admitted are noted, with few exceptions. From these elements the 
period of birth has been calculated. The period when hearing was lost has also been ascertained 
in all cases where the age of the pupil when deafness occurred is stated in the report. 
In tables K and L of the Appendix the non-congenital pupils of both institutions are class- 
ified according to the period when bearing was lost and according to the disease that caused 
deafness. In regard to the Illinois report it is unfortunately the case that the age of the pupil 
when deafness occurred is not stated in 327 cases out of 947, so that we are only able to classify 
about two-thirds of the cases in this way. The results are shown graphically in the upper dia- 
grams of Fig. 10. 
From the tables in the Appendix we have clear evidences of two epidemics of "spotted fever,"* 
or epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis. Oue epidemic during the decade 1810 to 1819, reaching a 
maximum in the year 1815, and the other (a great epidemic) in the decade 1860 to 1869, continuing 
in the last decade, 1870 to 1879. 
The pupils who became deaf from cerebro-spinal meningitis and from scarlet fever are clas- 
sified according to the period when deafness occurred in the lower diagrams of Fig. 10. 
The numbers of the non-congenitally deaf are evidently subject to great and sudden fluctuations on 
account of epidemical diseases which cause deafness, whereas the groicth of the congenitally-deaf popula- 
tion seems to be much more regular. 
* According to Dr. Russell Reynolds "spotted fever" is a popular name for epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis. 
See "A System of Medicine," 1880, Vol. I, pp. 296-7. 214 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
[Fig. 10. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
215 
In Table T of the Appendix I have classified 215 cases of deaf-mutes who are the off-spring 
of deaf-mutes according to their period of birth, separating those who have one parent deaf from 
those who have both. The results are shown graphically in Fig. 11. 
Fig. 11.-The dark line indicates the deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf. The lower light line represents those who have one parent 
deaf, and the upper line the total number of deaf-mutes returned who have one or both parents deaf. 
No deaf-mute having both parents deaf has been returned who was born before the year 1832. 
It seems probable, therefore, that the oldest deaf-mute in the country whose parents were both 
deaf-mutes is only now a little past middle age. We have therefore received into our institutions 
only the first generation of deaf-mutes born from the intermarriage of deaf-mutes. The apparent 
decrease in the number born since 1861 does not necessarily indicate a real decrease, for many of 
the deaf-mutes born in the decade 1861 to 1870 have not yet been admitted to institutions for the 
deaf and dumb. Those portions of the curves that we know to be unreliable from this cause 
are represented in dotted lines. 
In concluding this portion of my subject it may be well to institute a comparison between the 
deaf-mute population and the total population of the country as returned by the census of 1880. 216 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
In Table U of the Appendix I have classified the people of the United States according to the 
decades in which they were born, and have reduced the number born in each decade to a percent- 
age of the whole. In the same table I have classified the 12,154 congenital deaf mutes mentioned 
by Mr. Wines in a similar manner, and also the deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf-mutes. 
We can thus examine upon the same scale the distribution of the three classes according to age. 
The results are shown graphically in the diagram, Fig. 12. 
The ordinates represent the percentage of the whole who were born in the decades indicated 
by the abscissae. 
If we assume that the numerical relation now existing between congenital deaf-mutes and 
hearing persons of the same age approximately represents the proportion of the congenitally deaf 
to the whole population born at the period when they were born, we have a means of comparing 
the growth of the congenitally deaf population with that of the population at large. 
The indications are that the congenital deaf-mutes of the country are increasing at a greater rate 
than the population at large ; and the deaf-mute children of deaf-mutes at a greater rate than the con- 
genital deaf-mute population. Fig. 12. 
Legend.-Distribution according to age (1) of the whole population of = 
the United States, (2) of the congenital deaf mute population, and (3) of | 
deaf mutes who are the children of deaf mutes. 
The ordinates of the curves represent the percentage of the whole who = 
? : were born in the decades indicated by the absciss®. 
„ ... represents population of the United States. 
■ represents congenital deaf mutes of the United States. । 
represents deaf mutes who are the children of deal । 
I mutes. | 
I represents portion of the curves known to be unreliable । 
| on account of incomplete returns. I 
r: . . । . -- -।1 1 h- - Chapter VI. 
UPON THE CAUSES THAT DETERMINE THE SELECTION OF THE DEAF BY THE DEAF IN MARRIAGE. 
In the preceding chapters I have shown that sexual selection is at work among the deaf and 
dumb, tending to produce a deaf variety of the human race. 
Those who believe as I do, that the production of a defective race of human beings would be 
a great calamity to the world, will examine carefully the causes that lead to the intermarriages of 
the deaf with the object of applying a remedy. 
It is a significant fact that "before the deaf and dumb were educated comparatively few of 
them married";* and intermarriage (if it existed at all) was so rare as to be practically unknown. 
This suggests the thought that the intermarriages of the deaf and dumb have in some way been 
promoted by our methods of education. When we examine the subject from this point of view a 
startling condition of affairs becomes apparent. 
Indeed, if we desired to create a deaf variety of the race, and were to attempt to devise 
methods which should compel deaf-mutes to marry deaf-mutes, we could not invent more complete 
or more efficient methods than those that actually exist and which have arisen from entirely 
different and far higher motives. 
Let us, then, consider how we might proceed to form a race of deaf-mutes, if we desired so to do, 
and let us compare the steps of the process with those that have been adopted by philanthropists 
and others, from the purest and most disinterested motives, to ameliorate the condition of the 
deaf and dumb. How would we commence1? 
1. With such an object in view, would it not be of importance to separate deaf-mutes from 
hearing persons as early in life as possible and make them live together in the same place, care- 
fully guarding them from the possibility of making acquaintances among hearing persons of their 
own age? This is what we do. We take deaf children away from their homes and place them in 
institutions by the hundred, keeping them there from early childhood to the commencement of 
adult life. 
2. It would also be of importance to promote social intercourse among them in adult life, so that 
the boys and girls of former years should meet again as men and women. We might, for instance, 
hold periodical reunions of former pupils at the institutions. This again is what we do. 
Indeed, the graduates of our institutions now commonly organize themselves into societies or 
associations for the promotion of social intercourse in adult life. Societies of deaf-mutes are to be 
found in all large cities, and in many of the smaller ones. Rooms are hired in a central locality, 
which become the rendezvous of the deaf-mutes of the neighborhood. After the business of the 
day is done the deaf-mutes of the city meet together for social intercourse, and on Sundays for 
public worship. Not only do local societies exist, but there are State associations for promoting 
social intercourse between the deaf-mutes of a State. Periodical conventions are held in different 
* See "The Causes of Deafness," by the Rev. W. W. Turner, American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. 1, p. 32. 
S. Mis. 110 28 
217 218 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
parts of the State, attended by deaf-mutes of both sexes. At these meetings they amuse them- 
selves in various ways. Sometimes they hold fairs-have theatrical representations in dumb 
show, spectacular tableaux, dancing, &c. 
Not only do these State associations exist, but a National Association has been formed for 
the purpose of promoting social intercourse between the scattered deaf-mutes of the country. The 
Second National Convention of Deaf Mutes met only a short time ago in New York and was at- 
tended by hundreds of deaf-mutes from all parts of the United States. 
3. Another method calculated to foster class-feeling among the deaf and dumb would be to 
provide them with newspapers and periodicals of their own, which should make a specialty of 
"personals" relating to the deaf and dumb-newspapers that should give full accounts of the deaf- 
mute conventions and reunions, and keep their readers informed of the movements of deaf-mutes, 
their marriages, deaths, &c. 'Quite a number of such newspapers have come into existence.* The 
majority being supported by the educational institutions of the country, with the benevolent object 
of teaching the deaf-mutes the art of printing. These papers, I understand, are generally edited 
and printed in the institutions, under the superintendence of the teachers. It was only natural 
to include among the items "personals" concerning former pupils, and that former pupils of the 
institution should take pleasure in reading them. In addition to the periodicals printed in the 
institutions, others have appeared edited and managed by adult deaf-mutes not connected with 
any institution. These latter papers became the organs of communication between the adult deaf- 
mutes, and were affiliated with the conventions and associations above referred to. 
4. The methods specified above, while they serve to facilitate social intercourse between adult 
deaf-mutes, do not necessarily prevent them from also associating with hearing persons. As there 
are 1,500 hearing persons for every one deaf-mute, it seems difficult to formulate any plan which 
would restrict their choice of partners in life to deaf-mutes alone or to the hearing members of 
deaf-mute families. Let us consider how this could be accomplished. 
What more powerful or efficient means could be found than to teach the deaf-mutes to think 
in a different language from that of the people at large? This is what we do. In the majority 
of our institutions for the deaf and dumb a special language is used as the vehicle of thought, 
a language as different from English as French or German or Russian. The English language is 
confined to the school-room and is simply taught as a school exercise, much as French and German 
are taught in the public schools. 
The deaf-mutes think in the gesture language, and English is apt to remain a foreign tongue. 
They can communicate with hearing persons by writing, but they often write in broken English as a 
foreigner would speak. They think in gestures and often translate into written English with the 
idioms of the sign language. The constant practice of the sign language interferes with the mas- 
tery of the English language, and it is to be feared that comparatively few of the congenitally deaf 
are able to read books understandingly unless couched in simple language. They are thus in a 
great measure cut off from our literature. This is another element in forcing them into each other's 
society. They are able to understand a good deal of what they see in our daily newspapers, 
especially if it concerns what interests them personally, but the political speeches of the day, the 
leading editorials, &c., are often beyond their knowledge of the English language. 
*These must not be confounded with the American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, a journal of a very different 
character, not intended to be read specially by deaf-mutes themselves. This journal is a quarterly magazine devoted 
to the discussion of subjects connected with the education of the deaf and dumb, and forms the official organ of com 
munication between teachers. It is one of the most admirably conducted special journals in existence, and contains 
within its pages almost the complete literature of the world relating to the education of the deaf and dumb. THE FOBMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
219 
5. Another method of consolidating the deaf and dumb into a distinct class in the community 
would be to reduce the sign-language to writing, so that the deaf-mutes would have a common 
literature distinct from the rest of the world. Such a species of writing would constitute a form 
of ideography like the Egyptian hieroglyphics. This, I understand, has already been accomplished 
by the late Mr. George Hutton, of Ireland, afterwards principal of the Institution for the Deaf and 
Dumb in Halifax, Nova Scotia.* The full publication of his method was prevented by his prema- 
ture death; but a committee was appointed by the Indianapolis Convention of American Instruc- 
tors of the Deaf and Dumb, to act in conjunction with his successor and son, Mr. J. Scott Hutton, 
to attempt the recovery of the system from the posthumous papers of Mr. George Hutton. I have 
not yet seen the report of the committee. 
6. Another and very powerful method of obstructing intercourse with hearing persons and 
compelling deaf-mutes to associate exclusively with one another would be to disseminate through- 
out the community incorrect ideas concerning the deaf and dumb, so that people should avoid and 
even fear them. The growth of erroneous ideas is favored by collecting deaf-mutes into institu- 
tions away from public observation. People rarely see a deaf-mute, and their information con- 
cerning them is chiefly derived from books and periodicals. 
Whatever the cause, it is certainly the case that adult deaf-mutes are sometimes hampered by 
the instinctive prejudices of hearing persons with whom they desire to have business or social re- 
lations. Many persons have the idea they are dangerous, morose, ill-tempered, &c. Then again 
people do not understand the mental condition of a person who cannot speak and who thinks in 
gestures. He is sometimes looked upon as a sort of monstrosity, to be stared at and avoided. 
His gesticulations excite surprise and even sometimes alarm in ignorant minds. In connection 
with this subject I may say that as lately as 1857 a deaf-mute was shot dead in Alabama by a 
man who was alarmed by his gestures.! In fact fallacies concerning the deaf and dumb are so 
common as to touch us all and to suggest the advisability of seriously examining the fundamental 
ideas we hold concerning them. 
I have elsewhere discussed the subject of " Fallacies concerning the deaf and the influence 
of these fallacies in preventing the amelioration of their condition," and shall not therefore en- 
large upon the subject here. I shall simply give a few of the conclusions at which I arrived in the 
paper referred to.| 
"1. Those whom we term'deaf-mutes' have no other natural defect than that of deafness. 
They are simply persons who are deaf from childhood, and many of them are only ' hard of hearing.' 
"2. Deaf children are dumb not on account of lack of hearing, but of lack of instruction. No 
one teaches them to speak. 
"3. A gesture-language is developed by a deaf child at home, not because it is the only form 
of language that is natural to one in his condition, but because his parents and friends neglect to 
use the English language in his presence in a clearly visible form. 
"4. (a) The sign-language of our institutions is an artificial and conventional language derived 
from pantomime. 
"(5) So far from being natural either to deaf or hearing persons, it is not understood by deaf 
children on their entrance to an institution. Nor do hearing persons become sufficiently familiar 
* See Mr. Hutton's article " Upon the Practicability and Advantages of Mimography," American Annals of the 
Deaf and Dumb, vol. xiv, pp. 157-182. 
t See American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, Vol. x, p. 116. 
t See Bulletin Philosophical Society of Washington, D. C., October 27, 1883; also American Annals of the Deaf and 
Dumb, January, 1884. 220 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
with the language to be thoroughly qualified as teachers until after one or more years' residence 
in an institution for the deaf and dumb. 
"(c) The practice of the sign-language hinders the acquisition of the English language. 
"(d) It makes deaf-mutes associate together in adult life, and avoid the society of hearing 
people. 
" (c) It thus causes the intermarriage of deaf-mutes and the propagation of their physical defect. 
"5. Written words can be associated directly with the ideas they express, without the inter- 
vention of signs, and written English can be taught to deaf children by usage so as to become 
their vernacular. 
" 6. A language can only be made vernacular by constant use as a means of communication, 
without translation. 
" 7. Deaf children who are familiar with the English language in either its written or spoken 
forms can be taught to understand the utterances of their friends by watching the mouth. 
" 8. The requisites to the art of speech-reading are : 
"(a) An eye trained to distinguish quickly those movements of the vocal organs that are 
visible (independently of the meaning of what is uttered); 
" (b) A knowledge of homophenes-that is, a knowledge of those words that present the 
same appearance to the eye; and, 
"(c) Sufficient familiarity with the English language to enable the speech reader to judge by 
context which word of a homophenous group is the word intended by the speaker. 
7. From what has been said above it will be seen that we have in actual operation the ele- 
ments necessary to compel deaf-mutes to select as their partners in life persons who are familiar 
with the gesture language. This practically limits their selection to deaf-mutes and to hearing 
persons related to deaf-mutes. They do select such partners in marriage, and a certain propor- 
tion of their children inherit their physical defect. We are on the way therefore towards the 
formation of a deaf variety of the human race. Time alone is necessary to accomplish the result. 
If we desired such a result what more could we do to hasten the end in view? We might 
attempt to formulate some plan which should lead the deaf children of deaf-mutes to marry one 
another instead of marrying deaf-mutes who had not inherited their deafness; or to marry hearing 
persons belonging to families in which deafness is hereditary. If, for instance, a number of the 
large deaf-mute families of the United States-families in which we know deafness to be heredi- 
tary-were to settle in a common place so as to form a community largely composed of deaf-mutes, 
then the deaf children born in the colony would be thrown into association with one another and 
would probably intermarry in adult life, or marry hearing persons belonging to the deaf-mute fam- 
ilies. Though fewer in number than the original deaf settlers, they would probably be more prolific 
of deaf offspring: and each succeeding generation of deaf-mutes would increase the probability of the 
deaf-mute element being rendered permanent by heredity. Such a result would certainly ensue 
if the numbers of the deaf and dumb in the colony were constantly kept up by the immigration 
of congenital deaf-mutes from outside; and if a large proportion of the hearing children born in 
the colony were to leave and mingle with the outside world. Under such circumstances we might 
anticipate that a very few generations would suffice for the establishment of a permanent race of 
deaf-mutes with a language and literature of its own. 
Plans for the formation of a deaf-mute community have a number of times been discussed by the 
deaf-mutes themselves. The idea originated in the action of Congress in endowing the American 
Asylum for Deaf-mutes at Hartford with a tract of land. Mon. Laurent Clerc, in conversation 
with some of the earlier pupils of the American Asylum, remarked that it would be a good 
* See speech by Laurent Clerc, "American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb," vol. x, p. 212. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
221 
plan to sell a portion of the land for the benefit of the institution and retain the remainder as 
head-quarters for the deaf and dumb, to which they could emigrate after being educated.* This 
idea took root in the minds of the pupils of the American Asylum, and afterwards developed 
into a number of independent and eccentric schemes for the formation of a deaf-mute community. 
Some of the pupils before their graduation formed an agreement to emigrate to the West and 
settle in a common place.* 
Then a number of years afterwards a deaf-mute publicly urged the formation of a deaf-mute 
commonwealth. Congress was to be petitioned to form a deaf-mute state or territory, &c. The 
details, though quite impracticable, brought forward the fact that a number of schemes of some- 
what similar character were in the minds of deaf-mutes in different parts of the country. One 
deaf-mute publicly offered to contribute $5,000 towards such a scheme if others could be found to 
join him. It was urged that the natural affection of the parents would lead to the distribution of 
the land among their children, and that as the majority of their children could hear and speak the 
land would soon pass out of the control of the deaf-mutes themselves. This was to be remedied in 
various ways-as, for instance, by legislation-so as to secure descent in the deaf-mute line alone. 
The American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb became the channel of communication between 
the various thinkers.! The scheme that received most approbation was the purchase of a tract of 
land by a few of the wealthy deaf-mute*, who were to agree to sell out the land in small blocks 
to other deaf-mutes. The whole scheme was afterwards discussed at a convention of the deaf- 
mutes of New England, and was overthrown by the influence of the Rev. W. W. Turner, Mr. Lau- 
rent Clerc, and other teachers, in conjunction with the most intelligent of the deaf-mutes them- 
selves. Since then the subject has not been publicly discussed, to my knowledge; but such a 
scheme is still favored by individual deaf-mutes, and may therefore be revived in organized shape 
at any time4 
CONCLUSION. 
I think all will agree that the evidence shows a tendency to the formation of a deaf variety of 
the human race in America. What remedial measures can be taken to lessen or check this ten- 
dency? We shall consider the subject under two heads: (1) repressive, (2) preventive measures. 
(1.) Repressive measures.-The first thought that occurs in this connection is that the intermar- 
riage of deaf-mutes might be forbidden by legislative enactment. So long, however, as deaf-mutes 
of both sexes continue to associate together in adult life, legislative interference with marriage might 
only promote immorality. But, without entirely prohibiting intermarriage, might not the mar- 
riages of the deaf be so regulated as to reduce the probabilities of the production of deaf offspring 
to a minimum? For instance, a law forbidding congenitally deaf persons from intermarrying 
would go a long way towards checking the evil. Such a law might, however, become inoperative 
on account of the impossibility of proving that a person had been born deaf. 
Legislation forbidding the intermarriage of persons belonging to families containing more 
than one deaf-mute would be more practicable. This would cover the intermarriage of hearing 
persons belonging to such families, and also the case of a consanguineous marriage in a deaf-mute 
family. 
In order to justify the passage of such an act, however, the results of intermarriages of this 
kind should be more fully investigated than is possible at the present time on account of limited 
* See "American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb," vol. x, p. 73. 
+ See vol. x, pp. 72-90; 136-160; 212-215. 
t Since this paper was read, a European philanthropist has commenced the colonization of a tract of land in 
Manitoba by deaf-mutes. I am informed by a friend who resides in Winnipeg that about 24 deaf-mutes, with their 
families, have already arrived from Europe and have settled upon the land. More are expected next year. 222 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
data. Steps should be taken towards the collection of special statistics, and the institutions should 
be urged to publish the materials in their possession. I wrote to the principals of all the institu- 
tions in the country, requesting them to forward to me such of their published reports as contained 
any of the required statistics. Although my request was honored by a response from a large .num- 
ber of institutions, the information contained in the reports in reference to the subject of inquiry 
was generally of the most meagre description. 
Among repressive measures should perhaps be included the influence of friends to prevent 
undesirable intermarriages. While such action might affect individual cases it could not greatly 
influence the general result. For there is no subject on which a man will so little brook interfer- 
ence as one of this kind where his affections are involved. 
A due consideration of all the objections renders it doubtful whether legislative interference with the 
marriage of the deaf would be advisable. 
(2.) Preventive measures.-The most promising method of lessening the evil appears to lie in 
the adoption of preventive measures. In our search for such measures we should be guided by the 
following principle: (1.) Determine the causes that promote intermarriages among the deaf and dumb ; 
and (2) remove them. 
The immediate cause is undoubtedly the preference that adult deaf-mutes exhibit for the com- 
panionship of deaf-mutes rather than that of hearing persons. Among the causes that contribute 
to bring about this preference we may note: (1) segregation for the purposes of education, and 
(2) the use, as a means of communication, of a language which is different from that of the people. 
These then are two of the points that should be avoided in the adoption of preventive measures. 
Nearly all the other causes I have investigated are ultimately referable to these. 
Segregation really lies at the root of the whole matter; for from this the other causes have 
themselves been evolved by the operation of the natural law of adaptation to the environment. 
We commence our efforts on behalf of the deaf-mute by changing his social environment. 
The tendency is then towards accommodation to the new conditions. In process of time the 
adaptation becomes complete; and when, at last, we restore him to the world as an adult, he finds 
that the social conditions to which he has become accustomed do not exist outside of his school life. 
His efforts are then directed to the restoration of these conditions with the result of intermarriage 
and a tendency to the formation of a deaf-mute community. 
The grand central principle that should guide us, then, in our search for preventive measures 
should be the retention of the normal environment during the period of education. The natural ten- 
dency towards adaptation would then co-operate with instruction to produce accommodation to 
the permanent conditions of life. 
The direction of change should therefore be towards the establishment of small schools, and 
the extension of the day-school plan. The practicability of any great development of day schools 
will depend upon the possibility of conducting very small schools of this kind economically to the 
State; for the scattered condition of the deaf and dumb in the community precludes the idea of 
large day schools, excepting in the great centers of population. The principle referred to above 
indicates that such schools should be of the minimum size possible; for the school that would most 
perfectly fulfil the condition required would contain only one deaf child. It also points to the 
advisability of coeducation with hearing children-but this is not practicable to any great extent. 
No instruction can be given through the ear, and complete coeducation would only therefore be 
possible by a change in the methods of teaching hearing children. It is useless to expect that such 
a change would be made for the benefit of the deaf and dumb on account of their limited number. 
Partial coeducation is, however, possible, for some studies are pursued in the common schools 
in which information is gained through the eye. For instance, deaf-mutes could profitably enter THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
223 
the same classes with hearing children for practice in writing, drawing, map-drawing, arithmetic 
on the black-board, sewing, &c. For other subjects special methods of instruction would be nec- 
essary, and these demand the employment of special teachers. They do not, however, necessitate 
special schools or buildings, and a small room in a public school building would accommodate as 
many deaf children as one teacher could successfully instruct. Considerations of economy render 
advisable the appropriation of a room of this kind, as the appliances of a large school might thus 
be obtained without special outlay. 
The average per capita cost of the education of a deaf child in an American institution is $223.28 
per annum.* Very small day schools could be maintained at no greater cost. The cost, at an 
institution, however, includes board and industrial training. On the day-school plan the parents 
would generally assume the expense of maintenance, and some special provision would have to be 
made for industrial training. This need give no concern, for so many deaf-mutes are earning their 
livelihood by trades which they were not taught in the institutions as to demonstrate the practi- 
cability of apprenticing deaf-mutes in ordinary shops. 
The indications are that in all places where three or four deaf children could be brought to- 
gether near their homes the cost would be no more to form them into a class in the nearest public 
school building under a special teacher than to send them to an institution. On the basis of the 
average per capita cost at an institution the sum of $669.84 would be received for three, and 
$893.12 for four pupils; aud such sums would probably be sufficient to pay the salary of a special 
teacher, as well as to cover incidental expenses. 
If this is so the day-school system could be made to penetrate into the smaller centers of popu- 
lation as well as into the large cities, in which case it would exert a considerable influence as a 
remedial agent. The plan of forming small classes of deaf children in public school buildings 
recommends itself as affording the closest approximation possible, on the large scale, to the normal 
conditions of life. 
Segregation during education has not only favored the tendency towards the formation of a 
race of deaf-mutes, but has led to the evolution of a special language adapted for the use of such a 
race-"the sign-language of the deaf aud dumb." This is especially true in America'where the 
sign-language is employed by a large majority of the teachers in instructing their pupils. In for- 
eign countries the vast majority employ, for this purpose, the ordinary language of the people. 
This will fully appear by reference to Table V in the Appendix. 
The lack of articulate speech should also be noted as an indirect cause of segregation in adult 
life, operating to separate deaf-mutes from hearing persons. Hence, instruction in articulation and 
speech-reading should be given to every pupil. 
This is done in Germany. Indeed, in 1882, more than 65 per cent, of all the deaf and dumb in 
foreign schools were being taught to speak and understand the speech of others, whereas in 
America less than 9 per cent, were to be found in oral schools.! 
According to more recent statistics compiled by the Clarke Institution | we find that in May, 
1883, about 14 per cent, of the deaf and dumb in American institutions were using speech in the 
* See Table X in the Appendix. 
t See American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, vol. xxviii, pp. 47-61; also, Table V, in the Appendix-from 
which it will appear that of 7,155 American deaf-mutes, only 584, or less than 9 per cent., were to be found in oral 
schools; whereas of 19,318 deaf-mutes in foreign schools, 12,662, or more than 65 per cent., were taught to speak in 
purely oral schools. 
+ See Appendix to Sixteenth Annual Report of the Clarke Institution. See, also, Table Y in the Appendix. 
Complete returns were not obtained, but the cases noted number 6,232, thus comprehending the vast majority of the 
pupils under instruction in May, 1883. Of these 886, or 14 per cent., were under oral instruction; 1,105, or 18 per 
cent., received occasional instruction in speech in sign institutions; and 4,241 received no instruction in articulation 
whatever. 224 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
school-room as the language of communication with their teachers; 18 per cent, were taught to 
speak as an accomplishment, and 68 per cent, received no instruction whatever in articulation. 
Nearly one-third of the teachers of the deaf and dumb in America are themselves deaf,* and 
this must be considered as another element favorable to the formation of a deaf race-to be 
therefore avoided. 
The segregation of deaf-mutes, the use of the sign language, and .the employment of deaf 
teachers produce an environment that is unfavorable to the cultivation of articulation and speech- 
reading, and that sometimes causes the disuse of speech by speaking pupils who are only deaf. 
Having shown the tendency to the formation of a deaf variety of the human race in America, 
and some of the means that should be taken to counteract it, I commend the whole subject to the 
attention of scientific men. 
* See American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb (January, 1883), vol. xxviii, pp. 56-57. Out of 481 teachers 154, 
or 32 per cent., were deaf. APPENDIX . 
1. Tables A to M give an analysis of 3,726 cases of deaf mutes from the American Asylum 
and Illinois Institution. For this analysis I am indebted to Mr. Franck Z. Maguire, of Wash- 
ington, D. C.; and I have personally verified his results. The relation of the tables to one another 
will be understood from the following classification: 
Classification of Tables A to K. 
Whose deafness was stated to be congenital 
(see Table B). 
Recorded to have deaf-mute relatives (see 
' Table E). 
1 Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table F). 
Total number of pupils of the 
American Asylum and Illi- 
nois Institution (see Table 
A). 
Whose deafness was stated to be non-congen-) 
ital (see Table C). ) 
Recorded to have deaf-mute relatives (see 
Table G). 
Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table H). 
The cause of whose deafness was not stated) 
(see Table D). j 
Recorded to have deaf-mute relatives (see 
Table I). 
Recorded as sporadic cases (see Table J). 
Table A gives the summation of Tables B, C, and I). 
Table B gives the summation of Tables E and F. 
Table C gives the summation of Tables G and H. 
Table D gives the summation of Tables I and J. 
In Table K the non-congenitally deaf pupils are classified according to period of birth and 
according to period when deafness occurred. 
In Table L the non-congenitally deaf pupils of the American Asylum are classified according 
to the period when hearing was lost, and according to the diseases that caused deafness. 
In Table M the non-congenitally deaf pupils of the Illinois Institution are classified according 
to the period when hearing was lost, and according to the diseases that caused deafness. 
2. Tables N, O, P, Q relate to the Tenth Census of the United States (1880), and give the 
results of an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns. (See communication 
by the Rev. Fred. D. Wines upon the 1880 census of the deaf and dumb; proceedings of the 10th 
convention of American instructors of the deaf and dumb, Jacksonville, Ill., August, 1882, pp. 
122-128, published with the 21st biennial report of the Illinois Institution for the Deaf and Dumb.) 
Table N gives an analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes living June 1, 1880, showing the 
number who became deaf each year since the year 1770. 
Table O shows the number of these deaf-mutes who became deaf each year since 1873, sepa- 
rating the congenital from the non-congenital cases. 
Table P classifies the 22,472 cases by periods of five years and reduces the number who became 
deaf in each quinquennial period to a percentage of the whole on a basis of 10,000 cases in all. 
Table Q classifies the 22,472 cases by periods of five years and separates the congenital from 
the non-congenital cases. 
3. Table R shows the number of deaf-mutes in the United States living June 1,1880, arranged 
according to race and sex and according to cause of deafness. The materials for this table have 
S. Mis. 110 29 
225 226 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
been furnished in advance of the publication of the census returns by the courtesy of General 
Seaton, General Superintendent of the Census. (See " Science," vol. iii, p. 244; and "American 
Annals of the Deaf and Dumb," vol. xxix p, 160.) 
4. Table S shows (a) the number of schools and institutions for the education of the deaf and 
dumb in the United States, 1883; (&) the date of opening of each institution; (c) the number of 
deaf children under instruction, 1883; and (cZ), the total number of pupils that have been received 
into the institutions. These particulars have been obtained from the "American Annals of the 
Deaf and Dumb," vol. xxix, pp. 90-94. The table also shows (e) the number of deaf children 
whose parents were deaf-mutes who have been received into the institutions. These particulars 
have been received directly from the principals or superintendents of the institutions and schools in 
answer to a circular-letter of inquiry. The total number of such pupils cannot be ascertained from 
the table as some of the institutions have not yet made returns. 
5. Table T gives an analysis of 215 cases of deaf-mutes whose parents were deaf. 
6. In Table U the total population of the country, the congenitally deaf population, and the 
deaf-mutes who have both parents deaf, are classified according to their period of birth, and the 
number of persons born in each period has been reduced to a percentage of the whole. 
7. Table V contains a tabular statement of the institutions of the world in 1882, showing the 
methods of instruction employed. This Table is taken from the "American Annals of the Deaf 
and Dumb," for January, 1883, vol. xxviii, p. 61. 
8. Table W gives a list of those pupils of our institutions for the deaf and dumb who are stated 
to have deaf parents. The information has been obtained directly from the principals and super- 
intendents of the institutions in answer to a letter of inquiry. 
9. Table X shows the per capita cost of the education of a deaf child in an American institu- 
tion. This table was prepared by the principal of the Illinois Institution from materials published 
in the American Annals of the Deaf and Dumb, and from other materials privately collected and 
published in the Twenty-first Biennial Report of the Illinois Institution (1882), pp. 16-17. 
10. Table Y contains a tabular statement concerning the teaching of articulation in the insti- 
tutions of the United Stab s in May, 1883. The information was obtained by the principal of the 
Clarke Institution, Northampton, Mass., directly from the principals of the other institutions in 
reply to a circular of inquiry. See Appendix B, Sixteenth Annual Report of the Clarke Institu- 
tion for Deaf Mutes, September 1, 1883. 
11. Appendix Z contains an examination of the marriages of the pupils of the American Asy- 
lum and Illinois Institution by the light of the theory of Probabilities, with the object of determin- 
ing approximately the proportion of the congenitally deaf who marry congenital deaf-mutes. This 
investigation has been kindly undettaken by Prof. Simon Newcomb, to whom I am indebted for 
the result- obtained. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
227 
J 
* 
X 
55 
O 
F 
X 
55 
1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 
X 
S 
o 
X 
9 
o 
X 
o 
o 
X 
o 
o 
2 
X 
o 
5 
o 
I 
§ 
o 
1780-1789 .... 
1790 1799 
o 
55 
55 
Period of 
birth. 
2,106 
■ 
1 
2 
7 
44 
158 
276 
288 
324 
387 
387 
228 
4 
Total. 
Q 
CO 
1 
1 
4 
24 
95 
152 
170 
184 
214 
231 
140 
3 
Males. 
md total. 
00 
1 
3 
20 
63 
124 
118 
140 
173 
156 
88 
I 1 
i 
Females. 
1,464 
1 
1 
5 
27 
78 
) 127 
144 
| 195 
[ 291 
363 
j 228 
4 
Total. 
Not records 
have man 
865 
12 
42 
72 
90 
112 
169 
222 
140 
3 
Males. 
Ui 
co 
co 
1 
3 
15 
36 
55 
54 
83 
122 
141 
88 
1 
Females. 
id to 
ied. 
£ 
to 
1 
2 
17 
80 
149 
144 
129 
96 
24 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
29 (?) 
Cl 00 I-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number' of deaf children 
boro to the pupils. 
£ 
1 
2 
12 
53 
80 
80 
72 
45 
9 
Total. 
Males. 
<55 
CO CH 05 to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
W 
05 CO cn 05 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
x 
x 
5 
27 
69 
64 
57 
51 
15 
Total. 
Females. 
w 
I-* 
to CO Ui to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
00 
h- 
to cn ui Ci 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bom to the females. 
Ui 
to 
9 
46 
122 
111 
117 
81 
16 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
to 
• • Ui C5 O CO • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
cs 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
a 
S 
C5 
7 
27 
64 
61 
63 
36 
5 
Total. 
Males. 
H 
• CO 4^ C5 >- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
30 239 
• <55 C5 m co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
2 
19 
58 
50 
54 
45 
11 
Total. 
Females. 
c 
to to 4- to • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
co 
to to O Ui • 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
o 
1 
2 
8 
34 
27 
33 
15 
8 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recoided to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Ui 
H-1 
to 
Ui 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
5 
1- 
C5 
co 
Recoided number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
co 
1 
5 
26 
16 
19 
9 
9 
4 
Total. 
to 
C5 
• h- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
• co 
co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
co 
3 
8 
11 
14 
3 
6 
j 4 
Total. 
Females. 
co 
H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
co 
1-* 
' CO Ui 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boru to the females. 
Table A.-Total number of pupils. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 228 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
% 
1810 
1820 
1830 
1840 
1850 
1860 
1870 
Uni 
3 
Period of 
birth. 
1819 .... 
1829 .... 
1839 ... 
1849 .... 
1859 .... 
1869 .... 
1879 .... 
lown ... 
>tal 
1, 620 
5 
27 
127 
268 
414 
573 
201 
5 
Total. 
Grand total. 
914 j 706 
1 4 
12 15 
73 54 
161 107 
220 194 
330 243 
114 87 
3 2 
Males. 
Females. 
1,446 , 823 | 623 
1 1 
16 4 1 12 
92 55 37 
202 126 76 
368 197 | 171 
561 325 | 236 
201 114 87 
4 2 1 2 
o 
o 
Total. 
Males. 
Females. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
3 
11 
35 
66 
46 
12 
Total. 
Total. 
o 
& 
14 i (?) j 91 
to w a to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
to co 
Qi W QI 00 00 W 
Total. 
Males. 
00 
| 
o 
to »-» to to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
tO tO CO tO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
00 
co 
2 
3 
17 
31 
23 
7 
Total. 
Females. 
o 
to 4^ 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
00 
CO Qi 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Q1 
to 
2 
9 
31 
58 
41 
11 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
CO 
to CO O) to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
S 
g 
H 
a 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
00 
o 
7 
15 
32 
21 
5 
Total. 
Males. 
! M 
to h-» to to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
co 
to to «o to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
2 
2 
16 
26 
20 
6 
Total. 
Females. 
00 
- 
- 
tO 4^ 
co oi 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to 
»-* 
>-* Qi 00 4*. tO »-* 
Total. 
w 
w 1 Recorded to have deaf children. 
ot re 
Cota 
1 11 1 
to co 
CO 
H* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
corded to ha's 
mutes 
I. Male 
H-* 
; Recorded number of deaf children 
' born to the males. 
'e married de. 
co 
Qi 
- 
I-* 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Femal 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
PIN 
Table A.-Total number of pupils-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
229 
Total.... 
i 
5 
X 
■ 
© 
1850-1859 
X X X X X 
**> co to w © 
? ? ? ? ? 
X X X X X 
w to >-< © 
© © © © © 
g 
9 
© 
1770-1779 .... 
i 1780-1789 
© 
© 
© 
© 
Period of 
birth. 
3 
w 
X 
© 
73 
114 
153 
173 
198 
© 
- 
Total. 
£ 
© 
JJ 
X 
© 
42 
62 
83 
95 
102 
Males. 
p 
p 
& 
o 
co 
co 
© 
to 
JI 
X 
© -1 -J © co 
© X © to ►- 
© 
o 
Females. 
p. 
© 
X 
© 
40 
60 
75 
112 
140 
o 
© 
Total. 
Not 
hav 
w 
$ 
JI 
X 
-1 
<1 © ^. co to 
<| to S 4- H* 
© 
o 
Males. 
recorded to 
e married. 
8 
© 
o 
© 
© 
B S S 8 S 
-* 
o 
Females. 
to 
* 
M 
© © © W 
X ►- X 4* CO 
o 
Total. 
to 
° 
IO © X 4^ 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
Recorded number of, deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
X 
to co co to to 
Ji CO © X »- 
© 
to 
Total. 
s 
>- 4^ CO to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Males. 
Total. 
to 
co 
h- X X © 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
ft 
to 
co to co to »-» 
© X © © to 
to 
Total. 
w 
© 
4-* to © to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
'emale 
to 
© 
►-4 4- © © 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
I 
w 
© © © 4^ to 
^ ^ © to tc 
Total. 
© 
to o co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
p 
► 
2 
to 
© 
IO to w to »-* 
w © © © w 
Total. 
ried tc 
00 
4- co CO H- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Males. 
• deaf-mutes. 
- 
r-» © X W 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
- 
to 
9 
22 
30 
25 
31 
Total. 
Females. 
00 
H» -' 4^ tO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
M 
O © 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bora to the males. 
© 
-1 X tO H* 
w 
to 
Total. 
Total 
o 
tO 4-* 4- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
>- 
' © © co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
o 
X 
to £» © X X 
- 
to 
Total. 
Males 
id to ha\ 
mutes 
IO 
• 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
© 
; CO I co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bora to the males. 
• ® 
« 
to co © 4»> CO 
to 
Total. 
p 
g. 
* 
' »-u uu . 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
■mal 
& 
• 
' CO © • 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CO 
I -J«« 
Table B.-Congenitally deaf pupils. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 230 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF 
SCIENCES. 
unKnown ... 
Total 
J.8ZU-18ZU .... 
1830-1839 .... 
1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 .... 
1860-1869 .... 
1870-1879 .... 
- 
1810-1819 .... 
Period of 
birth. 
00 
1 
13 
52 
77 
140 
105 
29 
1 
Total. 
Grand to 
to 
co 
00 
• 
33 
43 
73 
63 
19 
1 
1 
Males. 
00 
o 
1 
7 
19 
34 
67 
42 
10 
Females. 
w 
£ 
8 
36 
55 
122 
104 
29 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
IO 
o 
Ul 
1 
1 
25 
32 
65 
63 
19 
1 
Males. 
to 
11 
23 
57 
41 
10 
Females. 
(i) 9 TO 
L .. 
5 
16 
i 22 
18 
1 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
- 
r- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
w 
w 
oo F-* oo cn 
Total. 
Males. 
to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
u 
* 
- 
8 
11 
10 
1 
Total. 
Females. 
M CO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1 - 
tO 4* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
botn to the females. 
w 
i ® 
- 
1 
4 
16 
20 
17 
1 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
o 
h- 4*. K* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
► 
W 
2 
S 
o 
• 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
co 
o 
00 O 00 4" 
Total. 
Males. 
to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
to 
H* CO O 00 
1 Total. 
Females. 
H* CO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
OS 
to 4*- 
i Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Ci 
1 " 
t-* to • H* 
! Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
| Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
co 
1 - 
i Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
| I 
| Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
- w : 
Total. 
Females. 
! Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. _ 
Table B.-Congenitally deaj pupils-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
231 
1760 
1770 
1780 
1790 
1800 
1810 
1820 
1830 
1840 
1850 
1860 
Unis 
Period of 
birth. 
1789 .... 
1799 .... 
1809 .... 
1819 .... 
1829 .... 
1839 .... 
1849 .... 
1859 .... 
1869 .... 
lown ... 
Total .. 
9 
55 
© 
1, 040 | 622 
1 
12 
70 
147 
124 
146 
182 
224 
133 
1 
Total. 
C 
7 
43 
81 
79 
85 
109 
137 
80 
1 
Males. 
and total. 
00 
1 
5 
27 
66 
45 
61 
73 
87 
53 
Females. 
5 
1 
4 
30 
58 
62 
79 
145 
206 
133 
1 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
w 
2 
16 
32 
41 
46 
89 
130 
80 
1 
Males. 
to 
00 
t-o 
1 
2 
14 
26 
21 
33 
56 
76 
53 
Females. 
co 
to 
8 
40 
89 
62 
67 
37 
18 
' Total. 
00 
8-* 
to to CO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
Total. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
| born to the pupils. 
8 
5 
27 
49 
38 
39 
20 
7 
Total. 
Males. 
> 
2 
B 
to co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
CO 
oi m 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
co 
© 
3 
13 
40 
24 
28 
17 
11 
Total. 
Females. 
to 
»-* • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
• 
I-* ' 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
^0 
co 
5 
20 
76 
48 
62 
26 
L." 
j Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
<1 
to to co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
135 
3 
10 
42 
29 
34 
13 
4 
Total. 
Males. 
05 
to 1- co 
j Recorded to have deaf children. 
co 
C3 t-1 <1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boin to the males. 
8-* 
2 
10 
34 
19 
28 
13 
8 
Total. 
Females. 
1-8 
। i-* • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
• I-* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to 
1-* 
3 
20 
13 
14 
5 
11 
6 
j Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have marrie 
mutes. 
>-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1-8 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
CH 
© 
CO <1 C71 © <1 5 to 
Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
to 
CO 
cn o> co *-* 
Total. 
Females. 
1-' 
' Recorded to have deaf children. 
& 
*- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table C.-N on-congenitally deaf pupils. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 232 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 . , 
P*JO5Oii^WNH M 
t-OOOGOOO . -t 
1 
1869 .... 
1879 .... 
lown ... 
Total .. 
•iod of 
irth. 
1819 .... 
1829 .... 
1839 ... 
1849 .... 
1859 
947 534 । 413 
Grand total. 
1 3 £ 
H S h 
2 1 1 
11 4 7 
58 ! 29 । 29 
164 102 62 
217 122 95 
364 206 158 
129 69 60 
2 1 | 1 
852 482 
3 
3 
1 
6 
41 
123 
192 
358 
129 
2 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
2 
20 
79 
109 
202 
69 
1 
Males. 
w 
o 
® w a n Females. 
co 
17 1 
41 2 
25 2 
6 
Total. 
f-* 
| Recorded to have deaf children. 
1-• 
Total 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
tn 
to 
_ to : Total. 
4^ CO CO <© to 1-* 
Males. 
Total. 
to F- 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Ol 
to to 
i Recorded number of deaf children 
, . i born to the males. 
CC 
3 
8 
18 
12 
2 
' Total. 
to 
M I- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
'emale 
to 
F-1 ' 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
s 
s 
00 
to 
4 
14 
36 
22 
6 
Total. 
m 
to IO H- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Married t 
£ 
2 
6 
21 
11 
4 
Total. 
co 
to ►-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
o deaf- 
Males 
to to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
mutes. 
CO 
00 
'8 
15 
11 
2 
Total. 
ft 
to 
Hl H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
male 
to 
H. Hi 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bom to the females. 
w 
co ui co i-* i- Tota . 
Total. 
Not recorded tc 
n 
! ! hi Recorded to have deaf children. 
, ; Recorded number of deaf children 
! ! " born to the pupils. 
oo 
to to co • i-* Total. 
H* 
! hi I Recorded to have deaf children. 
> ha^ 
ante 
dale 
1 5 
; ' Recorded number of deaf children 
: w | born to the males. 
e married deaf- 
H* CO 
Hl 
Total. 
Femal 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CD 
Table C.-Non-congenitally deaf pupils-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
233 
Total... 
| 1860-1869 .... 
i Unknown ... 
j 1820-1829 .... 
1830-1839 .... 
| 1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 .... 
i 1810-1819 .... 
1790-1799 .... 
1800-1809 .... 
1770-1779 .... 
1780-1789.... 
! 1760-1769.... 
Period of 
birth. 
w 
H* 
Total. 
Grand total. 
CH 
tocooow^oo«©oeo 
I-4 
Males. 
CO 
o 
H'ceh-»4^»-'Wouito 
Females. 
Ci 
00 
COtOCJO^^l^COW 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
fe 
to co -q co qi ci cn t-4 
Males. 
to 
Ci 
1-4 co co co 
• to co co to 
Females. 
bD 
Qi 
W H H O to 
k- 
Total. 
Total. | Males. 
1 
Total. 
w 
E 
8 
p 
M 
• I-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Ci 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
1-* 
• co co u« to 
1-4 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
: • 
- 
- 
- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
o 
IO H* 1- H* 
co to 
Total. 
Females. 
I-4 
- 
k-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
K 
)_4 H4 |_4 CO rf^- 4^ 
- 
- 
Total. 
Total. Males. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
» 
to to 4^ 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Cl 
I-4 
I-4 |_4 |-4 |-4 tO 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Females. 
k-4 I 
H* 
>-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Total. 
4-4 
to 
t-4 to co to 
t-4 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
I 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
-1 
h-4 
t-4 t-4 r- 
o 
Total. 
Males. 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1 
1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
* 1 
>-4 to 
- 
Total. 
1 
r 
„ 1 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children j 
born to the females. | 
Table D.-Pupils the cause of whose deafness was not stated. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 
S. Mis. 110 30 234 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
319.... 
1820-1829.... 
1830-1839... 
1840-1849.... 
1850-1859.... 
1860-1869.... 
1870-1879.... 
Unknown .. 
Total .... 
Period of 
birth. 
to 
Qi 
2 
3 
17 
27 
57 
104 
43 
2 
Total. 
Grand total. 
F-» 
to 
2 
11 
16 
25 
61 
26 
1 
Males. 
113 240 
2 
1 
6 
11 
32 
43 
17 
1 
Females. 
1 
2 
15 
24 
54 
99 
43 
2 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
W 
O 
1» 
15 
23 
60 
26 
1 
Males. 
o 
1 
1 
5 
9 
31 
39 
17 
1 
Females. 
1 a 
cn w co to h* 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
3 
► 
w 
S 
s 
u 
to 
F- Fa 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
O 
to 
tO 
Total. 
Males. 
Fa H* 
Recorded-to have deaf children. 
w 
ce 
- 
IO Fa 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to Fa 
Fa 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have' deaf children. 
n 
- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to to F-i H* 1-a 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
(i) i 2 
- 
- 
Fa Fa 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
O 
Fa to Fa F4 
Total. 
Males. 
to 
Fa F- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
* 
tO Fa 
। Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
1 w 
CO 
Fa 
Fa 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
I Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
4- 
Ha Fa Fa )-a 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
| Recorded to have deaf children. 
| Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
j Total. 
XT 1 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
| Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
4- 
1 
W 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Tabt/e D.-Pupils the cause of whose deafness was not stated-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
235 
Total.... 
j 
• ■ • • 6981-0981 
1840-1849 .... 
| 1780-1789 .... 
1790-1799 .... 
1800-1809 ..,.. 
I 1810-1819 .... 
) 1820-1829 ... 
<1 
= 
o 
5i 
5i 
O 
Period of 
birth. 
§ 
5 
15 
43 
CT 
1 m 
! 101 
I 107 
60 
38 
Total. 
Grand total. 
to 
to 
to 
3 
6 
26 
31 
63 
55 
55 
38 
22 
Males. 
to 
00 
2 
9 
17 
36 
48 
46 
52 
22 
16 
Females. 
( 354 
4 
11 
26 
j 29 
54 
61 
73 
58 
38 
Total. 
Not recorded to ' 
have married, j 
to 
o 
2 
• 
15 
16 
35 
34 
41 
38 
22 
Males. 
1 147 
2 
7 
11 
13 
19 
27 
32 
20 
16 
Females. 
go 
1 
4 
17 
38 
57 
40 
34 
2 
Total. 
Total. 
Total married. 
O' 
to <1 to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
£ 
► 
W 
s 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
CD 
to 
1 
2 
11 
15 
28 
21 
14 
Total. 
Males. 
«3 
W to K* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
00 
w 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
O 
1 2 
6 
23 
29 
19 
29 
2 
Total. 
Females. 
00 
►- H- Ct >-» 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
H* W Qi tO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
152 
2 
11 
32 
41 
34 
30 
2 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
I-* 
to to Ci 
Recorded to have deaf children. , 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Ci 
00 
2 
7 
11 
19 
17 
12 
Total. 
Males. 
CH 
>-* to to • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
h- -q ' 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
00 
4 
21 
22 
I 
17 
18 
2 
Total. 
Females. 
Ci 
H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
co 
-• 
o to 
Recorded number of deal children 
born to the females. 
O Ci O O to »-• 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- | 
mutes. 
to H* H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Ci ci co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
tO 4^ 
Total. 
Males. 
1-* 
w 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
- 
• CO 
co 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to to <1 to to to 
Total. 
Females. ! 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
co cn ' • 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table E.-Congenitally deaf pupils recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 236 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
. limiu w Ai ... 
Total.... 
1U1V-AULi7 . . . . 
1820-1829 .... 
1830-1839 .... 
1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 .... 
1860-1869 .... 
1870-1879 .... 
o 
0 
J 
0 
Period of 
birth. 
196 
9 
25 
34 
69 
47 
11 
1 
Total. 
Grand total. 
o 
o 
4 
16 
18 
30 
29 
8 
1 
Males. 
s 
9 
16 
39 
18 
3 
Females. 
159 
6 
17 
21 
57 
47 
11 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
89 70 
1 
13 
12 
26 
29 
8 
Males. 
5 
4 
9 
31 
18 
8 
Females. 
00 
k-* 
3 
8 
13 
12 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
■ 
- 
§ 
s 
p 
to 
*-* k-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
•eO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
h- 
4^ O CO CO 
Total. 
Males. 
k-* 
H-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
t-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
O 
00 *4 Ul 
Total. 
Females. 
M 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
r-* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CO 
3 
8 
12 
11 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
to 
k-' »-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
5 
Ot CO CO 
Total. 
Males. 
H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
k-' 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
CO 
-O <1 CH 
) Total. 
Females. 
h-* 
>-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
H* 
k-< 
j Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
co 
H* 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
! Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
oorn to the pupils. 
to 
k-1 
Total. 
Males. 
1 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
k-* 
1 
k-1 
Total. 
Females. 
1 Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table E.-Congenitally deaf pupils recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
237 
Total 
' 1860-1869 .... 
i Unknown _.. 
1760-1769 .... 
1770-1779 .... 
1780-1789 .... 
1790-1799 .... 
1800-1809 .... 
1810-1819.... 
1820-1829 .... 
1830-1839 .... 
1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 .... 
Period of 
birth. 
1*3 
OJ 
1 
1 
1 
12 
30 
47 
42 
72 
» 
81 
45 
Total. 
•pj}O| pnuig 
bO 
M 
1 
8 
16 
31 
20 
40 
47 
48 
29 
Males. 
00 
Ui 
4 
14 
16 
22 
32 
44 
36 
16 
F-4 
Females. 
co 
to 
co 
9 
14 
31 
21 
51 
67 
83 
45 
F-4 F-4 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
F-4 
co 
5 
6 
18 
9 
28 
36 
47 
29 
F-4 
Males. 
4 
8 
13 
12 
23 
31 
36 
16 
F-4 
Females. 
103 
1 
3 
16 
16 
21 
21 
24 
1 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
e 
K 
E 
M 
e 
m 
to to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Ci 
to 
1 
II 
n 
In 
SI 
« 
8 
I 
Total. 
Males. 
co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Ui 
F-4 f- W 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
6 
3 
10 
9 
13 
Total. 
Females. 
to 
F-4 • f-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
>u 
F-4 • CO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to females. 
00 
2 
10 
19 
20 
24 
1 
...... 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
Ui 
to »-* to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Ut 
to 
2 
6 
9 
11 
12 
11 
1 
Total. 
Males. 
co 
1-4 F-' F-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Ui 
F-4 F-4 W 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
co 
UI 
CO 00 00 f-» u» 
Total. 
Females. 
to 
F-4 i F-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
F-4 i CO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
s 
F-4 tO Ci Ui F-4 H* 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
o 
: >_> 
Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
08 
>-* to to 
Total. 
Females. 
: : : 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table F.-Congenitally deaf pupils recorded as sporadic cases. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 238 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
H 
1810-1819 .... 
1820-1829 .... 
1830-1839 .... 
' 1840-1849 .... 
1850-1859 .... 
1860-1869 .... 
1870-1879 .... 
Period of 
birth. 
to 
to 
to 
1 
4 
27 
43 
71 
58 
18 
Total. 
Grand total. 
co 
to 
2 
17 
25 
43 
34 
11 
Males. 
8 
1 
2 
10 
18 
28 
24 
7 
Females. 
CO 
Qi 
2 
19 
34 
65 
57 
18 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
05 
20 
39 
34 
11 
Males. 
s 
2 
7 
14 
26 
23 
7 
Females. 
H* O CO 00 to h-* 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
► 
w 
2 
H 
p 
1-* CO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
■ 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
S 
4* Qi Qi tO 
Total. 
Males. 
• I-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
• I-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
H* 
H4 to co 
I-4 
Total. 
Females. 
CO 
M tO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
• 
to CO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to females. 
H4 05 00 00 H4 H4 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
H4 CO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
f~* 
Qi 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Qi Qi i-4 
Total. 
Males. 
M 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
M 
• k-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
5 
H4 tO CO CO 
t-4 
Total. 
Females. 
CO 
H4 tO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Qi 
to CO 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
I 1 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
w 
• • h-4 
Total. 
Males. 
i 1 
Recorded to have dedf children. 
; 1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
w 
H4 • 
Total. 
Females. 
; 1 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
; 1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table F.-Congenitally deaf pupils recorded as sporadic cases-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
239 
Total 
00 
d o 
r £ 
3 oo 
?J Ci 
3 
X 00 
JI 
L £ 
X X 
Ji 4^ 
o co 
X 
-o 
5 
X 
-O 
o 
X 
3 
o 
0 
a 
X 
O 
r 
X 
o 
X 
o 
o 
r 
X 
5 
o 
O 
- 
o 
o 
X 
o 
r 
X 
O 
o 
£ 
o 
3i 
o 
» 
o 
Period of 
birth. 
to 
Cn 
4 
12 
6 
14 
19 
26 
30 
14 
Total. 
Grand total. 
O> 
o 
9 
ST 
El 
A 
L 
8 
8 
T 
Males. 
Ci 
cn 
3 
4 
3 
7 
12 
13 
15 
8 
Females. 
00 
o 
1 
7 
1 
8 
11 
20 
24 
14 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
o 
5 
1 
3 
6 
12 
13 
6 
Males. 
o 
00 H- O0 CI Cl 
to >-* 
• 
Females. 
s 
Ci Ci 0O Ci Cl Cl co 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
K 
to 
»-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
1-* 
to i-i. H* to CO >-* 
Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
Ot 
4^ Cl -4 to CO to to 
Total. 
Females. 
to 
h-i 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
co 
o 
4^ 4^ 00 Cl 4^- tO CO 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
r- 
»-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
co 
- 
»-* b-» )-* CO tO 
>-*e 
Total. 
Males. 
g 
w 
o 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to 
H-* 
CO CO -J to to to to 
Total. 
B 
H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
H* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CO 
to to 
4-* 4- CO 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
M 
w 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1-• 
I-1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Cl 
4-* 
CO 
Total. 
Males. 
Recor ded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
i born to the males. 
>-* tO 
4-* 
Total. 
Females. 
>- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1- 
1-' 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table G.-Non-congenitally deaf pupils recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 240 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
1 
Total .... 
AOUV-1OJ3... 
1860-1869.... 
1870-1879.... 
0 00 00 0 
CO b 
? ? 2 
D 00 00 0 
H W b 
CO C© « 
2 
0 
3 
<0 
3 
0 
Period of 
birth. 
to 
o 
2 
6 
22 
39 
37 
14 
Total. 
Grand total. 
65 55 
2 
2 
12 
19 
24 
6 
Males. 
4 
10 
20 
13 
8 
Females. 
106 57 
1 
4 
17 
33 
37 
14 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
1 
1 
10 
15 
24 
6 
Males. 
s 
3 
7 
18 
13 
8 
Females. 
K 
O C3 to M 
Total. 
® I 
Total. 
8 
>■ 
I 
co 
IO l-» • 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
00 
IO 1-' 
Total. 
Males. 
to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
OS 
to CO M 
Total. 
Females. 
1-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
M 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CO 
Q3 Ui h-* H* 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
tO 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
to 
to 
1 Total. 
Males. 
to 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Oi 
IO co 
Total. 
Females. 
H* 
1-* 
| Recorded to have deaf children. 
H* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
I-• 
>- 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
| Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1 Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table G.-Non-congenitally deaf pupils recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
241 
1850-1859.... 
1860-1869.... 
Unknown... 
Total.... 
1830-1839.... 
1R40-1R4Q 
X 
3 
o 
r 
X 
to 
o> 
c 
O 
r 
o 
1780-1789.... 
1790-1799.... 
1809-1809 
-1 
0 
<1 
p 
O 
Period <?f 
birth. 
(D 
m 
1 
8 
58 
141 
110 
127 
156 
194 
119 
1 
Total. 
Grand total. 
CH 
Ci 
6 
35 
78 
72 
78 
96 
122 
74 
1 
Males. 
00 
Ui 
co 
1 
2 
23 
63 
38 
49 
68 
72 
45 
Females. 
05 
CO 
1 
3 
23 
57 
54 
68 
। 125 
182 
119 
1 
Total. 
Not 
hav 
co 
CD 
• 2 
11 
31 
38 
4. 
77 
117 
74 
1 
Males. 
recorded to 
e married. 
to 
to 
1 
1 
12 
26 
16 
28 
48 
65 
45 
Females. 
I 282 
5 
35 
84 
56 
59 
31 
12 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
o 
to >-4 co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
1-4 
>-* 
4 
24 
47 
34 
38 
19 
5 
Total. 
Males. 
Ci 
to I-* co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
S 
Z 
H 
e 
CO 
UI h-4 ^1 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
1 
11 
37 
22 
21 
12 
7 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to 
co 
2 
18 
72 
43 
54 
22 
8 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
Ci 
to 1-4 co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
to 
Ci 
10 
40 
26 
33 
12 
3 
Total. 
Males. 
Ci 
to >-4 co 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
CO 
Ui t-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
CO 
8 
32 
17 
21 
10 
5 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
s 
3 
17 
12 
1 13 
5 
9 
4 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
: : : : 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
* 
IO -1 UI co to 
Total. 
Males. 
• 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
to to • Ui Ui W ►-* 
Total. 
Females. 
F 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table H.-N oncongenitally deaf pupils recorded as sporadic cases. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 
S. Mis. 110 31 242 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
1870-1879.... 
Unknown... 
Total.... 
X 
n 
§ 
S E 8 
£ £ £ 
5 E 8 
o co o 
X 
o 
5 
X 
xD 
O 
X 
F 
X 
Period of 
birth. 
00 
io 
2 
9 
52 
142 
178 
327 
115 
2 
Total. 
Grand total. 
o 
<0 
1 
2 
27 
90 
103 
182 
63 
1 
Males. 
358 746 
1 
7 
25 
52 
75 
145 
52 
1 
Females. 
1 
5 
37 
106 
159 
321 
115 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
rc 
CH 
1 
19 
69 
94 
178 
63 
1 
XT 1 
Males. 
g 
1 
4 
18 
37 
65 
143 
52 
1 
Females. 
2 
9 
61 
98 
1 
Total. 
Total. 
Total. 
K 
P 
w 
H 
p 
w 
H* H4 
K* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
* 
1 
t 
6 
18 
8 
I 
I 
Total. 
Males. 
to 
H* • 
Hi 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
w 
to • 
Hi 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bom to the males. 
co 
3 
7 
15 
10 
2 
Total. 
Females. 
H* 
1-* 
• H* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boro to the females. 
CD 
3 
13 
31 
16 
6 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
to 
Hl Hl 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boro to the pupils. 
CO 
- 
4^ O H* 
Total. 
Males. 
k-» 
Hl ' 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
to 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boro to the males. 
co 
to 
to CO to -1 to 
Total. 
Females. 
H* 
H* i 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
H* 
i H* 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
to 
CO Ql to H* I-1 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
1-* 
H* 
-■-;- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
-4 
to LO to 
Total. 
Males. 
Hl 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Hl 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bora to the males. 
Qt 
MW* 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
। ! 
Recorded number of deaf children 
boro to the females. 
Table H.-Non-congenitally deaf pupils recorded as sporadic cases-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FOBMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
243 
1760 
1770 
1780 
1890 
1800 
1810 
1820 
1830 
1840 
1850 
1860 
Uni 
Period of 
birth. 
Illi 
O 00 oo 
i Cl O' 
P. g cd © 
00 
4^ 
© 
00 00 
cc to 
to © 
» 
© 
JO 
to 
© 
co 
X 
© 
CD 
d 
© 
Cl 
u< 
-1 D to 
w H* 
•- w »-* 
- 
- 
Total. 
Males. 
Females. 
Grand total. 
o 
>-* o tc 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
cn 
CH 
CO 
CO I-* 
- 
- 
- 
Males. 
Females. 
Total. 
Total. Males. 
Total. 
K 
> 
s 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
- 
- 
- 
- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bora to the pupils. 
Total. 
ST 
X 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
bora to the males. 
Total. 
Females. 
- 
- 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
- 
- 
- 
j Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
1 Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. ' 
Males. Females. 
- 
- 
1 Total. 
1 Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table I.-Pupils the cause of whose' deafness is not stated who are recorded, to have deaf-mute relatives other than children. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 244 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Total 
3 
3 
$ 
X 
s 
X 
<1 
X 
n 
o 
r 
X 
3> 
© 
X 
J' 
3 
X 
X 
4- 
O ■ 
o 
o 
X 
JO 
© 
X 
9 
o 
X 
9 
r 
X 
o 
4? 
X 
3 
X 
£> 
Period oi 
birth. 
■ 
■e- 
to 
to 
X 
JO 
JO 
I-* 
Total. 
? 
to 
CO 
Ji to 
O >-* 
Males. 
- 
g 
to 
o o 
x to 
Females. 
p. 
o 
to 
JO 
fx -' 
Total. 
tit, 
p® 
<1 „ 
to 
o 
>-* 
JI 
o 
Males. 
II 
1 
o 
co 
3 
X 
o 
Females. 
ad to 
ied. 
o 
• 
o 
Total. 
H- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
1-' 
to 
)-* 
I-* 
to 
- 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Males. 
Total. 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
B 
CD 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Total. 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
g 
p 
2 
5 
Total. 
t ried t 
S 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Males. 
o deaf-mutes 
to 
to 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
1 
- 
- 
- 
- 
Total. 
; Recoided to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Females. 
>- 
Total. 
tzj 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
© 
p 
ot re 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
>cord 
Total. 
Male 
ed t 
i 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
a ha 
uut( 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
» 
a < 
• ® 
B 
Total. 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
s 
5" 
a. 
>d deaf- 
Table I.-Pupils the cause of whose deafness is not stated who are recorded to have deaf-mute relatives other than children-Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. N OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
245 
Total .... 
Unknown ... 
1 1860-1869 ... J 
! 1850-1859 .... 
1840-1849 
1830-1839...J 
i 1820-1829....' 
I 1810-1819 .... 
1 1800-1809.... 
1790-1799 .... 
1 1780-1789.... 
O 
1 
CD 
7i 
r 
Ci 
CD 
Period of 
birth. 
00 
CO 
to 
o 
*-• 
C3 
o 
Bl 
CH 
©1 
t-* 
Total. 
Gra 
Oi 
to 
to 
co 
M 
CO 
4* 
<1 
co 
o 
co 
Males. 
o' 
co 
- 
o 
co 
Ci 
CH 
to 
Females. 
p. 
IO 
o 
»-* 
o 
4- 
o 
c© 
00 
cb 
Total. 
W 
to 
o 
C5 
w 
4. 
4- 
Ci 
Ot 
K* 
Males. 
3 S 
S 2 
>0 
oo 
to 
to 
co 
co 
to 
Females. 
ed to 
•ied. 
to 
o» 
w 
h-* 
4^ 
Ci 
•4 
to 
i-• 
Total. 
H4 
Refolded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
. born to the pupils. 
13 
CO 
co 
C3 
to 
Total. 
- 
- 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recoided number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Males. 
Total. 
s 
to 
co 
to 
Total. 
hrj 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
I 
X 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
• 
• 
- 
co 
4. 
4. 
Total. 
H* 
I-* 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Total. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
p 
K 
00 
to 
to 
Total. 
cried t 
c 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
p. 
© 
OD 
if-mutes 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
5i 
Total. 
2 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
nalei 
I 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
o 
to 
Total. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
© 
p. 
© 
© 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
o 
© 
H* 
Total, 
Maier 
II 
n pa 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
»have mi 
rutes. 
Recorded number of deaf children, 
born to the males. 
Total. 
J 
© 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
malt 
d des 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
* 
- 
T*4 
Table J.-Pupils, the cause of whose deafness is not stated, who are recorded as sporadic cases. 
AMERICAN ASYLUM. 246 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Total... 
1870-1879.... 
1830-1839.... 
1840-1849.... 
1850-1859.... 
1KRO_1«R0 
1810-1819.... 
1R9n_1«9O 
Period of 
birth. 
ro 
co 
2 
2 
14 
23 
44 
91 
37 
Total. 
Grand total. 
to 
1 
9 
14 
20 
54 
23 
Males. 
to 
to 
fl 
28 
15 
6 
9 
T 
5 
Females. 
005 
1 
1 
14 
20 
41 
86 
37 
Total. 
Not recorded to 
have married. 
o 
9 
13 
18 
53 
23 
Males. 
£ 
1 
1 
5 
7 
23 
33 
14 
Females. 
w 
Ui CO CO 
Total. 
• 
Total. 
Total. 
H4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Qi 
H* tO M 
Total. 
Males. 
M 
• 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
• 
H4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
00 
4^ H4 tO 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
I 10 
- 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
• 
S 
g 
s 
p 
to to 
H4 H4 
Total. 
Total. 
Married to deaf-mutes. 
M 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
3 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
CI 
H4 tO H-4 
h-4 
Total. 
. Males. 
I-4 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
H4 
H-4 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
Ui 
CO 
h-4 
H4 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
CO 
h- H4 
Total. 
Total. 
Not recorded to have married deaf- 
mutes. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the pupils. 
Total. 
Males. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the males. 
co 
I-> )-> 
Total. 
Females. 
Recorded to have deaf children. 
i 
i 
Recorded number of deaf children 
born to the females. 
Table J.-Pupils the cause of whose deafness is not stated, who are recorded as sporadic cases -Continued. 
ILLINOIS INSTITUTION. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
247 
Table K.-Non-congenital pupils. 
Period. 
American Asylum. 
Illinois Institution. 
Classified accord- 
ing to period of 
birth. 
Classified accord- 
ing to period 
when hearing 
was lost. 
Classified accord- 
ing to period 
of birth. 
Classified accord- 
ing to period 
when hearing 
as lost. 
1760-1769 
1770-1779 
1780-1789 
1 
1 
1790-1799 
12 
10 
1800-1809 
70 
42 
18'0-1819 
147 
151 
2 
1 
1820-1829 
124 
112 
11 
1830-1839 
146 
138 
58 
31 
1840-1849 
182 
167 
164 
116 
1850-1859 
224 
196 
217 
133 
1860-1869 
133 
168 
364 
224 
1870-1879 
17 
129 
120 
Unknown 
1 
38 
2 
327 
Total 
1,040 
1,040 
947 
947 
Table L.-N on-congenital pupils of the American Asylum, classified according to the period when 
hearing teas lost and according to the disease that caused deafness. 
ci 
8 
g 
ci 
a 
CQ 
ci 
ci 
o 
Ci 
O 
ci 
£. 
00 
GO 
00 
00 
00 
GO 
GO 
00 
Cause of deafness. 
| 
ry 
ci 
i*-'i 
f*-) 
r- 
-- 
t- 
GO 
Ci 
00 
CQ 
00 
GO 
CO 
CO 
00 
00 
O 
rH 
rH 
T-< 
F^ 
fH 
r-> 
rH 
Scarlet fever1 
1 
5 
8 
13 
61 
72 
84 
62 
5 
311 
Brain fever2 •. 
4 
15 
7 
21 
12 
14 
2 
75 
Epidemiccerebro-spinal meningitis3 
... 
b 
35 
4 
6 
1 
... 
4 
2 
54 
Measles 
1 
4 
10 
8 
2 
...... 
38 
Whooping-cough 
2 
2 
6 
4 
o 
6 
4 
29 
Hydrocephalus4 
3 
3 
6 
1 
3 
2 
1 
19 
Typhus fever 
3 
4 
4 
1 
2 
2 
1 
..... . 
17 
Convulsions6 
2 
. ..... 
3 
3 
23 
4 
4 
1 
17 
Disease of ear6 
2 
12 
24 
22 
28 
13 
124 
Diseases of lungs and air passages7 
..... 
1 
1 
2 
6 
6 
14 
...... 
30 
Miscellaneous diseases8 
1 
2 
4 
6 
7 
11 
13 
5 
49 
Accident9 
1 
1 
5 
3 
9 
O 
15 
13 
1 
53 
Diseases not specified 
1 
6 
19 
64 
35 
11 
11 
17 
22 
186 
Total 
1 
10 
42 
151 
112 
138 
167 
196 
168 
17 
1,002 
Period when hearing was lost unknown ... 
38 
Total 
1,040 
•Includes canker-rash (15 cases). 2Includes inflammation of brain, inflammation of head. 3Includes spotted fever (51 cases), meningitis 
(3 cases). 4Includes dropsy in head, dropsy in brain, water on brain. 5Includes fits, paralytic fit (1 case), paralysis and convulsions (1 case). 
6Includes disease in head, humor in head, abscess in head, eruption in head, gathering in head,' scrofula in head, sores in head, ulcers in head, 
ulcers in ears, sores in ears, discharge from ears, gathering in ears. 'Includes lung fever (11 cases), cold (18 cases), influenza (1 case). 8 In. 
eludes small pox, chicken-pox, diptheria, croup, bilious fever, catarrhal fever, erysipelas, palsy, salt rheum, mumps, spasmodic cough, mar- 
asmus, rickets, teething, cholera infantum, inflammation of bowels. 9 Includes fall (39cases), discharge of cannon, pistol-shot, scald (2 cases), 
fright (2 cases), blow on head, run over by cart, sea-bathing. 248 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. J 
Table M.-Hon-congenital pupils of the Illinois Institution, classified according to the period when 
hearing was lost and according to the disease that caused deafness. 
Cause of deafness. 
1810-1819. 
1820-1829. 
1830-1839. 
1840-1849. 
•6981-0^1 
ci 
GO 
1 
§ 
ci 
00 
00 
T-< 
Unknown. 
Total. 
Spotted, fever * 
2 
27 
12 
7 
48 
Meningitis* 
1 
6 
29 
143 
179 
Scarlet fever 
6 
18 
22 
28 
9 
27 
110 
Brain fever 
6 
9 
31 
17 
10 
73 
Inflammation of brain 
5 
2 
4 
2 
12 
25 
Congestion of brain 
1 
2 
3 
5 
11 
Disease of ear1 
1 
1 
8 
15 
3 
28 
63 
Diseases of lungs and air passages2 . 
1 
1 
7 
6 
6 
12 
17 
50 
Accident3 
1 
1 
6 
9 
11 
5 
7 
40 
Measles 
4 
6 
8 
8 
11 
37 
Typhoid fever 
1 
3 
8 
14 
6 
5 
37 
Whooping-cough 
2 
4 
2 
3 
1 
8 
20 
Convulsions 4 
5 
2 
6 
1 
3 
17 
Quinine 
1 
1 
6 
3 
3 
14 
Hydrocephal us 
2 
2 
4 
2 
10 
Diphtheria. 
1 
4 
1 
4 
10 
Miscellaneous diseases5 
1 
24 
14 
17 
6 
19 
81 
Diseases not specified 
1 
6 
23 
30 
36 
8 
18 
122 
Total 
1 
5 
21 
116 
133 
224 
120 
327 
947 
^Epidemic cerebro-spinal meningitis. 
■Includes gathering in head (3 cases), scrofnla (10 cases), gathering in ears, sore ears, earache, rising in head, risings, swelling in head, 
gradual loss, inflammation of head, sickness in head. 
2Includes cold (31 cases), lung fever, pneumonia, bronchial affection, influenza, catarrh (5 cases). 
3 Includes shock of lightning, sunstroke, exposure to heat, fell into water, sea-sickness, burn, scald, sprain in neck, tar cap for scald-head, 
washing in cold spring, fright (2 cases), fall (22 cases), drinking lye (1 case). 
4 Includes spasms and fits. 
'Includes mumps (7 cases), bilious fever (9 cases), nervous fever (6 cases), congestive chill (7 cases), winter fever (8 cases), remittent 
ever (3 cases), teething, jaundice, pernicious fever, worms and fever, ague, paralysis, vaccination, small-pox, chicken-pox, cholera, croup, 
cramps, chills, cold plague, worm fever, typhus fever, cholera infantum, inflammation of bowels, disease of kidney, cancer, rickets, erysip- 
elas, spinal disease (6 cases). THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
249 
Table N.-Analysis of 22 f 12 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns, showing the number of 
these deaf mutes living June 1, 1880, who became deaf each year since the year 1770. 
Year. 
No. 
Year. 
No. 
Year. 
No. 
Year. 
No. 
1879-'8O 
1869-'7O 
751 
1859-'6O 
527 
1849-'5O 
453 , 
1878-'79 
161 
1868-'69 
665 
1858-'59 
436 
1848-'49 
219 
1877-78 
207 
1867-'68 
721 
1857- 58 
484 
1847-'48 
264 
1876-'77 
300 
1866-'67 
710 
1856 '57 
402 
1846-'47 
221 
1-75-76 
414 
1865-'66 
794 
1855-'56 
422 
1845-46 
230 
1874-'75 
472 
1864-'65 
797 
1854-'55 
349 
1844-'45 
308 
1873-'74 
750 
1863-'64 
776 
1853 '51 
382 
1843-'44 
237 
1872-73 
1, 168 
1862-'63 
692 
1852-'53 
303 
1842-'43 
209 
1871-'72 
1,067 
1861-'62 
642 
1851-52 
349 
1841-'42 
215 
1870-'71 ... 
'769 
1860-'61 
470 
1850-'51 
260 
1840-'41 
153 
Ten years 
5, 308 
7,018 
3,914 
2,509 1 
1839-M0 
318 
1829-'30 
200 
1819-'2O 
147 
1809-T0 
81 
1838-'39 
139 
1828-'29 
93 
1818-'19 
54 
l'08-'09 
36 
1837-'38 
158 
1827-'28 
111 
1817-T8 
73 
1807-'08 
46 
1836-'37 
135 
1826-'27 
95 
1816-T7 
77 
1^06-'07 
15 
1835-'36 
125 
1825-'26 
95 
1815-T6 
73 
1805-'06 
27 
1834-'35 
188 
1824-25 
120 
1814-'15 
83 
1804-'05 
37 
1833-'34 
141 
1823-'24 
88 
1813-T4 
49 
I8O3-'O4 
23 
1832-'33 
126 
1822-'23 
89 
1812-T3 
45 
1802-'03 
11 
183l-'32 
157 
1821-'22 
100 
1811-T2 
55 
1801-'02 
11 
1830-31 
105 
1820-'21 
67 
1810-'U 
43 
1800-'01 
7 
1,592 
1,058 
699 
294 
1799-1800 
23 
1789-'9O 
3 
1779-'8O 
1798-'99 
10 
1788-'89 
1778- 79 
1797-'98 
11 
1787- 88 
2 
1777-'78 
1796-'97 
6 
1786-87 
1776-'77 
1795-96 
4 
1785-'86 
1775-'76 
1794-'95 
4 
1784-'85 
4 
1774-'75 
1793-'94 
8 
1783-'84 
1773-'74 
1792-'93 
1 
1782-'83 
1772- 73 
1791-'92 .. 
3 
1781-'82 
1771-'72 
1790-'91 
1 
1780-'81 
1770-'71 
1 
71 
9 
1 
Table O.-Analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes from the census returns. 
[This table shows that the decline in the number of these deaf-mutes returned who became deaf 
siuce 1873 affects the congenital, as well as the non-congenitally deaf.] 
Year in which deafness occurred. 
1873. 
1874. 
1875. 
1876. 
1877. 
1878. 
1879. 
Total number 
1,168 
750 
472 
414 
300 
207 
161 
Congenitally deaf 
'348 
271 
203 
202 
130 
105 
46 
Non-oongenitally deaf 
820 
470 
269 
212 
170 
102 
115 
S. Mis. 110 32 250 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table P.-Analysis of 22,472 cases of deaf-mutes taken from census returns, classified by periods of 
five years. 
[The number who became deaf in each quinquennial period is reduced to a percentage of the whole on a basis of 
10,000 cases in all.] 
Period. 
Number. 
Per cent. 
1781-1785 
4 
. 0002 
1786-1790 
. 0002 
1791-1795 
17 
. 0008 
1796-1800 
54 
. 0024 
1801-1805 
89 
. 0040 
1806-1810 
205 
. 0091 
1811-1815 
275 
.0122 
1816-1820. 
424 
.0189 
1821-1825 
464 
. 0206 
1826-1830 
594 
.0265 
Period. 
Number. 
Per cent. 
1831-1835 
717 
. 0319 
1836-1840 
875 
. 0389 
1841-1845 
1122 
. 0499 
1846-1850 
1387 
.0617 
1851-1855 
1643 
. 0731 
1856-1860 
2271 
. 1011 
1861-1865 
3377 
. 1503 
1866-1870 
3641 
. 1620 
1871-1875 
4226 
. 1881 
1876-1880 
1082 
.0481 
Table Q.-Analysis 0/22,472 cases from the census returns, classified by periods of five years, and 
separating the congenital from the non-congenital cases. 
Period. 
Congenital. 
Non-con- 
genital. 
Total. 
1781-1785 
4 
0 
4 
1786-1790 
5 
0 
5 
1791-1795 
15 
2 
17 
1796-1800 
48 
6 
54 
1801-1805 
79 
10 
89 
1806-1810 
162 
43 
205 
1811-1815 
193 
82 
275 
1816-1820 
279 
145 
424 
1821-1825 
328 
136 
464 
1826-1830 
423 
171 
594 
1831-1835 . 
477 
240 
717 
1836-1840 
601 
274 
875 
1841-1845.. 
719 
403 
1,122 
1846-1850 
895 
492 
1,387 
1851-1855. ... 
998 
645 
1,643 
1856-1860 
1,462 
809 
2,271 
1861-1865 
1' 639 
1,738 
3,377 
1866-1870 
1,759 
1^ 882 
3,641 
1871-1875 
1'585 
2,641 
4, 226 
1876-1880 
'483 
599 
1,082 
Total 
12,154 
10,318 
22,472 
Table R.- Total number of deaf-mutes in the United States living June 1, 1880, classified according 
to race and sex. 
Causes of deafness. 
Colored. 
Foreign white. 
Native white. 
Total. 
Males. 
Females. 
Males. 
Females. 
Males. 
Females. 
Males. 
Females. 
Congenital 
714 
587 
545 
444 
5,229 
4,520 
6, 488 
5,551 
7 
2 
8 
2 
34 
17 
49 
21 
Disease of ear 
7 
8 
10 
7 
204 
166 
221 
181 
Other diseases 
178 
147 
306 
252 
4,172 
3,368 
4,656 
3,767 
Miscellaneous 
73 
28 
81 
77 
'610 
423 
764 
52 < 
Not stated 
815 
651 
944 
681 
4, 630 
3,931 
6,389 
5,263 
Total 
1,794 
1,423 
1,894 
1,463 
14,879 
12,425 
18,567 
15,311 THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE 
251 
Table S.-Institutions for the deaf and dumb in the United States, 1883. 
A.-Public Institutions. 
Number of pupils. 
s .who 
ion. 
Admitted since the 
opening of the 
institution. 
1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
K 
9 
10 
U 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47. 
48 
49 
50 
Name. 
American Asylum 
New York Institution 
Pennsylvania Institution... 
Kentucky Institution 
Ohio Institution 
Virginia Institution 
Indiana Institution 
Tennessee School 
North Carolina Institution.. 
Illinois Institution 
Georgia Institution 
South Carolina Institution . 
Missouri Institution 
Louisiana Institution 
Wisconsin Institution 
Michigan Institution 
Iowa Institution 
Mississippi Institution 
Texas Asylum 
Columbia Institution 
Alabama Institution 
California Institution 
Kansas Institution .. 
Le Couteulx St. Mary's In- 
stitution. 
Minnesota School 
Institution for Improved In- 
struction. 
Clarke Institution 
Arkansas Institute 
Maryland School 
Nebraska Institute 
Horace Mann School 
St. Joseph's Institute 
West Virginia Institution .. 
Oregon School 
Institution for Colored 
Colorado Institute 
Erie Day-School 
Chicago Day-School 
Central New York Institu- 
tion. 
Cincinnati Day-School 
Western Pennsylvania In- 
stitution. 
Western New York Institu- 
tion. 
Portland Day-School 
Rhode Island School 
Saint Louis Day-School .... 
New England Industrial 
School. 
Dakota School 
Oral Branch Pennsylvania 
Institution. 
Scranton Oral School 
New Jersey Institution 
Location. 
Hartford, Conn 
Washington H'ts, 
New York, N. Y. 
Philadelphia, Pa... 
Danville, Ky 
Columbus, Ohio.... 
Staunton, Va 
Indianapolis, Ind. .. 
Knoxville, Tenn.... 
Raleigh, N.C 
Jacksonville, Hl.... 
Cave Spring, Ga.... 
Cedar Spring, S. C.. 
Fulton, Mo 
Baton Rouge, La... 
Delavan, Wis 
Flint, Mich 
Council Bluffs, Iowa 
Jackson, Miss 
Austin, Tex 
Washington, D. C.. 
Talladega, Ala 
Berkeley, Cal 
Olathe, Kansas 
Buffalo, N. Y 
Faribault, Minn.... 
New York, N. Y 
Northampton, Mass. 
Little Rock, Ark ... 
Frederick City, Md. 
Omaha, Nebr 
Boston, Mass 
Ford 1j am, N. Y 
Romney, W.Va .... 
Salem, Oregon 
Baltimore, Md 
Colorado Sp's, Colo. 
Erie, Pa 
Chicago, UI 
Rome, N. Y 
Cincinnati, Ohio ... 
Turtle Creek, Pa ... 
Rochester, N. Y.... 
Portland, Me 
Providence, R. I.... 
Saint Louis, Mo .... 
Beverly, Mass 
Sioux Falls, D. T... 
Philadelphia, Pa... 
Scranton, Pa 
Trenton, N.J 
bi 
'5 
® 
a 
O 
© 
® 
c3 
0 
1817 
1818 
1820 
1823 
1*29 
1839 
1844 
1845 
1844 
1846 
1846 
1849 
1851 
1852 
1'52 
1854 
1855 
1856 
1857 
1857 
1860 
1860 
4-61 
1862 
1863 
1867 
1867 
1868 
1868 
1869 
1869 
1869 
1870 
l~70 
1872 
1874 
1874 
1875 
1875 
1875 
1876 
1876 
1876 
1'77 
1878 
1880 
1880 
1881 
1883 
1883 
CO 
§8 
t-4 
c3 
® 
® 
£ 
bD 
.9 
= 
A 
210 
488 
362 
167 
505 
80 
328 
147 
114 
575 
93 
58 
250 
43 
237 
271 
290 
78 
97 
100 
51 
126 
190 
167 
147 
187 
94 
80 
108 
115 
91 
279 
71 
33 
15 
49 
12 
58 
180 
35 
120 
162 
35 
33 
49 
19 
23 
73 
14 
82 
© 
3 
126 
310 
206 
98 
274 
44 
175 
90 
56 
325 
53 
26 
152 
25 
134 
145 
170 
35 
65 
83 
30 
80 
102 
94 
82 
108 
49 
47 
60 
74 
41 
125 
41 
16 
8 
19 
9 
30 
111 
21 
79 
81 
17 
16 
32 
11 
14 
45 
7 
47 
® 
a 
® 
Ph 
84 
178 
156 
69 
231 
36 
153 
57 
48 
250 
40 
32 
98 
18 
103 
126 
120 
43 
32 
17 
21 
46 
88 
73 
65 
79 
45 
33 
48 
41 
50 
154 
30 
17 
7 
30 
3 
28 
69 
14 
41 
81 
18 
17 
17 
8 
9 
28 
7 
35 
CO 
co 
00 
r-! 
© 
^0 
a 
® 
o 
® 
A 
® 
co 
® 
A 
174 
369 
298 
136 
407 
74' 
312 
118 
104 
501 
85 
48 
199 
38 
208 
266 
260 
76 
86 
88 
51 
121 
157 
154 
129 
161 
91 
52 
99 
93 
80 
237 
60 
20 
13 
43 
10 
48 
153 
28 
102 
143 
35 
25 
42 
19 
21 
66 
12 
81 
US 
a? 
°® 
® > 
^2© 
a g 
« ® 
> 
a a 
© 
2,325 
2,993 
2, 079 
830 
2, 008 
546 
1,495 
1,700 
325 
185 
835 
665 
948 
657 
203 
489 
185 
262 
369 
350 
330 
311 
220 
195 
278 
181 
212 
333 
199 
72 
39 
70 
125 
243 
82 
184 
219 
37 
45 
73 
30 
28 
73 
14 
82 
: : : ; • ; • • • : ; : : :::::: Number of pupils having j 
• • HO © O © CO : O ; O O H*; © O • O; Oto O*- ©•(-'©i-illl'wOWO'CnlliltO'tO h W One parent deaf. 
: : : : : : : : ; : :::::: Number of pupils having 
• • o © o o o o to • © • © © ©' o to • i-*• ca. h* © h* h- • o o cc • ' ' ■ i-> wo©' ©! ' ' ' P' 5 to both parents deaf. 
© 
.8^ 
J = 
® 5 
& 
S -© 
p 
- A 
o O 
58 
53 
21 
13 
14 
6 
3 
3 
4 
9 
0 
1 
1 
0 
3 
1 
2 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
6 
0 
1 
50 
Public institutions 
6,991 
3,898 
3, 093 
5,993 
23,119 
83 
132 
215 252 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table S.-Institutions for the deaf and dumb in the United States, 1883-Continued. 
B.-Denominational and Private Institutions. 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
8 
58 
Name. 
Whipple's Home School.... 
German Evangelical Lu- 
theran Institution. 
St. John's Catholic Institute 
F. Knapp's Institute ... .... 
Phonological School 
St. Joseph's Institute 
Location. 
Mystic River, Conn. 
Norris, Mich 
bC 
n 
'8 
O 
O 
o 
Q 
1869 
1875 
1876 
1877 
1878 
1882 
1883 
1883 
Number of pupils. 
Total number of pupils who have । 
m cn cn to o cn received instruction. 
00 t® 00 O O OH* t 
Admitted since the 
opening of the 
institution. 
co 
00 
oo 
- 
® 
>> 
® 
£ 
to 
a 
= 
Q 
16 
44 
48 
34 
8 
18 
* 2 
8 
ce 
s 
14 
28 
30 
23 
5 
7 
1 
7 
a 
2 
16 
18 
11 
3 
11 
1 
1 
h-* co 4^ h* Present December 1,1883. 
00 tOM OD O CO O j 
Number of pupilshaving 
one parent deaf. 
Number of pupils having 
both parents deaf. 
Total number having one 
or both parents deaf. 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
Saint Francis, Wis . 
Baltimore, Md 
Milwaukee, Wis.... 
Hannibal, Mo ... 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
A. Graham Bell's School.... 
Voice and Hearing School.. 
Denominational and private 
institutions. 
Institutions in the U. S 
Washington, D. C.. 
Chicago, Ill 
178 
7,169 
45 
115 
4,013 
45 
63 
3,156 
0 
162 
6,155 
34 
406 
23,525 
252 
0 
83 
0 
132 
' 0 
1215 
National College* 
Washington, D. C .. 
1864 
* The National Deaf-Mute College is a distinct organization within the Columbia Institution. Its officers and students are included in 
the statement of the Columbia Institution given above.' 
t Eliminating cases where same pupil is returned from more than one institution; 83 have one parent deaf; 124 have both parents deaf: 
total, 207. 
Table T.-Deaf-mute offspring of deaf-mute parents.* 
[Analysis of 215 cases received into American Institutions for the Deaf and Dumb before November, 1883.] 
Period of birth. 
Deaf-mutes 
who have 
one par- 
ent deaf. 
Deaf-mutes 
who have 
both par- 
ents deaf. 
Total. 
Period of birth. 
Deaf-mutes 
who have 
one par- 
ent deaf. 
Deaf-mutes 
who have 
both par- 
ents deaf. 
Total. 
1771-1780 
1841-1850 
18 
20 
38 
1781-1790 
1851-1860 
25 
42 
67 
1791-1800 
1861-1870 
14 
41 
55 
1801-1810 
1 
1 
1871-1880 
6 
19 
25 
1811 1820 
3 
3 
1821-1830 
6 
6 
Total 
82 
133 
215 
1831-1840 
9 
11 
20 
'A slight error has been discovered in the table owing to duplicate returns in 8 cases. The general result, however, is not affected. 
The correct figures for deaf-mutes having both parents deaf (reading down the column) should be 11, 20, 36, 37, 20; total, 124. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
253 
Table U.-Deaf-mute population compared with the population at large. 
Period of birth. 
Population of the United 
States (1880), classified 
according to period of 
birth, and the number 
of persons born in each 
period reduced to a per- 
centage of the whole. 
12,154 congenital deaf- 
mutes living June 1, 
1880, classified accord- 
ing to period of birth, 
and the number of deaf- 
mutes born in each 
period reduced to a per- 
centage of the whole. 
Deaf-mutes both of whose par- 
ents were deaf-mutes, clas- 
sified according to period of 
birth, and the number of 
deaf-mutes born in each 
period reduced to a percent- 
age of the whole. 
Number of 
persons. 
Percentage. 
Congenital 
deaf-mutes. 
Percentage. 
Deaf-mutes both 
of whose par- 
ents were deaf 
and dumb. 
Percentage. 
1871-1880 
13,394,176 
26.7051 
2,068 
17.015 
19 
14.3 
1861-1870 
10,726,601 
21.3866 
3, 398 
27. 958 
41 
30.8 
1851-1860 
9,168, 393 
18.2798 
2, 460 
20.240 
42 
31.6 
1841-1850 
6, 369, 362 
12.6992 
1,611 
13.280 
20 
15,0 
1831-1840 
4,558,256 
9. 0882 
1,078 
8.870 
11 
8.3 
1821-1830 
3,111,317 
6.2033 
751 
6.179 
1811-1820 
1,830,095 
3. 6488 
472 
3. 883 
1801-1810 
776,507 
1. 5482 
241 
1. 983 
1791-1800 
196,197 
0. 3912 
63 
0. 518 
1781-1790 
20,863 
0. 0416 
9 
0. 074 
1780 
4,016 
0.0080 
Total 
50,155,783 
100. 0000 
12,154 
100. 000 
133 
100.0 
Table V.-Tabular statement of the institutions of the world for the education of the deaf and dumb. 
Country. 
No. of institutions. 
NUMBER OF PUPILS. 
No. of teachers. 
METHODS OF INSTRUCTION. 
Total. 
Male. 
Female. 
Manual. 
Oral. 
Combined. ! Not reported. 
i No. of institutions. 
No. of pupils. 
No. of teachers. 
No. of institutions. 
No. of pupils. 
No. of teachers. 
No. of institutions 
No. of pupils. 
No. of teachers. 
No. of institutions. 
No. of pupils. 
No. of teachers. 
Australia 
Austria-Hungary 
3 
17 
10 
1 
7 
4 
67 
90 
46 
35 
2 
1 
2 
3 
1 
7 
1 
10 
7 
17 
11 
55 
147 
1,147 
864 
32 
803 
326 
3,482 
5, 608 
2, 650 
1, 491 
65 
29 
30 
465 
22 
283 
8 
584 
222 
680 
380 
7,155 
82 
656 
482 
32 
397 
150 
65 
454 
382 
11 
64 
1 
14 
2 
2 
133 
9 
17 
5 
T, 147 
339 
64 
Belgium 
5 
525 
Brazil 
3 
84 
41 
580 
244 
237 
7 
3 
7 
40 
2 
34 
1 
59 
16 
76 
39 
481 
1 
32 
3 
Canada 
406 
176 
1 
1 
150 
97 5 
653 
57 
Denmark 
1 
142 
15 
2 150 
28 1,962 
90 5 608 
23 
1 
18 
QI i Q 
France 
4 
254 
17 
871 
395 
Germany 
Great Britain and Ireland 
Italy .... 
1,042 
1,413 
815 
37 
15 
23 
256 
13 
155 
7 
363 
125 
421 
182 
4, 085 
908 
1, 237 
676 
28 
14 
7 
209 
9 
128 
1 
221 
97 
259 
198 
3, 070 
580 
56 
227 
8 
558 
54 
20 
34 
496 
1, 405 
13 
1 
1,356 
86 
109 
10 
7 
240 
25 
Japan 
2 
65 
7 
Luxembourg 
1 
29 
3 
Mexico 
2 
30 
7 
Netherlands 
3 
1 
6 
465 
22 
224 
40 
2 
23 
New Zealand 
Norway 
.... 
1 
59 
11 
Portugal 
1 
8 
1 
Russia (including Courland 
and Finland) 
3 
2 
8 
122 
111 
346 
10 
5 
217 
26 
2 
7 
5 
245 
222 
324 
23 
16 
35 
Spain 
Sweden 
9 
26 
3 
11 
12 
68 
380 
584 
10 
39 
62 
7 
177 
22 
Switzerland 
United States 
35 
6, 225 
393 
Total 
397 
26, 473 
*10, 751 
*8, 545 
2, 029 
32 
1, 642 
130 
239 
13,246 
1,182 
91 
87 
1, 019 
63 
* The reports from France and Prussia do not indicate the sex of the pupils. 254 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
Table W.-A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents. 
Name. 
Where educated. 
When ad- 
mitted. 
Age. 
Remarks. 
Acheson, Charles 
American Asylum 
1864 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Acheson, Dutee W 
New England Industrial School 
1881 
8 
Do. 
Acheson, Eugene A 
American Asylum 
1870 
8 
Do. 
Acheson, George W 
do 
1864 
11 
Do. 
Acheson, Pauline M 
Horace Mann School 
1872 
5 
Do. 
Do 
American Asylum 
1878 
11 
Do. 
Acheson, Robert 
do . 
1869 
10 
Do. 
Allard, Hattie M 
do 
1871 
8 
Do. 
Allen, Asa W . 
do 
1845 
9 
Do. 
Allen, Eliza 
do 
1849 
9 
Do. 
Allen, Mabel H 
do 
1881 
8 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Allen, Sarah 
do - 
1843 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Arnold, Eanny 
New York Institution 
1835 
10 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Arnold, Jane 
do 
1833 
15 
Do. 
Atherholt, Colonel 
Ohio Institution 
1851 
13 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Ballin, Albert 
New York Institution 
1868 
7 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Barnard, Lucretia R 
American Asylum 
1863 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Barnes, Rosa I 
Western New York Institution 
1883 
6 
Do. 
Bayne, Mary E 
Pennsy 1 vanialnstitution 
1878 
10 
Do. 
Belcke, Charles 
Illinois Institution 
1879 
9 
Do. 
Berry, Francis 
New England Industrial School 
1883 
12 
Do. 
Bender, Caroline 
New York Institution 
1859 
14 
Father partially deaf. 
Bennett Mary L 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1875 
9 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Do 
New York Institution 
1882 
16 
Do. 
Bentz, Anna De H 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1869 
11 
Do. 
Bodine, Charles Van W 
New York Institution 
1867 
7 
Bothpaients "hard of hear- 
ing-" 
Do. 
Brasher, Fanny C 
Hlinois Institution 
1882 
13 
Brown, Susan F 
American Asylum 
1865 
14 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Brown, Thomas 
do 
1822 
18 
Do. 
Brown, Thomas L 
do 
1851 
12 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Brown, Helen H 
do 
1855 
13 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Bruner, Harry A 
Western New York Institution. 
1876 
10 
Mother somewhat deaf. 
Bucklen, Simeon D 
New York Institution 
1842 
12 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Bucklen, Martha Ann 
do 
1838 
12 
Do. 
Burgess, W. Taylor 
West Virginia Institution 
1878 
21 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Burgess, Jane E 
do 
1880 
19 
Do. 
Burt, Harrison A 
New York Institution ... 
1863 
15 
Mother partially deaf-. 
do - 
1878 
18 
Father deaf in one ear. 
Cairnes, William T 
Maryland School 
1881 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Campbell, Lizzie 
Clarke Institution 
1877 
16 
Mother partially deaf. 
Churchill, Anna R 
New York Institution 
1858 
12 
Father " hard of hearing." 
Cook, Elizabeth 
do 
1851 
13 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Cooper, William E 
Minnesota School 
1863 
11 
Both parents slightly deaf. 
Crawford, Josephine L 
do 
1879 
21 
Mother somewhat deaf. 
Culver, Annie J 
American Asylum 
1878 
9 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Culver, John 
do 
1883 
11 
Do. 
Culver, Hernan M 
do 
1881 
9 
Do. 
Daniels, Willie E 
New England Industrial School 
1882 
7 
Do. 
Derby, Ira H.. 
American Asylum 
1861 
11 
Do. 
Diamond, Albert 
Le Couteaux St. Mary's Institution 
1867 
9 
Do. 
Dithorn, Mary E 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1859 
10 
Do. 
Driskell, Elsie A 
Illinois Institution 
1867 
8 
Do. 
Duntz, Caroline •- 
New York Institution 
1855 
(?) 
Father deaf in one ear. 
Dupee, Franklin L 
Oral Branch Penn Institution 
1882 
10 
Mother slightly deaf. 
Edwards, Walter D 
Hlinois Institution 
1864 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Edwards, Mary E 
do 
1867 
10 
Do. 
Felton, John 
Wisconsin Institution 
1869 
14 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Genet, William F 
New York Institution 
1859 
13 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
George, Dudley W 
Columbia Institution 
1871 
16 
Do. 
Getman, Ida 
New York Institution 
1874 
7 
Do. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
255 
Table W.-A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents-Continued. 
Name. 
Where educated. 
When ad- 
mitted. 
Age. 
Remarks. 
Gloyne, Mary 
New York Institution 
1868 
7 
Goodness, Alex 
Wisconsin Institution 
1874 
17 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Hahn, Maximilian 
New York Institution 
1868 
13 
Father partially deaf 
Hall, William Franklin 
do 
1865 
12 
Both parents deaf-mutes 
Hall, Flotilla 
Western New York Institution 
1883 
6 
Hennricks, Henry . 
Minnesota School 
1870 
20 
Father very deaf. 
Hine, Janies 
American Asylum 
1846 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes 
Hines, William W 
Ohio Institution -. 
1878 
9 
Do. 
Hord, Edwin 
Missouri Institution 
1864 
14 
Hord, Mary E 
do 
1866 
11 
Do. 
Howell, Wallace F 
New York Institution 
1865 
10 
Do. 
Howell, William L 
do 
1868 
9 
Do 
Housel, Helen Estelle 
do 
1875 
7 
Jones, Florence Harriet 
do 
1864 
7 
Do 
Kershner, John M 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1880 
11 
Do 
Kershner, Emma R 
do 
1883 
10 
Do. 
Kindred, Maria J 
Illinois Institution 
1860 
15 
Father a deaf-mute 
Kindred, Elizabeth 
do 
1860 
13 
Kingsley, Isabella 
American Asylum ............................. 
1833 
13 
Koffman, Abey 
New York Institution 
1868 
15 
Father "hard of hearing." 
Koffman, Samuel 
do 
1868 
12 
Do. 
Koffman. Lewis 
... do 
1868 
10 
Do 
Laird, James F 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1862 
14 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Laird, Elizabeth I 
do 
1867 
11 
Do. 
Laister, Eleanor Jane 
New York Institution 
1849 
12 
Lancaster, Lucas C 
do 
1877 
14 
Lloyd, John, jr 
do 
1878 
17 
Lovejoy, Benjamin 
American Asylum 
1844 
15 
rauwruear i torn 01(1 age. 
Lovejoy, Hartwell 
do 
1851 
17 
Do 
Lovejoy, Sarah 
do 
1851 
15 
Do 
Lovejoy, Emma 
.. do 
1851 
10 
Do 
Lovejoy, Erastus 
do 
1860 
17 
Do. 
Lovejov, Abigail 
do 
1860 
12 
Do 
Lovejoy, Lydia A 
do 
1867 
10 
Do. 
Lovejoy, Hattie M 
... do 
1872 
9 
Do 
Lovejoy, Roscoe P 
New England Industrial School 
188.2 
15 
Do 
Marsh, Catharine B 
American Asylum 
1852 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Marsh, Paulina N 
... do 
1855 
10 
Do 
Marsh, Jonathan F 
do 
1860 
11 
Do. 
Marshall, George W 
Illinois Institution 
1863 
10 
Do 
Marshall, Benjamin F 
do 
1866 
9 
Do. 
Marshall, Edith H 
American Asylum 
1879 
11 
Marshall, Gilbert F 
do 
1879 
9 
Do. 
Marshall, Leslie G 
do 
1882 
8 
Do. 
Mayhew, Benjamin 
do 
1858 
12 
Do 
Mayhew, Jared 
.... do 
1864 
11 
Do. 
Mayo, Hawes 
do 
1865 
ID 
McClave, Robert 
Ohio Institution 
1865 
12 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
McClurg, Drucilla H 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1877 
12 
Do. 
McGregor, Bessie 
Ohio Institution . . 
1883 
5 
Do. 
McLaughlin, Amanda 
Western New York Institution 
1876 
6 
Do. 
Meacham, Mary 0 
American Asylum 
1866 
14 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Meacham, Marcellia A 
.. .do 
1866 
9 
Do 
Meacham, George 
do 
186R 
R 
Meacham, Allen B 
do ... 
1872 
11 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Meade, Margaret 
Minnesota School 
1873 
10 
Mother very hard of hearing. 
Metrash, Robert L. G 
American Asylum 
1872 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Munson, Lizzie 
New York Institution 
1879 
9 
Mother partially deaf (recent). 
Ormsby, Edward E 
New York Institution 
1870 
13 
Mother "hard of hearing." 
Park, James M 
Columbia Institution 
1871 
19 
Do 
Ohio Institution 
1864 
12 
Do 256 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table AV.-A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents-Continued. 
Name. 
Where educated. 
' When ad- 
' mitted. 
Age. 
Remarks. 
Pier, John W 
Ohio Institution 
1876 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Place, Larissa 
New York Institution 
1863 
14 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Pimm, Joshua R 
do 
1858 
9 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Pimm, Rachel A 
do 
1861 
11 
Do. 
Pimm, Martha 
do 
1864 
13 
Do. 
Pimm, Charles Augustus 
.... do 
1867 
(?) 
Do. 
Purvis, James H 
Columbia Institution 
1865 
16 
Do. 
Purvis, Amanda J 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1865 
12 
Do. 
Purvis, Kate L 
do 
1870 
12 
Do. 
Purvis, Mary 
do ... 
1872 
13 
Do. 
Purvis, Mary A 
do 
1871 
11 
Do. 
Purvis, Timothy 
do 
1872 
9 
Do. 
Purvis, James M 
do 
1880 
11 
Do. 
Riggs, Charles A 
American Asylum 
1878 
10 
Do. 
Ramsey, Ann E 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1849 
12 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Redmond, Henry 
New York Institution 
1883 
7 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Richardson, George E 
Clarke Institution 
1880 
6 
Mother partially deaf. 
Risley, Luman L 
New York Institution 
1856 
13 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Risley, Charles E 
do 
1870 
6 
Do. 
Roberts, John James 
do 
1877 
8 
Father deaf in one ear. 
Rogers, Jane I 
South Carolina Institution 
1855 
9 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Rogers, William H 
do 
1858 
10 
Do. 
Rogers, David S 
do 
1860 
11 
Do. 
Do 
Columbia Institution 
1868 
17 
Do. 
Rogers, Laura A 
South Carolina Institution 
1867 
10 
Do. 
Rogers, Clara A. 
do 
1869 
10 
Do. 
Rogers, Nettie S., daughter of Wm. H. Rogers. 
do 
1880 
7 
Do. 
Sawhill, Collins S 
Columbia Institution 
1878 
21 
Do. 
Do 
Ohio Institution 
1871 
14 
Do. 
Do 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1869 
12 
Do. 
Sawhill, Isaac H 
Ohio Institution 
1870 
12 
Do. 
Do 
Columbia Institution 
1878 
20 
Do. 
Sawhill, Jesse U 
Ohio Institution 
1871 
9 
Do. 
Sawhill, William L 
do 
1873 
10 
Do. 
Sawhill, Lavinia A 
do 
1876 
8 
Do. 
Schroeder, Anthony 
Minnesota School 
1877 
10 
Father very deaf. 
Scovel, Harriet E 
American Asylum 
1818 
14 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Scovel, Steven 
do 
1838 
25 
Do. 
Scovel, Olive 
do 
1838 
15 
Do. 
Shannon, William 
New York Institution 
1870 
12 
Mother "hard of hearing." 
Skelsy, John 
do 
1855 
15 
Mother becoming deaf. 
Stevenson, Charles W 
Columbia Institution 
1863 
12 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Do 
Maryland School 
1868 
14 
Do. 
Stevenson, Georgiana 
Columbia Institution 
1863 
9 
Do. 
Stiles, Penniah Anna 
New York Institution 
1868 
11 
Father a little deaf. 
Stratton, Sarah C 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1857 
12 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Stratton, James Wells 
New York Institution 
1874 
7 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Straw, Mary .. 
Ohio Institution 
1869 
12 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Suart, Emma M 
Illinois Institution 
1883 
12 
Mother partially deaf. 
Suart, Mabel C 
do 
1883 
11 
Do. 
Sutton, Ross P 
Ohio Institution 
1883 
10 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Swett, Persis H 
American Asylum 
1863 
11 
Do. 
Swett, Charlotte E 
do 
1872 
11 
Do. 
Swett, Mitchel 
do 
1873 
11 
Do. 
Swett, Lucy Maria 
Clarke Institution 
1882 
18 
Do. 
Sweet, Margaret S 
American Asylum 
1875 
9 
Do. 
Tate, Margaret 
Missouri Institution 
1870 
(?) 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Taylor, Anna R 
American Asylum 
1851 
13 
Do. 
Townsend, Albert M 
Illinois Institution 
1873 
12 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Turner, Lucy M 
American Asylum 
1864 
15 
Do. 
Van Kirk, Joseph S 
Pennsylvania Institution .• 
1856 
11 
Do. 
- 
- 
- THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
257 
Table W.-A partial list of deaf children of deaf parents-Continued. 
Name. 
Where educated. 
When'ad- 
mitted. 
Age. 
Remarks. 
Van Kirk, Jolin 
Pennsylvania Institution 
1859 
11 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Van Kirk, Charles II 
do 
1861 
11 
Do. 
Vaughn, Emily W 
Illinois Institution 
1877 
9 
Do. 
Watson, Frederick W 
California Institution 
1883 
15 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Webster, Joseph 
New York Institution 
1850 
12 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Wells, Anna E 
Illinois Institution 
1863 
19 
Mother deaf adult life. 
Welle, Helen D 
Maryland School 
1883 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
West, Rebecca T 
American Asylum 
1856 
12 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
West, George 
do 
1861 
13 
Do. 
West, Benjamin I) 
do 
1868 
15 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
West, Deidama J 
do 
1868 
12 
Do. 
Wildfang, Daniel 
Wisconsin Institution 
1860 
12 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Wildfang, Addie 
do 
1883 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Williams, Laura 
New York Institution 
1833 
12 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Williams, Elizabeth 
do 
1846 
12 
Both parents deaf and dumb. 
Williams, Harriet 
do 
1850 
12 
Do. 
Weidt, William 
Louisiana Institution 
1883 
13 
Do. 
Weidt, A 
do 
1883 
11 
Do. 
Weidt, Annie 
do 
1883 
8 
Do. 
Wise, George A 
New England Industrial School 
1881 
11 
Do. 
Wise, Lottie 
do 
1881 
8 
Do. 
Wolpert, David H 
Colorado Institution 
1874 
7 
Father deaf in one ear. 
Woolever, Margaret Ann 
New York Institution .. - 
1863 
12 
Mother partially deaf. 
Worcester, Ira E 
American Asylum 
1879 
9 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Works, William S 
New York Institution . 
1848 
15 
Do. 
Works, Martha Jane 
do 
1848 
13 
Do. 
Works, Mary Ann 
do 
1851 
13 
Do. 
Works, Charles H 
do 
1855 
(?) 
Do. 
Whittington, Louis 
Columbia Institution 
1869 
(?) 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Wyncoop, Cora A 
New York Institution 
1856 
(?) 
Father a deaf-mute. 
Wyncoop, Frederick .. 
Western New York Institution 
1877 
11 
Mother a deaf-mute. 
Zimmerman, Alice 
Maryland School 
1879 
8 
Both parents deaf-mutes. 
Zimmerman, Jennie 
do 
1883 
9 
Do. 
S. Mis. 110 33 258 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
Table X.-Showing per capita cost for the education of a deaf child in an American institution. 
Name of institution. 
Number of pupils 
Dec. 1, 1881. 
Amount expended 
for support. 
Per capita. 
American Asylum, Hartford, Conn 
180 
481 
319 
139 
432 
85 
325 
103 
99 
508 
47 
37 
192 
478 
249 
67 
117 
44 
108 
190 
146 
128 
112 
137 
88 
59 
84 
250 
78 
26 
39 
160 
104 
116 
$47, 641 
131,307 
71, 301 
26, 705 
79, 612 
19,185 
54, 831 
24, 369 
34, 000 
85, 000 
14, 241 
8,092 
37, 359 
40, 888 
43, 603 
10, 610 
51,108 
12, 500 
35, 352 
43, 416 
19, 500 
19,100 
24,425 
35, 454 
25, 437 
13, 600 
23,189 
27, 588 
19, 472 
4, 000 
7,579 
34, 287 
19,011 
27, 901 
$264 67 
273 00 
223 51 
192 12 
184 28 
225 70 
165 48 
236 59 
344 44 
167 32 
230 00 
218 70 
194 57 
229 14 
175 11 
149 25 
496 64 
284 09 
327 30 
226 40 
133 56 
148 43 
218 03 
258 78 
287 00 
230 55 
276 02 
110 35 
249 64 
153 84 
194 33 
214 29 
182 79 
240 52 
New York Institution, New York City 
Pennsylvania Institution 
Kentucky Institution 
Ohio Institution t 
Virginia Institution * 
Indiana Institution 
Tennessee Institution 
North Carolina Institution.. 
Illinois Institution 
Georgia Institution 
South Carolina Institution 
Iowa Institution 
Wisconsin Institution 
Michigan Institution 
Mississippi Institution 
Columbia Institution (including the National College) 
Alabama Institution . 
California Institution t 
Missouri Institution 
Kansas Institution J 
Le Couteaux St. Mary's* 
Minnesota Institution 
Improved Instruction Institution, New York 
Clarke Institution, Massachusetts 
Arkansas Institution 
Maryland Institution 
St. Joseph's Institution* 
West Virginia Institution 
Oregon Institution 
Colorado Institution 
Central New York Institution 
Western Pennsylvania Institution 
Western New York Institution 
Total 
5,247 
1,171, 571 
223 28 
* Conducted by sisters of charity; no salaries paid. 
t Has a blind department. 
J Superintendent's last report states per capita cost $183.05. THE FORMATION OF A DEAF VARIETY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 
259 
No. 
Name. 
Location. 
Date of opening. 
* 
Chief executive officer. 
Articulation teacher 
first employed. 
Employed constantly 
since? 
* 
No. teachers of articu- 
lation now employed. 
No. pupils in institu- 
tion. 
No. receiving instruc- 
tion in articulation. 
No. using it as a means 
of instruction. 
No. taught articula- 
tion, but not using 
it as a means of in- 
struction. 
1 
American Asylum 
Hartford, Conn 
1817 
Job Williams, M. A., principal ; 
1855 
No. (a) 
2 
188 
35 
None. 
35 
2 
New York Institution 
Washington Heights, 
1818 
Isaac LewisPeet, LL. D., principal; Carlton Carson, 
1818 
No.(&) 
8 
448 
200 
33 
167 
New York, N. Y. 
M. D., superintendent and resident physician. 
3 
Pennsylvania Institution 
Philadelphia, Pa 
1820 
Joshua Foster, principal 
1870 
Yes. 
2 
315 
70 
None. 
70 
4 
Kentucky Institution 
Danville, Ky 
1823 
D. C. Dudley, M. A., superintendent 
None. 
146 
6 
(c)6 
None. 
5 
Ohio Institution 
Columbus, Ohio 
1829 
Benjamin Talbot, M. A., acting superintendent 
1868 
Yes. 
2 
430 
80 
None. 
80 
6 
Virginia Institution 
Staunton, Va 
1839 
Charles S. Roller, principal 
1876 
Yes. 
1 
57 
16 
10 
6 
7 
Indiana Institution 
Indianapolis, Ind 
1844 
William Glenn, superintendent 
1876 
Yes. 
1 
327 
41 
None. 
41 
8 
Tennessee School 
Knoxville, Tenn 
1845 
Thomas L. Moses, principal .: 
1880 
Yes. 
1 
102 
13 
13 
None. 
9 
North Carolina Institution 
Raleigh, N. C 
1844 
W. J. Young, principal 
1880 
Yes. 
1 
80 
10 
10 
None. 
10 
Illinois Institution 
Jacksonville, Ill 
1846 
Philip G. Gillett, LL. D., superintendent 
1868 
Yes. 
3 
523 
133 
None. 
133 
11 
Georgia Institution 
Cave Spring, Ga 
1846 
W. O. Connor, principal 
None. 
76 
8 
None. 
8 
12 
South Carolina Institution 
Cedar Spring, S. C .... 
1849 
Newton F. Walker, superintendent 
1880 
Yes. 
1 
48 
6 
. 6 
None. 
13 
Missouri Institution 
Pulton, Mo 
1851 
William D. Kerr, M. A., superintendent 
1874 
Yes. 
2 
192 
55 
None. 
55 
14 
Louisiana Institution 
Baton Rouge, La 
1852 
R. G. Ferguson, M. A., superintendent 
- 
None. 
32 
(d)4 
None. 
4 
15 
Wisconsin Institution 
Delavan, Wis 
1852 
John W. Swiler, M. A., superintendent 
1868 
Yes. 
1 
190 
33 
33 
None. 
16 
Michigan Institution 
Flint, Mich 
1854 
F. A. Platt, M. A., principal; Dan. H. Church, su- 
1876 
Ye.s. 
1 
245 
28 
(e)28 
None. 
perin tendent. 
17 
Iowa Institution 
Council Bluffs, Iowa.. 
1855 
Rev. A. Rogers, superintendent 
1878 
No.(/) 
1 
270 
28 
10 
18 
18 
Mississippi Institution 
Jackson, Miss 
1856 
J. R. Dobyns, superintendent 
1882 
Yes. 
1 
72 
24 
None. 
24 
19 
Texas Asylum 
Austin, Texas 
1857 
JohnS. Ford, superintendent 
<71879. 
No.(7i) 
None. 
87 
None. 
None. 
None. 
20 
Columbia Institution 
Washington, D. C .... 
1857 
E. M. Gallaudet, Ph. I)., LL. D., president 
1870 
Yes. 
1 
51 
34 
None. 
34 
21 
Alabama Institution 
Talladega, Ala 
1860 
Joseph H. Johnson, M. D., principal 
None. 
45 
None. 
None. 
None. 
22 
California Institution 
Berkeley, Cal 
1860 
Warren Wilkinson, AI. A., principal 
1831 
Yes. 
1 
116 
45 
None. 
45 
23 
Kansas Institution 
Olathe, Kans 
1862 
G. L. Wyckoff, acting superintendent 
1882 
Yes. 
1 
157 
32 
12 
20 
24 
LeCouteulx St. Mary's Institution .... 
Buffalo, N.Y 
1862 
Sister Mary Anne Burke, principal 
1873 
Yes. 
1 
153 
91 
17 
74 
25 
Minnesota Institution 
Faribault, Minn 
1863 
Jonathan L. Noyes, M. A., superintendent 
1880 
Yes. 
1 
127 
32 
6 
26 
26 
Institution for Improved Instruction .. 
New York, N. Y 
1867 
D. Greenberger, principal 
1867 
Yes. 
14 
166 
166 
166 
None. 
27 
Clarke Institution 
Northampton, Mass... 
1867 
Miss Harriet B. Rogers, principal 
1867 
Yes. 
12 
85 
86 
85 
None. 
28 
Arkansas Institute 
Little Rock, Ark 
1868 
H. C. Hammond, M. A., principal 
None. 
52 
None. 
None. 
None. 
29 
Maryland School 
Frederick City, Aid .. 
1868 
Charles W. Ely, AI. A., principal 
1871 
Yes. 
2 
89 
66 
yr 
isone. 
(i)66 
30 
Nebraska Institute 
Omaha, Nebr 
1869 
J. A. Gillespie, B. D., principal 
1881 
Yes. 
2 
94 
56 
13 
43 
31 
Horace Mann School 
Boston, Mass 
1869 
Miss Sarah Fuller, principal 
1869 
Yes. 
8 
83 
83 
83 
None. 
32 
Whipple's Home School 
Mystic River, Conn... 
1869 
J. Whipple, proprietor 
1868 
Yes. 
2 
12 
12 
12 
None. 
(a) "Interval of 5 years, 1863-1868." (b) "Employed, 1818-1821; 1846 one year, and from 1867 to present time." (c) "Semi-mutes taught almost wholly by lip-reading." (d) "Taught by prin 
cipal." (e) "To some extent." (/) "Fire interrupted." (g) "Also in 1880 and 1882." (h) "Could not procure teacher." (i) "We now give all our young pupils at least a year's carefu 
instruction in speech before deciding whether the effort shall be discontinued or not." 
Table Y.-Tabular statement concerning the teaching of articulation in the institutions of the United States, May, 1883. 260 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
No. 
Name. 
Location. 
Date of opening. 
Chief executive officer. 
। Articulation teacher 
first employed. 
Employed constantly 
" since 1 
No. teachers of articu- 
lation now employed. 
No. pupils in institu- 
tion. 
No. receiving instruc- 
tion in articulation. 
No. using it as a means 
of instruction. 
No. taught articula- 
tion, but not using 
it as a means of in- 
' struction. 
33 
St. Joseph's Institute 
Fordham, N. Y 
1869 
Miss Mary B. Morgan, superintendent 
1870 
Yes. 
6 
241 
(a) 89 
75 
14 
34 
West Virginia Institution 
Romney, W. Va 
1870 
J. C. Covell, M. A., principal 
1877 
No.(b) 
None. 
66 
None. 
None. 
None. 
35 
Oregon School 
Salem, Oreg 
1870 
Rev. P. S. Knight, principal 
None. 
23 
None. 
None. 
None. 
36 
Institution for Colored 
Baltimore, Md 
1872 
F. D. Morrison, M. A., superintendent 
None. 
13 
None. 
None. 
None. 
37 
Ev. Lutheran Institution 
Norris, Mich 
1873 
H. D. Uhlig, principal 
1873 
Yes. 
3 
40 
40 
40 
None. 
38 
Colorado Institute 
Colorado Springs, Colo 
1874 
P. W. Downing, principal; J. R. Kennedy, super- 
None. 
37 
(07 
2 
5 
intendent. 
39 
Erie Day School 
Erie, Pa 
1874 
Miss Mary Welsh, teacher 
1874 
Yes. 
1 
10 
10 
10 
None. 
40 
Chicago Day Schools 
Chicago, 111 
1875 
P. A. Emery, M. A., principal 
1882 
Yes. 
1 
(d) 
41 
Central New York Institution 
Rome, N. Y 
1875 
Edward B. Nelson, B. A., principal 
1877 
Yes. 
1 
163 
25 
20 
5 
42 
Cincinnati Day School 
Cincinnati, Ohio 
1875 
A. F. Wood, principal 
None. 
26 
None. 
None. 
None. 
43 
Western Pennsylvania Institution 
Turtle Creek, Pa 
1876 
Thomas Maclntire, Ph. D., principal 
1882 
Yes. 
1 
102 
13 
6 
7 
44 
Western New York Institution 
Rochester, N. Y 
1876 
Z. F. Westervelt, principal 
1876 
Yes. 
4 
136 
125 
5 
(e) 120 
45 
Portland Day School 
Portland, Me 
1876 
Miss Ellen L. Barton, principal 
1877 
Yes. 
4 
33 
33 
33 
None. 
46 
St. John's Catholic Institute 
Saint Francis, Wis ... 
1876 
Rev. Charles Fessler, principal 
1876 
Yes. 
2 
42 
34 
None. 
34 
47 
Rhode Island School 
Providence, R. I 
1877 
Miss Katharine H. Austin, principal 
1877 
Yes. 
3 
30 
30 
30 
None. 
48 
Mr. Knapp's School 
Baltimore, Md 
1877 
Frederick Knapp, principal., 
1877 
Yes. 
4 
40 
40 
40 
None. 
49 
Phonological Institute 
Milwaukee, Wis 
1878 
Adam Stettner, principal 
1878 
Yes. 
2 
21 
21 
21 
None. 
50 
Saint Louis Day School 
Saint Louis, Mo 
1878 
D. A. Simpson, B. A., principal 
None. 
41 
None. 
None. 
None. 
51 
New England Industrial School 
Beverly, Mass 
1878 
William B. Swett, superintendent 
1880 
Yes. 
1 
19 
6 
1 
5 
52 
School of Articulation 
Marquette, Mich 
1877 
Mrs. A. M. Kelsey, principal 
1870 
Yes. 
(/) 
53 
Scranton Day School 
Scranton, Pa 
1880 
Jacob M. Koehler, principal 
None. 
12 
None. 
None. 
None. 
54 
Dakota School 
Sioux Falls, Dak 
1880 
James Simpson, superintendent 
None. 
19 
None. 
None. 
(g) 2 
55 
Oral Branch Pennsylvania Institution. 
Philadelphia, Pa 
1881 
Miss Emma Garrett, teacher in charge 
1881 
Yes. 
7 
60 
60 
60 
None. 
55 
Institutions in the United States 
112 
6, 232 
1, 991 
886 
1,105 
National College 
Washington, D. C .... 
1864 
E. M. Gallaudet, Ph. D., LL.D., president 
1877 
No.(li) 
None. 
31 
None. 
None. 
None. 
(a) These figures seem not to do justice to the articulation work done. (b) "Only two years." (c) "Taught by principal and a hearing teacher." (d) " No further definite information." 
(e) " AU will have practical use made of articulation as a means of instruction." (/) "School closed June, 1882." (y) " Semi-mutes, who converse orally with all who can hear." (h) Employed 
or 3 or 4 years; " discontinued because of interference with legitimate work of the college. With a few lip-readers, considerable use is made of speech in recitation." 
Table Y.-Tabular statement concerning the teaching of articulation in the institutions of the United States, May, 1883-Continued. APPENDIX Z. 
The following table, combining all the cases of marriage recorded in Tables A to J, was sub- 
mitted to Prof. Simon Newcomb for his opinion regarding the number of congenital deaf-mutes 
who had married congenital deaf-mutes. The Reports of the American Asylum and Illinois Insti- 
tution give no information bearing on this point; but it seemed possible to determine the proba- 
bilities from the data given in the table, especially as the intermarriages, in a large proportion of 
cases, undoubtedly occurred between deaf-mutes who had been educated in the same Institution, 
and who were therefore both included in the table: 
Cause of deafness. 
Deaf-mutes who are recorded to 
have married deaf-mutes. 
Deaf-mutes stated to have married, 
but who are not recorded to have 
married deaf-mutes. 
Males. 
Females. 
Total. 
Males. 
Females. 
Total. 
Congenital 
150 
148 
298 
37 
25 
62 
Non-congenital 
179 
152 
331 
58 
27 
85 
Not stated 
14 
11 
25 
8 
15 
Total 
343 
311 
654 
102 
60 
162 
The main question proposed was this: Of the congenital deaf-mutes who are recorded to have 
married deaf-mutes, what proportion have married congenital deaf-mutes'? 
Professor Newcomb has been kind enough to send the following letters in reply to the query: 
Nautical Almanac Office, Navy Department, 
Washington, D. C., May 20, 1884. 
Dear Mr. Bell : Although the question you ask seems to admit of a satisfactory answer, I notice a singular 
defect in the statistical table. It contains not a single case of a deaf-mute being reported as having married a hearing 
person. If this is an accidental omission in making the copy for you it ought to be corrected. If there is really no 
such record the case is very singular.* It would look as if the parties were ashamed to state that they had married 
hearing persons, or the recorders had rejected all such cases. 
The main question you ask can, I think, be answered by the theory of probabilities. Your table, if I understand 
it correctly, shows that out of 629 persons in the institution (of whom 329 were males and 300 females) a little less 
than one-half (298) were congenital deaf-mutes. Now, I see no reason for supposing that the persons whom they 
married would be divided in any essentially different proportion between the two classes. 
It is true that could we learn from the census tables how the entire deaf of the country of marriageable ages, say, 
between the ages of twenty and thirty, are divided between the two classes, our conclusions might be modified. If, 
for example, it should be found that of the total number of deaf alluded to only one-third were congenital cases, we 
* Only eleven deaf-mutes were specifically stated to have married hearing persons, and 151 were recorded 
simplv as "married." 
261 262 
MEMOIRS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 
might be allowed to suppose that the marriages reported were divided according to this ratio, rather than according 
to the approximate ratio of equality found in the asylum. But we should consider that this surplus of non-con- 
genital deaf would indicate a class who associate principally with hearing persons, and who would, therefore, be less 
likely to marry deaf-mutes than others would. I think, therefore, that under the circumstances, we should regard 
the ratio given by statistics of the institution as the most probable one. Of course the reason for this is strengthened 
if, as you intimate, a large proportion of the statistics may be mutual. Allowing for a probable slight tendency of the 
two classes congenital and non-congenital to choose each other, I think the most probable conclusion would be this: 
Of the congenital deaf one-half married congenital and one-half non-congenital deaf. 
Of the non-congenital three-sevenths married congenital deaf and four-sevenths non-congenital deaf. 
And I consider these results sufficiently probable to form the basis of conclusions in cases where slight changes 
in the numbers would not change the general result. 
If you wish your table returned please inform me. 
Yours, very truly, 
S. NEWCOMB. 
Washington, D, C., May 26, 1884. 
Dear Mr. Bell: The remarkable agreement between the ratio of congenital and non-congenital cases in the 
census reports, and in the numbers married, affords a strong confirmation of the probable soundness of the conclusion 
I indicated to you. The small discrepancy to which you allude probably arose from the twenty-five " not stated" 
cases. I return you the tables. 
Yours, very truly, 
8. NEWCOMB.