The statistics of the insane and idiotic in Prussia presented by Mayet clearly indicate the large part which heredity plays in the production of mental disorders. Tables XX and XXI set forth the most important results of his work. Mayet considers a case hereditary if any near relative of the subject suffered from mental or nervous disorder, or was intemperate, suicidal, criminal or eccentric.[[72]]

TABLE XX.
No. of Cases.Percentage hereditary.
1.Simple Insanity102,09731.7 = 100
Consanguineous parentage66469.0 = 218
Parents cousins59568.1 = 215
Parents uncle and niece6677.3 = 244
2.Paralytic Insanity22,93617.6 = 100
Consanguineous parentage9545.3 = 257
Parents cousins8744.8 = 255
Parents uncle and niece875.0 = 426
3.Epileptic Insanity14,06725.6 = 100
Consanguineous parentage7953.2 = 208
Parents cousins7050.0 = 195
Parents uncle and niece966.7 = 261
4.Imbecility and Idiocy16,41628.7 = 100
Consanguineous parentage23743.0 = 150
Parents cousins21143.1 = 150
Parents uncle and niece2638.5 = 134

Table XXI gives the proportion of the mentally defective who are the offspring of consanguineous marriages. The term "cousin" in both these tables probably means first cousins. It will be remembered that Prussian statistics of consanguineous marriages are very imperfect, but that at least 6.5 in every thousand are consanguineous (first cousins or nearer).

TABLE XXI.[[73]]
Parentage of Mental Defectives in Prussia.
Consanguineous.Cousins.Uncle and Niece.
1.Insanity (simple)6.5[A]5.8[A].64[A]
Hereditary14.212.51.6
Not hereditary3.02.7.22
2.Paralytic Insanity4.13.8.35
Hereditary11.19.61.48
Not hereditary2.92.5.11
3.Epileptic Insanity5.64.9.64
Hereditary11.79.91.57
Not hereditary3.53.2.29
4.Idiocy and Imbecility14.412.81.58
Hereditary21.619.32.12
Not hereditary11.510.21.37
[A] Per thousand.

From these tables we may infer that consanguinity influences idiocy far more than it does insanity, but it is not entirely clear why the number of hereditary cases should be relatively smaller among the idiotic. Since insanity is more likely to have some more definitely assignable cause than idiocy, we should expect the percentage due to heredity to be lower and consequently the influence of consanguinity less.

It is generally admitted that a tendency toward insanity is inheritable, and it seems probable that this tendency as well as other neuroses may be intensified through double heredity. A case in point can be found in the Shattuck genealogy.[[74]] For four generations in the S. family there is no indication of neurosis. The average number of children to a family had been eight, few children died young and all were prosperous farmers. But in 1719 J.S. married E.C. and their son Z.S. is thus described: "He was sometimes subject to depression of spirits; and some peculiar traits of character in a few branches of his family seem to have originated with him." He married A.C., a niece of his mother. They both lived to be over 80 and had ten children, of whom three were insane; only six married, and of these only two are known to have left surviving children. One of these a daughter, S.S., married E.S., a nephew of her father, and himself the offspring of a second cousin marriage within the S. blood. E.S. and S.S. had five children, all of whom married, and there is no further mention of insanity. We may suppose, then, that the C. stock was neurotic, and that a consanguineous marriage within that stock, although of the S. surname, intensified the tendency into insanity, but with a further infusion of the normal S. blood the morbidity was eliminated. It is very evident that the heredity and not the consanguinity was the cause of these three cases of insanity.


CHAPTER VI

CONSANGUINITY AND THE SPECIAL SENSES