[29] The first Europeans established at Jamaica were Spaniards or Portuguese; but the island was, 1655, conquered by the English, when all the old colonists retired, carrying away the greater portion of their wealth. Cromwell hastened to re-people the island, by transporting to it a number of political convicts. In 1659, four years after the conquest, there were already 4,500 Europeans and 1,400 Negroes on the island. In 1670, the white population amounted to 7,500, slaves 8,000. It will then, be observed, that the population of Jamaica descends exclusively from English colonists and Negro slaves. With regard to the Caribs, they have been entirely exterminated by the Spaniards a century before the arrival of the English.
[30] Long (Edward), History of Jamaica, vol. ii, p. 235, London, 1774, cited in the Charleston Medical Journal, vol. vi. 1851.
[31] The relation of Lewis is, in certain respects, more suggestive than that of Long. The latter says that the Mulattoes of the first degree are well constituted; while Lewis pretends that they are mostly weak and flabby, whence it results that the physical inferiority becomes manifest at the very first crossing. We believe this to be incorrect. The author endeavours to explain the defect of vitality in the children of Mulattoes, and has recourse to a theory which, if well founded, would, instead of weakening, only strengthen the fact. On the other hand, we believe that the assertion of Long, despite of the corrective which accompanies it, is too general. If it were true that the union of Mulattoes is always unproductive in Jamaica, the fact would have been too evident not to have been long known, for absolute sterility is easily ascertained. Relative sterility, however, may long escape notice, considering that there is always in the pure races a certain number of cases of sporadic sterility. It is probable that further investigations will establish for Jamaica conclusions analogous to those adopted by Mr. Nott for South Carolina; namely, that the Mulattoes of this English island are less prolific between themselves than with the whites or blacks, and that their direct descendants are generally less vivacious and prolific than the men of the pure races.
[32] Waitz, loc. cit., p. 205. Van Amringe, Investigation of the Theories of the Natural History of Man. Hamilton Smith, Natural History of the Human Species, 1848. Day, Five Years Residence in the West Indies, vol. i, p. 294, 1852.
[33] Seemann, Reise um die Welt, bd. 1, p. 314, 1853. Waitz, Anthropologie, p. 207.
[34] Bulletins de la Société d’Anthropologie: procés-verbal de la séance du 1er Mars, 1860, vol. i, p. 206.
[35] Dr. Tschudi adds, “considered as men, the Zambos are far inferior to the pure races:” Travels in Peru, London, 1847. G. Pouchet, De la Pluralité des Races Humaines, p. 137. Paris, 1848.
[36] Boudin, Géographie Médicale, Introduction, p. 39. Paris, 1857.
[37] Graf Görtz, Reise, bd. iii, p. 288. Waitz, Anthropologie, bd. i, p. 297. I find in the voyage of Havorinus a passage which may, perhaps, explain the singular act pointed out by Graf Görtz. Having given the number of the European population of Batavia, Havorinus adds, “Among the Europeans figure also such as are born from European parents, among whom females form the great majority” (Havorinus, Voyage par le Cap de Bonne-Espérance et Samarang, et traduit du Hollandais, chap. viii, t. II, p. 283. Paris). It seems thus that the influence of climate produces some modification in the generative powers of Europeans, rendering them less apt to procreate males even with the women of their own race. This modification may be transmitted to their descendants by intermixtures. The fact of Havorinus should, however, be verified.
[38] Steen Bille, Bericht über die Reise der Galathea, bd. i, p. 376, 1852: Waitz, loc. cit.