this 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 have 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 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 marry in adult life or marry hearing persons belonging to deaf-mute families, and each succeeding generation of deaf-mutes would increase the probability of the deaf-mute element being rendered permanent by heredity; and 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 their own.
Plans for the formation of such a community of deaf-mutes have many times been discussed by the deaf-mutes themselves, contributions of money for the purpose have been publicly offered, and it has even been proposed to procure the enactment of laws to secure the descent of the land and other property in the deaf-mute line alone, so that the hearing children would be led to leave the community. A colony of this sort has even been founded in Manitoba, and twenty-four deaf-mutes with their families have already arrived from Europe and have settled upon the land, while more are expected this year.
The analogy of all other organisms would lead us to expect that, with all these selective influences at work, the number of deaf-mutes should increase rapidly, and the interesting question, "How far do the facts justify this opinion?" at once presents itself, and we ask, first, whether deafness is hereditary; and, second, whether it is true that many deaf-mutes marry; and, third, whether our system of education does lead those who marry to select deaf-mutes as their partners; and, fourth, whether deafness is more frequent among their children than it is in the community at large.
If the published records answer all these questions in the affirmative, it is clear that, however much the present system may appeal to our sympathies, it is neither the best one for the interests of the whole community, nor the best for the deaf themselves, since it tends to increase the evil which it is designed to alleviate.
Few of the institutions publish any record regarding the relatives of pupils, but the records of the American Asylum, at Hartford, Connecticut, show that, of 2,106 pupils admitted to that institution, 693, or nearly 33 per cent, were known to have deaf-mute relatives, and in the majority of these cases the pupils have more than one relative deaf and dumb, while in a few cases as many as 15 deaf-mute relatives are recorded. The report of this institution for 1877 shows that
| 593 | pupils had one or more | brothers or sisters deaf and dumb. | |
| 100 | """ | cousins | " |
