 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
58
Hereditary Genius
inquiries, that the relations of these latter judges, speaking generally, have
not so large a share of eminence as we shall find among those of the judges
in my list. This might have been expected, for it is notorious that the
standard of ability in a modern judge is not so high as it used to be. The
number of exceptionally gifted men being the same, it is impossible to
supply the new demand for heads of great schools and for numerous other
careers, now thrown open to able youths, without seriously limiting the field
whence alone good judges may be selected. By beginning at the
Restoration, which I took for my commencement, because there was
frequent jobbery in earlier days, I lose a Lord Keeper (of the same rank as
a Lord Chancellor), and his still greater son, also a Lord Chancellor, namely,
the two Bacons. I state these facts to show that I have not picked out the
period in question, because it seemed most favourable to my argument, but
simply because it appeared the most suitable to bring out the truth as to
hereditary genius, and was, at the same time, most convenient for me to
discuss.
There are 286 judges within the limits of my inquiry; 109 of them have one
or more eminent relations, and three others have relations whom I have
noticed, but they are marked off with brackets, and are therefore not to be
included in the following statistical deductions. As the readiest method of
showing, at a glance, the way in which these relations are distributed, I give
a table below in which they are all compactly registered. This table is a
condensed summary of the Appendix to the present chapter, which should
be consulted by the reader whenever he desires fuller information.
 |
|
 |
|