VII-1 DISCUSSION OF THE DATA OF STATURE. 95
Anthropological Committee to the British Association in 1880, and published in its Journal.
I concluded after carefully studying the chart upon which each of the individual observations from which Table 11 was constructed, had been entered separately in their appropriate places, and not clubbed into groups as in the Tables, that the value of Q in each CoFraternal group was roughly the same, whatever their Mid-Parental value might have been. It was not quite the same, being a trifle larger when the Mid-Parents were tall than when they were short. This justifies what will be said in Appendix E about the Geometric Mean ; it also justifies neglect in the present inquiry of the method founded upon it, because the improvement in the results to' which it might lead, would be insignificant, while its use would have added to the difficulty of explanation, and introduced extra trouble throughout, to the reader more than to myself. The value that I adopt for Q in every Co-Fraternal group, is 1.5 inch.
Regression.-a. Filial: However paradoxical it may appear at first sight, it is theoretically a necessary fact, and one that is clearly confirmed by observation, that the Stature of the adult offspring must on the whole, be more mediocre than the stature of their Parents ; that is to say, more near to the M of the general Population. Table 11 enables us to compare the values of the M in different Co-Fraternal groups with the Statures of their respective Mid-Parents. Fig. 10 is a graphical representation of the meaning of
