EDITORrnThomas FlemingrnMANAGING EDITORrnTheodore PappasrnSE;NIOR EDITOR, BOOKSrnChilton Williamson, Jr.rnASSISTANT EDITORrnMichael WashburnrnART DIRECTORrnAnna Mycek-WodeckirnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSrnHarold O.j. Brown, Katherine Dalton,rnSamuel Francis, George Garrett,rnPaul Gottfried, Christine Haynes,rnE. Christian Kopff, j.O. Tate,rnClyde WilsonrnCORRESPONDING EDITORSrnBill Kauffman, William Mills,rnJacob Neusner, ]ohn Shelton Reed,rnMomcilo SelicrnEDITORIAL SECRETARYrnLeann DobbsrnPUBLISHERrnAllan C. CarlsonrnPUBLICATION DIRECTORrnGuy C. ReffettrnPRODUCTION SECRETARYrnAnita CandyrnCIRCULATION MANAGERrnRochelle FrankrnA publication of The Rockford Institute.rnEditorial and Advertising Offices:rn934 North Main Street, Rockford, IE 61103,rnEditonal Phone: (815) 964-5054,rnAdvertising Phone: (815) 964-5813.rnSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800,rnMount Morris, IE 61054. Call 1-800-877-5459.rnU.S.A. New’sstand Distribution bv Eastern NewsrnDistributors, Inc., One Media Wav, 12406 Rt. 250rnMilan, Ohio 44848-9705rnCopvright © 1997 b>The Rockford Institute.rnAll rights reserved.rnChmmdes (ISSN 0887-5731) ,s publishedrnmonthly for $39.00 (foreign subscriptions add $12rnfor surface delivery, $48 for ,ir Mail) per year brnThe Rockford Institute, 934 North Main Street,rnRockford, IL 61103-7061, Preferred periodicalrnpostage paid at Rockford, IL and additional mailingrnoffices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes tornChmmdes, P.O. Box 800, Mount Morns, IL 61034.rnThe ie\s expressed in Clmmides are thernauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflectrnthe views of The Rockford Institute or of itsrndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot bernreturned unless accompanied bv a self-addressedrnstamped envelope.rnChroniclesrnVol.21, No. 5 M.ircfil997rnPrinted in the United States ot AmericarnPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESrnOn Family LifernIn the No ember 1996 issue of Chronicles,rnthere is a review (“Heathen Days”rnbv Gregory McNamec) of John Gilhs’srnbook A World of Their Own Making. I dornnot know whetlier to blame the reviewerrnor the author, but I find mam of thernstatements questionable.rnMcNamee savs “Gil lis eombs the eensusrnreeords to show that . . . premaritalrnpregnaney rates in most Ameriean statesrn. . , have never fallen below ten pereent.”rnI have spent man- davs eombing censusrnreeords and ha e ne^ er seen anythingrnwhich would allow anv conclusion aboutrnpremarital pregnane) rates. The onlyrnthing that would come close would be arnmarriage date less than nine months beforernthe birth of a child, and most of thernUnited States census records do not providernthis. For the one or two that do, Irnfound practically no such cases, and indeedrnsince the information was providedrnbv the individual, it would have beenrnvery easy to change the marriage date. Arnmarriage certificate was not required byrnthe census taker,rnEnglish church records do providernsome measure of illegitimac}’ since childrenrnare listed as bastard or base-born,rnbut having spent some time with suchrnrecords, I would hardly put the rate asrnhigh as ten pereent. Interestingly, Irnfound no case in which a female had twornbastard children. Apparently the communityrnsaw to it that the father did hisrnduty to the poor lass.rnAnd I do not know what Gillis meansrnby “no great fuss” about premarital pregnancyrnbefore the 19th century. Gillisrnmight want to check the colonial reeords,rnwhere he would find that there was indeedrna fuss about premarital pregnancy.rnHence the shotgun vyedding, presidedrno’er by the father and brothers of the offendedrngirl.rn—Charles PrevostrnSan Jose, CArnDr. Gillis Replies:rn1 do not believe authors should be heldrnresponsible for the way reviewers representrntheir books. Gregory McNamee’srnshort and generous treatment of my ArnWorld of Their Own Making could notrnpossiblv present all its nuances. As someonernwho is not a historian, Mr. McNameernmay have missed the differencernbetween census and parish records. I wasrnreferring explicitly to evidence from thernparish reeords, which, as Peter Laslett,rnEdward Shorter, and Lawrence Stonernhave shown, reeal considerable illegitimac”rnbefore the modern era. And, in arnfew instances, women did bear morernthan one child out of wedlock.rnAs mv book makes clear, the familyrncultures I am describing originated inrnboth Europe and North America amongrnthe Victorian urban Protestant middlernclasses. Mr. Prevost is right in thinkingrnthat the family cultures of rural andrnworking-class people were quite differentrnuntil this century. As for the dating ofrncompulsor’ education, the laws were onrnthe books by the late 19th century,rnthough I would agree that full compliancernwas not easily achieved.rnI appreciate Mr. Prevost’s probingrnquestions, most of which are answeredrnbv the book. I hope he will read it.rn—John R. GillisrnProfessor of HistoryrnRutgers UniversityrnNew Brunswick, N/rnOn Crime GenesrnKevin Lamb’s excellent article (“CrimernGenes and Other Delusions,” Decemberrn1996) illuminated recent behavioral geneticrnresearch on temperament and itsrnrelation to crime and showed that scientificrninterest of this kind is growing rapidly,rndespite continued opposition fromrnthe political correctness crowd. CoincidentalK’,rntwo new articles of mine bearrndirectlv on this issue.rnIn the July 1996 issue of the medicalrnjournal Psychiatric Cenetics, I examinedrndata from several hundred twin pairs andrnfound that general misbehavior for menrnis about 75 pereent heritable and thatrnviolence is about 50 percent heritable.rnThe measures of ‘iolence included carryingrnand using a weapon, fighting inrnpublic, struggling with a policeman, andrnvandalism. This may have been the firstrnstudy to show that violence per se is heritable,rnfor even some behavioral geneti-rn4/CHRONlCLESrnrnrn