l the credit of these endowments to the score of
national character? Is not some part traceable simply to the abolition
of the old privileges and customs of primogeniture? I fancy that were
it American usage to pass the bulk of great estates to a succession of
eldest sons or to the nearest heir, we should see fewer great bequests
to the public. "The heir" would ever be an overshadowing figure in the
rich man's plans; whereas now, if kith and kin be well provided for, no
one finds it strange that the bulk of an estate like Mr. Peabody's or
Mr. Lick's or Mr. Cornell's should go to public education and charity.

Our English-speaking race, as we all know, has ever had a thirst for
posthumous power; so bent were our ancestors on tying up their estates
in perpetuity that when the law came in to forbid it many were the
devices to prolong the grasp. Privileges of primogeniture are still
jealously guarded in England, for the sake of accumulating family
honors and wealth. Even in America older brothers sometimes oddly think
themselves sole managers of the parental estate--a fancy due, perhaps,
to the influence of our English derivation. We see its traces where
even an estimable oldest brother, as self-appointed head of the family,
deals with the inherited estate as if it were all his own: prescribes
the household expenses, "invests" the portions of others as may seem
good unto him, loses them in his speculations without qualm of
conscience, or doles out from his gains to his younger brothers and
sisters with the air of a munificent prince giving bounties.
Paterfamilias was eminently just in taking him into the historic firm
on a third share, but it would be preposterous to do the same by
brother Tom. Let Tom and Harry, after a few years' longer probation of
clerkship than Primus needed, be generously taken in; but let them
divide a third of the partnership between them. Primogeniture, I
repeat, still leaves its curious traces with us in these unpleasant
delusions of the oldest male child; but the abolition of its ancient
privileges, and the habit of distributing fortunes and opportunities
share and share alike among equal heirs or legatees, have accustomed
many rich men besides childless millionaires to sparing a generous
portion for charities and colleges. This view is strengthened by
observing that the famous dedications of private fortunes to public
uses are made by men who have earned their wealth, not inherited it.
Inherited