•mMmmm-: 
 
COfflCLLMMlfmilTT 
 
CORNELL UNIVERSHY LIBRARY 
 
 3 1924 076 504 152 
 
The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924076504152 
 
EUGENICS: 
 
 Twelve University Lectures 
 
EUGENICS: 
 
 Twelve University Lectures 
 
 BY 
 
 MORTON A. ALDRICH 
 
 WILLIAM HERBERT CARRUTH 
 
 CHARLES B. DAVENPORT 
 
 CHARLES A. ELLWOOD 
 
 ARTHUR HOLMES 
 
 W. H. HOWELL 
 
 HARVEY ERNEST JORDAN 
 
 ALBERT GALLOWAY KELLER 
 
 EDWARD L. THORNDIKE 
 
 VICTOR C. VAUGHAN 
 
 HERBERT JOHN WEBBER 
 
 ROBERT H. WOLCOTT 
 
 WITH A FOREWORD BY 
 
 LEWELLYS F. BARKER 
 
 NEW YORK 
 DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY 
 1914 
 
Copyright, 1914 
 By LUCY JAMES WILSON 
 
 /1H 
 
EXPLANATORY NOTE 
 
 The lectures contained in this volume were selected 
 from among a number given in various universities and 
 colleges throughout the country in the scholastic year of 
 19 1 2-1 9 13. They were arranged for in the belief 
 that the most necessary step to be taken towards the end 
 of awakening a eugenical conscience, and thus paving 
 the way to an effective operation of public opinion and 
 to wise legislation along eugenical lines, must be that of 
 education. Therefore, the purpose has been to have 
 the subject of eugenics — what it means, what the neces- 
 sities for it are, and what are its aims — put clearly 
 and forcefully before as many undergraduate student 
 bodies as possible. 
 
 It being found impracticable to provide for a lecture 
 at every college or university, those twenty-eight were 
 chosen which had registered over two thousand stu- 
 dents, and to these were added Wellesley, Vassar, Bryn 
 Mawr, and the University of Virginia. Each of these 
 institutions was then offered an honorarium for a lecture 
 on eugenics to be prepared and delivered by a suitable 
 member of the faculty. This accounts for the repeti- 
 tions which are found in the volume, although an 
 earnest effort has been made to minimise them. The 
 value of this repetition lies in that it will at once appear, 
 to any reader not already familiar with the subject, that 
 these are not views expressed by a small group of peo- 
 ple influenced by each other, but that on the contrary 
 thinking men in various parts of the country concur in 
 the same general belief and admit the same general 
 premises, L. J. W. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 EXPLANATORY NOTE 
 FOREWORD . . . . 
 
 PAGE 
 V 
 
 ix 
 
 By Lewellys F. Barker, M.D., LL.D., Professor of Medi- 
 cine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. 
 
 I The Eugenics Programme and Progress in Its Achieve- 
 ment I 
 
 Delivered at the University of Minnesota, November, 
 
 1912, by Charles B. Davenport, Ph.D., Director, De- 
 partment of Experimental Evolution (Carnegie Insti- 
 tution of Washington), Cold Spring Harbor, Long 
 Island, N. Y. 
 
 II Eugenics as Viewed by the Zoologist 15 
 
 Delivered at the University of Nebraska, May 6, 1913, 
 by Robert H. Wolcott, B.Sc, A.M., M.D.; Head Pro- 
 fessor of Zoology and Junior Dean of the College of 
 Medicine, University of Nebraska. 
 
 III Eugenics from the Point of View of the Physician . . 41 
 
 Delivered at the University of Michigan, December, 1912, 
 and at the University of Wisconsin, January, 1913, by 
 Victor C. Vaughan, M.D., LL.D.; Dean of the Depart- 
 ment of Medicine and Surgery, University of Michi- 
 gan; President, Michigan State Board of Health. 
 
 IV Eugenics as Viewed by the Physiologist 78 
 
 Delivered at Johns Hopkins University, February 27, 
 
 1913, by W. H. Howell, Ph.D., M.D., Sc.D., LL.D.; 
 Professor of Physiology, Johns Hopkins University. 
 
 V Eugenics: Its Data, Scope and Promise, as Seen by the 
 
 Anatomist 107 
 
 Delivered at the University of Virginia, January 15, 
 1913, by Harvey Ernest Jordan, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.; 
 Professor of Histology and Embryology in the Univer- 
 sity of Virginia. 
 
 VI Eugenics from the Point of View of the Geneticist . 139 
 Delivered at Cornell University, May 6, 1913, by Her- 
 bert John Webber, B.S., M.A., Ph.D., D.Agr.; Profes- 
 sor of Plant Breeding, Cornell University; now with 
 the University of California. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 VII The First Law of Character-Making 177 
 
 Delivered at the Pennsylvania State College, January 17, 
 1913, by Arthur Holmes, B.A., Ph.D.; Dean of the 
 General Faculty, The Pennsylvania State College. 
 
 VIII The Eugenics Movement from the Standpoint of So- 
 ciology 213 
 
 Delivered at the University of Missouri, April lo, 1913, 
 by Charles A. Ellwood, Ph.B., Ph.D.; Professor of 
 Sociology, University of Missouri. 
 
 IX Eugenics and Its Social Limitations 239 
 
 Delivered at Yale University, March 10, 1913, by Albert 
 Galloway Keller, Ph.D., Professor of the Science of 
 Society, Yale University. 
 
 X Selections from an Address on Eugenics 27a 
 
 Delivered at the University of Kansas, May 8, 1913, by 
 William Herbert Carruth, Ph.D.; Professor of Ger- 
 manic Languages and Literatures, and Vice-Chancellor 
 of the University of Kansas; now with Leland Stan- 
 ford Junior University. 
 
 XI Eugenics and Economics 293 
 
 Delivered at the Tulane University of Louisiana, May • 
 iS> I9I3) by Morton A. Aldrich, Ph.D. ; Professor of 
 Economics and Sociology and Professor of Industrial 
 Hygiene in the Tulane University of Louisiana. 
 
 XII Eugenics: With Special Reference to Intellect and 
 
 Character 319 
 
 Delivered at Columbia University, March 19, 1913, by 
 Edward L. Thorndike, Ph.D., Professor of Educational 
 Psychology, Teachers College, Columbia University. 
 
 INDEX • 343 
 
FOREWORD 
 
 When Sir Francis Galton founded, in London, the 
 Eugenic Laboratory known by his name. National Eu- 
 genics was declared to be " the study of agencies under 
 social control that may improve or impair the racial 
 qualities of future generations either physically or men- 
 tally." 
 
 The problems of eugenics are as old certainly as his- 
 torically recorded human life. They were discussed, in 
 some of their fundamental features at least, among the 
 Hebrews at the time when the Bible was written. Plato 
 deals with them in a famous chapter in the Republic. 
 But the attempt to create an actual science of eugenics 
 was first made toward the end of the nineteenth century 
 after the principle of evolution had become widely ac- 
 cepted and thoughtful men and women had adopted the 
 creed that man himself, like all other objects, animate 
 and inanimate, is subject to the reign of natural law. 
 
 The progress of physics, chemistry, and biology has 
 made possible so many beneficial practical applications 
 of these sciences that human beings, more than ever 
 before in the world's history, have come to appreciate 
 the value of accurate knowledge as a guide to conduct. 
 Wherever man has begun to know scientifically, he has 
 found himself also, better than before, able to predict; 
 he has gained the power to control. This increase in 
 
X FOREWORD 
 
 power to control has only whetted an appetite which 
 appears to be insatiable ; man now strives for ends which 
 his ancestors would have regarded as presumptuous in 
 him to try to reach. Thus, to-day, he not only utilises 
 these forces of nature to improve the conditions under 
 which he lives, but he is determined, if possible, to beget 
 a better and a nobler race to succeed him. 
 
 The crude selective processes of nature have through 
 the struggle for existence and the elimination of the 
 less fit gradually led up from lower man to the man of 
 our time. But modern man is a sympathetic being. 
 He tries to prolong the life of the defective and the 
 diseased. Instead of killing the criminal, he attempts 
 to reform him. Instead of allowing children who have 
 a feeble resistance to tuberculosis to die, he keeps them 
 alive and they grow up, perhaps to transmit their weak- 
 ness to offspring. He prevents epidemics. He limits 
 the exterminating influences of alcoholism, and of pov- 
 erty. Thus modern charity, modern philanthropy, and 
 modern medicine combine to interfere with that selective 
 death-rate which, biologists tell us, has, hitherto, 
 played an Important role in race-betterment. 
 
 In view of this remarkable change in conditions, 
 thoughtful men are asking themselves a new question. 
 It Is this : — Can man, from now on, through the use 
 of his Intelligence, learn enough about the Influences of 
 heredity and environment to permit him consciously 
 and successfully to act In the direction of a selective 
 birth-rate which will compensate, or more than com- 
 pensate, for the race-impairment threatened by his con- 
 scious Interference with the selective death-rate? So- 
 
FOREWORD xi 
 
 called eugenlsts are optimistic and believe that he can; 
 they assert that he already knows enough to permit of 
 some practical applications of the eugenic science. 
 Though granting that man will never be able consciously 
 to direct the processes of improvement of his racial 
 qualities in any way comparable to the control exer- 
 cisable by experimental breeders of plants and animals, 
 they feel that through the scientific study of heredity 
 and dissemination of knowledge among the people, 
 ideals may be gradually fostered regarding parenthood 
 which will go far toward Improving the Inherent quali- 
 ties of the human race. 
 
 Certainly, a vast deal of nonsense Is being talked 
 and written about eugenics. The word is In the mouths 
 of many laymen, who have no conception of Its real 
 meaning. The quack doctors of society have seized 
 upon it, exploiting its popularity, to advance in favour 
 their own pet panaceas for social reform. True eu- 
 genics is, at present, in less danger from its avowed 
 enemies than from those who masquerade as its friends. 
 Hasty and ill-advised legislation Is preceding not only 
 the cultivation of public opinion, but also that solid foun- 
 dation of demonstrable fact which alone would justify 
 law-making. Surely much harm may easily result from 
 eugenic zeal without sufficient eugenic knowledge ! 
 
 It is gratifying to know that careful studies of eugenic 
 problems are now being made in this country. The 
 organisation of the Eugenics Record Office at Cold 
 Spring Harbor marks the opening of a new period in 
 eugenic study and in education along eugenic lines in the 
 United States. Those who harbour eugenic Ideals 
 
xii FOREWORD 
 
 should be under no illusion, however, as to the rapidity 
 with which real progress can be made. It will take a 
 long time to lead even the more thoughtful of the people 
 into a full understanding of the nature and importance 
 of the principles of eugenics, and there does not seem 
 to be any probability that the people as a whole will in 
 the near future be led to think or act in accordance with 
 these principles. 
 
 It was a recognition of the need of educating younger 
 people of the better sort regarding eugenics that led 
 Mrs. Huntington Wilson to provide a lecture on the 
 subject in each of a large number of American uni- 
 versities last year. The present volume makes cer- 
 tain of those lectures generally available, and the 
 perusal of them will doubtless lead many readers to 
 pursue the subject further. 
 
 Among the books arid articles dealing with eugenics 
 the following may be mentioned as especially suitable 
 for those approaching the topic for the first time : — 
 
 1. Karl Pearson, The scope and importance to the 
 3tate of the science of national eugenics, Lond., 191 1. 
 
 2. Karl Pearson, The groundwork of eugenics, 
 Lond., 19 1 2. 
 
 3. Karl Pearson, The problem of practical eugenics, 
 Lond., 19 1 2. 
 
 4. D. S. Jordan, The heredity of Richard Roe, Bos- 
 ton, 191 1. 
 
 5. W. E. Kellicott, The social direction of human 
 evolution, N. Y., 191 1. 
 
 6. C. B. Davenport, Heredity in relation to eugenics, 
 N. Y., 1912. 
 
 7. H. A. Miller. The Psychological limitations of 
 eugenics. Pop. Sci. Mo,, April, 19 14. 
 
FOREWORD xiii 
 
 8. H. H. Goddard, The Kallikak Family, N. Y., 
 1912. 
 
 9. The various publications of the Eugenics Record 
 OfEce, Cold Spring Harbor, N. Y. 
 
 Much good, it must be believed, will result from ef- 
 forts directed toward increasing our knowledge of 
 heredity and toward educating the people as a whole 
 concerning the facts of heredity. When people are 
 made familiar with the facts, they will, themselves, find 
 the way practically to apply them. Thus, the cultiva- 
 tion of a healthy public opinion regarding marriage and 
 parenthood will, it seems probable, be more efficient in 
 promoting eugenics than anything that can be done by 
 way of legislation, at any rate at present. As knowl- 
 edge increases, it seems likely that more and more peo- 
 ple will voluntarily apply to reputable physicians for 
 their approval before undertaking marriage or the re- 
 sponsibility of parenthood. Already a number of 
 clergymen favour the plan by which applicants for mar- 
 riage, submit voluntarily, along with their licenses, med- 
 ical certificates of health and fitness. 
 
 Lewellys F. Barker. 
 
EUGENICS: 
 
 Twelve University Lectures 
 
THE EUGENICS PROGRAMME AND PROGRESS 
 
 IN ITS ACHIEVEMENT 
 
 C. B. DAVENPORT 
 
 Eugenics is a branch of applied biology which looks 
 toward the improvement of racial qualities. The cor- 
 ner stone of the science is the biological fact that man 
 is not a single homogeneous " species " but is composed 
 of numerous elementary species — or the potency of 
 such — ; races which are often concealed on account of 
 the extensive, almost universal, hybridisation that is 
 going on in mankind. The programme of eugenics is 
 to secure in our population as large a proportion as pos- 
 sible of persons belonging to the strains whose traits 
 are of the greatest value to our social order. 
 
 Since the term is sometimes loosely applied, it is nec- 
 essary to state expressly that eugenics is to be dis- 
 tinguished from sex hygiene; though it Is easily seen 
 that venereal disease has certain relations to eugenics, 
 among others, in leading many young women of good 
 stock to fear the consequences of marriage, to refrain 
 from it, and so to fail to perpetuate their excellent 
 traits. Eugenics is likewise not " prenatal culture," 
 though there is no doubt that the protection of the fetus 
 from alcoholic and other poisoning and from infection 
 is a good thing for the development of the child after 
 birth and for him as a potential parent. The dignity 
 
2 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 of the connotation of the term eugenics has caused it to 
 be seized by a great variety of enterprises, such as baby 
 shows and contests, and even pure milk committees. 
 These are all useful undertakings, but it does a grave 
 harm to the progress of a matter of the greatest pub- 
 lic concern to appropriate its name for another and a 
 special interest, because It confuses the public as to the 
 real scope and aims of eugenics. In the long run it will 
 be bad for the undertakings that are improperly appro- 
 priating the name; for the public is rapidly coming to 
 discriminate between the proper and the false content 
 of the term and to feel unkindly toward the propaganda 
 that is assuming a name falsely. 
 
 The interests of eugenics in the different countries 
 are in the hands of various societies. The American 
 Breeders' Association (now The American Genetic As- 
 sociation), started in 1903, early organised a committee 
 on eugenics which, in 19 10, was expanded into a section 
 of eugenics. Its work has been done with the assistance 
 of a number of sub-committees (or committees) and 
 especially with the Eugenics Record Office. The As- 
 sociation publishes the Journal of Heredity. In June, 
 191 1, and again in June, 19 12, a conference of eugen- 
 ical field workers was held at Cold Spring Harbor, and 
 in June, 19 13, at a third conference, a Eugenics Research 
 Association was organised to comprise those engaged 
 in, and those superintending, eugenics field work and 
 also scientific students of eugenical data. In England, 
 the Eugenics Education Society was established in 1909, 
 maintains a quarterly magazine called The Eugenics Re- 
 view, organises courses of lectures, and was instru- 
 mental in carrying out an International Eugenics Con- 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT 3 
 
 gress in London, 19 12, of which, by the way, the next 
 meeting is to be held in New York City, September, 
 19 1 5. The English Eugenics Education Society has 
 branches in New Zealand. In Germany, Dr. Ploetz 
 has organised an Internationalle Gesellschaft fiir Ras- 
 senhygiene of which the Archiv fiir Rassen- und Gesell- 
 schafts-Biologie is the organ. In France a national 
 society was organised a year ago ; in Hungary one was 
 established last spring. 
 
 Of institutions, there is the Francis Galton Labora- 
 tory of National Eugenics at London, directed by Pro- 
 fessor Karl Pearson ; it issues a Treasury of Human In- 
 heritance and other publications. In America, Alex- 
 ander Graham Bell founded, about 1888, the Volta Bu- 
 reau which has fulfilled the function of a clearing house 
 for family data relating to the deaf. In October, 19 10, 
 there was started at Cold Spring Harbor, N. Y., the 
 Eugenics Record Office, made possible by the interest 
 and the gifts of Mrs. E. H. Harriman. This office 
 trains field workers who study, for state (and other) in- 
 stitutions, the family histories of the inmates. It has 
 also a staff employed on special investigations. It pre- 
 serves and indexes family records thus secured and also 
 the " Records of Family Traits " and scattered data 
 supplied by numerous volunteers. Its publications con- 
 sist of a Bulletin series (11 numbers) and Memoirs in 
 quarto (two numbers already issued). Besides Mrs. 
 Harriman, the work has been supported by Mr. John 
 D. Rockefeller and others. Its scientific work is di- 
 rected by a board consisting of Alexander Graham 
 Bell, chairman; William H. Welch, vice-chairman; 
 Lewellys F. Barker, Irving Fisher, E. E. Southard and 
 
4 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 C. B. Davenport, secretary. The superintendent is 
 H. H. Laughlin.1 
 
 Of books on eugenics and human heredity many have- 
 been written by Galton, Saleeby, Ellis and the Whet- 
 hams in England; by Jordan, Kellicott, Woods and 
 others in America. Of books on heredity (including 
 eugenics) may be mentioned those of Bateson, Castle, 
 Punnett and Walter. 
 
 Studies in eugenics soon reveal the importance of 
 " race " and, as stated above, lead to the conclusion 
 that any population is a hybrid mixture of numerous in- 
 cipient races. There are not many pure races. Even 
 Africa has been penetrated through and through by 
 Arabs and other non-black peoples. Even the Amer- 
 ican Indians were not a homogeneous people. Now 
 these different species have different mental and physical 
 characteristics and in so far as they have entered into 
 the blood of any country (as they have into the blood 
 of the United States) they complicate the topic of eu- 
 genics — a subject which is concerned so largely with 
 hereditary traits. 
 
 Eugenics has also relations with families and the 
 study of genealogy. For as there are racial character- 
 istics so there are also family characteristics, and these 
 are maintained, despite widespread hybridisation, by 
 two processes ; first by consanguineous marriages which 
 are commonest in islands, mountain valleys, rural com- 
 
 1 Since this lecture was delivered Mrs. Huntington Wilson has pro- 
 vided for educational extension work in connection with the Eugenics 
 Record OfHce, and the services of A. E. Hamilton, M.A., have been 
 secured for this purpose. Lectures on eugenics will be given before 
 such clubs, societies, churches and educational institutions as may re- 
 quest them. 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT 5 
 
 munitles and places with a minimum of intermigrations, 
 and second by homogamy, or " like marrying like," 
 which holds everywhere. The consequences of the lat- 
 ter process are to create families of statesmen (Harri- 
 son), of financiers (Morgan of Connecticut), of 
 scholars (Edwards-Dwight), of inventors (Wilkin- 
 son), of soldiers (Lee of Virginia), of naval men 
 (HuU-Foote), of actors (Jefferson). Such may be 
 called aristogenlc. On the other hand there are pro- 
 duced families of the feeble-minded, of the criminalistic, 
 of deaf-mutes, of the tubercular. Such families may 
 be called cacogenic. Cacogenic families are illustrated 
 by the Jukes, the Ishmaelites, the Nams, the Hill Folks, 
 and the Kallikaks. These examples of aristogenic and 
 cacogenic families are evidence of a real social strati- 
 fication in our population. Despite our boasted ideal 
 of social equality, the unconscious factors of marriage 
 selection, stronger than paper theories, have brought 
 about the persistence of many family characteristics. 
 
 Eugenics rests on heredity, for permanent social im- 
 provement depends on the acquisition by the race of good 
 hereditary traits. The great advance that eugenics is 
 making to-day depends largely on improved methods of 
 studying heredity which give results that are more utilis- 
 able than by the old methods. By these methods our 
 knowledge of heredity in plants and animals has enor- 
 mously increased; new laws, new points of view have 
 been gained and new methods of analysing data have 
 been acquired. As a result of these studies we know 
 that iris-pigment, dark hair-pigment, curly hair, dark 
 skin colour, normal mental development, normal men- 
 tal " stamina," normal resistance to epileptic convul- 
 
6 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 sions are all positive traits. When absent from both 
 parents their absence is to be expected in all children. 
 When present in, either parent their presence is to be 
 expected in at least half the children. Other traits 
 which are more or less probably inherited as positive 
 characters are short stature, slenderness, inability to 
 express oneself adequately in music, painting, literature 
 and mechanics. 
 
 Among diseases the normal condition seems prob- 
 ably to be the positive (dominant) condition in the fol- 
 lowing : — hereditary ataxia, astigmatism, otosclerosis, 
 Thomsen's disease, alkaptonuria, and, possibly, in non- 
 resistance to consumption. 
 
 In other diseases the abnormal condition seems to be 
 the positive (dominant) condition. This is true with 
 more or less probability in Huntington's chorea, colo- 
 boma, or imperfect closure of the iris ( ?) , microphthal- 
 mia, cataract, displaced lens, corneal opacity, ptosis and 
 other imperfections of the muscles of the eyeball and 
 lid (?), retinitis pigmentosa, night-blindness, epider- 
 molysis bullosa (?), tylosis (or skin thickening), moni- 
 lothrix (or beading of the hair) spottedness of hair 
 coat, epistaxis or nosebleed ( ?) , teleangiectasis, dia- 
 betes insipidus, hypospadias (males only), achondro- 
 plasia, or imperfect development of the skeleton, syn- 
 dactylism, polydactylism, and brachydactylism? 
 
 Still other traits are sex-limited. Typically, such 
 sex-limited traits show themselves only in males ; these 
 males do not have affected children and their sons, in- 
 
 2 Italicised names are those of diseases that have been best studied, 
 and of whose method of inheritance we are best assured. Names 
 followed by a query (?) are those of diseases whose inheritance has 
 not been sufficiently studied. 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT 7 
 
 deed, do not carry the defect in their germ plasm. But 
 the daughters do carry the defect in half of their germ 
 cells and since the sons of such a woman have an equal 
 chance of coming from tainted and non-tainted germ 
 cells, half of the sons will show the defect. But the sis- 
 ters (unless their father show the defect somatically) 
 will not show it though half of them may transmit it to 
 half of their sons. The following cases have not all 
 been worked out completely; some pedigrees even show 
 apparent exceptions, but the rule as given above seems 
 to hold for them as a first approximation. These sex- 
 limited traits are : colour blindness, atrophy of the optic 
 nerve, hamophilia, muscular atrophy, multiple scler- 
 osis, nystagmus and myopia (in some families). 
 
 While many traits of man are clearly due to a single 
 factor, others are complex and due to two or more fac- 
 tors. Thus the skin pigment of the full-blooded West 
 Coast African negro is produced under the stimulus of 
 two duplex (four somatic) determiners. Consequently 
 inheritance is complicated in this case. 
 
 The great work of the future in eugenics is to deter- 
 mine as accurately as possible the law of heredity of 
 each human trait. 
 
 Eugenics as a social science in its application to nor- 
 mal stock is effective, however, only if it is applied; and 
 if persons actually make use of its conclusions in select- 
 ing marriage mates. Here is where, in the minds of 
 many, eugenics as an applied science is bound to fail. 
 Every one knows, indeed, how powerful are the bonds 
 of affection between a young man and a young woman 
 who have fallen in love and how little influence the ad- 
 vice and protest of relatives and friends often has 
 
8 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 on the outcome. Nevertheless, young persons differ 
 greatly in their control over romantic love and, above 
 all, it is true that there is usually a long period inter- 
 vening between first acquaintance and betrothal. Young 
 persons fall in love gradually. This period should be 
 one for considering not chiefly personal convenience or 
 the social consequences of marriage, but for consider- 
 ing, above all else, the consequences to offspring. Here 
 is where eugenic education may help with those capable 
 of taking advantage of it. 
 
 Eugenics must inculcate the ideal of fruitful mar- 
 riage of our best stock. Many of our best young 
 men and women in college or professional schools 
 have their personal ambitions aroused and ask 
 themselves if marriage may not interfere with the 
 highest realisation of their ambitions. The writer 
 recalls discussions on this matter between graduate stu- 
 dents over the dinner table at Harvard College. And 
 he was personally impressed by the advice of a dis- 
 tinguished German professor against the marriage of 
 those who wished to gain eminence in their professional 
 career. Many a man at the opening of his life work 
 vows, as Judge John Lowell of the middle of the eight- 
 eenth century did, as he was being graduated from Har- 
 vard College, that he will never marry. But nature was 
 too strong for John Lowell and he married three times 
 and among his descendants was the director of a great 
 astronomical observatory, the president of Harvard 
 College, a principal founder and promoter of the 
 Massachusetts General Hospital and the Boston 
 Atheneum; the founder of the City of Lowell and its 
 cotton mills ; the founder of the Lowell Institute at Bos- 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT 9 
 
 ton; the beloved General Charles Russell Lowell and 
 his brother, James, both of whom fell in the Civil War, 
 and James Russell Lowell, poet, professor and am- 
 bassador; besides brilliant lawyers and men entrusted 
 with large interests as executors of estates. Do you 
 think John Lowell would have taken that vow could he 
 have foreseen the future ? No, if the German profes- 
 sor's conclusion was correct for Germany, I do not think 
 it holds for this country. In my own Harvard class, 
 among the 328 members there were in 1909, 287 sur- 
 viving; of whom nearly a third (31 per cent.) had not 
 married. Of these twenty-six were in " Who's Who 
 in America." We should expect, were " success " in 
 professional life promoted by bachelorship to find some- 
 thing over a third of those in " Who's Who " to be un- 
 married. Actually all but two, or less than 8 per cent., 
 were married and one of these has since married. The 
 only still unmarried man was a temporary member of 
 the class and Is an artist who has resided for a large 
 part of the time in Europe. There is, therefore, no 
 reason to believe that bachelorship favours professional 
 success. 
 
 On the selection of marriage mates made by the ris- 
 ing generations depends the quality of the generation 
 yet unborn — the generation that will be taking up the 
 nation's burdens at the time those of us who are in 
 middle life are dropping them. How momentous then 
 for the nation are the betrothals that are taking place 
 this year I Society has a right to inquire if a little in- 
 telligence has been displayed in the selections, or has it 
 all been left to a blind Instinct or to propinquity and 
 cohvenience. Fortunately there is evidence that many 
 
10 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 of the young people of the country do think very seri- 
 ously about the consequences of the selection upon chil- 
 dren. The Eugenics Record Office has prepared a 
 schedule for recording family traits of both of the in- 
 terested persons, that these may be filled out and sub- 
 mitted to the Eugenics Record Office for such advice as 
 can be given. The task of filling out the schedule is 
 considerable and only about two per cent, of those sent 
 out in response to requests have (so far) actually been 
 filled out and returned. In two cases where an ad- 
 verse finding was rendered on the report we were in- 
 formed that the finding would be followed, and that the 
 engagement had been broken off. Fortunately, in 
 most cases, there has been no obvious need for an ad- 
 verse report. Of course, lack of knowledge of the in- 
 heritance of many traits limits our ability to advise. 
 The interested pair are always given the benefit of any 
 doubt or lack of knowledge. The main point is that 
 there are persons who seek advice for the sake of pos- 
 sible children, and there are those who have had the 
 will power and the courage to break off an engagement 
 of a marriage which if consummated would almost cer- 
 tainly have resulted in defective offspring. The mat- 
 ing of the more intelligent of our stock Is to a certain 
 extent under social control. 
 
 The lowest stratum of society has, on the other hand, 
 neither Intelligence nor self-control enough to justify 
 the State to leave its matings in their own hands. On 
 the contrary, the defectives and criminalistic are, so far 
 as may be possible, to be segregated under the care of 
 the State during the reproductive period or otherwise 
 forcibly prevented from procreation. State laws per- 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT ii 
 
 mitting the sterilization of institutional cases have been 
 passed by a dozen state legislatures. There is reason 
 for believing that if executed at all they will be ad- 
 ministered conservatively. It is desirable that the 
 States should proceed slowly in this matter of sterilisa- 
 tion as a substitute for segregation. But In some way 
 or other the reproduction of defectives must be con- 
 trolled. 
 
 But It Is not sufficient to secure good matings and cut 
 off the bad. The eugenic marriages must be fecund 
 and must equal or exceed the fecundity of the cacogenic 
 matings. No fact is more startling to-day, and 
 fraught with greater danger to the commonwealth, 
 than the low fecundity of our best blood. From 1 193 
 bachelors of arts of Bryn Mawr College since 1888 
 there have been produced to January, 1913, 263 girls 
 all told. Twenty years after graduation, close to the 
 reproductive limit, 328 graduates of Harvard In my 
 class have reproduced 195 sons to take their place. An 
 earlier class of 278 persons, twenty-five years after 
 graduation, had produced 141 sons, or had only about 
 half reproduced itself; and no account is made of in- 
 fant deaths. Assuming that a class matures half as 
 many sons as it graduates and that their descendants do 
 the sam,e for six generations, 1000 Harvard gradu- 
 ates of the i88o's will have sixteen male descendants 
 of the 2o8o's. These sixteen sons will be ruled by the 
 scores of thousands of descendants of 1000 of the Ru- 
 manians, Bulgarians, Greeks and hybrid Portuguese of 
 the i88o's. Such figures must make one fear for the 
 future. Some way or other the duty not only of mar- 
 riage but of large families must be brought home to 
 
12 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 our eugenic stock. The young men must earnestly 
 seek to marry and to marry well, and to deserve to 
 marry well by living a clean, wholesome, reasonable 
 life. And the young women must be willing to make 
 sacrifices of their personal ambitions, their freedom, 
 their love of ease, to do the work that none others 
 can do and which is a patriotic service not less sublime 
 than that rendered on the fields of battle. But the sac- 
 rifices bring their own highest reward. 
 
 As I have intimated, it is, however, not merely the 
 number born of children of the different stocks that 
 determine their relative number in the community but 
 the number who survive to maturity. The survival of 
 the eugenic in greater numbers than the cacogenic is to 
 be sought. We hear a great deal about infant mor- 
 tality and child savipg that appeals to the humanity and 
 the child-love in us all. It is, however, always the sav- 
 ing of the lowest social class that is contemplated. I 
 recall the impassioned appeal of a sociologist for as- 
 sistance in stopping the frightful mortality among the 
 children of prostitutes. But the daughters of prosti- 
 tutes have hardly one chance in two of being able to 
 react otherwise than their mothers. Why must we 
 start an expensive campaign to keep alive those who, 
 were they intelligent enough, might well curse us for 
 having intervened in their behalf? Is not death na- 
 ture's great blessing to the race? If we have greater 
 power to prevent it than ever before, so much the 
 greater is our responsibility to use that power selec- 
 tively, for the survival of those of best stock; more than 
 those who are feebleminded and without moral con- 
 trol. 
 
AND ITS ACHIEVEMENT 13 
 
 But any programme for improving our stock is fu- 
 tile unless we take into account immigration and the 
 possibility of controlling it selectively. Assuming that 
 the annual addition to our population by births is 2,- 
 500,000 and that only 2,000,000 survive infancy, it 
 is probable that between one-quarter and one-third 
 of the annual increment of our population is through 
 immigration. And, while we know something of 
 the family history and " breeding stock " of those 
 who are born here, we know practically nothing of 
 the family stock of the million souls who immigrate 
 here in the year. They are the greater menace to 
 the country because they bring in so many un- 
 known factors. Why do we so long delay finding 
 something about the family history, the mental ca- 
 pacity, the moral control, of the stock from which our 
 immigrants come? Why do we not take these 
 things into account in passing them through our 
 portals? Every social worker knows families in his 
 territory all of whose children are a social menace be- 
 cause they are untrainable. Thousands of such persons 
 are coming into this country every year, but we are not 
 able to recognise them as such, by inspection. We take 
 them into our communities and, as servants, even into 
 our homes, when we would not take those of our own 
 town of whose bad breeding we are aware. The eu- 
 genics programme can never disregard the, say, 30 per 
 cent, annual increment of our population due to immi- 
 gration. 
 
 Eugenics seeks to serve society and deserves a place 
 among the agencies that tend to social amelioration. 
 It does not minimise the value of education ; it seeks to 
 
14 I. DAVENPORT: EUGENICS PROGRAMME 
 
 increase the proportion, of the educable and the de- 
 gree of their response to educational efforts. It is not 
 opposed to religion ; it seeks to increase the proportion 
 of those who can be emotionally controlled or who lend 
 themselves more easily to religious and social influ- 
 ences. It does not find itself out of sympathy with ef- 
 forts put forth for individual welfare. Physique, 
 brain, and character must be cultivated; but that need 
 must not render us blind to the fact that there are those 
 who can not be improved by all of these social efforts 
 and render it only the harder to help those who can be 
 improved. 
 
 Thus the programme of eugenics stands; first, in- 
 vestigation; then, as knowledge grows, education. Fi- 
 nally, legislation based on sound public sentiment. For 
 the carrying out of this programme the public is quite 
 ready and indeed waiting. It is seeking to be wisely 
 led. 
 
II 
 
 EUGENICS AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST ^ 
 ROBERT H. WOLCOTT 
 
 To man is given the capacity of exercising dominion 
 over all other animals, and if he so will, over himself. 
 One of the early steps in the ages-long evolution which 
 has raised humanity so far above the level of the beast 
 was taken when man made subject to his will the ani- 
 mals with which he had previously contended on equal 
 terms. Having harnessed some, they became tools in 
 the subjugation of all. The period when our ances- 
 tors made the discovery that by breeding they could 
 improve the quality and so increase the efficiency of 
 these animals which they had domesticated is shrouded 
 in the mists of ancient history. And so, indeed, is the 
 name of him who first applied this concept to the hu- 
 man race. It entered into Greek philosophy and Plato 
 emphasised the idea of the " purification of the State." 
 Throughout the course of written history, in various 
 nations, and under various guises, far-seeing men have 
 urged plans for race improvement. As we, in tracing 
 the course of history, approach nearer and nearer the 
 present day we see these plans presented with increas- 
 ing insistence. Science points out the parts played by 
 inheritance and by environment in the development of 
 the individual, and these plans fall into two categories 
 
 1 (Address delivered at University Convocation, University of Ne- 
 braska, May 6, 1913.) 
 
 »5 
 
i6 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 — those that seek this Improvement through bettered 
 environmental conditions, and those that look for it to 
 be most effective if brought about by better breeding; 
 the former falling within the scope of euthenics, the 
 latter that of eugenics. 
 
 Progress in the field of euthenics has been retarded 
 by the difficulty of developing an educated and dynamic 
 public sentiment. Biology has but just discovered the 
 facts which could render potent the ideas of those who 
 urged the principles of eugenics. The recent rapid 
 growth of our knowledge, the placing of these subjects 
 on a proper scientific basis, and the great Increase of 
 public interest In the questions they raise, are among 
 the signs of the dawn of a new period in human his- 
 tory. Mankind is emancipating itself from blind 
 obedience to what has been conceived to be natural and 
 therefore divine law, and no longer looks upon itself 
 as hedged about by divinely appointed limitations. 
 We have harnessed the forces of nature and they an- 
 swer to our bidding. We are now beginning to exert 
 a certain control, as yet feeble, over the forces that 
 operate in living matter, and to see that we hold In 
 our hands the power to mould even our own des- 
 tiny. 
 
 In order to understand what the possibilities pre- 
 sented actually mean we must consider briefly the struc- 
 ture of the body, the degree to which It is modifiable, 
 how these modifications are produced and transmitted, 
 and how we may exert a selective power over them. 
 So far as man's physical nature is concerned, he Is an 
 animal, and his body Is composed of that material — 
 protoplasm, a proteid complex — of which the bodies 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 17 
 
 of all animals are composed, and in which alone, so 
 far as we know, life phenomena are manifested. 
 Highly complex, probably an aggregate of many dif- 
 ferent chemical compounds, and at the same time ex- 
 ceedingly unstable, protoplasm itself suffers a change 
 with every modification of conditions in its surround- 
 ings or within itself, and thus is rendered possible the 
 perfect adjustment which exists between an animal and 
 its environment and the carrying on of the manifold 
 activities of the living organism. 
 
 The smallest and simplest animals are composed en- 
 tirely of a single bit of protoplasm or a single " cell," 
 the larger and more complex of myriads of such cells. 
 Within each cell, whether it exists as an independent 
 organism or as a unit in a many-celled animal, the 
 protoplasm is not homogeneous, but in different parts 
 of the cell varies in physical and chemical characters. 
 At some point in this cell is a sharply defined portion 
 known as the nucleus, of a definite more or less regular 
 form, more highly refractive to light than the rest of 
 the cell, and showing under the microscope a network 
 of material which, having a particular affinity for cer- 
 tain chemical dyes, is stained by them more deeply than 
 the rest of the cell and is therefore known as chromatin. 
 The remainder of the cell, or the cytoplasm, varies in 
 consistency in different portions of its mass, especially 
 during activity, and may contain non-living food par- 
 ticles, the waste matter remaining after the digestion of 
 this food, and other products of cell activity, solid, 
 liquid, or gaseous. 
 
 There is division of function within the cell. The 
 presence of the nucleus is essential to the carrying on of 
 
i8 11. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 nutrition and the maintenance of the integrity of the 
 whole, while this structure is also the active part in the 
 cell-division or cell-multiplication by virtue of which 
 animals increase both in size and number. It is be- 
 lieved that the chromatin of the nucleus is the substance 
 which transmits the characters of the parent to the 
 daughter cell, though the nature of that which deter- 
 mines the characters is unknown, as is also the mechan- 
 ism of transmission. The cytoplasm is the seat of 
 functions the performance of which requires exposure 
 to the external world, as irritability, absorption, diges- 
 tion, excretion, and respiration. 
 
 The one-celled animal performs in a very simple 
 fashion all the functions possessed by the higher multi- 
 cellular form. As the body of the latter develops by 
 Increase In the number of cells, these come to exist 
 under a variety of conditions, some being exposed, 
 others covered in, some coming under the operation of 
 certain external Influences, others under that of other 
 stimuli, with the result that they acquire peculiarities 
 In form and structure, as well as differences in chemical 
 character and function. Thus by a process of differ- 
 entiation we get muscle cells, nerve cells, digestive 
 cells, and so on, each type of cell performing very well 
 one or a few functions while losing the ability more or 
 less completely to perform any other function. For a 
 time this process does not prevent the cell giving rise 
 to other cells by division, but as cells become highly 
 differentiated they may lose this power completely. 
 By artificially changing the conditions under which a 
 cell exists we may modify the character of the differen- 
 tiation, and Impose on it a structure and function dif- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 19 
 
 ferent from that which in the natural course of events it 
 would have possessed, 
 
 A one-celled animal, then, is a single undifferentiated 
 cell giving rise by repeated divisions to other similar 
 undifferentiated cells, each of which maintains an inde- 
 pendent existence, while the higher many-celled animals 
 are made up very largely of differentiated cells quite 
 incapable of giving rise to another animal and even, it 
 may be, unable to reproduce themselves. In the latter 
 case, reproduction of the individual is rendered pos- 
 sible by virtue of the fact that a limited number of 
 cells, protected from the influences that cause differ- 
 entiation, remain undifferentiated, and thus retain not 
 only the power of repeated division but also those char- 
 acters which were inherited from the parent, and which 
 are passed on from generation to generation un- 
 changed. 
 
 These undifferentiated cells are termed germ cells 
 or gametes, and their protoplasm germ-plasm or 
 gametoplasm, the differentiated cells which make up 
 the bulk of the body somatic cells and their protoplasm 
 somatoplasm. In all animals that display the phe- 
 nomenon we call sex the gametes are of two types, and 
 the small, actively motile male sex-cells or sperms are 
 markedly different in every way from the large food- 
 laden female sex-cells or ova. A new individual in 
 such animals is normally produced by the union of a 
 sperm and an ovum, or egg-cell, a process called ferti- 
 lisation. It has been found that before fertilisation is 
 possible both sperms and ova undergo a process of mat- 
 uration, which involves not only the assumption of the 
 peculiar form and structure which distinguish the ma- 
 
20 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 ture sex-cells, but also as a result of division a change 
 in the amount of chromatin. In any division of 
 somatic cells the chromatin becomes broken up into 
 separate portions and the number of these is always the 
 same in the case of cells from the body of any one 
 species of animal, while differing considerably in the 
 case of those from the bodies of different animals. 
 These portions are termed chromosomes, and since 
 these each divide into two exactly equal parts in the 
 division process, the two daughter cells produced by 
 the division contain exactly equal amounts of chromatin 
 and exactly the same number of chromosomes, each 
 representing a half of one of the parent chromosomes. 
 The mathematical accuracy with which this takes place 
 is a strong argument in favour of the accepted view that 
 the chromosomes are the bearers of hereditary char- 
 acters, the equal division assuring to each daughter cell 
 a precisely similar inheritance. In the maturation of 
 sex-cells the number of chromosomes is halved and thus 
 by the union of the two cells in fertilisation is produced 
 as a starting-point for a new individual a cell with ex- 
 actly the number of chromosomes characteristic of the 
 somatic cells in the species to which the individual be- 
 longs. 
 
 We may picture a higher animal at the beginning of 
 its development as an egg, a mass of germ plasm de- 
 rived from a union of material from both male and fe- 
 male parents, carrying a load of hereditary potentiali- 
 ties derived in equal part from the two parents. In its 
 development this germ plasm increases in amount and 
 the egg cell is multiplied by repeated division; the re- 
 sulting cells become in part modified to form cells of 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 21 
 
 various types, and thus evolve all of the various organs 
 — bones, muscles, nerves, etc. — which make up the 
 body of the adult animal. But somewhere within that 
 body is left a portion of the undifferentiated germ 
 plasm, retaining the same potentialities which it re- 
 ceived from the parents, and transmitting them to the 
 germ plasm contained in the egg which this individual 
 produces, and from which, after the addition again of 
 material from the other sex, is to be developed the 
 next generation. Thus are passed on from genera- 
 tion to generation the characters which distinguish the 
 species, the race, the strain, and even the more closely 
 related individuals, the descendants from a common 
 parentage; and these are transmitted essentially un- 
 changed. Moreover, these represent properties of 
 germ plasm as such, for by early separation of the cells 
 produced by division of the egg cells of many of the 
 lower animals we have been able to cause the develop- 
 ment of two independent individuals from a single 
 
 egg. 
 
 From what has been said it is evident that it is pos- 
 sible theoretically to distinguish clearly between two 
 categories of forces acting in and upon the animal in 
 its development. One includes the forces or tenden- 
 cies inherent in the germ plasm, or those we call 
 hereditary. By their operation are imposed upon the 
 animal the characters which betray its relationship to 
 other animals, the degree of relationship being indi- 
 cated in a general way by the closeness of the re- 
 semblance which exists. The other category, which 
 comprises those we call environmental, includes not 
 only such forces or tendencies as act upon the body of 
 
22 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 the animal from without, and thus belong to th^e en- 
 vironment in the narrow sense, but also those that act 
 within the body but not in any degree whatever through 
 the germ plasm. 
 
 By the operation of these environmental influences 
 are produced many of the more minute differences 
 which exist between even the most closely related in- 
 dividuals. Since no two individual animals can de- 
 velop or indeed livfe under precisely the same conditions 
 this individual variation is a universal phenomenon. 
 We never are at a loss to recognise our friends even 
 in the throng, we recognise chance acquaintances less 
 readily, an expression familiar to all indicates our ina- 
 bility to recognise individuals of an alien race, and 
 rare indeed is the person who can discriminate between 
 individuals of the lower animal species. But it is none 
 the less true that individual variation obtains through- 
 out the animal world, and this variation may be 
 germinal or somatic, hereditary or acquired. 
 
 This antithetical use of the terms hereditary and 
 acquired is justified by the belief which a majority 
 of biologists accept to-day that acquired characters 
 are not in any degree inherited. The belief in such 
 inheritance has existed from very ancient times and 
 has until a generation ago been the prevailing one, but 
 beginning with the clear distinction drawn by Weiss- 
 mann between germ plasm and somatoplasm, and ac- 
 celerated by experimental work, in animal breeding, 
 the pendulum has swung the other way. Agreement 
 has been prevented in part by lack of harmony in the 
 ideas held by different biologists of what constitutes an 
 acquired character. It Is evident that every step in 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 23 
 
 the march of evolutionary development from the lower 
 to the higher forms of animal life has been accom- 
 plished by the addition of characters which must in one 
 sense have been acquired. But if we define an ac- 
 quired character, as does Weissmann, as " any somatic 
 modification that does not have its origin in the germ 
 plasm," then we must agree with the majority and deny 
 the inheritance of acquired characters. It must be 
 stated, however, that neither side of the contention can 
 be proven correct — it is a matter of the weighing of 
 evidence and the acceptance of the more probable 
 view. So far as we know there is no way in which 
 the characters of the differentiated somatic cells 
 can be impressed upon the germ cells, though the pos- 
 sibility of such an effect inust be acknowledged. Up to 
 the present time there is no known case of the inherit- 
 ance of a mutilation, no proven instance of the trans- 
 mission of the results of training, no authentic case of 
 the passing on of a pathological condition acquired 
 during the life of the individual. At the same time it 
 is possible to explain all cases of apparent transmission 
 of an acquired character on the basis of the develop- 
 ment of characters carried in the germ plasm. 
 
 Assuming, then, that inheritance is purely concerned 
 with the characters of the germ plasm, and that a char- 
 acter present in one generation can only reappear by in- 
 heritance in a succeeding generation if it be in some 
 manner incorporated in the germ plasm or be a result 
 of matter or force contained therein, we may question 
 how germ plasm may be made to vary or to acquire 
 new characters. One internal cause is " amphimixis," 
 as Weissmann calls it — the mixture of germ plasm 
 
24 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 from two strains nearly or distantly related, the latter 
 being termed hybridisation. In either case there is the 
 possibility of a new character being developed by some 
 new combination of the material different from any 
 combination previously existing. However, in the ab- 
 sence of sexual fertilisation new characters appear, and 
 the fact that they seem independent of external causes 
 suggests the possibility in this case also of recombina- 
 tion and new combinations within the same mass of 
 germ plasm. A third possibility is the direct action of 
 external stimuli upon germ plasm. This has been 
 proven possible by the use of chemical agents, and if it 
 could be shown that somatic cells might by developing 
 such agents affect the germ cells this would strengthen 
 greatly the cause of those who believe in the inherit- 
 ance of acquired characters. 
 
 Confining our discussion now to germinal variation, 
 we find it exhibited in two forms with respect to the 
 mean. If in the study of a large number of specimens 
 all belonging to the same type we find them groping 
 about the mean of the type in a manner conforming to 
 the law of chance, we suspect what is termed " fluctuat- 
 ing variation," and this judgment is confirmed if, by 
 breeding those not agreeing with the mean, they show 
 in every case a tendency to revert to it. From such 
 breeding no new type could be produced. If, how- 
 ever, the examination of such a collection shows certain 
 specimens differing from their fellows qualitatively, 
 and this qualitative difference reappears in succeeding 
 generations, or if they differ quantitatively and in 
 breeding their progeny group itself about a new mean 
 which remains constant, we have what is termed " mu- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 25 
 
 tation," and these mutants are really new types. The 
 magnitude of the difference is not essential. Accord- 
 ing to De Vries this is the only manner in which new 
 species are known to originate. The test comes en- 
 tirely in breeding. 
 
 Up to this point in our discussion, though we have 
 referred in a certain way to sexual reproduction and to 
 hybridisation, we have been viewing the animal never- 
 theless as an individual. We have touched upon the 
 nature of the organism, made up as it is of impression- 
 able protoplasm, the character of Its development and 
 the phenomenon of differentiation, the way in which 
 its characteristics are passed on to its offspring through 
 chromatin division, the extent — or rather the lack of 
 extent — to which it may transmit acquired characters, 
 the degree to which the characters of its germ plasm 
 may be modified, and the possible manner in which it 
 may vary from the mean of the type to which it be- 
 longs. Now let us change our point of view and con- 
 sider the animal as a hybrid — as a combination of 
 characters derived from two unlike parents. Since 
 variation is a universal phenomenon this will be true 
 in the case of every animal resulting from sexual repro- 
 duction. We shall have to investigate the characters 
 presented by each of the two parents and examine those 
 of the new individual with respect to the manner and 
 degree in which the parental characters reappear. 
 We will find frequently that any given character has 
 been inherited intact, as for example in the case of eye- 
 colour, which in the young is like that of one parent or 
 the other, not half-way between. 
 
 Whep we come to investigate inheritance in the light 
 
26 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 of our present knowledge we find that in every case 
 these hereditary characters seem to act as units, which, 
 however intimately they may be associated together in 
 the individual, are segregated in the process of matura- 
 tion of the sex-cell, those which remain being able to 
 enter into new combinations when, by union of this sex- 
 cell with that from another individual, a third indi- 
 vidual is produced. In those combinations where the 
 inheritance is alike from each parent we get a charac- 
 ter reappearing intact — the offspring is homozygous 
 with respect to this character. When the inheritance 
 is unlike the offspring is said to be heterozygous with 
 respect to the particular character. Here the charac- 
 ter from one parent may dominate over the character 
 from the other,- which is then said to be recessive. 
 Or, finally, a character from either may become evi- 
 dent only in case a factor is furnished from the other 
 which brings it out. These principles of independent 
 unit characters, segregation, and dominance are all in- 
 volved in Mendel's law, the result of the work of an 
 Austrian monk during the middle of the last century. 
 This law as well as the factor hypothesis is theoretical, 
 but these theories furnish us with a logical explanation 
 of the facts of inheritance as we know them to-day. 
 
 Let us examine the various forms of inheritance in 
 the light of the theories just stated, taking first alter- 
 native inheritance. Mendel used peas. If he crossed 
 a tall pea with a dwarf one all the seeds developed tall 
 peas. If he crossed a dwarf pea with a dwarf one all 
 the seeds developed dwarf peas. But if he crossed a 
 tall pea with a dwarf, he secured a hybrid which was 
 tall, because, as he found out from his experiments, 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 27 
 
 tallness was dominant over shortness. If we represent 
 the tall pea by T and the dwarf by D, individuals pro- 
 duced in the first experiment can be represented by 
 TT, those in the second by DD, those in the third by 
 TD. Now if tall peas are bred together we can never 
 get anything but TT, if dwarf nothing but DD, but if 
 the hybrids are crossed we can get three types — TT, 
 TD, and DD, and these will be in the proportion of 
 1:2: I ; but since tallness (T) dominates they will ap- 
 pear as if 3 tall and i dwarf. TT will breed true, 
 DD will do likewise, and the hybrids will continue to 
 develop both types in the above proportion. A pure 
 tall (T) bred with a hybrid (TD) will produce half 
 tall and half hybrid, but all will appear tall; a pure 
 dwarf (D) with a hybrid (TD), half dwarf which are 
 pure and half hybrid which appear tall. If we examine 
 the inheritance of dark and blue eyes among persons 
 we find the presence of pigment and absence of pig- 
 ment acting as unit characters, the former being domi- 
 nant over the latter. Many examples of such char- 
 acters are now known among animals, examples being 
 hornlessness dominant over horns in cattle, red eyes 
 over white in the pomace fly, the trotting habit over 
 the pacing in horses, short hair over angora hair in 
 guinea-pigs, crested over plain head in canaries, 
 rumplessness over long tails in poultry, polydactylism 
 over normal number of toes in several species of ani- 
 mals, etc. 
 
 It is evident that alternative inheritance Involves the 
 complete dominance of one character over another, a 
 phenomenon which has been found to occur in the case 
 of very diverse characters and in very different organ- 
 
28 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 isms. In many other cases, however, the characters 
 have seemed to blend, and this has up to the present 
 time been considered due to characters failing to act as 
 units but being susceptible of fusion and that in varying 
 proportions. Nevertheless, very recent work seems 
 to indicate that this phenomenon may be due in certain 
 cases to imperfect dominance of characters, which are 
 after all unit characters. An example is the Anda- 
 lusian fowl, of a bluish colour. 
 
 Andalusian X Andalusian 
 
 black Andalusian Andalusian mottled (white 
 
 splashed with black) 
 
 / 
 
 breed breed out as breed 
 
 true above true 
 
 To produce loo per cent, of Andalusians we must 
 breed Black x Mottled. 
 
 In other cases Davenport explains the blending of 
 characters or the absence of dominance as due to varia- 
 tions in the potency of that upon which the character 
 depends. He instances : 
 
 Two rumpless cocks of the same blood, bred with the same 
 array of hens. 
 
 Rumplessness is due to an inhibitor of tail development. 
 
 Neither cock has a trace of a tail. 
 
 In one the development of the tail in a cross with a tailed 
 hen is not interfered with at all, and even with rumpless hens 
 the character is not well developed. 
 
 In the other rumplessness develops in 47 per cent, of all 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 29 
 
 crosses with tailed hens, and crosses with rumpless hens may 
 produce a family in which all possess the lack of tail. 
 
 That is, If a determiner lack potency the character 
 may be incompletely developed, may be retarded in 
 its development, or may fail to manifest itself at all. 
 Still another way in which blended inheritance may be 
 explained is by assuming that the intermediate grada- 
 tions are due to the action of several determiners each 
 conveying the same kind of character but in different 
 degrees and each acting as a unit. Without entering 
 into the details of experimentation, it may be said that 
 carefully conducted experiments seem to show the 
 probability also of the last of these explanations being 
 true in certain cases, and one or the other of them ap- 
 plicable in every case of blended inheritance. 
 
 The explanation of particulate inheritance involves 
 what may be termed the factor hypothesis, which as- 
 sumes the possibility of combinations of determiners. 
 According to this hypothesis one determiner added to 
 another may cause a character to appear, may inhibit 
 its appearance, may modify the degree of its develop- 
 ment, or may modify its character. Bateson found 
 two strains of white sweet peas, each breeding true, 
 which, when crossed, gave only purple flowers; and 
 this is explained as due to the presence of complemen- 
 tary factors in the presence of which purple colour was 
 developed. Experiments upon the inheritance of 
 colour in guinea-pigs and mice, by Castle, Cuenot, and 
 Miss Durham, have pointed clearly to the existence of 
 pattern factors, intensifying factors, and diluting 
 factors. 
 
30 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 When one considers that a higher animal presents a 
 complex aggregate of highly varied characters, and 
 that these may be segregated in reproduction and a 
 different aggregation be evolved in the next generation, 
 and then reflects upon the possibilities presented by this 
 factor hypothesis, it is seen that we are but on the 
 threshold of our investigations in this field. 
 
 Applying what has been said to man, the practical 
 conclusions which I desire to draw are as follows : An 
 individual's personality is due, so far as its inherited 
 nature is concerned, to the presence of characters de- 
 rived in equal degree from both parents ; some of these 
 are dominant and potent and cause the individual to re- 
 semble strikingly one parent or the other; others may 
 be dominant, but through imperfect dominance, lack of 
 potency, or the existence of graded determiners the 
 charaoters associated with them may appear to be a 
 blending of characters derived from the two parents, 
 or resemblances to one or the other be exhibited only 
 in moderate degree; others still are recessive and ex- 
 hibit no evidence of their presence ; the individual may 
 present a character present in neither parent but trace- 
 able to a more remote ancestor, having been recessive 
 or having not been developed owing to the presence or 
 absence of some factor in combination. Our knowl- 
 edge at present is insufficient to do more than establish 
 the truth of the axiom " blood will tell," to enable us to 
 say that a man's essential nature is determined by his 
 inheritance. It is conceivable that the time may come 
 when we can analyse the individual in terms of his an- 
 cestry and predict with certainty the nature of his off- 
 spring. 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 31 
 
 At this point the question naturally arises, if inherit- 
 ance concern merely the germ plasm and acquired 
 characters are not transmitted, how has man been able 
 to improve old types of cultivated animals and plants 
 and to establish new ? Several methods have been fol- 
 lowed. One is to place the stock under the most favour- 
 able conditions and then select for breeding the best 
 developed of the individuals produced. This is a proc- 
 ess of selection, based upon the belief that acquired char- 
 acters are inherited, and the results are uncertain. If 
 the characters are purely acquired ones they may reap- 
 pear in succeeding generations with an equally favour- 
 able environment, but will disappear if this is not main- 
 tained. If they persist in the absence of such environ- 
 ment the assumption is that a favourable strain has been 
 selected which is breeding true or that it is a case of 
 mutation. Another method is to select for breeding 
 those individuals that make the best showing under 
 ordinary or even adverse conditions and then by cross- 
 ing these to secure stock of an improved quality. This 
 method comes more nearly securing stock which is de- 
 sirable by nature and therefore capable of transmit- 
 ting its desirable qualities to the offspring. A third 
 method consists in the search for mutations and their 
 continued preservation. A fourth involves the isola- 
 tion of pure lines by breeding from a single individual 
 which is self-fertilised or asexually produced, and thus 
 a superior strain is evolved, but this is evidently of 
 limited application with respect to animals. A fifth 
 is the method of chance hybridisation and the selection 
 from among the hybrids of desirable types. And last 
 is the application of a knowledge of segregation and 
 
32 11. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 dominance to the production of new types starting from 
 parents having the desired qualities. Recessives will 
 always breed true; homozygous dominants will also do 
 so ; but heterozygous dominants will only yield in time 
 a practically pure strain by the constant elimination of 
 recessives as they appear. 
 
 So in many ways man has attacked the problem of 
 developing new and improved types, and it will be 
 noticed that permanent progress in this direction de- 
 pends on the extent to which he has succeeded in in- 
 fluenciijg the germ plasm. But he does not stop at 
 the securing of better blood and superior seeds. By 
 care and cultivation he endeavours also to develop the 
 finest individuals; his soil is thoroughly tilled, well 
 fertilised, and If possible well watered, his animals are 
 well reared, well fed, and properly protected from the 
 inclemencies of the weather. This is logical since as 
 we have seen an individual is the product of both in- 
 heritance and environment — the former determining 
 his nature and the possibilities of his normal develop- 
 ment, the latter the extent to which these possibilities 
 are realised and the assumption of acquired characters 
 which may favour or hinder their action. Thus are ap- 
 plied both the principles of eugenics, which has to do 
 with the inheritance, and of euthenics, which has to do 
 with the environment; the individual is the product of 
 neither alone, but of both. 
 
 Before applying what we have said more specifically 
 to man, it should be noted that psychical traits seem to 
 act in inheritance just as do physical characters. Both 
 mental ability and mental defectiveness seem to be 
 heritable, and while skill in action is a result of culti- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 33 
 
 vation and an acquired character there seems to be the 
 inheritance of such ability as makes it possible for one 
 individual to develop a much greater degree of excel- 
 lence in performance than another with the same 
 amount of practice, and also makes it possible for one 
 to attain a degree of proficiency which is impossible to 
 the other under any conditions whatever. On the 
 other hand, the possession of an inherited character 
 which would favour a certain kind of ability may not 
 be suspected till some condition in the environment 
 brings it out — it might never be suspected at all. As 
 Conklin has said, " In all organisms, the potentialities 
 of development are much greater than the actualities." 
 In applying to man the facts and theories which have 
 been presented we must recognise certain qualifying 
 factors. In the first place, man has come to be exempt 
 to a degree from the operation of natural selection, 
 since he can apply artificial means to the compensa- 
 tion of physical deficiencies. The law of the survival 
 of the fittest does not apply to him, for the same 
 reason. Man to a considerable degree lives in an 
 artificial environment, and can determine for himself 
 many of the conditions of existence and of develop- 
 ment. Nurture is transmitted from parent to ofE- 
 spring as it can not be in animals, and moreover every 
 person has it within his power to profit by the culture 
 which is the common property of the race. Thus 
 mankind modifies to a slight degree its inheritance, 
 but could modify it much more by the application of 
 the principles of eugenics; it modifies greatly its en- 
 vironment, but will no doubt modify it still more, and 
 so the principles of euthenics, with the limitations im- 
 
34 11. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 posed by the non-Inheritance of acquired characters, 
 should be better understood and more constantly ap- 
 plied. 
 
 The application of the laboratory method is impos- 
 sible in the study of heredity in man, so we must fall 
 back upon the evidence derived from genealogical 
 records and from statistics furnished by institutions 
 such as insane asylums, prisons, sanitariums, and homes 
 of various kinds. A dassical example of the inherit- 
 ance of undesirable characters is the history of a 
 family known as the " Jukes," the descendants of a 
 backwoodsman, " a good-natured, lazy sot, without 
 doubt of defective mentality." The histories of over 
 a thousand of the family are more or less well known. 
 About one-third died in infancy ; an equal number were 
 professional paupers; 440 were wrecked physically by 
 disease which their own wickedness bred; more than 
 half of the women were grossly Immoral; 130 were 
 convicted criminals; 60 were habitual thieves; and 7 
 were murderers. In contrast to this is the record of 
 • the descendants of Jonathan Edwards, of whom 1,394 
 were identified in 1900. Of these 13 were college 
 presidents, 65 college professors, 60 physicians; 100 
 and more clergymen, missionaries and theologians; 75 
 officers In the army and navy, 60 authors and writers, 
 100 lawyers, 30 judges, and 80 public officials, one of 
 whom was vice-president of the United States, and 
 three United States senators. Davenport gives facts 
 Indicating clearly that the characters which stamp this 
 inheritance were not developed In Jonathan Edwards 
 but are traceable to his grandmother, Elizabeth 
 Tuttle. 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 35 
 
 A convincing case of the inheritance of a specific 
 character, feeble-mindedness, is that of the " Kallikak 
 family," the history of which dates back to the time of 
 the Revolution. In the case of the " Jukes " family 
 the descendants of one of the daughters of the original 
 ancestor have been prevailingly criminal, of a second 
 sexually immoral, of a third paupers. 
 
 In the histories just given the evidence for the in- 
 heritance of ability and a high degree of morality on 
 the one hand, and defective mentality and criminality 
 on the other, seems indisputable. But for myself I 
 can not help thinking that environment played its part. 
 We are told that not one of the " Jukes " had a com- 
 mon school education, while 295 of the descendants 
 of Jonathan Edwards were college graduates. This 
 may have been due to temperamental and therefore 
 hereditary differences in the children of successive 
 generations in the two families, but it is at least con- 
 ceivable that home influence and other factors in the 
 environment had much to do with this result. Both 
 home training and opportunity militated against the 
 chance of a child of one family securing an education, 
 while strongly urging that of the other to do so. One 
 was nurtured in an atmosphere of ignorance and crim- 
 inality, and the other in that of enlightenment and 
 morality. And yet it must be confessed that little suc- 
 cess has attended experiments in the placing of chil- 
 dren of criminal parentage in industrious and respect- 
 able families. 
 
 An interesting fact derived from the study of hu- 
 man heredity, and referred to in the preceding para- 
 graph, is that moral traits, as well as physical and 
 
36 II. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 mental, seem to be heritable. (See pages 79, 112, 123, 
 200, 330, et seq.) 
 
 Davenport, in his book on Heredity and Eugenics, 
 has attempted to bring together all that is known about 
 the inheritance of family traits in man, and enumerates 
 a large number as clearly heritable. Among these are 
 many physical characters, as eye-colour, hair-colour, 
 hair-form, skin-colour, stature, body weight, etc.; a 
 number of mental traits, including possession of 
 marked ability on the one hand and feeble-mindedness, 
 epilepsy, certain forms of insanity and criminality on 
 the other; musical, literary, and artistic ability, mathe- 
 matical aptitude, and inventive genius, as well as 
 temperament and moral sense. 
 
 Several agencies are at work gathering data and we 
 may expect a considerable increase in our knowledge 
 of heritable traits in the near future. The most 
 notable of these is the Eugenics Record Office at Cold 
 Spring Harbor, Long Island. 
 
 The ultimate aim of both eugenics and euthenics Is 
 the improvement of the race. The former seeks to 
 secure this by bettering the conditions of the indi- 
 vidual and, by education, cultivating his capacities to 
 the utmost; the latter by securing a better heritage 
 from generation to generation. The two, however, 
 must work together. Any hereditary characteristic is 
 the result of a reaction between the germ plasm and Its 
 environment — is the expression In the soma of a tend- 
 ency or potentiality transmitted through the germ. 
 The biologist who would minimise the value of en- 
 vironmental Influences and educational effort, Is as 
 much at fault as the sociologist who falls to grasp the 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 37 
 
 vital importance of the germ plasm. As Walter has 
 well said, " Without euthe.nic opportunity the best of 
 heritages would never fully come to its own. With- 
 out the eugenic foundation the best opportunity fails 
 of accomplishment." 
 
 The programme of euthenics, then, consists in secur- 
 ing better conditions of living, and this opens a wide 
 field when one considers that these conditions concern 
 not only the needs of the individual but the common 
 needs of society. The details of this programme are 
 to a considerable degree a matter of common knowl- 
 edge, and time does not allow of their individual con- 
 sideration here. 
 
 One cacothenic factor which is deserving of especial 
 mention is alcoholism, and this may be accepted as 
 typical of the action of several poisons, particularly 
 narcotics, to the influence of which the body may be 
 subjected. If alcohol is taken into the body in small 
 amounts and at infrequent intervals it may be burned 
 up without affecting even the somatic cells except per- 
 haps those with which it comes directly in contact. If 
 taken in larger amounts or at more frequent intervals 
 so that it is absorbed and circulated more intimately 
 among the tissues it may modify the soma permanently 
 and thus acquired characters be developed. And the 
 amount taken may be so great or the influence of the 
 drug be constant for so long a time that even the germ 
 plasm may be affected, perhaps not the chromatin but 
 at least the cytoplasm of the germ cells. As a result 
 when such a germ cell develops the effect is seen in the 
 failure of the body cells to differentiate normally, and 
 various types of defectiveness are exhibited. It seems 
 
38 11. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 clear from the study of inheritance in families that in 
 this way defects which would otherwise be recessive 
 are allowed to become apparent. 
 
 In a manner similar to that just described, the effects 
 of disease may be transmitted, even though the dis- 
 ease itself is not. This might be urged as the inherit- 
 ance of an acquired character, but I should say that 
 that does not follow, since there is no evidence that the 
 chromatin, the substance which carries the hereditary 
 properties, has been affected, and since the effect re- 
 ferred to in the absence of a continuance of the stimulus 
 is not transmitted as a heritable character to succeeding 
 generations. At all events the effect has been exerted 
 directly and not through the soma. 
 
 The science of eugenics is in its infancy, and much 
 on the programme it presents is tentative. The first 
 step in this programme is the accumulation of facts 
 and since the method used must be largely statistical 
 all reliable data bearing on human heredity are impor- 
 tant, whether they pertain to traits that have in the 
 past been transmitted in a given family or whether they 
 pertain to the appearance of traits in the coming gen- 
 eration which are shared in common with the parents. 
 A second step consists in the restriction of the unde- 
 sirable elements in the heritage by closer control of 
 immigration, more discriminating marriage laws, the 
 segregation of defectives, and sterilisation of con- 
 firmed criminals, idiots, and imbeciles. There is lit- 
 tle question of the desirability of all of these measures 
 but the last, but there are two sides to this question. 
 The procedure must be looked upon as experimental, 
 and since eight states have sterilisation laws on their 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE ZOOLOGIST 39 
 
 statute books it would seem the part of wisdom to 
 await the results of these experiments before begin- 
 ning others. A third step in the programme is the 
 conservation of desirable germ plasm by preventing 
 the loss of manhood due to war, by enlarging indi- 
 vidual opportunity, and educating the public to the 
 desirability of more care in the selection of mates. 
 Increased individual opportunity may be secured by sub- 
 sidising the fit, by a higher scale of wages, by a de- 
 crease in the cost of living, and by the removal of social 
 hindrances to marriage such as the increasing demands 
 of professional and business life. The methods of 
 procedure last outlined again carry us over into the 
 field of euthenics, which we have seen from so many 
 points of view lying close to that of eugenics. 
 
 Many additional suggestions have been offered, 
 some of them most unpractical and sure to bring the 
 eugenic movement into ridicule and disrepute. But if 
 the measures referred to above, which are those most 
 advocated, are pushed, a wide field for fruitful en- 
 deavour is presented which will not be exhausted for 
 many years to come. 
 
 In conclusion, let me urge you to make personal ap- 
 plication of that which has been given. You are an 
 individual with a multitude of hereditary characters, in 
 part evident and known to yourself if not to others, in 
 part not evident and quite unsuspected even by your- 
 self, with potentialities certainly far beyond those you 
 have so far realised, with abilities awaiting a favour- 
 able opportunity for their development. You have a 
 body through which these characters, these potentiali- 
 ties, must be expressed, and by means of which these 
 abilities may be developed. 
 
40 11. WOLCOTT: EUGENICS 
 
 If you would be successful study your own char- 
 acter, seek out these potentialities, test your abilities, 
 that you may learn of those you possess and develop 
 them. Study your ancestry, for thereby you may dis- 
 cover possibilities of which you are ignorant. If you 
 would be wise conserve your body so that it may be an 
 effective instrument in the realisation of these possibili- 
 ties. Seek to avoid the development of unfavourable 
 acquired characters and cultivate those which are 
 favourable. Be temperate in all things. 
 
 You have a social duty to perform. Unless pre- 
 vented by the performance of some other equally im- 
 portant obligation or by some other social service, and 
 if you be fit, you owe it to society to marry and bring 
 up children. But do not marry or produce children 
 without first considering carefully your own fitness to 
 do so and also the fitness of your mate. If you have 
 an honourable and a favourable heritage, see to it that 
 you transmit it unsullied to children who will honour 
 you. If your heritage is defective make the most of it 
 yourself, but consider carefully before you pass it on to 
 others. 
 
 I have presented to you a subject which should be 
 read and studied by every educated man and woman. 
 It is a field as yet little developed, but which even now 
 offers knowledge of incalculable value. 
 
 Some of you have received one talent, some two tal- 
 ents, some five. Do not bury even the one in the earth 
 of unfavourable acquirement. By careful husbandry 
 of your resources add to them and pass on a worthful 
 inheritance to future generations. 
 
Ill 
 
 EUGENICS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE 
 PHYSICIAN 
 
 VICTOR C. VAUGHAN 
 
 The word, eugenics, meaning the generation or repro- 
 duction of the good and referring to the human race, 
 was coined by the late Sir Francis Galton, who defined 
 the term as follows: "Eugenics is the science which 
 deals with all influences that improve the inborn quali- 
 ties of a race ; also with those that develop them to the 
 utmost advantage." It will be seen from this defini- 
 tion that Galton intended that this new science should 
 not be restricted to a study of heredity and its effects 
 upon race development, but should include congenital 
 and postnatal influences as well. In one of his essays, 
 Galton speaks of heredity and environment as follows : 
 " Nature is all that a man brings with himself into the 
 world; nurture is every influence from without that 
 affects him after his birth. The distinction is clear; 
 the one produces the infant such as it actually is, in- 
 cluding its latent faculties of growth, of body and 
 mind; the other affords the environment amid which 
 the growth takes place, by which natural tendencies 
 may be strengthened or thwarted, or wholly new ones 
 implanted. Neither of the terms implies any theory; 
 natural gifts may or may not be hereditary; nurture 
 does not especially consist of food, clothing, education, 
 
 41 
 
42 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 or tradition, but it includes all these and similar in- 
 fluences whether known or unknown. When nature 
 and nurture compete for supremacy on equal terms in 
 the sense to be explained, the former proves the 
 stronger. It is needless to insist that neither is self- 
 sufficient; the highest natural endowments may be 
 starved by defective nurture, while no carefulness of 
 nurture can overcome the evil tendencies of an in- 
 trinsically bad physique, weak brain, or brutal dis» 
 position." 
 
 It is along these broad lines marked off by the 
 founder of this new science that I propose to discuss 
 certain questions bearing on the development of the 
 human race. This is not to be a strictly scientific 
 lecture on disputed, or as yet unsolved, problems in 
 heredity. It is a fact of universal observation ap- 
 plied to all living things from the lowest to the highest 
 that like begets like, that man reaps what he sows, and 
 that in man himself racial and family traits are re- 
 peated in generation after generation. It is equally 
 true that in all the wide world of animate things there 
 are no two individuals exactly identical. Similarity 
 and variation are equally in evidence wherever we turn. 
 Without stability in reproduction life would be chaos; 
 without variation in generation development would be 
 impossible. The child may resemble father or mother 
 or both, but cannot be an exact reproduction of either. 
 Most likely the child resembles its father in some re- 
 spects and its mother in others, but in all instances it 
 differs from both, and these differences may be marked. 
 The ancestors of the child are those of the father plus 
 those of the mother, and it not infrequently happens 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 43 
 
 that some dominant trait in the ancestral line back of 
 father or mother and not recognisable in them becomes 
 the most potent factor for good or ill in moulding the 
 child. This is an old observation as is shown from 
 the following quotation from Bacon's " Advancement 
 of Learning " : " It happeneth sometimes that the 
 grandchild or other descendant resembleth the ancestor 
 more than the son." The physical, mental and moral 
 attributes of the child are determined not wholly by 
 father and mother, but in part by the ancestry that lies 
 further back. In order to forecast the destiny of a 
 child it is necessary to know not only the father and 
 the mother, but the stock from which each has come. 
 The eugenic records recite many illustrations of this, 
 and I will briefly abstract one reported by Davenport. 
 The father is an educated, respected physician, the 
 mother is a talented woman, who has shown no other 
 defect than migraine and chorea in girlhood. The 
 children are two boys, one normal, truthful and lov- 
 able; the other a liar and a thief. The mother's 
 father, whom the children never saw or even heard of, 
 was a drunkard, and was once involved in a murder. 
 
 Galton calculated with a fair degree of probability 
 that the average child receives one-fourth of its pe- 
 culiarities or characteristics from each parent, or one- 
 half from the two, but half of these may be intensified 
 by like qualities or neutralised by contradictory in- 
 heritances. The greatest possible contribution made 
 by each of the grandparents would be one-eighth, but a 
 part of this is included in that which comes through the 
 parents, and the remainder, be it for good or ill, comes 
 from the endless line of the ancestral dead. This 
 
44 HI. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 would be true if all traits were alike transmissible, but 
 as we shall see, certain ones are dominant and tend to 
 appear, while others are recessive and tend to lie hid- 
 den. It is also a fact that traits do not necessarily re- 
 appear in succeeding generations in exactly the same 
 form. This is true of both good and bad inheritances. 
 Family traits have been observed and commented on 
 from remote times, but the first scientific, experimental 
 study of their transmission was undertaken by an Aus- 
 trian monk, Mendel by name, about the middle of the 
 last century. This man had the true scientific spirit, 
 experimenting intelligently, observing accurately and 
 recording truthfully. His work was published, but did 
 not attract attention until nearly forty years later when, 
 quite ignorant of his work, De Vries, Correns, Tscher- 
 mak and others undertook like investigations and ob- 
 tained similar results. Then, some one found the for- 
 gotten work of Mendel and those who had unconsciously 
 followed him were big enough to give him credit, and 
 now we speak of the Mendelian law of inheritance. 
 Mendel experimented with peas which he grew in the 
 garden of the monastery. He carefully crossed those 
 of contrasting characteristics; those with long stems 
 with short; those with green unripe pods with those of 
 yellow pods; those with inflated pods with those of con- 
 stricted pods; those with round seeds with those of 
 angular seeds ; those with yellow seed leaves with those 
 of green leaves ; those with white seeds with those that 
 yield grey, etc. Mendel found that when he crossed 
 contrasting peas, in the first generation one or the other 
 character prevailed practically to the exclusion of the 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 45 
 
 other. For instance when dwarfs were crossed with 
 tall stemmed peas, all were tall. 
 
 The characteristic which prevails in crossing pure 
 stocks is known as the dominant character, while that 
 which apparently disappears is known as the recessive 
 character. In the cross between short and long 
 stemmed varieties of peas tallness is dominant and 
 shortness recessive. When one parent is of pure blue- 
 eyed stock and the other of pure brown-eyed stock, all 
 the children will have brown eyes. In this case brown 
 is dominant and blue recessive. But the dominant char- 
 acter does not permanently prevail, nor is the recessive 
 permanently lost. The tall peas produced by a cross 
 between tails and shorts when bred among themselves 
 produce three tails to one short. This means that in 
 the first generation from the cross-breeds seventy-five 
 per cent, have the dominant character, and twenty-five 
 per cent, the recessive character. Furthermore, when 
 the recessives of this generation are interbred all the 
 offspring have the recessive character and continue this 
 and this only so long as the interbreeding continues. On 
 the other hand, when the dominants are inter-bred, some 
 produce only dominants, others produce three domi- 
 nants to one recessive, and this continues. It will then 
 be seen that in crossing the two pure stocks the domi- 
 nant and recessive characters are in reality distributed in 
 the offspring as follows : One-fourth inherit the dom- 
 inant character only and transmit this to their offspring; 
 one-fourth are in reality recessives, and when interbred 
 reproduce this character only ; one-half are in fact cross- 
 breeds and show both dominants and recessives in their 
 
46 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 offspring with the former numerically greater than the 
 latter. 
 
 The followers of Mendel hold that the individual is 
 made up of unit characters each of which is transmitted 
 through inheritance quite independently of the others. 
 These unit characters do not themselves exist in the re- 
 productive cells, but the germ plasm contains a " deter- 
 miner " which leads to the development of its own 
 special unit character. The nature of the determiner is 
 not understood. Some think that it is a ferment, but 
 this assumption has no support in fact, and it is more 
 probable that the determiner is a small atomic group in 
 the very large and complex molecule present in the re- 
 productive cell. When a certain unit character does 
 not develop it is assumed that the determiner is ab- 
 sent, but that this cannot always be true is shown by the 
 fact that the unit character which may not be in evidence 
 in either parent manifests itself in their offspring.^ It 
 is supposed that brown eyes are due to a determiner or 
 enzyme which produces a coloured pigment, while blue 
 eyes are due to the absence of the enzyme. The unit 
 characters do not blend, and the individual is a mosaic 
 of the units transmitted from his ancestors. In this 
 way it happens that the individual may strikingly re- 
 semble one parent in some respects and the other in 
 different peculiarities, or he may display In marked de- 
 gree the peculiarities of one of his four grand-parents, 
 or he may inherit some striking trait passed down from 
 a more remote ancestor. When one parent has a given 
 
 ^ A " unit character " that appears in the children but not in either 
 parent is really, by hypothesis, due to the lack of a determiner. Thus 
 " blue eyes " is due to the absence of the determiner for browi iris 
 pigmlsntatiQn. 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 47 
 
 characteristic while the other does not have it, the child 
 gets it from only one side, and in the second generation 
 half the children may possess it, and the other half be 
 without it. In this way a child may resemble one of 
 its grand-parents in this one particular more than either 
 parent. A characteristic which comes from only one 
 parent is known as simplex, while one coming from both . 
 parents is said to be duplex. When a given recessive 
 character is not found in either parent it will be absent 
 from all the offspring. When both parents have blue 
 eyes, which are due to the absence of brown pigment, all 
 the children have blue eyes. When both parents have 
 blond hair all the children will be light haired. If 
 both parents have brown eyes all the children may have 
 brown eyes or one-fourth of them may have blue, the 
 latter inheriting from a grand-parent. When one par- 
 ent has brown and the other blue eyes either all the chil- 
 dren will have brown eyes or half will have blue. Dav- 
 enport says: " If both parents are simplex in a char- 
 acter, so that they produce an equal number of germ 
 cells with and without the character, then in a large 
 number of offspring, one in four will have the character 
 duplex; two in four simplex, and one in four will not 
 have the character at all (nuUiplex). This gives in 
 the offspring of such a pair the famous three to one 
 ratio, sometimes called the " Mendelian ratio." [See 
 also Webber, pp. 149-150, Elwood, pp. 223-224.] 
 
 It will be" seen from what has been said that heredity 
 consists in the transmission of unit characters or their 
 determiners; that some of these are dominant while 
 others are recessive ; that they do not blend one with the 
 other, but form mosaics ; that the unit may be simplex, 
 
48 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 duplex or absent (nuUiplex) . Students of heredity are 
 busy trying to determine what are unit characters, and 
 whether or not like laws control the transmission of all 
 of them. Among the physical characteristics best 
 studied are colour of eyes, hair and skin, stature and 
 body weight. The two last mentioned seem to involve 
 two or more units. In stature, length of limbs, body 
 and neck and head may vary quite independently; be- 
 sides stature depends upon age and is influenced some- 
 what by occupation. Davenport makes the following 
 statements concerning the inheritance of stature: 
 " The first general law is that in case the four grand- 
 parents are very unlike, the adult children will vary 
 greatly in stature, whereas, when the grandparental 
 statures are closely alike those of the children will be 
 also. . . . The second general law is that when both 
 parents are tall all of the children tend to be tall; but, 
 on the contrary, if both parents are short some of the 
 children will be short, and some tall, in ratios varying 
 from i:i to 2:1. If all the grand-parents are short 
 then there tend to be twice as many short children as 
 tall; but if one grandparent on each side be tall there 
 will tend to an equality of short and tall chil- 
 dren." 
 
 Body weight is dependent upon several factors, but 
 it is well known that both sp|reness and rotundity, espe- 
 cially in adult life, are often notable family traits. 
 
 Temperament, fluency in speech and readiness in com- 
 position, manual dexterity, memory, Imagination and 
 other physical and mental characteristics show unusual 
 development in certain families, and Galton has col- 
 lected much interesting and instructive data in his book 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 49 
 
 on " Hereditary Genius." Making all due allowance 
 for family influence in securing positions of honour and 
 trust, it must be admitted that mental ability repeats it- 
 self in certain families, while it Is unknown In others. 
 
 The most distressing matter with which eugenists are 
 at present concerned Is the Inheritance of defective men- 
 tality. The prevalence of feeble-mindedness In this 
 country is becoming alarming, and demands the atten- 
 tion of all who are Interested In the future of the race; 
 and who Is not? Without being an alarmist or a pessi- 
 mist, I wish to say that the American people Is threat- 
 ened with the spread of mental and moral degeneracy 
 through the multiplication of the unfit. I am not 
 alarmed about this because I believe steps will be taken 
 to check this threatening disaster. However, It Is the 
 plal;i duty of those who perceive this danger to call at- 
 tention to it and suggest. If possible, how it may be 
 averted. Davenport and Weeks after making a scien- 
 tific study of epilepsy and feeble-mindedness in New 
 Jersey make the following statement :f\^" If our data 
 should hold for strains with epileptic members we could 
 conclude that if no change in mating and fecundity oc- 
 cur, the number of epileptics and feeble-minded in the 
 State of New Jersey will be relatively double what it is 
 now In 1940, and relatively four times as common in 
 1970. Thus, If the present proportion Is i to 500 it 
 would be I to 125 in 1970." \,^ 
 
 Rosanoff and Orr have arrived at the following con- 
 clusions from a study of Heredity and Insanity : " The 
 neuropathic constitution Is transmitted from generation 
 to generation in the manner of a trait which Is, In the 
 Mendelian sense, recessive to the normal condition. 
 
50 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 Rules of theoretical expectation are accordingly as fol- 
 lows: 
 
 a. Both parents being neuropathic all children will 
 be neuropathic. 
 
 b. One parent being normal, but with the neuro- 
 pathic taint from one grand-parent, and the other parent 
 being neuropathic, half the children will be neuropathic 
 and half will be normal, but with the capability of trans- 
 mitting the neuropathic make-up to their progeny. 
 
 c. One parent being normal and of pure normal an- 
 cestry, and the other parent being neuropathic, all the 
 children will be normal, but capable of transmitting the 
 neuropathic make-up to their progeny. 
 
 d. Both parents being normal, but each with the 
 neuropathic taint from one grand-parent, one-fourth the 
 children will be normal and not capable of transmitting 
 the neuropathic make-up to their progeny, one-half will 
 be normal, but capable of transmitting the neuropathic 
 make-up, and the remaining fourth will be neuropathic. 
 
 e. Both parents being normal, one of pure normal 
 ancestry and the other with a pure neuropathic taint 
 from one grand-parent, all the children will be normal, 
 half of them will be capable, and half not capable of 
 transmitting the neuropathic make-up to their progeny. 
 
 f. Both parents being normal and of pure normal 
 ancestry, all the children will be normal and not capable 
 of transmitting the neuropathic make-up to their prog- 
 eny." 
 
 There has been some divergence of opinion concern- 
 ing the inheritance of epilepsy as a unit character. If 
 tradition and history are true, some great men — Na- 
 poleon and Csesar for instance — were subject to mild 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 51 
 
 forms of epilepsy, but the evidence is not unquestion- 
 able. Epilepsy may follow a blow, in other words it 
 may be traumatic, but a like traumatism is followed by 
 epilepsy in only a few, and it is thought by some that 
 these have an inherited taint. It is certainly true that 
 when both parents are epileptic all the children are de- 
 fective mentally. Epilepsy and feeble-mindedness 
 seem to be interchangeable in inheritance, and that epi- 
 leptics are not fit parents has been abundantly demon- 
 strated. 
 
 All agree that certain forms of insanity are transmis- 
 sible, and so far as such inheritance has been studied it 
 seems to follow the Mendelian law. When both par- 
 ents are insane, none of the children remain normal; 
 when one parent is normal but of insane stock and the 
 other insane, half the children may become insane ; when 
 both parents arc normal, but of insane stock, about one- 
 fourth the children become insane. Certain forms of 
 insanity, such as those due to trauma or to certain 
 poisons and diseases are not transmissible. This leaves 
 a third class in which the insanity is due to alcohol, 
 syphilis and other poisons, concerning the transmissi. 
 bility of which there is still diversity of opinion. How- 
 ever, parenthood from this class is not desirable, and is 
 not likely to improve the race. 
 
 In discussing questions of heredity it is well to dis- 
 tinguish between poverty and pauperism. A man's 
 poverty may be greatly to his credit. Carlyle writes : 
 " I have a sacred pride in my peasant father. Let me 
 write my books as he built his houses, and walk as 
 blamelessly through this shadow world." Speaking 
 further of his parents he said : " They had to scramble. 
 
S2 Til. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 scraffle for their clothes and food. They knit, they 
 thatched for hire, above all, they hunted. My father 
 had tried all these things from boyhood. The mother 
 had not always meal to make them porridge. Once the 
 meal which had perhaps been long scarce, and certainly 
 for some time wanting, arrived at last late at night. 
 The mother proceeded at once to make cakes of it, and 
 had no fuel but straw that she tore from the beds to 
 do it with." The man of good family may decline to 
 enrich himself by means which his less scrupulous and 
 baseborn neighbour does not hesitate to employ. But 
 the shiftless, ne'er-do-well pauper is usually the de- 
 scendant of poor stock. We cannot call shiftlessness a 
 unit character, but as a rule the individual who exhibits 
 it has no reason for pride in ancestry, nor much hope in 
 posterity. It usually means lack of. energy and indif- 
 ference to those incentives that move the normal man to 
 strive for the necessity and comforts of life. Even the 
 diseases which afflict the pauper and tend to keep him in 
 that state are often the results and not the causes of his 
 condition. 
 
 Whether alcoholism and similar addictions are due 
 to inherited weakness or to acquired depravity is still a 
 question on which there are differences of opinion. 
 There are families of drunkards, and drunkards are 
 much more common in families characterised by mental 
 defects than in normal ones. Feeble-mindedness, epi- 
 lepsy, insanity, sexual obliquity, criminality and alcohol- 
 ism are often found on the same genealogical tree, and 
 seem to thrive under like conditions. There is much 
 evidence to support the claim that alcoholism engrafted 
 on gQod stock leads to deterioration, while on bad stock 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 53 
 
 it increases the defects. Davenport and Weeks In their 
 studies of epilepsy state : " We see, accordingly, a con- 
 stant excess beyond expectation of epileptic and feeble- 
 minded offspring from alcoholic parents. Insofar our 
 results support the view that alcoholism, to a certain 
 extent, is a cause of defect; that 10 to 20 per cent, 
 more children in any fraternity are defective than would 
 be were it not for alcohol. However, a word of cau- 
 tion must be added. It is not improbable that some of 
 the alcoholics are actually feeble-minded, and any such 
 would tend to increase the average of defective offspring 
 because of their inherent defective germ cells, and quite 
 apart from any poisoning effect on the germ cells of al- 
 cohol." Evidently we have to leave it undetermined 
 for the present whether alcoholism is begotten of, or 
 begets, feeble-mindedness. It is sure that they belong 
 to the same breed. 
 
 The relation of heredity to crime is a complicated 
 problem, and one which remains without satisfactory 
 solution. All authorities on the subject say that some 
 are criminals by descent, but to what extent the criminal 
 tendency is inherited through the germinal plasma, and 
 how much it owes to environment it is difficult to say. 
 That we have in our population the greatest proportion 
 of criminals of any civilised nation has been asserted by 
 some of our greatest jurists. Wier says that in this 
 country " 250,000 persons whom the law never touches 
 are engaged in the systematic pursuit of crime — There 
 are four and one-half times as many murders for every 
 million of our population to-day as there were twenty 
 years ago. . . . Ten thousand persons are murdered in 
 this country every year, and of the murderers only two 
 
54 HI. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 in every hundred are punished." The causes of this 
 sad condition are variously interpreted. No less an 
 authority tlian President Taft thinks it in part at least 
 due to defective administration of the criminal law. 
 He says: "It is not too much to say that the 
 administration of criminal law in this country is 
 a disgrace to our civilisation, and that the prevalence 
 of crime and fraud, which Is here greatly in ex- 
 cess of that In European countries is due largely to the 
 failure of the law and its administrators to bring crim- 
 inals to justice." Then, there Is the question of what 
 is crime. The poor mother who steals a loaf of bread 
 to feed her hungry children or picks up lumps of coal 
 fallen from an over-loaded car to keep them from freez- 
 ing is a thief, and Is quite sure to be condemned as 
 such while the stock manipulator who steals a railroad 
 is a great financier. A former Earl of Shaftesbury said 
 that the dangerous classes are not the people, but the 
 rich who do no good with their money. To my mind 
 the man who sells watered, or fictitious stock, is as truly 
 a thief as the one who steals a purse, and the student of 
 the relation between crime and heredity must Include 
 the former as well as the latter in his studies before he 
 can show that inheritance is more potent than environ- 
 ment in the development of the criminal. However, I 
 am ready to admit that the feeble-minded are often petty 
 criminals, but these are not able to distinguish between 
 right and wrong. The juvenile courts are acquainted 
 with cases of this kind, and Coulter of New York speaks 
 of them as follows : " When a case of out and out 
 mental deficiency is discovered In a juvenile delinquent 
 there is no place where that child can receive proper 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 55 
 
 treatment. The result is that such of those children 
 as are committed to ordinary institutions are being 
 made into habitual criminals and paupers; each, too, 
 an agent for the reproduction of his kind in later years." 
 
 In addition to the unit characters, certain anatomical 
 peculiarities are transmitted and mark certain families. 
 This is strikingly illustrated in supernumerary digits, 
 cleft palate, etc., but is also true of less obvious struc- 
 tures. Inborn deaf-mutism is well known, and inter- 
 marriage among these defectives should not be encour- 
 aged. President Jordan states that the Cretins of 
 Aosta have been eliminated within less than thirty years 
 by segregation of the sexes, and thus preventing their re- 
 production. Certain diseases, as hemophilia, Fried- 
 reich's ataxia, and Huntington's chorea are hereditary 
 beyond any doubt. There are families of so-called 
 bleeders — people in whom hemorrhage is frequent and 
 difficult to control. There is an especially interesting 
 fact about the inheritance of this defect. It manifests 
 itself usually only in the males. The daughters, as a 
 rule, do not show it, but transmit it to their sons. 
 
 One of the most striking and convincing family his- 
 tories illustrating both the ill and the good that may 
 come through heredity is detailed by Goddard in his 
 story of the Kallikak family. The name is for obvious 
 reasons not the true one. At the beginning of the 
 Revolutionary War a young man, known in the history 
 as Martin Kallikak, had a son by a nameless, feeble- 
 minded girl, from whom there have descended in the 
 direct line four hundred and eighty individuals. One 
 hundred and forty-three of these are known to have 
 been feeble-minded, and only forty-six are known to 
 
S6 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 have bee.n normal. The rest are unknown or doubtful. 
 Thirty-six have been illegitimate ; thirty-three, sexually 
 immoral, mostly prostitutes; twenty- four, alcoholic; 
 three epileptic; eighty-two had died in infancy; three 
 were criminal, and eight kept houses of ill-fame. After 
 the war, Martin Kallikak married a woman of good 
 stock. From this union has come in direct line four 
 hundred and ninety-six, among whom only two were 
 alcoholic, and one known to be sexually immoral. "The 
 legitimate children of Martin have been doctors, law- 
 yers, judges, educators, traders, landholders, in short, 
 respectable citizens, men and women prominent in every 
 phase of social life." These two families have lived 
 on the same soil, in the same atmosphere, and in short, 
 under the same general environment, yet the bar sinister 
 has marked every generation of one and has been un- 
 known in the other. 
 
 Davenport, Goddard and others have collected sim- 
 ilar histories, and while no other is quite so striking as 
 that of the Kallikak family, all point to the fact that the 
 sins of the fathers extend even to the third and fourth 
 generation. The evidence that there is seed so bad that 
 good cannot come from it is conclusive. 
 
 The Jukes family of New York State, so thoroughly 
 studied by Dugdale, was for five generations made up 
 almost exclusively of criminals, prostitutes, drunkards 
 and paupers, and in the course of seventy-five years cost 
 the State more than a million and a quarter of dollars. 
 The family in Indiana, known as " the tribe of 
 Ishmael," has in five generations produced one thou- 
 sand seven hundred and fifty individuals. Of the fe- 
 males more than thirteen per cent, were known to be 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 57 
 
 prostitutes and most of the men were alcoholics and 
 criminals, the charges against them running along the 
 scale from petty larceny to murder. In one county in 
 Michigan there is a group of families more or less 
 closely connected by intermarriage, only five per cent, 
 of the individuals being normal. Miss McKinnie, who 
 has been conducting a survey for the State Board of 
 Health, says that the total cost of maintenance for de- 
 fective members of these families in State institutions 
 has been over $86,000, exclusive of the capital invested 
 in buildings and of local or State aid given in their 
 homes. From these families there are now thirty-eight 
 in the home for the feeble-mipded at Lapeer, one hun- 
 dred and thirteen feeble-minded at large, and twenty- 
 two known prostitutes. Miss McKinnie estimates that 
 there are not less than nine thousand feeble-minded at 
 large in the State, and these are multiplying their kind. 
 From this class come the Giteaus, Czolgoz and 
 Schranks. 
 
 The eugenist is trying to accomplish two things both 
 of which are essential to the future welfare of the race. 
 One of these is to prevent the multiplication of the bad 
 stock, and the other is to encourage the replenishment 
 of the good. It will be seen that the science of eu- 
 genics has its negative and its positive work. 
 
 Negative eugenics can succeed only by the help of 
 legal enactments. There must be laws preventing the 
 marriage and reproduction of the unfit. The first thing 
 to be done in carrying out a programme of this kind is to 
 determine who is unfit. At present surveys are being 
 made in certain localities by men and women trained at 
 the institution for the study of experimental evolution 
 
S8 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 located at Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, N. Y. 
 The Director of this Institution is Dr. Chas. B. Daven- 
 port, and the work is supported in part at least by the 
 Carnegie Institution at Washington. The men and 
 women trained by Dr. Davenport are excellently pre- 
 pared for this work. It is customary to begin such a 
 survey by going to a State institution for the feeble- 
 minded and then visiting the families represented by the 
 inmates. Field workers study the genealogy of the 
 feeble-minded. Davenport suggests that the school 
 teachers of the country should make a general eugenic 
 survey, but I doubt the feasibility of this proposal. 
 
 I wish to suggest a plan which I believe to be prefer- 
 able to that suggested by Davenport. The enumera- 
 tion and location of the feeble-minded and of others, 
 whose reproduction are to be discouraged, should be a 
 part of a broad, scientific scheme for the uplift of the 
 race. In every densely populated county of this coun- 
 try there should be a health officer or commissioner, an 
 efficient medical man with the training which would fit 
 him for his work. He should give his entire time and 
 energy to the preservation of the health of all within his 
 jurisdiction. He should study and authoritatively ad- 
 vise in matters of water supply, sewage, the general 
 sanitation of city, village and individual homes; should 
 prevent threatened epidemics and suppress existing 
 ones ; supervise disinfection and vaccination ; make a 
 complete sanitary survey of every part of his jurisdiction 
 twice or oftener every year; find every case of tuber- 
 culosis, infantile paralysis, typhoid fever or other in- 
 fectious diseases, see that the individual is properly 
 cared for and the spread of the infection prevented; 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 59 
 
 locate every case of inheritable defect whether it be 
 physical, mental or moral, and be ready to advise as to 
 the measures necessary to prevent the reproduction of 
 the unfit; study the conditions under which wayward 
 children are being reared ; ascertain whether their homes 
 are unfit places for them or they are unfit for their 
 homes, whether their defects are due to nature or to 
 nurture, to heredity or environment. Within a few 
 years such an officer with trained assistants would be- 
 come acquainted with the virtues and vices of every fam- 
 ily within his jurisdiction. Degenerative tendencies 
 would be detected in their early development, and with 
 the aid of a wise judge much could be done to stifle 
 crime before it is born. Crime is a disease due to 
 heredity or environmentj or both, and at present we per- 
 mit it to breed and come to maturity in our midst. It 
 will not grow less so long as this continues. Its breed- 
 ing places should be located and disinfected. Children 
 even in this day and right here among us are growing 
 up in an environment which precludes their development 
 into good citizens. This is true of some who have 
 come from good stock, and doubly true of those in 
 whom the tendency to evil is inborn. 
 
 No child should be born into this world save from 
 good stock. However, " good stock " needs some ex- 
 planatioru It does not mean riches. This is certain. 
 It is true that in common parlance we have unduly mag- 
 nified wealth. We say that such a young man or 
 woman has a great inheritance, and by this we mean 
 riches, but this is not the meaning given the term " good 
 inheritance " by the eugenist. One could hardly think 
 of the rugged and masterly intellect of Thomas Carlyle 
 
6o III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 or Abraham Lincoln coming from a line of wealthy an- 
 cestors. By " good stock " the eugenist means one rela- 
 tively free from undesirable unit characters, and the 
 most important of these are alcoholism, feeble-minded- 
 ness, epilepsy, insanity, pauperism and criminality. All 
 of these classes should'be excluded from the list of those 
 to whom is granted the privilege of exercising the high- 
 est, holiest, most important function of the race — par- 
 enthood. From what I have already said it is evident 
 that in order to boast of good stock it is necessary to 
 have the history of at least three successive generations. 
 Among these there should be none of the defective unit 
 characters mentioned above. The marked develop- 
 ment of any one of them is likely to reproduce itself in 
 some of the descendants. Among your ancestors, there 
 may be those who were poor; those who won no official 
 position ; those who made no great contributions to liter- 
 ature, science, or art, in short all may have been very 
 ordinary people, but so long as all were sober, sane and 
 honest, you have a goodly inheritance. This is a fam- 
 ily record of which but few kings can boast, and its pos- 
 session should be highly prized by those fortunate 
 enough to rightfully claim it, and it remains for such to 
 so live as to honour the worthy dead, to whose lineage 
 they belong. As Macaulay said : " As we would have 
 our descendants judge us, so ought we to judge our 
 fathers." 
 
 While I have been talking about heredity I dare say 
 that the young among my auditors have been busy think- 
 ing of their ancestors, and wondering what manner of 
 people they were. I ask you to turn about and face the 
 other direction. Let the dead past rest with those who 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 6l 
 
 have made us what we are, and with whom we are 
 bound by the unbreakable thread of the continuity of 
 the race. The fact that we are here in this great institu- 
 tion of learning, striving to prepare ourselves for the 
 duties that lie before us is sufficient proof that however 
 the good and the bad may have mingled in our creation, 
 the dominant unit characters in our lineage must have 
 been good. Let us now look into the future — say fifty 
 years from now. Then young men and women will be 
 wondering what kind of ancestors they had, and this 
 means that they will be thinking of you and me. The 
 past has made us; for the future we are responsible. 
 When we were conceived in our mothers' wombs the 
 gates of ancestral gifts were closed. 
 
 The warp and woof of the character-habiliments 
 that we are wearing have been spun for the most part 
 at least by those who are now mouldering in graves. 
 We are to prepare the character raiment for those who 
 are to fill our places. Let us do this work skilfully, 
 intelligently and honestly. 
 
 The generations of the future will have cause to bless 
 or curse us according to the lives we live. By the proc- 
 ess of evolution, man has grown to a degree of intelli- 
 gence which makes him a co-worker with the creator, 
 and the future of the race is largely within man's power 
 to make or to mar, to illume or to darken, to fill with 
 the joy of life or with the regret of having been born. 
 It may be that years from now some young man, having 
 apparently a brilliant future before him, will be stricken 
 with insanity because one of you, his ancestor, got drunk 
 and acquired syphilis. As potent as it is, heredity is not 
 the only factor In determining the future of the race. 
 
62 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 A man may come from the best stock imaginable, and 
 still he may do that which unfits him for parenthood. 
 As advancement in each generation is possible, so re- 
 lapses may occur. Decensus averno facile est. As I 
 have already stated, it is still a question as to the exact 
 relation between alcoholism and heredity. Some hold 
 that alcoholism is a result of bad inheritance, while 
 others are quite sure that it leads directly in the off- 
 spring to feeble-mindedness and insanity. Be this as it 
 may, it is an undesirable unit character and unfits for 
 parenthood. 
 
 There are some diseases that are so destructive to 
 man's physical and mental development that nature 
 makes an attempt to prevent their transmission. This 
 is true of the venereal diseases. In the male, gon- 
 orrhea renders a considerable per cent, of its victims 
 sterile, the exact percentage varying with the virulence 
 of the infecting agent. In woman this disease accom- 
 plishes the same end in a much more serious manner, 
 and a large per cent, of the women who go to the operat- 
 ing table for pelvic troubles owe their sad condition to 
 this disease. Blindness in the newly born is quite with- 
 out exception due to this disease. Syphilitic parents 
 seldom bring healthy children into the world, and prac- 
 tically all perish either in utero or in early childhood. 
 Knowing these things it must be evident that the ven- 
 ereal diseases unfit one for parenthood. A consider- 
 able per cent. — not all — of both these diseases is cura- 
 ble, and when properly treated this bar to parenthood 
 may be removed. But even when this can be secured, 
 it means much and prolonged distress of body and 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 63 
 
 mind, and in this connection we may repeat and extend 
 our quotation from the wise old Latin poet : 
 
 The gates of hell are open night and day ; 
 Smooth the descent and easy is the way; 
 But to return and view the cheerful skies — 
 In this the task and mighty labour lies. 
 
 It should be evident from what I have said that al- 
 coholism, epilepsy, the venereal diseases, feeble-minded- 
 ness, insanity and criminality should be absolute bars to 
 parenthood. 
 
 There are other matters which may be discussed in 
 this connection. It is generally believed that when 
 father and mother are much alike the children are prone 
 to be peculiar at least. This is due to the fact that the 
 unit characters become duplex and exaggerated. If all 
 the unit characters were desirable this would not be ob- 
 jectionable ; indeed it would be highly beneficial for good 
 unit characters to come from both sides and be duplex, 
 but since no one is free from some undesirable unit char- 
 acter this is likely to become duplex and to appear in the 
 child in an exaggerated form. This is the ground for 
 the ban placed on the marriage of first cousins. If each 
 possess only favourable unit characters there can be no 
 objection to such marriages. Some excellent families 
 have come from first cousins, but this is more likely 
 due to the fact that the dominant characters In each have 
 come from other than the common stock. On the 
 whole, in-breeding is to be condemned, the evidence 
 against it being so plainly seen In certain Isolated locali- 
 ties. There are many factors which tend to in-breed- 
 
64 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 ing. One is geographical isolation, such as islands and " 
 mountain ranges. Davenport has pointed out the ill 
 effects of close intermarriage on the islands and penin- 
 sulas of our Atlantic coast. Other factors are social 
 status, language and religion. One of the causes of 
 the marked degeneracy among the Southern Italians is 
 the fact that they are broken up into small communities 
 and have been isolated for so long that the dialect of 
 one group is not intelligible to that of a relatively near- 
 by community. Those in each group intelrmarry and 
 have done so for so long that the undesirable unit char- 
 acters have been exaggerated to such an extent as to 
 render the people decidedly inferior. Even among the 
 foreigners who have come to this country language re- 
 mains for one generation at least, as a barrier to wide 
 acquaintance and favours in-breeding. Religion has 
 had a similar effect. 
 
 While in-breeding is to be condemned it is equally cer- 
 tain that interracial marriages produce an undesirable 
 progeny. The Eurasians of India, the mulattos of our 
 own country, and the mixed races of South America and 
 neighbouring islands are unanswerable arguments 
 against race mixtures. The bad of each side becomes 
 dominant, and the mongrel whether man or beast, is no 
 credit to the pure blood on either side of the house. 
 
 Every normal individual from untainted stock should 
 prepare for the responsibility of parenthood. Some are 
 influenced by the hope of personal immortality; some 
 may be led to right living by the rewards promised in 
 another and better world ; some may be restrained from 
 evil by the fear of eternal punishment, but all should 
 know that each generation begets the succeeding one. 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 65 
 
 and that like breeds like with the possibility of better- 
 ment on the one hand and of deterioration on the other. 
 Our children and their descendants through generations 
 to come, with modifications coming in in each generation 
 will bear at least some of our characteristics. If we 
 are healthy they are likely to be. If we are strong 
 mentally and morally they will receive through inherit- 
 ance more or less of our strength. If we meet every 
 problem in life courageously and honestly they will find 
 it all the easier to perform their duties with credit to 
 tTiemselves and with benefit to others of the same gen- 
 eration. Every deviation from the path of rectitude 
 made by us will make it more difficult for them to keep 
 to the straight road. This is the teaching of science, 
 and is it not the highest conceivable incentive to make 
 ourselves strong in every proper direction ? The young 
 man or woman who neglects his or her opportunities 
 of self-betterment is doing an injury not only to self but 
 to those whose thread of life is for the time in their 
 keeping. Moreover, our influence on the future is to 
 have its effects not only on our direct line, but upon 
 those about us, and through them upon their descend- 
 ants. No man can live to himself alone, but each is a 
 part of the whole and the perfection of the whole de- 
 pends upon its parts. 
 
 I am compelled at this point to make a direct appeal 
 to the young women. Do not marry a man of bad 
 habits with the hope of reforming him. Even if you 
 succeed in this attempt, which most frequently fails, 
 you will likely bear children who will repeat the faults 
 of their father. Doii't marry any man unless you wish 
 your children to be like him. In fact women have been 
 
66 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 and are now, quite unconsciously for the most part, the 
 stronger eugenic power as between the sexes. Learned 
 statisticians have shown that the average length of life 
 is greater among married men than among unmarried 
 men, and this has been taken as proof that the conjugal 
 state favours longevity. This conclusion is not, how- 
 ever, the only one which may be drawn from the facts. 
 While some splendid men remain single from choice, 
 many remain in this state because no woman will marry 
 them. It follows therefore that the average married 
 man not only enjoys greater longevity, but is superior 
 in every particular to the average unmarried man, be- 
 cause in the latter group are included all those who on 
 account of obvious defects are excluded from the former 
 group. The same holds true between married and 
 unmarried women, and for like reason. There is one 
 striking and regrettable way in which man often fails to 
 show himself a eugenist. This I regard as so im- 
 portant and vital to racial welfare that I must be per- 
 mitted to go into some detail. The female moron, es- 
 pecially when of high grade and in early womanhood, 
 is often very attractive. Her face has the doll-like love- 
 liness so fatal to the susceptible man. In form and car- 
 riage she is to her admirer a goddess. He interprets her 
 weak-mindedness as maidenly innocence, and he says to 
 himself, sometimes to others, " She is the daintiest, 
 sweetest, most innocent creature in the world. She never 
 suspects anything wrong and she loves me so dearly 
 that she would do anything I might ask. She is my 
 darling little girl." It is true she is a " little girl," 
 and she will never be anything more. Mentally she 
 never grows beyond " sweet sixteen." She is an ani- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 67 
 
 mated doll and, like her prototype, the bloom on her 
 cheek will soon fade and her gay raiment will soon be- 
 come tawdry. Many a young man of good stock and of 
 excellent personality falls a victim to the bewitching 
 moron girl. Her vine-like clinging love will entwine 
 her admirer or any other post within her reach. 
 
 I was once enjoying an after dinner talk with a 
 great man, one who has achieved more than a national 
 reputation, and I led him to speak of himself and of 
 his family. With much animation and with pardon- 
 able pride he spoke of his ancestry, but as he turned 
 from the past to the future his face grew sad and his 
 voice tremulous as he said : " But when a man has 
 sons some one of them is pretty sure to marry a silly 
 girl and then the family name will go to pot." 
 
 Social duty has compelled me more than once to wit- 
 ness the marriage of such a butterfly with a high grade 
 man, and when the beautiful ceremony reached the 
 words: " If any man can show just cause why they 
 may not lawfully be joined together," etc., I have been 
 compelled to suppress the desire to cry out against the 
 outrage. 
 
 Every family physician of years of experience and 
 observation knows how disastrously such marriages 
 end. Let me briefly sketch the outlines of one instance. 
 Some forty years ago a brilliant young man of high 
 character met, admired and wed such a girl as I am de- 
 scribing. Both were poor, but this was an advantage 
 rather than otherwise. For his profession he was un- 
 usually equipped both by nature and by nurture. He 
 had bright dreams and the ability to weave the gossamer 
 of their structure into real fibre. But there was one 
 
68 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 picture in his dreams as he istood at the altar with his 
 fair bride, which no power on earth could ever bring to 
 realisation. He dreamed of winning a competency, if 
 not a fortune, of becoming a leader among men, of 
 professional fame, of rendering the highest and best 
 service to his fellow man, and the central figure in all 
 these visions of the future was a wife of whom he 
 should always be proud, who should stand by his side, 
 at all times his equal and who should bear to him 
 strong, manly sons and fair, intelligent daughters. He 
 won more than competency; there Was no oiEcial posi- 
 tion within the gift of his state which was not within his 
 reach; his professional service was sought by both rich 
 and the poor; from the one he demanded and received 
 liberal compensation, to the other he gave time and 
 labour cheerfully and gratuitously. Living, he was 
 honoured and beloved, now dead, his memory is held in 
 the highest esteem. All these victories he won and at 
 the same time he carried a heavy load. His wife never 
 grew mentally. He bought and read the choicest books. 
 She dusted and arranged them on the shelves, but of 
 their contents she was as ignorant as she was of He- 
 brew. Intelligent men and women sat at their table, 
 but their conversation was beyond her comprehension. 
 His most intimate friend never heard from him a word 
 indicating that he recognised any inequality between 
 himself and his wife. To her he was only kind, gentle 
 and considerate, but when he entered his own home 
 smiles fled from his face, and his voice lost much of 
 its charm. To this union there came three sons. The 
 eldest even with the help of private tutors was never 
 able to finish the high school course. In early man- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 69 
 
 hood he married a fellow moron, and they are now 
 multiplying their kind on a farm given by the father. 
 The second is more intelligent; after a university career, 
 broken by drunken sprees, he managed to secure a de- 
 gree, and now occupies his father's office, but not his 
 position in life. The third is hardly able to take care 
 of himself. 
 
 I speak with some feeling on this subject, because I 
 have known former students of mine to tie these mill- 
 stones about their necks, and then try to keep on the 
 surface of the sea of life. After vain struggles most 
 of them sink out of sight. To the young men of my 
 audience I wish to say, " Shun the attractive, frivolous 
 girl." She is found in nearly every community. The 
 object of the eugenist is not to multiply her kind, but 
 to exterminate her. 
 
 There is another anti-eugenic condition in this coun- 
 try which calls for plain talk. I refer to class distinc- 
 tion as a bar to proper marriage. But says one, we 
 have no social classes in this country. This Is not true. 
 Class distinctions exist in this and all other countries, 
 and probably always will. To a certain extent they 
 may be desirable, but the one to which I especially refer 
 at this time is on a' wrong basis. That basis is money. 
 The daughters of the rich are for the most part deserv- 
 ing of sympathy. They live so luxuriously that no self- 
 respecting American young man can afford to approach 
 one of them with matrimonial intentions. His total in- 
 come would not suffice to keep her in pin money, and 
 many such women have to find some man who is willing 
 to live a parasitic life, feeding on her wealth, and the 
 American young man worthy of parenthood is, as a rule. 
 
70 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 not willing to do this. He has not been bred to that 
 kind of life, and the poor girl often is compelled to find 
 a fool for a husband, be he a foreign one with title, or 
 a native without, and in either case she seems doomed 
 to become the mother of fools. The daily chronicles 
 of current events supply numerous illustrations and there 
 is no need for me to say more on this point, only to add 
 that in my opinion this defect is not confined to the 
 daughters of the ultra-rich. Those of many of the 
 moderately well-to-do live so expensively, idly and 
 vainly that they repel rather than attract proper suitors. 
 A young man once confided to a friend, saying: " Were 
 it not for one thing I would long ago have declared my- 
 self the slave of a certain young lady (well known to 
 both), but when I see that bird of paradise on her hat 
 I hesitate. Think of its cost, but more deterrent than 
 the cost is the fact that I cannot help thinking that one 
 who plumes herself with so characteristic an ensign of 
 savagery must still contain within herself a large rem- 
 nant of the barbarian." 
 
 It may be asked what kind of development best fits 
 for parenthood. It is man's nervous system which 
 has made him the lord of creation. In size, in muscu- 
 lar strength, in fleetness, in physical endurance he is sur- 
 passed my many animals. Even in his special senses 
 his development is not equal to that of many animals. 
 The vision of certain birds of prey penetrates distances 
 through which man could distinguish nothing. His 
 sense of smell is imperfect compared with that of his 
 dog. Man differs from, and is superior to, all other 
 animals in the evolution of his nervous system, the most 
 perfect product of nature's biological laboratory. The 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 71 
 
 Superman, when he Is established on earth, will not 
 radically differ from his progenitors in size, height, 
 muscularity or blood supply, but his nervous system will 
 be more highly developed. There are those who seem 
 to think that race regeneration is to be found in athletic 
 training. This is fallacious and even dangerous. 
 Overdevelopment of muscle makes in the long run for 
 weakness rather than strength. Man needs a strong 
 frame, properly developed muscles and good circulatory 
 apparatus, because all these are essential to his nervous 
 system. Even in his barbaric state, man's superiority 
 was determined not by brawn, but by brain. This has 
 held through every stage of his development, and will 
 continue. It has always been and always will be, intelli- 
 gence against brute force. Had it not been for superior 
 intellect the genus homo would long ago have disap- 
 peared in the contest with fellow creatures, extremes of 
 temperature and scarcity of food. Man comes into the 
 world the most helpless of all animals, and with one or 
 two exceptions he has the lowest birth rate, and yet he 
 has gained dominion over the earth and all that is 
 therein. With growth in intelligence the birth rate falls, 
 but this is quite compensated for by a lessened death rate 
 and increased longevity. The eugenlst is concerned with 
 quality more than quantity, and he agrees with Emer- 
 son who said: " Make your nation consist of knaves 
 and it is but the case of any other vermin — the more 
 the worse; " or as Ruskin wrote: " It is a matter of 
 no final concern to any parent whether he shall have two 
 children or four; but matter of quite final concern 
 whether those he has shall, or shall not, deserve to be 
 hanged." 
 
72 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 What is the measure by which we may decide that 
 one man is better than another ? In what direction and 
 for what purpose shall we strive for the betterment of 
 the race? In improving the breeds of the lower ani- 
 mals, some one trait is selected and developed. In this 
 way, draft, carriage and racehorses have been devel- 
 oped. The varieties of dogs evolved from the original 
 are as numerous as the fancy of man has dictated. 
 Some fruits are developed because of size, others for 
 flavour, and still others for form. What traits in man 
 are to be evolved through the efforts of the eugenist? 
 There is no call for a race of athletes because, as we 
 have seen, over-development of muscle is to be avoided. 
 Some say, let us develop for intellect and leave all other 
 traits out of consideration, but many men of intellect 
 prostitute their gift to the basest purposes. It is said 
 that the most liberally rewarded legal talent in this coun- 
 try is that which is employed in keeping high-grade 
 thieves, generally known as great financiers, out of 
 prison. 
 
 The Superman is to be healthy and intellectual, but 
 the standard of measurement will be neither of these. 
 It will be civic, worth, and what do we mean by this? 
 We mean the service he renders his fellowman. An 
 efficient man is one who supports himself and contributes 
 something to the welfare of the race. To beget and 
 rear children worthy of him is to make such a contribu- 
 tion. " Good breeding " as used by the eugenist does 
 not mean polish of manner, ability to behave properly 
 on all occasions, to dress in fashion, to use French 
 phrases, etc., as desirable as these qualifications may be. 
 It implies the desire, energy and ability to render social 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 73 
 
 service, to make the world better, be it ever so little, to 
 make his life a blessing to others. 
 
 The eugenist does not propose that marriage selec- 
 tions shall be determined by statute, but it does propose 
 to so educate the young that selections shall be made on 
 more rational grounds than is now too frequently the 
 case. The eugenist does not aim to abolish or de- 
 grade the institution of marriage, but does aim to in- 
 culcate the idea that marriage is the highest, holiest 
 of institutions, so holy that he who dishonours it shall 
 be counted worse than an infidel. It does not teach, as 
 Plato did, that no mother shall know or nurse her child, 
 but that every mother shall love and nurse her child. 
 It is no free love scheme, for that would lead to phys- 
 ical, mental and moral debasement. It does not pro- 
 pose to abolish the family, but to bind its members to- 
 gether by stronger ties of a more rational love. 
 
 The eugenist will endeavour to induce the State to 
 aid in the evolution of the Superman by the following 
 methods: By restricting the reproduction of the ob- 
 viously undesirable. It is even now a crime by statute 
 in this State for an individual of one sex to infect one 
 of the other with a venereal disease, whether the rela- 
 tion between the two be that of husband and wife or 
 not. However, such a statute is at present without 
 other than educational value. Inasmuch as the pre- 
 vention of crime is much wiser than permitting and 
 then punishing it, the State will go further and demand 
 that marriage be permitted only to those free from 
 these diseases. Even this may at first have but little 
 more than educational value, but it will soon be recog- 
 nised as a wise provision, and honourable people will 
 
74 in. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 voluntarily comply with it, and failure to comply with 
 it will be regarded as a social disgrace. The declara- 
 tion of Dean Summer of Chicago that no marriage will 
 be solemnised in his church unless both parties show 
 by medical certification that they are fit for parenthood 
 will accomplish quite as much as legal enactment. It 
 will come to pass that every wise man and woman will 
 undergo a medical examination once or oftener each 
 year, to ascertain whether they are sound or not. 
 Others will follow this wise example and preventive 
 medicine will prove the greatest factor in the evolution 
 of the Superman. In woricing out this problem the 
 State must supply expert medical advice, because this 
 opportunity must be open to poor and rich alike, and 
 the medical man must be the servant of the State for it 
 will be for the public good that such a service will be 
 rendered. No two consecutive examinations will be 
 made by the same physician, and the record of each 
 examination will be an official document. An abnor- 
 mal condition overlooked through carelessness or lack 
 of skill by one medical officer will be detected in subse- 
 quent examinations. In this way the effects of both 
 heredity and environment will be detected early, and 
 if they be bad the proper remedy will be at hand. 
 
 The State will not permit the reproduction of the 
 weak-minded, the insane, the alcoholic and the crim- 
 inal, and will deny parenthood to those suffering from 
 diseases which cripple offspring. This prohibition will 
 be enforced by segregation or by sterilization, or by 
 both. Already the sterilization of certain classes under 
 certain restrictions has been legalised in eight States, 
 and in one the operation has been performed upon 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 75 
 
 more than seven hundred individuals. The State has 
 the right to protect its honest citizens against those 
 that are evil, and no one can deny that the multiplica- 
 tion of the classes mentioned above and specified by 
 the law is an evil. In order to secure protection 
 against the evil doer, the State may and does often take 
 his life; may it not therefore render him incompetent 
 to reproduce his kind? Besides, it is the opinion of 
 competent men who have observed the effects of this 
 operation that it has a salutary effect upon the individ- 
 ual thus treated. For many reasons segregation is 
 better than sterilisation, the chief objection being the 
 greater cost, but the cost of this method, as great as it 
 would be, is much less than we now bear from the un- 
 restricted multiplication of these classes, the members 
 of which occupy our courts, necessitate a large police 
 expenditure, and fill our reformatories, asylums and 
 penal institutions. At present the bad multiplies and 
 the good is contaminated. Crime breeds in our midst. 
 We enact and attempt to enforce laws against it while 
 we permit it to grow and scatter its seeds year by year. 
 Here in this university town, there are children doomed 
 by birth and environment to be prostitutes and crim- 
 inals. The atmosphere in which they live is as fatal to 
 good citizenship as the temperature of the north pole 
 would be to the growth of tropical fruits. Specific 
 details are not suitable to this address, but can be sup- 
 plied if desired. The State is doing something in the 
 way of encouraging positive eugenics, and it will do 
 more when our legislators more fully comprehend the 
 higher purposes of government. The public school, 
 imperfect as it is, is a potent factor in race betterment. 
 
76 III. VAUGHAN: EUGENICS 
 
 To its support all must contribute, each in proportion 
 to his means. The rich help to educate the poor and 
 the childless bear a small part in preparing the coming 
 generation for its duties. The public school must and 
 will be improved. More attention will be given to the 
 sanitation of school houses and medical and dental in- 
 spection of the children constitutes an important move 
 in the right direction. Instruction in hygiene, includ- 
 ing that of sex, will be of great benefit. Leibnitz said : 
 " Permit me to direct the instruction of the children, 
 and I will change the world in a hundred years." It 
 seems to be conceded now that every grade of instruc- 
 tion from the primary through the university should 
 be within the reach of the poorest, provided he has the 
 ability to profit by it. This is true not only of basic 
 and general instruction but of expert training as well. 
 Less than fifty years ago it was still denied by many 
 that the State should train farmers, engineers, lawyers, 
 physicians, etc., but now it is generally admitted that 
 the development of efficient men and women is not only 
 a function of the State, but a profitable one. Voca- 
 tional education must be extended and must have its 
 roots in the primary and secondary schools. In these 
 grades evidence of degenerative tendencies must be 
 detected and the fit and unfit separated. It is worse 
 than idle to keep the normal and abnormal in the same 
 classes and try to force the latter to keep pace with the 
 former. Beyond a certain point in intelligence the 
 moron cannot go. 
 
 Sickness, especially infectious disease, Imposes a 
 heavy burden upon those who are parents, consequently 
 preventive medicine is a potent factor in the nature and 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSICIAN 77 
 
 nurture of generations. Even those of the best stock 
 become less fit for parenthood when infected with tu- 
 berculosis, scarlet fever and sequelae, poliomyelitis, 
 etc. It may be that the defects induced by these dis- 
 eases are not transmitted to their offspring, but that 
 they do not contribute to improve parenthood must be 
 admitted. More than two centuries ago Descartes said 
 that the regeneration and development of man must 
 come through preventive medicine, and the experiences 
 of the generations that have come and gone since that 
 time confirm his statement. The suppression of dis- 
 eases, both those that are transmissible from parent to 
 child and those which affect directly only one genera- 
 tion is a state problem, and must be solved by the State. 
 I include here as diseases, not only the microbic infec- 
 tions, but feeble-mindedness, alcoholism, insanity, sex- 
 ual perversion and criminality. 
 
 To deny the possibility of race betterment is the 
 worst form of infidelity; it means to be without faith 
 in self, in fellowmen and in the creator. To fail to 
 work for it is to neglect the highest duty. Race bet- 
 terment, which of course includes and depends upon 
 self-betterment, should influence our daily lives, form a 
 basis for our ethical judgments, determine our political 
 activities, and be a strong motive in our religion. 
 
IV 
 EUGENICS AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 
 
 ' PROFESSOR WILLIAM HENRY HOWELL 
 
 In his essay upon Evolution and Ethics, Huxley calls 
 our attention in his vigorous and attractive manner to 
 the antagonism that exists between the inner factors 
 tending toward the development of man's moral na- 
 ture, and those processes in the outer world which im- 
 pose upon him a struggle for existence. He designates 
 the two modes of evolution as the ethical process and 
 the cosmical process respectively, and he develops at 
 length his belief that in their action upon man they 
 work toward different ends. The conflict that he pic- 
 tures is familiar to all of us for it is in fact nothing 
 more than the ancient and unending strife between our 
 animal instincts and our moral nature, the struggle be- 
 tween the old Adam and the new. 
 
 Nature deals with living things in a large handed 
 extravagant fashion, and her methods are justified, if 
 we may use such a term, by the conditions of the prob- 
 lem. There is nothing in this world of ours so irre- 
 pressible as life — it tends to multiply itself, at the 
 expense of inorganic nature, with almost incredible 
 rapidity. The tiny infusoria in a pool of water, the 
 insects that inhabit the earth, the fish of the sea and 
 the birds of the air, if they were provided with favour- 
 able conditions and were protected from enemies 
 would, any of them, quickly possess the earth. They 
 
 78 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 79 
 
 are held in bounds by the cosmical process which so 
 far as living forms are concerned consists essentially, 
 in Galton's phrase, " in excessive production and whole- 
 sale destruction." Given the extraordinary fertility 
 of living things a practical balance can be maintained 
 only by the restraining influence of an equally gener- 
 ous mortality. 
 
 By means of the sifting process of selection Nature 
 has been working upon animals for untold ages and has 
 been creating those forms which are best fitted to meet 
 the conditions as they exist. Man has been trained in 
 this competitive struggle. He owes his supremacy as a 
 race mainly to the greater development of his brain and 
 the resulting increase in wisdom which has enabled him 
 to overcome his enemies from without, whether en- 
 vironmental or animal. He has used the same power- 
 ful weapon in the struggle with his fellowman, first 
 of all for the means of existence and later under civil- 
 ised conditions for the means of enjoyment. But in 
 man along with his increase in mental power there has 
 been going on the development of a moral sense which 
 finds itself out of harmony with Nature's principle of 
 the survival of the fittest; which in place of self-asser- 
 tion and self-aggrandisement teaches self-repression and 
 self-sacrifice ; which bids us to protect the weak and to 
 succour the unfortunate ; which sets up in fact an Ideal 
 of conduct toward our fellowman that is at variance 
 with the lessons impressed upon us by the struggle for 
 existence. This process of evolution of our moral na- 
 ture has been in progress from the dawn of civilisation. 
 In its full fruition it promises a time when the earth 
 shall belong to the meek in heart rather than to the 
 
8o IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 strong and crafty. It Is needless to say that we are 
 not yet within measurable distance of this millennial 
 state of existence, but it is equally certain that the 
 aspirations of civilised humanity look in that direction, 
 and when we compare our state with that of less civil- 
 ised peoples or indeed with that of our remote an- 
 cestors we are justified in beheving that some sensible 
 progress has been made. 
 
 It is not necessary perhaps to enlarge further upon 
 this point; I have made use of it simply to emphasise 
 the fact that mankind has proposed to itself certain 
 standards of conduct which are opposed to those that 
 Nature would seem to teach us are necessary to our 
 preservation. In this as in other matters man has not 
 submitted passively, like the beasts of the field, to the 
 order of Nature. By virtue of his intelligence he un- 
 derstands something of the methods of selection em- 
 ployed by Nature and he has applied his knowledge to 
 protect himself from being an unwilling victim to their 
 action. Whether or not he will be forever successful, 
 who can tell? At this period In the evolution of our 
 world man is the favoured form of animal life, but it 
 may not always be so. In the procession of the great 
 year, as Huxley expresses it, at some point In that cos- 
 mic cycle whose immense sweep we bub dimly compre- 
 hend, there may come a downward trend, a tendency 
 toward retrogressive changes in the physical surround- 
 ings for which man will be less fitted than some In- 
 ferior forms of life, but In which he may save his race 
 by his intelligent control of the forces and processes of 
 nature. Already he has used his knowledge success- 
 fully to oppose those environmental conditions which 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 8i 
 
 tend to limit his productivity. He not only prays that 
 a higher power may deliver him from tempest and 
 lightning, from pestilence and plague, from famine 
 and sudden death, but he has exerted all of his knowl- 
 edge to devise ways of delivering himself, and not with- 
 out a large degree of success. It is stated that in the 
 twelfth century the average expectation of life was but 
 little over twenty years. Disease and famine and war 
 cut down life at such a rate that the new-born child 
 could hope to live for only two decades. In our own 
 times the average expectation of life has been pro- 
 longed, in the most civilised communities, to forty-five 
 or fifty years — and we know that if we choose at any 
 time to make full and intelligent use of the knowledge 
 even now at our command we can still further safe- 
 guard our lives against the destructive agencies that 
 threaten us from all sides. Preventive medicine and all 
 other humanitarian mechanisms are but expressions of 
 the development of our moral nature, and it is safe 
 to say that mankind will continue always to approve 
 such tendencies and will strive to reach higher and 
 higher planes of moral excellence, unless indeed some 
 cataclysm of nature should reduce him again to a feral 
 state and revive the old savage struggle for mere ex- 
 istence. 
 
 Knowledge or science has done more than simply to 
 defend human life from the assaults of nature. By 
 means of education and hygiene and all the other 
 agencies of civilisation it has striven to improve the. 
 quality of the individual from a physical, mental and 
 moral standpoint, to make him more fit to maintain his 
 position as an independent unit in the competition of 
 
82 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 life, and above all to make him more fit as a social 
 unit in a race striving to realise the ideals set by our 
 moral nature. To this work humanitarians of all kinds 
 have devoted themselves with increasing enthusiasm 
 and at no time in our history have their efforts been 
 more intense and more wide-spread than at present. 
 No one is justified in minimising the enormous influ- 
 ence for good, as we see the good, which may be ex- 
 erted upon an individual by bringing him under favour- 
 able conditions of environment. The hope of human- 
 ity lies in this direction and we may not place any nar- 
 row limits upon the results that are to be expected. 
 
 But there is another consideration, another factor, 
 which we may reasonably hope to use for the benefit of 
 our race, as an accessory instrument to aid its develop- 
 ment under the laws of the ethical process. The 
 gardener, to use Huxley's metaphor, who is endeavour- 
 ing to raise certain kinds of fruits or flowers in ac- 
 cordance with his ideals of utility or beauty, not only 
 seeks to protect his plants from the competition of Na- 
 ture's lusty weeds and to give them the best of soil and 
 nourishment, but he strives also to select the best stock 
 that is attainable for the purpose he has in view. 
 Now in this garden of humanity which we hope to de- 
 velop according to certain ideals presented to us by our 
 ethical nature can we not also use this last method? 
 Can we not to some extent choose between the good 
 and the bad stock in humanity, and devise some method, 
 humane in character, which shall favour the perpetua- 
 tion of the good strains and the elimination of the bad? 
 This as I understand it is the province of eugenics. 
 The term is defined ofiicially as " the study of agencies 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 83 
 
 under social control that may improve or impair the 
 racial qualities of future generations either physically 
 or mentally." This is a wide definition that may in- 
 clude efforts to improve mankind by modifications of 
 his environment as well as by control of his produc- 
 tivity, but as specifically defined by Galton the objects of 
 eugenics are twofold: To check the birth-rate of the 
 unfit and to further the multiplication of the fit, the 
 terms fit and unfit being used, it will be noted, not only 
 in reference to the test of the cosmical process, but in 
 relation also to our ideals of what is most worthy to 
 survive as measured by our moral standards. The 
 term eugenics is comparatively new but the idea con- 
 veyed by the term is no doubt very old. The modern 
 conception of evolution in which so much stress is laid 
 upon natural selection has served to bring the idea more 
 prominently to the front in recent times. The suc- 
 cessful results obtained in the breeding of animals and 
 plants must have suggested to many minds the pos- 
 sibility of applying similar methods to the betterment 
 of mankind. By judicious selection and mating the 
 breeder is able to develop in animals or plants those 
 characteristics of structure or function which seem to 
 him desirable. As an abstract proposition there can 
 be no doubt that results of the same character might 
 be obtained in the human race, were it possible to try 
 the experiment, and without doubt many sincere spirits 
 have hoped that some procedure might be devised to 
 realise the benefits promised by such methods. There 
 is, however, a great difference between speculating 
 about such matters and actually formulating or advo- 
 cating specific regulations to carry them into effect. 
 
84 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 It is interesting to find that the leading biologists in 
 the preceding generation were not willing to admit 
 the feasibility of plans suggested for this purpose, 
 Huxley in the essay which I have been quoting does 
 not hesitate to express his entire scepticism in regard 
 to the practicability of such schemes — and indeed for 
 two reasons. In the first place because " no mere hu- 
 man being will ever possess enough intelligence to 
 select the fittest " and, as a sort of corollary to this 
 general proposition, because all such efforts must re- 
 sult in a " weake;iing or destruction of the bonds which 
 hold society together." Perhaps in making this lat- 
 ter objection Huxley may have borne in mind the out- 
 come of the legendary Spartan system of selection. 
 If we may believe the accounts that have come down 
 to us the authorities in that old Laconian city did at- 
 tempt under the Lycurgean system to breed a race ac- 
 cording to certain ideals of what they considered the 
 best. The " points " that they wished to develop 
 were beauty and strength of body and courage. They 
 paid but little attention to the cultivation of the mind 
 or the development of the moral nature, and we may 
 imagine that had their experiment been permitted to 
 go on longer than was the case it must inevitably have 
 resulted in disaster. For even at their own game of 
 war what would it have profited them to have bred a 
 race of heroes and giants, if other nations more at- 
 tentive to things of the mind had developed scholars 
 able to understand and use the forces of nature. No 
 mere human strength or courage can withstand the ex- 
 plosive force of gunpowder. Assuming that the ac- 
 counts are correct we can understand that the Spartans 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 85 
 
 made an experiment upon themselves without sufficient 
 warrant of knowledge. The question before our gen- 
 eration is whether our knowledge to-day places us in 
 a better position to interfere wisely in the matter of 
 human propagation. 
 
 As far back as 1865 Galton advocated a moderate 
 plan of eugenics which seemed to him to be justified 
 by the knowledge and experience of the times, but he 
 complains, in his autobiography, that he was not able 
 to interest his contemporaries, not enough of them at 
 least to give the movement any serious significance. 
 At this present time the ideas that he then suggested 
 have taken a strong hold upon the imagination of many 
 persons, in the public at large as well as in scientific 
 circles. There is in progress a world-wide discussion 
 of the possibility of the practical application of eu- 
 genics, and we may anticipate that something will 
 come out of this agitation, something that will influ- 
 ence directly the welfare of mankind, even the destinies 
 of nations. 
 
 It is interesting to inquire what has caused this 
 change in attitude. The answer is to be found I be- 
 lieve in the outcome of modern investigations upon 
 heredity. It has always been known that the offspring 
 inherits the physical peculiarities of the parents, and 
 in late years Pearson has produced specific evidence to 
 show that the same conclusion is justified in regard to 
 the transmission of mental and moral characteristics, 
 but the whole trend of recent biological investigation 
 has served to magnify the importance of heredity in 
 determining the fundamental characteristics of each 
 individual. Two beliefs or generalisations which have 
 
86 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 crystallised out of the work of many investigators are 
 especially significant in this connection. One is the 
 theory of the continuity of the germ-plasm, the other 
 is the so-called Mendelian law or laws in regard to in- 
 heritance in cross-breeding. By germ-plasm is meant 
 the special protoplasm or living matter of the germ- 
 cells, and by the phrase continuity of the germ-plasm 
 we mean to convey the belief that the material consti- 
 tuting the germ-cells in each individual is derived di- 
 rectly from the germ-plasm of the parents. The 
 microscopic bit of material from which you or I de- 
 veloped was not constructed wholly anew in the bodies 
 of our parents, it was a fragment — so to speak — of 
 the material out of which their bodies were made, and 
 so on down the ancestral tree. The germ-plasm 
 passes direct from generation to generation, carrying 
 with it inherent powers and characteristics of develop- 
 ment. In each generation a part develops into the 
 body of an individual and a part is reserved for trans- 
 mission under favourable conditions, to succeeding 
 generations. The germ-plasm of the human race is 
 like a great river which has broken into countless 
 streams. The water in each goes back to a common 
 source and there has been no interruption of direct con- 
 tinuity. What each individual develops into there- 
 fore is largely determined by the characteristics of the 
 particular strain to which he belongs. Our character- 
 istics in fact are not personal property (Davenport) 
 but are inherent in the stock. We possess them dur- 
 ing our life-time, but if we have children we must pass 
 them on, in part, for, figuratively speaking, they are 
 entailed upon our descendants by nature and can not 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 87 
 
 be wholly alienated. The so-called law or laws of 
 Mendel we owe to Gregor Mendel, Abbott of Briinn 
 in Silesia who discovered them in the course of some 
 experimental work upon the effects of cross-breeding 
 in the common garden-pea. His results were pub- 
 lished in 1865, but failed to attract the attention of the 
 biologists of that time. The facts noted by him were 
 re-discovered in 1900 by three independent investi- 
 gators and have since occupied a large place in the 
 work upon heredity. The fundamental points 
 brought out in this work are that what we call simple 
 characteristics are transmitted as units from parent to 
 offspring, and that these units are conveyed by definite 
 substances or structures In the germ-plasm. The sub- 
 stances, of whatever nature they may be, which serve 
 as the carriers of the unit characters are designated 
 usually as determiners or unit factors. In the germ- 
 cells of the parents these unit factors are sorted out or 
 segregated, and In the union of the male and female 
 germ-cells which gives rise to a new individual the com- 
 bination of the factors takes place In a predictable 
 fashion, when large numbers are considered. These 
 ideas may be illustrated by a simple case taken from 
 the excellent little popular book on evolution by Good- 
 rich. Two individuals of the snap-dragon family 
 were crossed, one representing a constant race with 
 crimson flowers and one a constant race with white 
 flowers. The results of this cross were all hybrids 
 with pink flowers. If now two of the hybrids were 
 bred together the colour characteristic separated out In 
 accordance with the law of Mendel — }i oi the off- 
 spring bore true crimson flowers, J4 pu^e white flowers 
 
88 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 and % showed the hybrid pink. The explanation of 
 this proportion depends upon the fact that the colour 
 factors were segregated in the germ-cells of the hy- 
 brids, as may be illustrated in the following diagram. 
 
 Pollen Ovule 
 
 P (Pollen) 
 
 Ovule 
 
 P (Ovule) 
 
 Possible combinations 
 
 I and 3 = pure white 
 
 1 and 4 = hybrid WC or pink 
 
 2 and 3 = hybrid WC or pink 
 2 and 4 = pure crimson 
 
 Experiments in breeding as well as the experience 
 obtained from observations upon natural propagation 
 indicate that the two fundamental ideas of transmis- 
 sion of characteristics by unit factors and the segrega- 
 tion of these factors in the germ-cells are probably cor- 
 rect. The problem is not always, not usually in fact, 
 so simple as in the illustration given above. Experi- 
 ence has shown that apparently simple characteristics, 
 colour for example, may be dependent for transmis- 
 sion upon the combined effect of several unit factors, 
 and it becomes necessary in such cases to unravel the 
 separate influence of each factor by careful breeding 
 experiments. The Mendelian law gives however a 
 leading idea by means of which intelligent experimenta- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 89 
 
 tion may be carried out upon a subject that otherwise 
 would be enveloped in the obscurity of altogether mys- 
 terious processes. As an instance of the advantages 
 which have followed upon the application of these laws 
 I may refer briefly to the cases of so-called sex-limited 
 inheritance. There are certain peculiarities or defects 
 in inheritance which seem to be associated definitely 
 with the property of sex. In mankind for instance we 
 have under this head such conditions as colour blind- 
 ness and hemophilia, which exhibit themselves usually 
 only in the male. The condition known as hemophilia 
 is characterised by a defective power of coagulation 
 in the blood. It affects chiefly the male and it is a 
 serious condition, since even slight injuries may result 
 in death from hemorrhage. Clinical experience indi- 
 cates that in those affected with this trouble something 
 like 80 to 90 per cent, die from hemorrhage before 
 reaching adult life. The condition is inherited, but 
 the mode of transmission is criss-cross, or as it has 
 been expressed, after the manner of the Knight's move 
 in chess. The affected male transmits his defect to his 
 grandsons through his daughters. His own sons or 
 daughters do not exhibit the abnormality, but the 
 daughters have or may have the factor upon which it 
 depends present in latent or inhibited form in their 
 germ plasm and thus transmit it to their sons. If we 
 assume that the factor or defective factor responsible 
 for this condition is associated with a structure known 
 as the sex-chromosome in the germ-cells of the male it 
 is possible, in accordance with the Mendelian law, to 
 predict that neither the sons of a hemophilic man nor 
 any of their descendants will show this abnormal char- 
 
go IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 acteristic, while the daughters will be likely to trans- 
 mit the defect to one-half of their sons, and, if they 
 have daughters, to pass c)n to a certain proportion of 
 them the possibility of further transmission. So far 
 as the facts are known in regard to this dangerous in- 
 heritance they accord very well with this prediction. 
 The understanding which we now possess of the 
 mechanisms involved places it in our power, if we so 
 desire, to eliminate this condition entirely by prevent- 
 ing the marriage of the daughters of a hemophilic man, 
 or, more simply, by rendering the hemophilic male in- 
 fertile by the process of so-called sterilization. Fortu- 
 nately this particular condition is relatively rare so that 
 the community as a whole need not perhaps take cog- 
 nisance of it as a serious menace to the race. But for 
 the individual who suffers from this defect or for the 
 daughters of such an individual it is certainly a grave 
 question whether or not they should permit themselves 
 to bring children into this world handicapped by a_^func- 
 tional disorder that subjects them to the constant 
 danger of death by accident. I fancy that If these 
 facts were placed before Intelligent and not wholly 
 egotistical Individuals of this class, most of them would 
 accept the logical conclusion and would refrain from 
 marriage or from procreation, but upon the ignorant, 
 or upon that group of intelligent persons who are 
 prejudiced against scientific knowledge and believe that 
 it is Impious for man to attempt to deal rationally with 
 the mysteries of life, evidence of this kind would prob- 
 ably have but little effect. If the condition were suf- 
 ficiently widespread it would be necessary for the 
 public to take some decisive action, and for Its own pro- 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 91 
 
 tection as well as for the sake of the innocent sufferers 
 to impose such legal restrictions as would prevent the 
 propagation of the inheritance. 
 
 We have in this case an example of how the idea 
 of eugenics may be applied for the benefit of the race — 
 first, by the spread of knowledge and the force of per- 
 suasion, and second by definite legal restrictions in 
 those conditions that are serious or widespread and 
 for which the transmission by heredity has been defi- 
 nitely^ established. 
 
 It is evident also from this and many similar cases 
 that we begin to understand something of the mechan- 
 ism of heredity and that biological science has a means 
 of investigation which promises much additional in- 
 formation. It is the realisation of this fact it seems to 
 me which has given serious importance in our day to 
 the idea of eugenics as a means of benefiting the race. 
 
 In former times each individual was considered 
 more or less as a new creation, dependent for his fu- 
 ture development mainly upon the nature of the en- 
 vironmental factors. We realise now that the funda- 
 ments of his character and structures are contained 
 potentially in the germ stock to which he belongs, and 
 that a good stock may be expected to produce good 
 fruit, a poor or defective stock evil fruit. To some 
 persons this conception carries the depressing convic- 
 tion that character is wholly predetermined and hence 
 all efforts toward personal reform or Improvement are 
 useless. It seems to me that an attitude of this kind 
 is altogether unwarranted. It is an example simply 
 of a common tendency to build a complete logical argu- 
 ment upon incomplete premises ; to treat half-truths as 
 
92 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 though they were whole truths and thus develop a con- 
 clusion which may be entirely logical in form but alto- 
 gether erroneous in fact. Even the wisest of us act or 
 think sometimes after the manner of Farmer Oak's 
 dog. This young animal you may remember was under 
 instruction in the art of tending sheep. He had got so 
 far in his education as to understand that a sheep was 
 an object to chase, and one unfortunate night when the 
 opportunity came to him he chased the flock so steadily 
 and consistently that he drove them all to destruction 
 over the edge of a cliff. There is no reason in this 
 matter of personal development why our newer knowl- 
 edge of the mechanism' of heredity should lead any one 
 to drive his conclusions to a. similar disastrous end. 
 The great fact that the germ-plasm has a certain defi- 
 , nite structure peculiar to the strain need not make us 
 overlook the equally important truth that the possibili- 
 ties latent in that structure depend for their full de- 
 velopment on the nature of the environmental condi- 
 tions. We must recognise the fact that in the develop- 
 ment of an individual organism heredity and environ- 
 ment both play important parts. In the words of a 
 recent writer they stand to each other somewhat in the 
 relation of an instrument and a player. What the in- 
 strument is by structure sets certain bounds to the char- 
 acter of the music it may be made to yield, but the 
 actual result will vary within wide limits according to 
 the proficiency and completeness of education of the 
 player. The world has long recognised the impor- 
 tance of environmental influence upon the development 
 of character and ability, and the idea of good and bad 
 stocks instead of discouraging our efforts to control 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 93 
 
 these influences should rather stimulate us to renewed 
 efforts, for it is evident that much that now lies dormant 
 in the lower strata of humanity may be intrinsically 
 good material that needs only a favourable environ- 
 ment to bring out its latent possibilities. Both good 
 and bad stocks will yield better results under a favour- 
 able than under an unfavourable environment. That 
 much we may assume as justified by all of our biological 
 knowledge and by our experience. The new question 
 or rather the old question in new form before us is in 
 regard to the practicability of limiting the spread of 
 the poor stock and favouring the preservation of the 
 good, in accordance with the ideas of fitness and unfit- 
 ness impressed upon us by our present state of moral 
 development. The knowledge derived from experi- 
 ments upon lower forms of life teaches us that results 
 may be obtained along both of these lines, but at the 
 same time we are warned by the results of such experi- 
 ments that we must proceed with caution, since our 
 knowledge of the factors concerned is obviously incom- 
 plete. Let us examine some of the concrete sug- 
 gestions that have been made by the eugenists. On the 
 one side we have the proposal to prohibit the propaga- 
 tion of the obviously unfit. In this matter of so-called 
 negative eugenics Galton outlined a programme which 
 has served as the basis for whatever action has since 
 been proposed. " Stern compulsion," said he, " ought 
 to be exercised to prevent the free propagation of those 
 who are seriously afflicted by lunacy, feeble-mindedness, 
 habitual criminality and pauperism." We recognise 
 without question that all of these conditions, in their 
 extreme forms at least, are detrimental to the welfare 
 
94 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 of the race. They are weeds in the garden of civilisa- 
 tion and we should be glad to have them eradicated by 
 any means that does not ofFend our sense of humanity 
 or endanger those " bonds of sympathy which hold so- 
 ciety together." It would be a matter of great con- 
 gratulation if medical science were able to deal with 
 these conditions, but this hope is denied us. If we de- 
 sire to move in the matter we must determine first 
 whether these characteristics are the outcome of vicious 
 environment or whether they are inherited traits. In 
 the case of pauperism and habitual criminality we deal 
 with conditions which are perhaps too vague and com- 
 plex to be attributed at once without further proof to 
 hereditary transmission, although the facts known to 
 us certainly justify the suspicion that heredity consti- 
 tutes an Important factor in their production and dis- 
 semination. There is a considerable body of evidence 
 which seems to show that these characteristics run 
 strong in certain strains. The pedigrees of the in- 
 famous Juke family in New York State and of the 
 Tribe of Ishmael in Kentucky have been worked out 
 with care, and furnish capital examples of the way In 
 which a bad stock spreads. The dismal frequency in 
 these two strains of pauperism, criminality and general 
 worthlessness will convince any one who consults the 
 records that our race would have been saved much 
 humiliation and expense had some high authority exer- 
 cised a stern compulsion over Ada Juke and Ben Ish- 
 mael to prevent them from propagating their breeds. 
 But this is a case of hind-sight. We will not get very 
 far in the Improvement of the race if it Is necessary to 
 prove first that the criminality or pauperism is habitual 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 95 
 
 in the strain. Some of our States have gone so far as 
 to appoint commissions to whom authority is given to 
 decide whether or not a criminal shows a record that 
 puts him in the habitual class, and if so, at their discre- 
 tion but under legal directions, to render him incapable 
 of further propagation by the operation of vasectomy. 
 This action, although it is held by some to be unconsti- 
 tutional, is good so far as it goes, as a mode of punish- 
 ment as well as a method of prevention, but I appre- 
 hend that it will not contribute greatly to the improve- 
 ment of the race, if the commissioners exert their 
 authority, as they should do, only after careful and con- 
 scientious inquiry. There is also the possibility that 
 under our form of government the officials charged 
 with this duty may not be selected always with reference 
 to their knowledge and character, and may therefore in 
 the end bring a good motive into public contempt. 
 While public opinion may not wholly sanction surgical 
 interference for purely eugenic purposes it will support, 
 I am confident, the exercise of the authority of the 
 government in restraining propagation among inmates 
 of almshouses, reformatories and penal institutions. 
 Among the inmates of our almshouses there may be 
 some who have come to their sad estate by force of un- 
 toward circumstances alone, but for the most part we 
 must believe that there is probably an underlying cause 
 in a defective heredity, and on this suspicion alone the 
 State should by careful supervision and discipline en- 
 force a condition of celibacy among the inmates of such 
 institutions. The past records of our almshouses are 
 sufficient to give warrant for this action. Dr. Goddard 
 has stated recently that a superintendent of one of the 
 
96 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 best county almshouses told him that of 105 children 
 born there in five years, 102 were feeble-minded. 
 
 What we most need in this matter of purifying the 
 race of its worst stock is some means of recognising the 
 hereditarily unfit before they have reached the age of 
 puberty. In this direction much significant work has 
 been done recently upon the condition known as feeble- 
 mindedness. It must be borne in mind in the first place 
 that there is a condition of defective mentality which is 
 caused by accident or disease at birth, or subsequently, 
 and which therefore is not indicative of a contaminated 
 strain. There can be no doubt at all that the most 
 normal minded and gifted person in the world may be 
 converted into an imbecile by disease or accident involv- 
 ing certain areas of the brain. If we may trust our 
 present knowledge of heredity the feeble-mindedness 
 that arises in this way Is not transmissible. But investi- 
 gation and observation have demonstrated that there 
 \s a feeble-mindedness which is Inherent in the strain 
 and which is transmitted through the germ-plasm from 
 generation to generation. Statistics collected by Dr. 
 Davenport of the Laboratory for Experimental Evolu- 
 tion of the Carnegie Institution of Washington indi- 
 cate that such strains may be traced back through many 
 generations and at all times they have constituted a de- 
 pendent and dangerous element in the community. 
 When feeble-minded individuals of such strains Inter- 
 marry their children are all defective, and If one of this 
 sort mates with a normal person the defect Is liable to 
 appear in the progeny somewhat in the proportion Indi- 
 cated by the Mendellan law. The pity of It is that the 
 opportunities for the propagation of such strains are 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 97 
 
 favoured rather than hindered by the state of our so- 
 ciety. It is not very probable that those afflicted with 
 insanity will marry with other insane persons, but un- 
 fortunately this is exactly what Is liable to occur in the 
 case of the feeble-minded. In this class of persons the 
 sexual Instincts exist in all their normal Intensity — ac- 
 cording to some observers indeed they are developed to 
 an abnormal degree — and owing to their general state 
 of irresponsibility, these instincts are followed or are 
 likely to be followed with as much disregard of conse- 
 quences as In the lower animals. An added danger is 
 found in the fact that In women of this strain physical 
 and temperamental attractiveness may accompany 
 mental weakness with the result that they more readily 
 fall victims to the passions of careless or reckless men. 
 The humanitarian ideals of our times have led to the 
 foundation of homes for these helpless people in which 
 they are shielded from that competition with man and 
 nature for which they are unfitted, and In which more- 
 over every effort Is made to Improve and develop their 
 mental capacity. The outcome of the unusual efforts 
 made to educate these unfortunates has only served to 
 emphasise the truth that environment alone can not 
 accomplish everything. Whatever care may be put 
 upon them the end result is a defective human being. 
 They must remain in the Institution throughout life or 
 at least be kept under direct charge and supervision of 
 some sort. 
 
 Dr. Goddard, the director of research in the Vine- 
 land Training School, New Jersey, has published re- 
 cently a remarkable account of the pedigree of one of 
 the Inmates of that school. She is described under the 
 
98 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 fictitious name of Deborah Kallikak. The account of 
 her family-tree is written in an interesting and convin- 
 cing way, and should be read by every one who is at all 
 concerned with this important sociological problem. 
 Deborah herself belongs to the class of high-grade de- 
 fectives designated as morons to distinguish them from 
 the lower grades of imbeciles and idiots. According 
 to the descriptions and photographs she is an attractive 
 healthy looking girl, with some pleasing qualities and 
 accomplishments, but with mental defects which make 
 it impossible to expect a wholly normal intellectual de- 
 velopment. Her pedigree is much too long to give in 
 detail. The main facts In brief are as follows. The 
 history begins with a certain individual designated as 
 Martin Kallikak, Sr., who as a young man joined one 
 of the military companies formed at the beginning of 
 the American Revolution. While a member of this 
 company he met at a tavern a feeble-minded girl by 
 whom he had an illegitimate son. After the Revolu- 
 tionary War Martin married a girl of good family by 
 whom he had seven children. He thus became the 
 progenitor of two lines of descendants. It has been 
 possible to trace the history of these descendants to the 
 present time. (See page 56.) On the side of the 
 legal marriage they number 496 in direct descent. All 
 of them were normal and indeed It would seem that 
 they represented an unusually good stock. On the 
 Illegitimate side the son born by the feeble-minded 
 woman was himself feeble-minded, and from him have 
 come 480 descendants, 143 of whom were or are de- 
 fectives. The graphic picture given by Dr. Goddard 
 of the life histories of these Individuals fills one with 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 99 
 
 regret and pity. Martin, Sr., probably gave but little 
 thought to that escapade of the days of his youth, but 
 we can imagine that if some higher power had given 
 him prophetic vision to see that long and still growing 
 line of degenerate sons and daughters the iron of re- 
 morse would have entered deep into his soul. 
 
 In this extraordinary history with its two sides of 
 good and of evil we have a convincing demonstration 
 that a defective mental condition is transmissible by 
 heredity and is liable to intensification by the union of 
 defective parents. It furnishes a striking confirma- 
 tion on a large scale of the correctness of modern bio- 
 logical views in regard to the fundamental impor- 
 tance of the hereditary factor, and it calls our attention 
 sharply to an evil that has been with us for centuries 
 and which it is within our power to remove or reduce. 
 If we were living strictly under the influence of the 
 cosmical process defectives of this kind would no doubt 
 be killed out in the struggle for existence, but under 
 the conditions of civilisation it is necessary that they 
 shall be protected and cared for. Does this obliga- 
 tion, imposed upon us by our moral sense, carry with it 
 also free permission to increase and multiply? It is 
 our duty as citizens to consider this problem. It is no 
 small matter. Statistics inform us that there are in 
 the United States some three hundred thousand feeble- 
 minded persons and it is altogether probable that this 
 is a minimal figure, for the field is a large one and it 
 has not been examined completely. Moreover in the 
 tide of immigrants pouring upon our shore recent In- 
 vestigations indicate that the proportion of feeble- 
 minded individuals is extremely high; 6 to 7 per cent. 
 
loo IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 Heaven knows how many Kallikak families we are in- 
 noculating into our racial stock through this agency. 
 It seems obvious that this problem is big enough and 
 serious enough and concrete enough to demand im- 
 mediate attention. It is perfectly clear also that if 
 any action is taken it should be in the direction of 
 mitigating the evil rather than merely concealing it. 
 I recall that a few years ago on one of the small is- 
 lands off the coast of Maine the population by much 
 inbreeding, and probably because of an initial mixture 
 of intrinsically poor stock, had reached such a condi- 
 tion of dependency and Incapacity that the matter was 
 forced upon the attention of the general public. The 
 neighbouring townships were unwilling to charge them- 
 selves with the care of these people and therefore the 
 authority of the State was invoked. The State acted, 
 but its action, as I understand it, consisted in depopu- 
 lating the island and scattering the inhabitants among 
 adjoining communities. Adequate provision was 
 made for compensation of property and the principles 
 of justice were observed, but from a eugenic standpoint 
 it was a very doubtful policy to follow. It was much 
 like getting rid of a pest-house by scattering the pa- 
 tients through the community. With the history of 
 the Kallikak family before us we may fear that the 
 State has favoured the propagation of degeneracy 
 among Its Inhabitants and has done evil where it in- 
 tended to do good. What action should we take In 
 such cases and indeed in regard to this whole matter 
 of f eeble-mindedness ? Opinions differ upon this 
 point, but it would seem to me that the right direction 
 for us to follow is the plan advocated by Dr. Goddard. 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST loi 
 
 Provision should be made for the examination of the 
 mental condition of school-children, of inmates of in- 
 stitutions and of immigrants, and when congenital 
 feeble-mindedness is clearly indicated the individual 
 except in the last named group should be removed 
 from the communal life and become a ward of the 
 State. By colonisation or segregation into special in- 
 stitutions these unfortunate persons can be cared for 
 much more satisfactorily as a rule than in their own 
 homes, so far as their individual happiness and com- 
 fort are concerned, and under such conditions strict 
 supervision may prevent successfully any further prop- 
 agation. Dr. Goddard believes that in addition it 
 may be possible to use the method of sterilization and 
 thus save something in the way of constant care or 
 supervision. But in regard to this feature it would 
 seem desirable to go slowly and to try out the idea ex- 
 perimentally first in chosen cases before advocating its 
 adoption as a general principle. The objections to 
 such a plan as this are its expense on the one hand and 
 on the other the appearance of inhumanity which may 
 go with the forcible separation of families. As re- 
 gards expense we deal with a practical question that 
 must of course be considered with care. The matter 
 is treated in some detail by Dr. Hart, Director of the 
 Department of Child-Helping of the Russell Sage 
 Foundation, in a most interesting pamphlet. He 
 points out thalt the financial difficulty is not greater than 
 in the case of the care of the insane, a problem which 
 we have already faced and solved with a considerable 
 degree of success. He states specifically a number of 
 means which may be used to reduce the expense and 
 
I02 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 which if followed consistently must eventually result in 
 the removal or significant reduction of this defect of 
 feeble-mindedness among our people. It is not pos- 
 sible presumably to corral at once this whole scattered 
 population of defectives, but if we recognise that this 
 is the proper kind of remedy we can make a beginning, 
 and proceed to reduce this evil as rapidly as our means 
 permit. In the long run it may not be so costly as 
 would seem at first sight, for Dr. Goddard makes a 
 plausible economical argument in stating, and in giving 
 figures to bear out his statement, that much of the 
 pauperism, petty criminality, sexual degeneracy and 
 prostitution which burden our communities have their 
 source in the existence of feeble-mindedness. By di- 
 recting our efforts toward the removal of this factor we 
 shall be striking at the root of much of the social de- 
 linquency which we now attempt to correct by elee- 
 mosynary, reformatory and penal institutions of va- 
 rious kinds. There can be little doubt that when the 
 people are fully informed in this matter pressure of 
 public opinion will force the enactment of some kind of 
 remedial legislation. There is reason to believe that 
 in this direction the first principle of eugenics, namely 
 the checking of the birth rate of the unfit, will soon be 
 given a practical test on a large scale. As regards the 
 second principle of eugenics, the use of agencies to pro- 
 mote the multiplication of the fit or of the most fit, it is 
 evident that we are presented with a proposition in 
 which speculations and aspirations may easily take the 
 place of sober facts. The idea is interesting and prom- 
 ising, and ample discussion can do no harm; on 
 the contrary it may do much good by emphasising 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 103 
 
 clearly the fact that each of us is in a measure re- 
 sponsible for the future characteristics of the race. 
 The " after us the deluge " theory is not popular in our 
 generation. We are much influenced, even the most 
 inconspicuous of us, by the desire to be of service in the 
 uplifting of mankind to higher levels, and the eugenic 
 consideration when fully presented and understood will 
 have its influence. One difiiculty is that in this as in 
 many other cases in which the facts of science touch the 
 practical sides of life, there is great temptation for en- 
 thusiasts to make extravagant claims in the name of 
 science that in the long run do harm to the cause by 
 furnishing points for justifiable criticism. I for one 
 would have little or no confidence in the judgment of 
 any man, scientific or unscientific, who became very 
 specific in saying thou shalt or thou shalt not in the 
 matter of mating among normal people. Like Mr. 
 Huxley I am not willing to believe that any man has 
 wisdom enough to give such advice freely. Moreover 
 while every one may be supposed to take some pride in 
 his own kith and kin, that man must be encased in the 
 triple-brass of a dense egotism who can feel that the 
 germ-stock represented in his proper person is wholly 
 best for survival. 
 
 Mr. Pearson talks eloquently and impressively of the 
 possibility of breeding for intelligence and character. 
 He makes us understand that in those nations in which 
 families of brains and righteousness perpetuate their 
 kind by mating with similars, leaders are likely to arise, 
 and that such nations may be the " dominant factors in 
 civilisation by the end of the century." But he does 
 not suggest any specific means to this end. The 
 
104 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 method presented to us by a consideration of the re- 
 sults of breeding in the case of lower animals, namely, 
 the method of compulsory mating, is of course out of 
 the question. And the method once suggested of em- 
 ploying eugenic certificates as a basis for marriage is, it 
 seems to me, scarcely less impracticable. If we wish to 
 apply the principle of positive eugenics to the better- 
 ment of the race we must consider the ways and means 
 by which voluntary mating may be influenced in the 
 right direction. There are certain misalliances on the 
 physical side that occur altogether too commonly and 
 that might be prevented. In the case of an obvious 
 disease such as leprosy public opinion will not sanction 
 the marriage relation, and indeed the element of self- 
 protection is sufficient to save the sound in body from 
 exposing themselves to the danger of such a relation. 
 There are however certain diseased conditions which in 
 the matter of physical danger are scarcely less dread- 
 ful than leprosy that have not been put under the ban. 
 In a way they are more dangerous than leprosy because 
 they are concealed from public knowledge, and by way 
 of marriage these diseases are communicated to wholly 
 innocent persons. An awakened public conscience is 
 needed to drag these conditions into the light and to 
 provide such laws or customs as will insure that those 
 entering into a marriage contract do not thereby ex- 
 pose themselves or their offspring to a hidden but 
 serious physical danger. It seems incredible that those 
 afflicted with such diseases should deliberately enter 
 upon the marriage relation and thus endanger the 
 health or life of those they profess to love — but the 
 records show that such is the case. Public sentiment 
 
AS VIEWED BY THE PHYSIOLOGIST 105 
 
 must be aroused against this unjust practice and it is 
 to be hoped that the common sense of mankind will 
 eventually sanction the suggestion that proper health 
 certificates shall be a customary feature in marriage ar- 
 rangements. 
 
 As regards misalliances on the mental side, if I may 
 use this phrase, it is evident that eugenics must exert its 
 influence through the agencies of education and appeal 
 to the higher qualities rather than by means of legis- 
 lative enactments. It is a misfortune from the eugenic 
 standpoint to have the intelligent mated with the stupid, 
 or the high-minded with the low in character — it 
 seems to be a case of mixing pure gold with a baser 
 metal. 
 
 But so long as we hold to our good custom of found- 
 ing marriage mainly on affection and mutual attractive- 
 ness, it is a difficult a;id delicate matter to influence the 
 direction that fancy may take. Mr. Galton looked at 
 the subject in a practical and sensible way. He calls 
 attention to the fact that it is our custom to allow many 
 considerations to play a minor part in this question of 
 selecting one's partner for life — considerations of race, 
 of religion, of occupation, of financial standing, etc. 
 etc., and what he hoped for was, that as a result of a 
 general education in regard to the influence of heredity, 
 eugenical considerations also may take their part among 
 those factors whose additive influence determines the 
 choice that is made. This is a moderate and conserva- 
 tive suggestion, but quite sufficient to give point to an 
 educational propaganda. It is likely in the long run to 
 prove wiser and more beneficial than an advocacy of 
 more radical measures. In spirit and intent it accords 
 
io6 IV. HOWELL: EUGENICS 
 
 very well with the advice of the wise and experienced in 
 such matters at all times. " Marry only for love," 
 said William Penn, " but be sure that thou lovest what 
 is lovely." This sage aphorism may be interpreted to 
 mean that we should so cultivate our appreciation of 
 what is best in humanity as to be attracted only by those 
 who possess desirable qualities. I fancy that this state 
 of things is what positive eugenics hopes to accomplish 
 or to aid in accomplishing; not by force, not even by 
 deliberate persuasion, but by bringing to the conscious- 
 ness of educated people a realisation of the fact that 
 the welfare of the next generation will be influenced 
 by the way they marry, as well as by the way they live. 
 
EUGENICS: ITS DATA, SCOPE AND PROMISE, AS 
 
 SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 
 
 HARVEY ERNEST JORDAN 
 
 The purpose of this lecture is to attempt to arouse in- 
 telligent interest on the part of university students in 
 the new science of eugenics. I have selected my ma- 
 terials and shaped the discussion with a view to best 
 meeting the needs as I understand them of the average 
 student. I have moreover attempted, as far as seemed 
 practicable, to employ primarily such illustrative data 
 as I have myself touched in my work and my special 
 interests; and further to include in my discussion more 
 particularly those aspects of eugenics which would seem 
 to make a singular appeal to youth and the spirit of 
 altruism. 
 
 Whoever treats the subject of eugenics sympathetic- 
 ally and from the biological viewpoint must employ 
 very much the same basic facts, but he can choose his 
 illustrations from quite a variety of materials. Inter- 
 pretations can not differ very markedly ; conclusions can 
 be stated only more conservatively or more radically. 
 My own notions of a working programme are conser- 
 vative ; however, in an attempt to present the full force 
 of the genetic data with reference to their eugenic sig- 
 nificance, I may perhaps at points seem to err on the 
 side of radicalism. My main mission, I take it, is to 
 arouse interest and to stimulate independent thought. 
 
 107 
 
io8 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 Eugenics is the science of good birth. It deals with 
 parents and offspring. One of its chief immediate con- 
 cerns is to discover the principles that govern human 
 heredity and variation. It desires to influence human 
 matings in the interests of future generations in accord- 
 ance with well-established facts of inheritance. It aims 
 to produce a better race by better breeding. It does 
 not aspire to create; It seeks merely to prevent sub- 
 traction and contamination, and by appropriate com- 
 bination of the best hereditary traits now in existence 
 or In future to arise to produce a race of thorough- 
 breds, considered physically, mentally and morally. 
 E^ugenics Is applied evolution in the Interests of human- 
 kind. 
 
 The word " eugenics " was first used by Sir Francis 
 Galton, the founder of the science, in his book, " In- 
 quiries Into the Human Faculty" published In 1883. 
 The foundations had already been laid In Galton's 
 book on "Hereditary Genius," published in 1869. 
 This, like Mendel's pioneer work four years earlier, 
 was for many years neglected. Pasteur's studies on 
 microorganisms, and the rediscovery of the Mendellan 
 principles of heredity in 1900, gave a new impetus to 
 the bio-social study of man. With renewed zeal and 
 Interest Galton returned to the work In the interests of 
 eugenics In 1901 when he delivered the Huxley lecture 
 of that year before the Anthropological Institute of 
 London on " The Possible Improvement of the Human 
 Breed Under the Existing Conditions of Law and Sen- 
 timent." Then the science of eugenics leaped into 
 prominence. Pasteur, who laid stress on the impor- 
 tance of the factor of environment with respect to man's 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 109 
 
 well-being; Galton, who emphasised the importance 
 of the factor of heredity to this end; and Mendel, who 
 stated the law of the inheritance of organic characters, 
 thus laying a scientific foundation for the social direc- 
 tion of human evolution, had now received a universal 
 hearing. Present indications point to the ultimate 
 realisation of Galton's hope, namely, that the concept 
 of eugenics may enter the national consciousness like a 
 new religion. 
 
 The foundation of eugenics is heredity. Eugenics 
 does not ignore the importance of environment. Both 
 heredity and environment are absolute essentials. The 
 science which aims to improve the race through im- 
 provement of the environment has come to be known 
 as euthenics. Eugenics is concerned with that still 
 greater improvement, even in a perfect environment, 
 made possible by application of the principles of 
 heredity. The sole difference between eugenists and 
 euthenists is one of place of emphasis. Co-operation is 
 the secret of ultimate complete success. But surely 
 heredity comes first ; environment can only follow. As 
 Barrington and Pearson put it, " The first thing is good 
 stock, and the second thing is good stock, and the third 
 thing is good stock, and when you have paid attention 
 to these three things, fit environment will keep your 
 material in good condition. But no environment or 
 educational grindstone is of service unless the tool to 
 be ground is of genuine steel — of tough race and tem- 
 pered stock." ^ Bad environment may spoil the best in- 
 heritance, but no environment however ideal can lift 
 an individual beyond the upper level of inherited po- 
 
 ^ Eugenics Lab. Pub. No. 5. 
 
no V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 tentialities for development. Professor Pearson rates 
 the influence of the environment at less than one-tenth 
 that of heredity. 
 
 Eugenics aims at race preservation and regeneration. 
 Race-degenerating factors or influences are designated 
 as dysgenic or cacogenic. The two main aspects of 
 eugenics are positive and negative. Positive eugenics 
 seeks to improve the race by encouraging greater re- 
 productivity among the racially fitter, the civically 
 more worthy, stocks. Negative eugenics aims to pre- 
 vent contamination and degeneration by prohibition of 
 parenthood to the obviously and grossly unfit. The 
 peculiar means employed by positive eugenics are 
 mainly educational, by negative eugenics legislative. 
 
 Opposed to eugenics is also the doctrine of " eu- 
 demics." This proclaims the welfare of the " common 
 people " as the vital desideratum, in the belief that 
 worthy leaders and geniuses will continually arise from 
 among the masses regardless of dysgenic or eugenic 
 factors. It represents largely a laissez faire attitude 
 towards racial interests. Eugenic and euthenic en- 
 deavours may have pessimistic phases, but they are 
 largely prompted and supported by the spirit of op- 
 timism ; eudemics, on the contrary, seem to contain ele- 
 ments of cynicism and hopelessness. Effective work 
 for racial improvement must build upon a foundation 
 of optimism. 
 
 Surely all must have been impressed with the recent 
 great interest and activity In eugenics. There are now 
 national and municipal and university eugenics societies 
 almost the civilised world over. National and inter- 
 national eugenics and genetics congresses have met ; in 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST in 
 
 Dresden and in Paris in 191 1, in Geissen and In Lon- 
 don in 1912. There are now a number of special eu- 
 genics laboratories and technical eugenics and genetics 
 journals. Almost every journal of almost every de- 
 scription has had its eugenics article. Eugenics touches 
 and impresses every possible human interest. What 
 has happened in recent years? Why all this activity? 
 Is there actually danger? Are signs appearing among 
 modern nations similar to those which accompanied the 
 demise of Babylonia, Egypt, Greece and Rome? 
 What then is the trouble? The trouble is implied in 
 a statement by Whetham, " Although the suppression 
 of the best blood of a country is a new disease In mod- 
 ern Europe, it is an old story in the history of nations 
 and has been the prelude to the ruin of states and the 
 decline and fall of empires." The care of our defec- 
 tives already costs the United States $100,000,000 an- 
 nually. According to statistics it has been calculated 
 that within 50 years the ratio of the fit to the unfit will 
 be as 1:1, i.e., there will be just one sane person, for 
 example, to look after one Insane. This of course Is 
 an extreme prediction ; but it serves to Impress eventual 
 possibilities unless conditions are materially altered. 
 
 I wish to disarm at the outset several stereotyped 
 criticisms of the eugenics propaganda. First this 
 perennial " human stock-farm " idea. To attach this 
 idea to the eugenics programme falsifies historical and 
 contemporary facts. Eugenics recognises love of the 
 highest and noblest quality as a cardinal factor In the 
 achievement of its Ideal. But it would have love intel- 
 ligent. The converse, however, does not follow; not 
 all so-called "love-matches" are eugenic. Eugenics 
 
112 V, JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 recognises certain matings which should be emphatically 
 discouraged and even legally disallowed, where ethical 
 appeals fail of potency. Probably the last trait the 
 eugenist would surrender in his programme of race-re- 
 generation would be human love. An environment 
 void of parental love is inadequate for the full develop- 
 ment of innate mental and moral possibilities. I need 
 develop this point no further. But, as Doctor AdolpK 
 Pinard of Paris remarks, eugenists " must bravely ap- 
 proach the civilising of the reproductive instinct, which 
 alone has remained in a barbarous state amongst all 
 the so-called civilised nations from the earliest times."^ 
 
 Secondly, eugenics does not aim alone at the preser- 
 vation of brute physical strength. A strong and 
 healthy physique is recognised as fundamental, but not 
 absolutely essential to lofty intellectual and moral at- 
 tainments. Eugenics recognises the fact that mental 
 and moral characters are hereditary, and possibly by 
 the same law as physical traits. And in our day moral 
 qualities are decidedly as valuable and desirable as sim- 
 ply physical strength. A capacity for honesty is per- 
 haps just as truly hereditary as the colour of eyes or 
 shape of nose. Rational eugenics will not lose the fu- 
 ture Keats', or Spencers, or Newtons, or Napoleons, 
 as has been feared. It will produce more of their 
 kind. And it may be able to combine such superb in- 
 tellects with a strong physique, and to that extent in- 
 crease their power and influence. 
 
 Thirdly, it does not preach a fatalistic creed. It is 
 probably not wholly true that man is like a watch, 
 wound up once for all, destined by inexorable law to 
 
 'Problems in Eugenics, 1912; p. 459. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 113 
 
 run a certain way at a certain speed willy nilly to a cer- 
 tain point definitely determined by heredity. Only the 
 upper limits are probably inexorably fixed. Man Is 
 more than mechanism. Man is spirit also. Science 
 has just begun to touch the outer fringe of the realm of 
 spirit. The resources that here lie hidden for aid in 
 conflict with inherited evil tendencies and weaknesses, 
 are all but limitless, and known in some small part I am 
 sure to each man in a peculiar and specially personal 
 way. Of course, there are probably very definite 
 bounds set to physical and mental attainments. But 
 how few men fathom these to the depth of inherited 
 potentialities ! One never knows until one has tried 
 what are the environmental and psychic possibilities in 
 correcting hereditary deficiences or obliquities. 
 
 The manly attitude here is the heroic and the altru- 
 istic. Seek to develop to the utmost your possibilities ; 
 be reconciled to your limitations if you are convinced 
 you have discovered such; if deficiencies are serious 
 have the wisdom to make an alliance such that your off- 
 spring may not be similarly limited or worse ; or If such 
 course is impossible the welfare of the race demands 
 magnanimous self-sacrifice. For example, one may in- 
 herit a bald head; this deficit can be made good by a 
 wig. One may inherit a hare lip ; this can be fixed by 
 modern surgery. But one such should not marry into 
 similar strains. One may have Inherited the phthisical 
 diathesis; tuberculosis may be obviated by wise choice 
 of environment and strict measures of hygiene; but such 
 should not marry into a similarly handicapped strain. 
 One may have inherited a thirst for strong drink; but 
 if one never tastes of alcohol, one can never become a 
 
114 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 drunkard. However, If the struggle against the in- 
 herited weakness demands so much of time or effort as 
 to appear to counteract the worth of results one should 
 manfully acquiesce to society's demands that such de- 
 fective protoplasm be cut off. In short a person Is a 
 bundle of a million of possibilities good and ill. Un- 
 less the 111 traits be of very low survival value, atten- 
 tion to the full development of the good may hide for 
 all practical purposes the relatively ill. But knowl- 
 edge of grave deficits In one's germ-plasm should give 
 one pause before he lightly accept the responsibility of 
 handing on the deficits to future generations. Common 
 sense controls eugenic practice, and has here the same 
 supreme importance as elsewhere. If ability to sing, 
 for instance, determined survival, happiness and use- 
 fulness of offspring, then those without this ability 
 should not intermarry. Since one can make a living 
 and be of service In a thousand other ways, such a dis- 
 ability is no bar to marriage. The common-sense at- 
 titude Is this : if you need to sing a little bit you can 
 probably acquire enough ability for all practical pur- 
 poses; but don't miss becoming a great engineer by 
 wasting time trying to achieve the Impossible, a career 
 as a public singer; also If you marry one of like limita- 
 tions, don't expect Carusos and Melbas among your 
 offspring. 
 
 The Welsmannian Interpretation of the relationship 
 between the germ-plasm and the body may be correct. 
 Acquired characters of education, culture and physical 
 development may not be capable of transmission to 
 offspring. Personal achievements apparently have no 
 direct Influence upon progeny. But this even If proved 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 115 
 
 does not free from personal responsibility. It is scien- 
 tifically established that the germ-plasm may be in- 
 jured to the detriment of offspring. If the germ- 
 plasm cannot apparently be potentially improved 
 it- can certainly be made to deteriorate. More- 
 over, Weissmannism may not express the whole truth. 
 The more recent Hering-Semon hypothesis of en- 
 gram action or cell memory recently so fully de- 
 veloped by Professor Francis Darwin,^ son of Charles 
 Darwin, may express much truth. According to this 
 hypothesis in a final analysis every deed, even every 
 thought, is somehow registered for good or ill in the 
 germ-plasm, as a cell-memory, to reawaken to organic 
 expression in one's offspring. This hypothesis gives 
 an almost appalling seriousness to life ; but its possible 
 truth must act as a powerful incentive to a high en- 
 deavour and a pure life. And it is most encouraging 
 to think that one may perhaps be instrumental in posi- 
 tively lifting the race to higher levels as well as being 
 simply, but in actual fact, a guardian of a stock of 
 hereditary factors which by ignorance or mistake may 
 be tainted to the injury of posterity. 
 
 In the fourth place, to repeat, neither good heredity 
 nor good environment can accomplish the potentially 
 possible except by acting conjointly. A fish cannot live 
 in the tree tops, nor an idiot become a scholar even at 
 the best of our universities. Both favourable heredity 
 and favourable environment are absolute essentials. A 
 perfect heredity unfolding in a perfect environment will 
 yield the superman. Darwin long ago wrote, " No 
 man Is so Ignorant as to breed from his worst anl- 
 
 3 Science, Vol. aS, Nos., 716 and 717, 1908. 
 
ii6 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 mals " ; and we well know that sweat-shop conditions 
 of industrial life may make consumptives even of 
 athletes. 
 
 It is a popular fiction that '* men are born free and 
 equal." Nothing really is further from the truth. 
 There are as great differences among human beings as 
 obtain between the crab-apple and the Albemarle 
 pippin, and for essentially the same reasons. As 
 Davenport puts it, " Men are born bound by their 
 protoplasmic make-up and unequal in their powers and 
 possibilities." * 
 
 It is an accepted dictum also that man has an " in- 
 alienablef right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happi- 
 ness." But we are still denying continued life to cer- 
 tain individuals guilty of certain crimes against society. 
 The eugenist desires to know also an individual's ideal 
 of happiness before he will accord to him the uninter- 
 rupted pursuit thereof. Many ideals of happiness are 
 anti-social and subversive of racial welfare. The eu- 
 genist also fearlessly labours to prevent reproductive 
 liberty to that individual who in the prosecution of that 
 liberty would contaminate the stream of life and injure 
 the future race. 
 
 But the impression should not be left that recogni- 
 tion of the value of good stock and of the importance 
 of heredity is of recent development. It is probably 
 as old as reasoning man. The prophets Jeremiah and 
 Ezekiel both allude to the ancient proverb, " The 
 fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children's teeth 
 are set on edge." The idea is expressed in Deuter- 
 onomy where Moses speaks of God as " visiting the in- 
 
 * Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, 1911. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 117 
 
 iquitles of the fathers upon the children to the third 
 and fourth generations." Christ asked the question 
 whether men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles 
 and replied, " A good tree cannot bring forth evil 
 fruit ; neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit." 
 Plato developed the idea in his Republic, and the Spar- 
 tans practised crude eugenics. Ancient Mythology at- 
 tributed the deformity of Vulcan to the drunkenness of 
 his father Jupiter. The Chinese for hundreds of 
 years, in deference to the fact of heredity no doubt, 
 have forbidden consanguineous marriages. 
 
 Recently eugenics has been put upon a surer basis of 
 scientific facts. But humanitarian advance along cer- 
 tain lines threatens to work racial havoc. However, 
 scientist, statesman and churchman are coming to un- 
 derstand each other better; they are uniting in a com- 
 mon humanitarian effort in the interests of the race as 
 well as of the present generation. This new emphasis 
 of the claims of the future and the race is awakening a 
 world-wide more intelligent interest in eugenics and its 
 foundations, and promi'ses to convert society into that 
 Utopia of which More wrote, and that Kingdom of 
 Heaven on Earth of which Christ spoke. 
 
 Galton puts it thus : " Eugenic belief extends the 
 function of philanthropy to future generations. It ren- 
 ders its actions more prevailing than heretofore by deal- 
 ing with families and societies in their entirety, and it 
 enforces the importance of the marriage covenant by 
 directing serious attention to the probable quality of 
 future offspring. It strongly forbids all forms of sen- 
 timental charity that are harmful to the race, while it 
 greatly seeks opportunity for acts of personal kindness 
 
ii8 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 as some equivalent to the loss of what it forbids. It 
 brings the tie of kinship into prominence and strongly 
 encourages love in family and race. In brief, eugenics 
 is a virile creed, full of hope, and appealing to many 
 of the noblest feelings of our nature." ^ 
 
 In the earlier history of the human race natural se- 
 lection through a struggle for existence worked a sur- 
 vival of the fittest. The fit were successively those 
 of brute strength, cunning and intelligence. The fittest 
 is he who combines the three in proper proportions. A 
 later evolution superposed the soul, or the ethical sense. 
 With the birth of morals came humanitarian senti- 
 ments. Charity has counteracted the beneficent influ- 
 ence of natural selection. Promiscuous and unguided 
 by scientific wisdom it works for a condition of reversed 
 selection. It favours the unfit at the expense of the 
 fit. Eugenics would take no backward step; it could 
 not countenance abandonment of rational charity; but 
 it must somehow neutralise the dysgenic effect of mis- 
 guided emotional charity. 
 
 Do you realise that only about 12 per cent, of the 
 present generation, that is only about 25 per cent, of 
 the marriages of a period, produce 50 per cent, of the 
 next? I need but ask the question, "Who constitutes 
 this 12 per cent.? " You well know It is not prepon- 
 deratingly our racial best. Our nation is in peril to the 
 extent that this includes the unfit whom eleemosynary 
 activities carefully shield and produce. Do you realise 
 that about 10 per cent, of our population is defective, 
 an economic and social burden, and a constant source 
 of racial menace and contamination? Only about i 
 
 ^Essays in Eugenics, V: Eugenics as a Factor in Religion, p. 70. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 119 
 
 per cent, of this portion is in institutions where any ef- 
 fort whatever can be made to prevent reproduction of 
 this type. Only about 10 per cent, of all feeble-minded 
 are in institutions — or can be — and the feeble- 
 minded are the race's gravest source of injury. Do 
 you realise that the fecundity of defectives is at least 
 about twice as great as that of the average of our popu- 
 lation? And as to the intellectual classes, Oxford 
 graduates barely numerically reproduce themselves, 
 and Harvard graduates do but little better. 
 
 In New England many of the old family names are 
 dying out by reason of decrease in the number of off- 
 spring and the scarcity or total absence of males in the 
 later generations. One family of which I have the data 
 from the year 16 10, given me by the last adult male 
 member, will suffice for illustration : The data include 
 10 generations. In the first three, males were pro- 
 duced in excess in the proportion of 9 to 7 ; in the suc- 
 ceeding six, females were produced in excess in the 
 proportion of 22 to 15. The average number of births 
 per generation is approximately 6 ; but in the last four 
 generations there is a sharp and regular decline from 
 9 to 5 to 3 to 2. The last generation includes 7 fe- 
 males and I male. 
 
 On the basis of Davenport's work on epilepsy in 
 New Jersey, we know that the number of epileptics 
 doubles every thirty years.^ It seems very clear then 
 if present conditions continue the Anglo-Saxon race is 
 eventually doomed. What remedy does eugenics of- 
 fer? And what are the scientific data upon which its 
 proposals rest? 
 
 * Davenport and Weeks. Eugenics Record OiEce Bull. No. 4, 1911. 
 
120 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 For Illustration of the working of Mendelian in- 
 heritance, upon which eugenics so heavily rests, I shall 
 take the case of use of the hand. This involves a brief 
 discussion of how we probably came to be right-handed. 
 The early representatives of the race, the Neanderthal 
 men for sake of concrete instance, were probably ambi- 
 dextrous, i.e., they used either hand equally well for 
 all manipulation. The child, recapitulating its racial 
 history, is ambidextrous until somewhere about the 
 seventh month. The race and the child become either 
 left-handed or right-handed — or in a few cases may 
 remain ambidextrous. However, what Is ordinarily 
 called ambidexterity in the adult Is more probably left- 
 handedness superposed on which is acquired right- 
 handedness. We shall not here Inquire how fun- 
 damentally right-handedness arose.'^ Once arisen those 
 who could not conform perhaps largely perished by 
 natural selection. From those who varied in the left- 
 handed direction, and escaped elimination, present left- 
 handed individuals have probably come. Left-handed- 
 ness and right-handedness may be considered alterna- 
 tive or unit characters In the Mendelian sense. In 
 the germ-plasm of the one may be said to be the de- 
 terminers for left-handedness ; in that of the other 
 for right-handedness. In terms of presence and ab- 
 sence, to which scheme the majority of Mendelian 
 characters appear to conform, right-handedness may 
 be conceived as dependent upon the presence of the 
 determiner in the germ-plasm, left-handedness and 
 ambidexterity as the result of its absence. But right- 
 
 ^ See "The Inheritance of Lefthandedness." American Breeders' 
 Magazine, 1911 j also "Studies in Human Heredity," Bull. Phil. Soc. 
 University of Virginia, 1912. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 121 
 
 handed individuals are of two sorts, those both of 
 whose parents were right-handed, and those with only 
 one parent right-handed. The former are said to be 
 of the duplex, the latter of simplex condition. Those 
 with both parents left-handed i.e., lacking the deter- 
 miner for right-handedness are said to be nuUiplex. 
 The right-handed condition dominates or masks the 
 left-handed condition in the hybrid generation. When 
 left-handed mate with left-handed all the children will 
 be left-handed. When the determiner for a character 
 is absent from the germ-plasm of the parent, that char- 
 acter cannot appear in the body of the offspring. 
 When simplex mate with simplex, one in every four will 
 be left-handed. This is the well-known i to 3 Men- 
 delian ratio for hybrid crosses with respect to a par- 
 ticular pair of unit characters. When simplex mate 
 witli nuUiplex one-half of the offspring will lack the de- 
 terminer for right-handedness and be left-handed. 
 
 In the classical experiments of Mendel with peas the 
 results are still more certain and clear. And they have 
 been verified in the case of many instances in animals 
 and man. The example of blue and brown eyes 
 worked out by Professor C. B. Davenport * in this coun- 
 try, and by Major C. C. Hurst » in England, is espe- 
 cially striking and conclusive. The above given ratio 
 of I to 3 for crosses of simplex hybrids and i to i for 
 simplex with nuUiplex cross could result only if the spe- 
 cial condition were fulfiUed with respect to the deter- 
 miners of the pair of contrasting characters, namely, 
 that they be contained in separate gerra-ceUs. That is, 
 no germ-ceU, either male or female, could contain both 
 
 8 Science, 1907, vol. 26, p. 589. » Nature, 1907, vol. 76, p. 558. 
 
122 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 the determiner for left-handedness and for right- 
 handedness — or, in conformity with the presence and 
 absence hypothesis only one-half of each class of germ- 
 cells could contain the determiner. Then assuming a 
 random mixture of such germ-cells from hybrid male 
 and female there would be one chance of a germ-cell 
 with a left-handed determiner meeting one of its kind, 
 to one with a right-handed determiner meeting one of 
 its kind, to two chances of a germ-cell with a right- 
 handed determiner meeting one with a left-handed de- 
 terminer. Again the law of chance under the altered 
 condition of simplex crossing with nuUiplex will give the 
 one to one ratio. The foregoing discussion has dealt 
 with the three central concepts of Mendelian inher- 
 itance; i) unit characters, i.e. such as apparently defy 
 further analysis and comport themselves as units in in- 
 heritance; 2) dominance, by virtue of which one of a 
 pair of alternative characters dominates or masks the 
 other in the first hybrid generation; 3) segregation, 
 producing a purity of germ-cells with respect to a par- 
 ticular pair of unit characters. Pure dominants and 
 pure recessives always breed true. Hybrids interbred 
 always produce dominants and recessives in the propor- 
 tion of I pure dominant to 2 hybrid dominants to i pure 
 recessive. This may on first hearing seem very compli- 
 cated. The significant fact is that definite law under- 
 lies human possibilities for development. Chance is 
 restricted to a limited numiber of possible combinations 
 of tlhe biparental stock of unit characters. 
 
 At least several score of human traits, physical, 
 mental and pathological are now thought by some to 
 conform more or less closely to this scheme. There is 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 123 
 
 not time to dwell upon numerous apparent exceptions, 
 e. g. blended inheritance (imperfect dominance), as an 
 instance of which the mulatto was, until recently, cited ; 
 Galtonian or ancestral inheritance, in accordance with 
 which one is thought to inherit to the extent of J^ from 
 his parents, %. from his grandparents, yi from his 
 great-grandparents, and so on ; and particulate inherit- 
 ance giving the mosaic or piebald condition. Suffice it 
 to say that were it not for exceptions genetic research 
 would by now be very uninteresting indeed; new data 
 are gradually bringing these exceptions into conformity 
 with Mendelian principles. Let me summarise this 
 much : man is not a blend, he is a complex, a mosaic of 
 which only part of the pattern is patent, an equal part 
 hidden. If the determiner for any portion of the pat- 
 tern is lacking in the germ-plasm it can never appear in 
 the soma unless introduced from another line of descent. 
 Germany and Austria are said to have become so im- 
 pressed with the hereditary aspect even of pauperism 
 and defect as to forbid marriage to recipients of poor 
 relief. 1" 
 
 There is some very suggestive evidence that es- 
 sentially the same principles govern the transmission of 
 mental and moral qualities.^^ Galton showed statistic- 
 
 I 10 Problems in Eugenics, p. 482. 
 
 11 However, there is as yet no complete agreement respecting the 
 precise significance of certain published human pedigrees, that is, 
 whether they warrant or contradict Mendelian interpretation. The 
 unit — character — factorial hypotheses of Mendelian teaching is at 
 present assailed by certain worlcers, viewed only symbolically or even 
 sceptically by others, and is by many regarded as insufficiently estab- 
 lished. But dissensions among scientists regardng the lanas of in- 
 heritance must not be suffered to obscure for us the fact of inheritance, 
 and the urgency in consequence of preventing reproduction among 
 defectives, and of encouraging an economically reasonable fecundity 
 
124 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 ally by a study of the families of the judges of Eng- 
 land between 1660 and 1865, that the chance of a son 
 of a judge showing eminent ability was about 500 times 
 as great as that for a man taken at random from the 
 population. Galton's study of the parentage of the 
 Fellows of the Royal Society showed equally convinc- 
 ingly that intellectual ability is hereditary. Schuster's 
 analysis of the class lists of Harrow and Oxford yielded 
 the same unequivocal evidence. The Italian biologist, 
 Antonio Marro, has recently called attention in sup- 
 port of the potency of hereditary influence to his obser- 
 vations that the Gauls and Germans still preserve the 
 moral qualities noted by Caesar and Tacitus centuries 
 ago. Attention is to be directed to such stocks as that 
 of Vesalius, the pioneer anatomist, whose ancestors 
 back four generations were distinguished physicians. 
 The history of the Edwards family of Connecticut is 
 well known ; as also that of the Lee family of Virginia ; 
 and the Breckenrldge family of Kentucky. The his- 
 tory of the Darwin family tells the same story. The 
 Bach family comprises 20 eminent composers and two 
 score of less eminent. Davenport calls attention to the 
 tenacious qualities of the peculiar protoplasm that ma- 
 tured a Bach at 22, a Beethoven at 13, and a Mendels- 
 sohn at 15. Mozart is said to have composed at the 
 age of 5, Potter to have shown extraordinary artistic 
 
 among the fitter stocks. Mr. Roosevelt touches the real heart of the 
 matter viewed positively and practically when he says: "The fun- 
 damental point to remember is that if there are not in the average 
 family four children, the race goes back, and that the element with 
 three children is stationary, and that the group where the average 
 family has two children or less represents a dying element in the 
 race." Outlook, Jan. 3, 1914.. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 125 
 
 talent at 15, and Titian at 13 ; and Burns was celebrated 
 as a poet at 16.^^ 
 
 Similarly with respect to defect, delinquency, va- 
 grancy, inebriety, pauperism and crime. The histories 
 of the Jukes and Nams ^^ of New York, the Hill 
 Folk ^* of Massachusetts, the Ishmaelites " of Indi- 
 ana, the Swiss family " Zero," and the Kallikak i« fam- 
 ily of New Jersey give unmistakable evidence that 
 these conditions are the result of defective germ- 
 plasm, not bad environment, and are as strictly heredi- 
 tary as eye colour or shape of ear. 
 
 Likewise with respect to many pathological charac- 
 ters, e.g. nervous and mental defects, cancer, nephritis, 
 rheumatism, tuberculosis, alcoholism, etc. The avail- 
 able evidence very forcibly suggests that the morbid con- 
 dition is due to the lack of a determiner upon which the 
 normal condition or resistance to infection depends. 
 Intermarriage of similarly seriously defective indi- 
 viduals is fraught with very grave dangers to the im- 
 mediate offspring and the future race. 
 
 This leads me to speak briefly of consanguineous mar- 
 riages. The evil effects of in-breeding are sadly patent 
 in isolated districts as the islands along our Atlantic 
 coast, and in inaccessible mountain sections. The hu- 
 man stock is here characterised by an unusual incidence 
 of physical and mental defects, the latter the more ob- 
 trusive. Close intermarriage is the secret of the de- 
 
 12 Heredity in Relation to Eugenics. 
 18 The Survey, March 2, 1912. 
 1* Eugenics Record Office Report, Aug., 1912. 
 
 i*i O. C. McCuIIoch : The Tribe of Ishmael. Inc. National Confer- 
 ence of Charities and Correction, Buffalo, N. Y., 1888. 
 16 H. H. Goddard: The Kallikak Family, 1912. 
 
126 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 cay of some of the royal families of Europe — Iso of 
 the strength of some, as can be explained. On the is- 
 land of Marken, some miles off the coast of Holland, 
 the inhabitants have intermarried for many generations. 
 Everybody is close kin by this time. The stock Is said 
 to be universally scrofulous, and the population of 
 Marken is probably doomed to rapid extinction unless 
 marriage with the Amsterdam Dutch, their nearest 
 neighbours, is facilitated. I have personally some half 
 dozen very significant histories of the evil of in-breed- 
 ing. The following will suffice for illustration. A 
 man of high intelligence married his first cousin. They 
 had 5 children, 3 boys and 2 girls. All suffered from 
 maniac depressive insanity, all remained unmarried, 
 and all died about the age of 35. The two girls were, 
 besides, deaf-mutes and left-handed. 
 
 But in-breeding is exactly what the stock-breeder re- 
 sorts to in producing a strong pedigreed stock. Why 
 this paradoxical result that the same procedure in one 
 instance preserves, in the other causes deterioration? 
 The stock breeder deals with pure pedigreed stock. 
 He breeds only from the perfect respecting the points he 
 considers valuable. To cross such with unknown stock 
 would mean contamination and deterioration. Few hu- 
 man stocks are strong at all points. Those closely re- 
 lated are likely to combine similar strengths and weak- 
 nesses. Strength in some points in the presence of 
 grave weakness is of little avail. A strong arm on an 
 imbecile, or a strong brain in a consumptive are of rela- 
 tively small value. In cross-breeding weakness and 
 defect are in general recessive to the corresponding 
 normal condition. One with weak kidneys thus, for ex- 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 127 
 
 ample, might marry one with weak lungs, and reason- 
 ably expect only healthy offspring. Such children if 
 they married cousins would be very likely to have a con- 
 siderable proportion of offspring combining the latent 
 weakness, now becoming patent because nuUiplex or du- 
 plex, in the presence of which strength in other points, 
 could be of little avail. Close intermarriage involves 
 grave risks to the offspring and the race, and should be 
 discouraged in the absence of pedigrees indicating ab- 
 sence of danger. 
 
 In apparent disproof of the eugenist's belief that 
 mental and moral qualities follow the same basal laws 
 of inheritance as have been established for many physi- 
 cal traits, you may be able to cite numerous instances of 
 this nature : a man of great intellect and superb charac- 
 ter, has only inferior or indifferent children. But I ask 
 you to look a little deeper before you complete your in- 
 ference. Every case must be judged in the light of the 
 environment." If the environment under which the son 
 of a great man is expected to develop into an equally 
 great man, on the assumption that intellect is hereditary, 
 is materially different from that in which the father actu- 
 ally did develop, it is manifestly unfair to conclude in 
 consequence of failure so to develop, that mental and 
 moral qualities are not hereditary. The potentialities 
 for such development may have been transmitted from 
 father to son, but a pampered environment may have 
 suppressed or left undeveloped the innate paternal 
 traits, and in consequence produced a vagrant or a 
 roue. Mistaken parental love often gets the better of 
 wise judgment and eliminates from the child's environ- 
 
 " Both pre- and post-natal. 
 
ia8 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 ment the very things needful for the full development 
 of the best hereditary endowments. Given the same 
 stock of inheritance, environments diaracterised by 
 stress and struggle on the one hand, and by ease and 
 luxury on the other, can no more produce the same men- 
 tal and moral result than they could physical result. 
 The product of one would likely be marked by mental, 
 moral and physical strength ; of the other, mental, moral 
 and physical weakness. 
 
 We must consider briefly also the eugenic aspect of 
 war.^" We are spending to-day almost $1,000,000 a 
 day in support of the army and navy.^^ This expendi- 
 ture must be met by the people of this country in the 
 shape of taxation. Taxation has doubled in the past 1 5 
 years. With rise in the cost of living and increased di- 
 rect and indirect taxation, income shrinks appallingly. 
 There results a postponement of marriage, itself work- 
 ing a lessened fecundity, coupled with smaller families 
 among the moderately circumstanced, and a relatively 
 increased fertility among the less fit who feel no keen 
 social and racial responsibility. On a peace footing, 
 the army and navy eliminate from productive and re- 
 productive life approximately a quarter of a million 
 picked men, in many respects the best the country has. 
 The French and German armies of to-day on peace foot- 
 ing number each more than half a million men in actual 
 service. This is more than 5 per cent, of each country's 
 men between the ages of 18 and 35. The guardians of 
 the world's peace number 6,000,000 men ; on war f oot- 
 
 ^^ Eugenics is vitally concerned also with immigration and race 
 mixtures. 
 
 ""Pensions, 191a, $152,986,433.72; Army, 1912, $93,088,664.00; 
 Navy, 1912, $123,518,549.00; total, $369,593,646.72." (L. J. W.) 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 129 
 
 ing 20,000,000. France is said to take annually 2 out 
 of 3 of all her young men arriving each year at military 
 age. And the birth rate for France has already fallen 
 I per thousand below the death rate. I need dwell no 
 further upon the racial significance of this feature of 
 militarism. 
 
 But what happens in actual war? Enormous quanti- 
 ties of dollars are deflected from productive use. This 
 of itself has its grave racial effect as shown above. But 
 still more seriously we kill men; and these the best a 
 country has. From 5 to 10 million men were lost in the 
 20 years of the Wars of the French Restoration and 
 Empire. One-third of these came from a single nation 
 whose total population at the beginning of the war was 
 25,000,000. The Thirty Years' War cost Germany 
 nearly three- fourths of her fighting men, about 10,- 
 000,000. In the last quarter of the 19th century, the 
 direct war losses totalled several human millions. Re- 
 member also that approximately for every young man 
 lost in war a similarly splendid young woman remains 
 unmarried. Rome declined and fell when her " hu- 
 man harvest became bad," the results of long con- 
 tinued conscription and using its young manhood as 
 fighting material. The " drooping spirit " of Europe 
 is undoubtedly due to no small extent to its recent 
 waste of its greatest asset, splendid young manhood 
 and womanhood. Think of the racial havoc of the 
 wars of Napoleon. Napoleon said, " I have an in- 
 come of 100,000 men! " 3,700,000 of the " elite of 
 Europe " were slain by Napoleon. The bonded war 
 debt of the world is already about four times the 
 amount of all the coin and bullion in the world; about 
 
I30 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 one-half the value of all the property of the world. 
 During the War between the States we lost 1,000,000 
 men and these were largely of the best we had. These 
 can never be replaced. America perhaps will never 
 reach the level of her potential world-influence because 
 so many of her best of a generation or two ago are 
 gone without leaving adequate representation. The 
 contra-selection worked by war is sufficiently indicated 
 by the fact that from 30 to 50 per cent, of the German 
 and French conscripts and voluntary enlistments in 
 England are rejected by the examining boards as unfit 
 for service because of undersize, infirmities and dis- 
 ease. 
 
 But this is not the whole story of militarism's racial 
 menace. The venereal diseases are to-day recognised 
 as aniong the most serious of dysgenic agencies. For 
 all venereal diseases the proportion in England was 32 
 per 10,000 of those applying for enlistment and re- 
 jected. Of those admitted to the army hospital, the 
 proportion was 1,000 per 10,000. Professor Kellogg 
 speaks as follows: "The Army is a veritable breed- 
 ing ground of the most dysgenic of human diseases. 
 While phthisis and cancer carry off their subjects at the 
 rate in England to-day, of 1,000 per year to each i,- 
 000,000 of population, syphilis kills only i per mil- 
 lion. It is therefore not a purifying but wholly a con- 
 taminating disease." ^^ 
 
 Facts such as these supply a portion of the argument 
 against war and preparation for war, both of which 
 are readily seen to be racially destructive. If either 
 
 20 Problems in Eugenics, p. sjo. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 131 
 
 were really any longer a necessity they might be patri- 
 otically tolerated. But arbitration has settled so many 
 international disagreements during the past 50 years 
 that it would seem to have fully demonstrated its ef- 
 ficacy and practicality for the satisfactory solution of 
 all probable misunderstandings between civilised na- 
 tions. War being unnecessary, large standing armies 
 and vast navies are an extravagance to say the least. 
 Moreover, the foremost nations are financially and 
 economically so interdependent that war between them 
 is the remotest possibility. War between England and 
 Germany, for example, would be as disastrous to victor 
 as conquered, and almost as disastrous to France as to 
 either. In fact such a war would probably be alto- 
 gether impossible, because none of these nations could 
 borrow any considerable amount of money In the face 
 of an already enormous bonded war debt, to carry on 
 war for any length of time. 
 
 Professor Cattell's recent suggestion regarding the 
 disposition of the army would seem to merit very 
 serious thought by our coming leaders, namely, to have 
 it care for the great federal engineering projects, safe- 
 guard the health of the people, inspect foods, do police 
 duty in towns and rural districts, build good roads, se- 
 cure pure water, and adequate sewerage. He sug- 
 gests that all officials of either the State or the munici- 
 pality (both men and women) should be members of 
 the United States Army. They should be subject to 
 drill and discipline. This would insure at all times a 
 well-organised and efficient army (and corps of nurses) 
 for defence and the suppression of riots. Such a plan 
 
132 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 would make civil war impossible. " The object of the 
 army," says he, " should be education and creation, not 
 destruction and dissipation." ^^ 
 
 Mr. Ginn's suggestion ^^ that an international army 
 and navy be established for guarding the world's peace, 
 by a union of about lo per cent, of the present naval 
 and military equipment of the foremost nations, ap- 
 peals to me as eminently sane and practical, and as de- 
 serving consideration by those whose interests can em- 
 brace the peace of the world. 
 
 Let me call your attention here also to an investiga- 
 tion of Professor Pearson's of London. Stated in 
 greatest brevity, Pearson has disclosed a decided lower- 
 ing of the English birth rate at a number of definite 
 periods corresponding closely to certain factory acts 
 reducing the economic value of children and applying 
 to bleaching and dyeing works, to copper, steel, and 
 iron industries, namely the Workshop Regulation Act 
 of 1867 ; the Education Act of 1876; the Factories and 
 Workshops Act of 1878; the Mines Act of 1887; and 
 the 1 89 1 act as to labour by women and children. 
 
 Pearson believes that the present precarious condi- 
 tion of England with respect to the birth rate is " a di- 
 rect effect of the destruction by legislation of the eco* 
 nomic value of the child." He advocates " reversal 
 of all legislation whic-h penalises the parentage of the 
 fit, and the restriction of all charity which favours the 
 parentage of the unfit." "We must directly or indi- 
 rectly," says he, " produce differential wages for the fit 
 
 ^^ Popular Science Monthly, April, 1912. 
 
 22 The M^orld Peace Foundation Pamphlet series, April, 191 1, No. i, 
 Part III, p. 8. 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 133 
 
 parent: in other words there must be endowment of fit 
 parentage at the expense of the unfit parent and of 
 childless men and women." 
 
 To quote further, " When we regard the present 6 
 or 7 million pounds a year — soon to be 10 or more 
 millions — given to a mere environmental 'reform, 
 which is applied long after the reproductive age cannot 
 possibly produce any permanent racial change, how 
 deeply one must regret the want of knowledge and of 
 statesmanship, which overlooked the naturally dis- 
 astrous policy of the factory acts, and did not seek its 
 opportunity to endow parentage rather than senility 
 with those annual millions I Even as a party cry I be- 
 lieve the endowment of parentage would have been ef- 
 fective ; as a step to meet grave racial dangers it would 
 have possessed real insight." ^^ Here is occasion for 
 serious thought and noble action on the part of the 
 young men whose lives will be cast more especially in 
 spheres of legislative influence. 
 
 In France also there is activity along these lines. 
 Here, however, there is perhaps more of practical work 
 and less of oratory and essay. The various agencies 
 which seek to counteract present economic conditions 
 which tend to penalise motherhood and to handicap the 
 man of family are cast largely along eugenic lines. 
 Numerous bonuses to large families and concessions to 
 the married here tend to preserve the middle class, the 
 backbone of any nation, the source from which under 
 present conditions, the men of ability and genius must 
 be recruited. For example in the city of Paris, 
 every workman receives at marriage a gift of 100 
 
 23 Eugenics Lab. Lect. Series V., 1909, p. 31. 
 
134 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 francs. Married workmen receive a gift of lOO 
 francs each at the birth of a child. The mother, if she 
 is in work or in service, has a right to six weeks' holiday 
 on full pay. Every workman who has more than three 
 children on his hands under the age of i6 receives the 
 sum of ICO francs per annum for each child after the 
 third. In the colonies also of England, Germany and 
 France research, agitation and legislation alotig eugenic 
 lines is advancing. 
 
 I do not want to be understood as wholeheartedly 
 subscribing to the full programme of maternity pen- 
 sions and differential wages. I believe the scheme must 
 be safeguarded with many checks and qualifications. 
 Without some coincident machinery allowing for alter- 
 ation of cases pari passu with changing circumstances, 
 I believe this scheme does more racial harm than good. 
 Those racially least deserving will not hesitate to ac- 
 cept its benefits. The more deserving will perhaps 
 feel too much self-respect. Only a lower type it seems 
 to me can accept state paternalism. A condition of re- 
 versed selection thus results. The unfit will increase 
 inordinately relative to the more fit. 
 
 Eugenics is very much interested also in two of the 
 church's sacraments, namely, confirmation and mar- 
 riage. Practically and briefly confirmation should, 
 among other more commonly accepted interests, em- 
 brace also instruction and consecration in matters of 
 racial responsibility. Sex and sex-relationship should 
 here be given the impress of things holy and sacred. 
 If the home and the school will not do this service, the 
 church cannot with impunity shirk it. Professor 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 135 
 
 Slaughter ^* claims that if the church is to grasp its 
 modern opportunity, failing which he thinks there is lit- 
 tle need of it, it must utilise its sacraments of confirma- 
 tion and marriage for their true purpose, namely, in the 
 Interests of an idealism which recognises the responsi- 
 bility laid upon the present by the future. Confirma- 
 tion is the psychological moment for instilling the eu- 
 genic ideal, and of awakening pure and noble aspira- 
 tions for being instrumental in the elevation of the race. 
 Sex is perhaps the most sacred gift vouchsafed to man, 
 and ignorance of its real significance is fraught with 
 untold misery to the individual and unending injury to 
 the race. 
 
 Still more practically, as minister, having won the 
 love, respect and sacred confidence of my charges in 
 confirmation, I would give every boy an opportunity to 
 pledge himself to a life of continence until marriage, 
 and every girl to the enforcement of the single stand- 
 ard of morals — not on any mystical or sentimental 
 ground primarily, but for the very practical reason of 
 personal gain in happiness and efficiency and of racial 
 welfare. If the Church will do this for mankind, pe- 
 culiarly fitted as it is for this service, she will establish 
 unbreakable bonds of love and gratitude, and' do a very 
 real and Christ-like work for the little children that He 
 loved, and upon the feet of whom the world will have 
 to move forward — or perchance backward. 
 
 As to marriage ; very many more churches should fol- 
 low the courageous example set by the authorities of 
 the Cathedral of SS. Peter and Paul of Chicago, under 
 
 2* The Eugenics Review, October, 1909, p. 9. 
 
136 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 the leadership of Dean Sumner, of refusing to give the 
 Church's sanction and blessing to a union where serious 
 physical or mental taint may bring suffering and inca- 
 pacity to an innocent party either of the present genera- 
 tion or the future offspring. Surely the requirement of 
 medical certificates guaranteeing freedom from ven- 
 ereal disease or serious genetic deficiency as a qualifica- 
 tion for church marriage is in no way discordant with 
 practical Christianity. 
 
 Where are we then, and what can we do as conscien- 
 tious, high-minded, rational and conservative eugenists ? 
 We can at least think the matter out for ourselves, and 
 then show the courage of our convictions in word and 
 deed. And I want to appeal to the altruism of the 
 youth here represented to harbour and cherish the eu- 
 genic ideal. You are carrying the sacred flame of life. 
 Be resolved that through no conscious fault of yours 
 shall it be dimmed. You represent terminal links in, a 
 chain and knots in a network of life. May the future 
 links and the coming web be not weakened at your 
 hands. But this is not all. You are your brother's 
 keeper! Your brothers are the human race. Even 
 patriotism should move you to want to make the Amer- 
 ican race the best and most virile of history. Where- 
 ever you go, whatever your profession in life may be, 
 racial conservation, the eugenic ideal, needs your guid- 
 ing counsel, your valiant help. 
 
 And I want especially to solicit the interest and aid 
 of the coming legal profession. Negative eugenics 
 claim our immediate attention. Effective procedure 
 demands appropriate legal assistance. Unless we 
 somehow at once cut off our defective protoplasm it 
 
AS SEEN BY THE ANATOMIST 137 
 
 would seem that as a nation we are in grave danger. 
 As I said above we are segregating only about i per 
 cent. — and this not effectively — of the 5 to 10 per 
 cent, that ought to be forbidden reproductive liberty. 
 It is perhaps economically impossible at this juncture 
 to adequately isolate our defectives. We are per- 
 haps at the point of a crisis. We need the help of eu- 
 thenists, to be sure, but what we most insistently need 
 at present is a workable law authorising the humane 
 procedure of sterilization of the grossly defective, 
 alarmingly fertile, anti-social class. Twelve States in 
 our Union now have such laws, but they are nowhere 
 operative due to circumstances that test cases have 
 come before the courts under the constitutional pro- 
 hibition of " unusual and cruel punishment." At- 
 torneys-general are loath to bring these cases to trial; 
 meanwhile the action of the law is stayed. The mis- 
 take it seems to me was to have considered this sterili- 
 zation law a portion of the Penal Code. Steriliza- 
 tion can probably not be defended as a punitive meas- 
 ure. The Bill of Rights would seem to be violated. 
 But such laws are perhaps not properly included in the 
 Penal Code. They are peculiarly public and racial 
 health measures, .and as such should form part of the 
 health code, to be administered under the State Police 
 Powers.^^ 
 
 I want to quote a recent statement by Dr. Lewellys 
 F. Barker, Professor of Medicine at the Johns Hop- 
 kins University, " Public opinion has not been prop- 
 erly formed as yet in this matter (of eugenics). So- 
 
 25 Even thus framed and interpreted the law has recently been de- 
 clared unconstitutional in New Jersey. 
 
138 V. JORDAN: EUGENICS 
 
 clety must he brought to the point where it realises that 
 it is its duty to protect itself against the propagation of 
 a degenerate stock. Only after it has been brought 
 to its senses and shown that inebriates, epileptics, the 
 insane and the feeble-minded, when they become par- 
 ents, are much more likely than are healthy people to 
 have children with insane tendency, with alcoholic 
 tendency, with epileptic tendency or with other de- 
 generate tendency, can much progress be made." *® 
 
 I believe I have now included everybody's possible 
 interest. Whether man or woman and whatever your 
 sphere of activity, more especially if you enter law, 
 medicine, philanthropy or the church, you have a 
 sacred eugenic responsibility. And unless one take 
 very serious thought, and act in accordance with the best 
 counsel he may readily become the cause of consider- 
 able racial subtraction and contamination. Moreover, 
 just as we are now guarding the public healthi so it is 
 our yet more clear and sacred duty to guard the health 
 of the race, by every humane effective means at our 
 command.^'' 
 
 26 " On the Prevention of Racial Deterioration and Degeneracy, Es- 
 pecially by Denying the Privilege of Parenthood to the Manifestly 
 Unfit." Pamphlet, 1910; p. 9. 
 
 ^'' For a complete bibliography of American works on eugenics in 
 general, the reader should consult "Die Rassenhygiene in den Verein- 
 igten Staaten von Nordamerika" by G£za von Hoffmann. J. F. Leh- 
 manns, Munich, 1913. 
 
,VI 
 
 EUGENICS FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE 
 GENETICIST 
 
 PROFESSOR H. T. WEBBER. 
 
 Introduction — The science of eugenics is con- 
 cerned with the improvement of the human race 
 through better breeding. It is generally recognised 
 that the laws of heredity that maintain in animals and 
 plants, are also in general applicable to the human race. 
 The practice of careful methods of breeding to main- 
 tain the various races of animals and plants in the 
 highest possible state of perfection is known to be a 
 necessary factor in successful agriculture. Until very 
 recently, however, no attempt has been made to apply 
 the same principles to the improvement of the human 
 race. Hundreds of men in every State are giving their 
 time and attention to the improvement of plants and 
 animals, but as yet only a few dozen men in the entire 
 United States are engaged in the study of eugenics. 
 
 The present era is characterised as one of great ad- 
 vancement in all directions. Human time has become 
 so valuable that the intelligence of the world is largely 
 directed toward the devising of labour-saving machines. 
 We now gin our cotton by machinery; we harvest and 
 thresh our grain by machinery; we card and spin by 
 machinery; and we knit and sew by machinery. These 
 machines increase the efficiency of man to the extent of 
 
 139 
 
HO VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 many millions of hands. We dash from one corner 
 of the earth to the other on iron rails; we spin from 
 one place to another in horseless carriages ; we have no 
 time to walk; we telegraph and telephone without even 
 the trouble of stringing wires ; the impossible has been 
 accomplished and we even fly — no longer the impos- 
 sible dream but a reality. 
 
 All of this has been accomplished to save man's time 
 and allow him greater opportunity to seek enjoyment 
 and to guarantee to him greater safety in living. Yet 
 what of man himself? In his hurry to help himself 
 man has forgotten himself. It is estimated that man 
 in the abstract is only half efficient. He lives only half 
 his allotted time and meanwhile eats twice as much as 
 he should. Half of those that are born to him die 
 before reaching a productive age or are incapacitated 
 by being mentally deficient. (Three per cent, of our 
 population are sick all the time and unable to work. 
 According to statistics compiled by the Eugenics Com- 
 mittee of the American Breeders' Association ^ in 1900 
 (the twelfth census) 634,877 or .8 per cent, of the 
 population of the United States were under custodial 
 care. It was also estimated that at least 3,000,000 or 
 nearly 4 per cent, were more or less, defective but not 
 under State care, while around the border line just 
 above this class, were 7,000,000 or nearly 10 per cent, 
 of our total population. In the light of such figures can 
 man be considered an efficient machine? Ruskin as- 
 serts that " There is no wealth but life," and Tille 
 affirms that " A nation is composed not of property nor 
 of provinces, but of men." It is fortunate, then, that 
 
 1 " Problems in Eugenics,'' Vol. I, p. 464. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 141 
 
 at last attention is centering on man himself. What 
 are we doing and what should we do to conserve human 
 life and efficiency, the greatest source of wealth in the 
 world? 
 
 We are told that the cost of living is increasing and 
 on this point we demand no proof. The increasing 
 difficulty of earning a living is patent to all. The com- 
 plicated life which we live makes it difficult to determine 
 the fundamental causes of this increased cost of living, 
 but it is certain that a considerable portion of the diffi- 
 culty is due to the increasing number of dependents. 
 The care of the insane, feeble-minded, incompetent 
 paupers, epileptics, deaf, blind, and others under cus- 
 tody, costs about $100,000,000 annually, and no one 
 can estimate the amount to which this fund would be 
 swollen If we could add to it the funds that are ex- 
 pended privately In the care of defectives outside of 
 Institutions and In private charities. Doubtless the 
 greatest of all difficulties Is to be found In the compara- 
 tively small percentage of the population that are actual 
 producers. The world demands men of greater 
 strength and ability. To succeed the race must be 
 vigorous, vital and healthy. The greatest of all prob- 
 lems Is the production of good men and women. 
 
 Are we to conclude then that the tide of human 
 heredity is declining? The great advance In knowl- 
 edge is likely to deceive us into assuming an improve- 
 ment in mental calibre at least. It must be remem- 
 bered that one generation builds on the knowledge of 
 the past. Galton estimated that England has pro- 
 duced one man of supreme excellence, where the old 
 culture of Athens produced two hundred. So far as 
 
142 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 can now be determined it would seem probable that 
 man in the Stone Age possessed about the same mental 
 power as does man to-day, and, doubtless, was less sub- 
 ject to disease. 
 
 Every advance in the science of medicine and surgery 
 serves to prolong life and increase the number of weak- 
 lings. True, we would not have it otherwise and wel- 
 come every method of conserving human life, but it 
 cannot be doubted that the improvement in medical 
 science has led to the survival and reproduction of a 
 very large number of weak individuals, that under the 
 less civilised conditions of a few centuries ago would 
 have been cut off without progeny. The improvement 
 in our methods of living, the better understanding of 
 hygienic laws, the spread of the Christian spirit, indeed, 
 the developments of civilisation, have tended all over 
 and more and more to orotect and nurture the weak- 
 lings of the race. 
 
 Inheritance versus Environment. — From these and 
 doubtless other causes, defectives and criminals have 
 come to form such a large proportion of the population 
 as to cause serious alarm. We must seek the cause 
 and determine the best methods of remedying the con- 
 dition. A considerable number of careful students of 
 social conditions have considered that the primary cause 
 of such degeneration is to be sought in the influence of 
 development under bad environmental conditions. 
 There is no denying that environment is a very potent 
 factor in the life of the individual. The development 
 under conditions of extreme poverty with all its at- 
 tendant evils, improper nourishment and difficulties, 
 is likely to produce poorly developed individuals phys- 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 143 
 
 ically, and warp and pervert the moral nature. Henry 
 George, Jr.,^ ascribes the increase that he finds in in- 
 sanity, suicide, and crime, to the evil influence of pov- 
 erty. 
 
 Mrs. Ellen H. Richards in her very interesting work 
 on " Euthenics " has given a valuable exposition of this 
 phase of the great human race problem. She would 
 have us believe that the environment, unwholesome 
 food, uncleanliness, crowding in tenement houses and 
 the like, are the primary causes of racial degeneracy, 
 and that through the correction of these causes much of 
 the deterioration could be arrested. 
 
 The eugenist, while willing to give weight to such 
 causes as having influence, would not be willing to grant 
 that environment is the main active agency in caus- 
 ing insanity, feeble-mlndedness, and criminality. He 
 would maintain that these are heritable characters and 
 are born and not made. We have thus the two doc- 
 trines, euthenics and eugenics, upheld as the causes of 
 racial deterioration and decay. 
 
 Dr. Davenport^ in a very able article on this subject 
 has summarised the matter as follows : " The thought- 
 ful mind must concede that, as Is often the case where 
 doctrines are opposed, each view Is partially Incomplete 
 and really false. The truth does not lie between the 
 doctrines; it comprehends them both. What a child 
 becomes is always the -resultant of two sets of forces 
 acting from the moment the fertilised egg begins Its 
 development — one is the set of internal tendencies and 
 
 2 " Menace of Privilege." 
 
 3 Davenport, C. B. " Euthenics and Eugenics." Popular Science 
 Monthly, January, ign. 
 
144 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 the other is the set of external influences. . . . De- 
 velopment is a form of behaviour and how a child shall 
 develop physically, mentally and morally is determined 
 not by conditions alone, not by blood alone, but by con- 
 ditions and blood; by the nature of the environment and 
 the nature of the protoplasm." 
 
 So much emphasis has been placed in literature on 
 the importance of environment that it is desirable to 
 consider its effect rather fully and arrive at a correct 
 understanding of its influence so far as its importance 
 in breeding is concerned. Lamarck and his followers 
 assigned to environment an all important part in direct- 
 ing and inducing variation and evolution in plants and 
 animals. In Darwin's exposition of evolution environ- 
 ment played an equally important part but in a very 
 different way, acting primarily as a selective agency, the 
 survival of the fittest being the main part of the theory. 
 It remained for Weismann, however, to clearly define 
 the environmental problem in its relation to heredity, 
 which from the eugenics standpoint, is of the most 
 fundamental importance. Weismann concluded after a 
 painstaking investigation of the subject, that acquired 
 characters are not inherited. By acquired characters 
 was meant characters acquired during the life of the in- 
 dividual. In general, his conclusions are now com- 
 monly accepted and would form the basis of our gen- 
 eral understanding of the subject in eugenics. A stalk 
 of corn that had grown to excessive height because of 
 having grown under exceptionally favourable circum- 
 stances, would not transmit to its progeny its greater 
 size. A man dwarfed and deformed by ill usage and 
 hardship during his life would not be expected to 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 145 
 
 transmit his dwarfed and misshapen form to his prog- 
 eny. In like manner if a man reared under bad moral 
 influences and in poverty, developed criminal tenden- 
 cies, he would not necessarily be expected to transmit 
 these tendencies to his progeny unless he had inherited 
 a weakness in this direction. The germ cells are dif- 
 ferentiated early in the development of the embryo and 
 are not influenced by any ordinary effect of environ- 
 ment. In the case of excessive use of alcoholic stimu- 
 lants and drugs, apparently there may be an influence 
 as will be pointed out later. So far as the effect of 
 environment on heredity is concerned it may thus 
 be concluded that in the human race, as in plants 
 and animals, environment is of secondary impor- 
 tance. 
 
 It is also doubtful if we have not over-estimated the 
 effect of environment on the development of the in- 
 dividual. In Galton's study of twins there was found 
 no tendency for similarity of education and home life 
 to render those originally unlike any more similar with 
 advancing years. Woods * In his study of royalty has 
 arrived at similar conclusions. He states: "Yet, in 
 spite of the fact that the environments show wide varia- 
 tions, these appear to be negligible factors in the pro- 
 duction of successful achievement or In the creation of 
 virtuous or viciou? types. That successful achievement 
 is almost entirely due to differences In germ plasm and 
 Is little influenced by environment Is the necessary con- 
 clusion." 
 
 * Woods, Dr. Frederick Adams. " Mental and Moral Heredity 
 in Royalty." New York. Henry Holt. 1906. And "Laws of 
 Diminishing Environmental Influences." Popular Science Monthly, 
 April, 1910. 
 
146 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 Thorndike's ^ study of twins in the schools of New 
 York City led to similar conclusions. He shows that 
 " Such likenesses and differences in environment as act 
 upon children living in New York City and attending 
 its public schools are utterly inadequate to explain the 
 likenesses and differences found in the traits measured 
 and are in all probability inadequate to explain more 
 than a small fraction of them." 
 
 Pearson and his pupils have arrived at similar con- 
 clusions from a study of the relative influence of hered- 
 ity and environment on the eyesight of children.^ 
 
 Woods '' in summarising his studies on this sub- 
 ject states " In fact it will be surprising if any one suc- 
 ceeds in demonstrating an important environmental 
 control acting on psychological differences, exhibited in 
 different mental and moral traits. All the evidence 
 that we possess renders it highly improbable that any 
 of the ordinary differences in human environment, such 
 as riches or poverty, good or bad home life, have more 
 than a very slight effect in modifying these complex and 
 high organic functions, the improvement of which is 
 the hope of the altruist and the reformer." 
 
 It would seem that the effect of nurture or environ- 
 ment on the individual may have been over-estimated 
 but whether it is as yet safe to draw such sweeping con- 
 clusions would appear doubtful. That Woods' con- 
 clusions will hold in cases where the necessities of life 
 
 IS Thorndike, E. L. " Measurements of Twins." Arch, of Philoso- 
 phy, Psychology and Scientific Methods. New York Science Press, 
 1905. 
 
 8 Amy Harrington and Karl Pearson. " A First Study of the In- 
 heritance of vision and the Relative Influence of Heredity and En- 
 vironment on Sight." London, igog. 
 
 7 Woods, Frederick Adams. I.e. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 147 
 
 are provided seems probable, but in the squalid condi- 
 tions existing in the slums of cities where children are 
 poorly nourished and housed and where the home life 
 is the poorest we can imagine, it is doubtful whether 
 traits will not be developed that under more whole- 
 some conditions would not be shown. We may, of 
 course, explain mental deficiencies or moral depravity 
 developed under such slum conditions as due primarily 
 to inherent heritable tendencies which the life of the 
 individual has only served to accentuate. 
 
 In general biology the whole question of the effect 
 of the environment on the individual during its life and 
 the effect of such change on the germ plasm is again- 
 being opened up and even here we must await further 
 evidence before any positive conclusion can be deduced. 
 If this is true in the case of animals and plants it is 
 even more markedly true in the case of man. 
 
 It would seem certain that there should be no inter- 
 ruption in our attempts to improve such bad environ- 
 mental conditions, at least until more conclusive evi- 
 dence is available, and in any case Christian charity and 
 decency demand that such cesspools of humanity be 
 purified and elevated so far as lies within our power. 
 
 The Laws of Heredity. — Regardless of what in- 
 fluence is assigned to environment, it needs no argu- 
 ment to convince us of the importance of heredity. 
 The fact that we inherit from our ancestors our various 
 physical and mental characters is too well known to 
 require proof. Until recently, however, the under- 
 standing of how characters were inherited was so in- 
 definite that it was not possible to formulate principles. 
 According to Galton's law of ancestral inheritance the 
 
148 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 offspring contained half of the blood or heritage of 
 each parent and one-quarter the heritage of each grand- 
 parent and this quantitative idea of inheritance with 
 all its indefiniteness was the best explanation available 
 until in 1900 when the now famous Mendelian prin- 
 ciples of inheritance were brought to attention. It is 
 to these laws or principles of inheritance that we owe 
 the great advancement which has been made recently 
 in the study of heredity. We recognise men by their 
 distinctive characters and rarely do we have acquaint- 
 ances so nearly alike but that we can easily recognise 
 their different facial expressions. One individual has 
 blue eyes, another black eyes ; one light blond hair and 
 another black or brown hair ; one straight hair, another 
 curly hair. 
 
 In the study of inheritance the different distinct char- 
 acters of this kind are studied rather than the ensemble 
 of all characters. It has been found that characters 
 are inherited as distinct entities and follow definite laws 
 of segregation and recombination. It is a well known 
 fact that a child may inherit its eye colour from one 
 parent and its hair colour from the other parent, and 
 the recognisable characters of a child in general are a 
 mosaic of the characters of its parents. To understand 
 the inheritance of characters, it is necessary to have a 
 clear conception of what are termed contrasted pairs 
 of characters or character pairs. An individual cannot 
 have blue eyes and at the same time black eyes, or be 
 both tall and short. These are illustrations of char- 
 acter pairs. The majority, if not all, of the characters 
 in which one individual differs from another form such 
 character pairs. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 149 
 
 It is recognised, of course, that a character Is not 
 transmitted as such from parent to child but the germ 
 cells which unite must contain the units or potentialities 
 which lead to the formation of such characters. The 
 theoretical units of protoplasms which represent the 
 character and are carried over in the germ cells are 
 designated as determiners, and are to be understood as 
 merely theoretical units. It is not known In what form 
 the character determiner is carried over in reproduction 
 but that it Is carried over is certain. 
 
 In the case of eye colour. It has been found by Daven- 
 port and by Hurst that the characteristic colour of the 
 eye is due to the formation of pigment in the iris. 
 When no pigment is present the eye is blue and different 
 shades of brown or black are produced If pigments are 
 present. If an individual having blue eyes Is mated 
 with another having blue eyes, no pigment determiner 
 being present in either case, the eyes of the offspring 
 will be blue. If an Individual with black eyes and trans- 
 mitting the black eye determiners is mated with an in- 
 dividual with blue eyes, I. e., without the determiner for 
 black iris pigment, the resulting offspring will receive 
 the pigment determiner from the black eyed parent and 
 will have black eyes, as the pigment determiner received 
 from one parent will be sufficient to cause the develop- 
 ment of pigment and the blue colour will be covered 
 up or masked. The body cells of this offspring will 
 contain the determiners of both characters, that is of the 
 presence of pigment (black) and the absence of pig- 
 ment (blue), but when the germ cells are formed, the 
 contrasted characters segregate and certain cells receive 
 the black pigment determiners ; while in certain others. 
 
ISO VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 no pigment determiners are received, and these transmit 
 blue eye colour. There are thus formed two types of 
 germ cells so far as this one character pair is concerned. 
 Such an individual is able to transmit either black or blue 
 eye colour. 
 
 If this individual that forms approximately equal 
 numbers of germ cells with the black pigment deter- 
 miners (black eyes) and without the pigment deter- 
 miners (blue eyes) is mated with an individual of 
 similar germinal constitution, i. e., transmitting both 
 black and blue, it will be seen by careful study that there 
 will result four possible combinations of the characters 
 under consideration. If we let large B stand for the 
 dominant black pigment determiner and small b for 
 blue or the absence of black pigment, the four possible 
 combinations would be B x B, b x b, B x b, and b x B. 
 Of these resulting unions the first, B x B, would give 
 an individual with black eyes and transmitting only this 
 character. The second combination, b x b, would give 
 an individual with blue eyes as no black is present and 
 would be able to transmit only the blue eye colour. 
 The other two unio^ns B x b and b x B, are in reality the 
 same, as it makes no difference from which parent a 
 determiner is derived, and would give individuals with 
 black eyes that would transmit both blue and black since 
 they would form two kinds of germ cells with refer- 
 ence to this character pair. Thus is obtained the 
 famous Mendelian formula i BB : 2 Bb : i bb, so far 
 as gametic constitution is concerned, or, if considering 
 the colour of eye exhibited by the offspring of such 
 unions, the formula, 3 black: i blue. 
 
 This law of segregation of characters in the germ 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 151 
 
 cells and their recombination in fecundation has fur- 
 nished the basis for an intelligent understanding of the 
 inheritance of characters in plants and animals and an 
 interpretation and understanding of many phenomena 
 of inheritance that were before entirely unintelligible. 
 
 The Origin of New Characters. — In the study of 
 human breeding it Is also important to question where 
 and how new characters arise. The study of this ques- 
 tion has naturally been limited mainly to plants and 
 animals. Time will permit only the statement that it 
 is now generally conceded that new characters usually 
 arise suddenly, as so-called mutations, and when once 
 formed are usually inherited. As illustrations of the 
 sudden origin of such characters the cases of extra toes, 
 talUessness, double spurs, and webbed toes in poultry 
 that were studied by Davenport, may be cited. Such 
 characters usually arise complete and perfect In the first 
 generation and are usually in considerable degree herit- 
 able. 
 
 Not Infrequently similar abnormal characters are 
 produced in man, as for instance extra toes or fingers, 
 webbed toes and fingers, albinism, and the like. Doubt- 
 less such characters as hairlessness and talUessness in 
 man were originally produced suddenly in the evolution 
 of the human species, as has been the case in the origin 
 of similar characters in certain races of dogs a'nd 
 poultry. Not Infrequently individuals of plants and 
 animals with new characters arise suddenly and per- 
 fectly developed forming the beginnings of new races. 
 Such was the origin of the first dwarf cupId sweet-pea, 
 and such has been the origin of many of the now impor- 
 tant races of plants and animals. 
 
152 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 There is little evidence to indicate that new characters 
 of value are likeily to form in man. The characters 
 that most commonly arise suddenly in man that may 
 be termed new characters, such as extra fingers, club- 
 foot, and the like, are usually to be considered as 
 abnormalities the addition of which to our human herit- 
 age would be a decided detriment. Yet such human 
 characters are in many instances known to be heritable 
 and to apparently follow the Mendelian law of inherit- 
 ance as above outlined. The network of human herit- 
 age is contaminated with the determiners of many such 
 detrimental characters. 
 
 Inheritance of Human Characters. — Evidence as to 
 the method of inheritance of human characters is more 
 difficult to obtain than in plants and animals, but the 
 careful studies, particularly of the Eugenics Record 
 Office at Cold Spring Harbor, L. I., in this country, 
 served to show that apparently a very large num- 
 ber of characters in general follow the Mendelian 
 law of inheritance as outlined above for eye colour. 
 It is of the highest importance for the advance of prac- 
 tical eugenics that the method of inheritance of all 
 important characters be determined at the earliest pos- 
 sible date. 
 
 We now know that eye colour, skin colour, hair col- 
 our, hair form, curliness or straightness of hair, stature, 
 obesity, and the hke, are in general, inherited in con- 
 formity with the MendeUan principles. General in- 
 terest in the inheritance of human characters centres 
 primarily on the inheritance of mental and physical de- 
 fects and deformities. It matters little whether we 
 fully understand the scientific theories of such inherit- 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 
 
 153 
 
 ance, as we are concerned here primarily with the fact 
 of inheritance. 
 
 The studies of Goddard on the inheritance of feeble- 
 mindedness furnish numerous instances that show con- 
 
 D- 
 
 Ot-D 
 
 [55nS^ B-T-^ <2) 
 
 OHD 
 
 I I I I I i i t I I'l T i 
 
 THfSE ALL Off U UN0ef(3\ VAS. 
 
 \h ' ^In](n)(n) 
 
 Fig. I. Inheritance of Feeble-mindedness (Goddard). 
 
 clusively the herltability of this most common defect. 
 Figures i and 2 show one of nature's experiments 
 studied by Goddard. The central union in Fig. i is 
 of an alcoholic man with a normal woman. The result 
 of this union was 19 children, of which 13 died in 
 
 Q 
 
 ■O-i-a 
 
 B- 
 
 [JdniJilSl I3-r^(^l& 
 
 ■o 
 
 Fig. 3. Inheritance of Feeble-mindedness {Goddard). 
 
 infancy, 3 are distinctly normal, i is alcoholic, and I 
 is neurotic. This alcoholic man had a congenital de- 
 fect in the number of joints in the fingers but none of 
 the 19 children showed the deformity. It should be 
 
154 
 
 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 noted that he had a feeble-minded half-brother but 
 otherwise the pedigree is fairly clear. 
 
 Later this alcoholic man married again and his sec- 
 ond wife (Fig. 2) was an alcoholic, feeble-minded 
 woman, who had a feeble-minded brother and whose 
 parents were both alcoholic. The result of this union 
 were 8 feeble-minded children, i of which was also 
 deaf. All of these 8 children inherited the father's 
 
 
 » fly INK. iHr.iNF.flS— I — ^■mr.iMF.iHF. H^ m 
 
 n^S^ 66 
 
 Fig. 3. Inheritance of Feeble-mindedness (Goddard). 
 
 defective fingers. Apparently the first wife was prepo- 
 tent and overcame her husband's abnormality. The 
 second wife, however, with weakened alcoholic germ 
 cells allowed him to transmit his abnormality. 
 
 A case that would be difficult to equal in its ex- 
 hibition of sexual depravity and transmission of de- 
 based mentality (also from Goddard) is shown in Fig. 
 3. Here a feeble-minded, alcoholic, sexually immoral 
 man married a feeble-minded, tuberculous woman. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 155 
 
 The pedigrees of both as far back as known show 
 serious mental defects. The result of this union was 
 II children, 6 of which fortunately died in infancy. 
 One daughter had 10 children by three different men, 
 all feeble-minded and all practically illegitimate as con- 
 ception in each case took place before marriage. 
 
 The study of feeble-mindedness indicates that this 
 character is to be considered as a Mendelian recessive 
 in its inheritance and that from two feeble-minded in- 
 dividuals, in general, only feeble-minded offspring can 
 result. It must be remembered, however, that there 
 are various degrees of feeble-mindedness and the 
 methods of determining the degree of this deficiency are 
 as yet too inaccurate to give fully trustworthy results. 
 The frequency of the occurrence of feeble-mindedness 
 in the children of alcoholic and sexually degenerate 
 parents is noteworthy. It has also been estimated that 
 about 16 per cent, of the feeble-minded come from con- 
 sanguineous marriages. 
 
 Similar to feeble-mindedness in its inheritance are 
 also such defects as epilepsy and insanity. In Fig. 4 
 is reproduced one of the charts from Davenport and 
 Weeks' study of the inheritance of epilepsy,* which 
 shows in marked degree the association of epilepsy 
 with such defects as feeble-mindedness, alcoholism, va- 
 grancy, criminality and sexual degeneracy. 
 
 Insanity exists in many different forms and is closely 
 related to other neurotic defects. " Cannon and Ros- 
 anoff state that " One of the first facts that appeared 
 
 8 Davenport, C. B., and Weeks, David F. "First Study of In- 
 heritance in Epilepsy." Bull. No. 4 Eugenics Record 0£Bce. Nov. 
 1911. Fig. 6. 
 
156 
 
 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 in the study of pedigrees was that any form of insanity 
 or even all the forms of hereditary insanity do not con- 
 stitute an independent hereditary character, but that 
 they are closely related to imbecility, epilepsy, hysteria, 
 and the various mental eccentricities that are not usually 
 included under the designation insanity." ® 
 
 Fig. 4. This chart shows the product of a feeble-minded man and 
 an epileptic, opium-eating, unchaste woman. The father's father was 
 feeble-minded and a " criminal " and, besides the man in question, he 
 had an epileptic son, and three alcoholics, of whom one had the 
 vagrant tendency (W). The mother's germ-plasm does not show up 
 much better, for she has a feeble-minded and alcoholic brother, who 
 lives at the almshouse, an alcoholic sister who is a prostitute and a 
 vagrant, and three alcoholic nephews of whom one (C) has been in 
 jail (4). Two children were born alive to this pair 35 odd years 
 ago. The first was feeble-minded and died before she was fourteen, 
 the second is at the State Village for Epileptics. Case 2857: {Daven- 
 port & Weeks.) 
 
 The interrelation of such mental defects has also 
 been emphasised by Davenport, Mott and other stu- 
 dents of the subject. Figure 5, a pedigree given by 
 Cannon and RosanofE shows the inheritance of insanity 
 
 8 Cannon, Gertrude L. and Rosanoff, A. J. Preliminary Report of 
 a Study of Heredity of Insanity in the Light of the Mendelian Laws. 
 Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, Vol. 38, No. 5, pp. 272-279, 
 191 1. Also republished Eugenics Record Office Ball., No. 3. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 
 
 157 
 
 and its association with epilepsy and neuropathic dis- 
 orders. 
 
 It is needless to repeat further pedigrees of such de- 
 generate families. Cases of similar families are doubt- 
 less known in almost every community. Some locali- 
 ties, however, are nearly free from insanity as shown 
 by Dr. Southard in his study of the geographical dis- 
 tribution of insanity In Massachusetts. He found that 
 
 E 
 
 5^4 
 
 ffl u^mwuuS^momJ^ 
 
 Fig. 5. The central mating, II, 7, II, 8, is that of a man, II, 7, 
 who is subject to melancholia and has an insane brother and another 
 who is neuropathic. His wife is normal but her mother was neuro- 
 pathic. The product of this union is n children of whom 3 are neu- 
 ropathic. One of these insane children marries a normal person 
 (probably of neuropathic ancestry), and has a neuropathic children 
 besides i that is epileptic, IV, ±. E, epileptic; /, insane; N, normal; 
 shaded sjonbols imply some neuropathic condition other than insan- 
 ity. {Cannon and Rosanoff, 1911.) 
 
 in three island townships and nine scattered townships 
 in the Berkshire Hill region there had been no insane 
 committed during the decade 1901 to 19 10, while in 
 twelve other regions the commitments had been at the 
 rate of 15 per 1000 and in the highest of these at the 
 rate of 19 per 1000. In general, the districts of high- 
 est commitment presented distinctly worse medical and 
 
158 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 social conditions indicating that insanity occurs in the 
 background of more general diseases, suggesting a cor- 
 relation between insanity, crime, pauperism, and dis- 
 ease.^" 
 
 That criminality and pauperism are inherited and 
 related to such mental defects as feeble-mindedness, 
 epilepsy and insanity, can scarcely be doubted after a 
 study of the now famous history of the Jukes and Zero 
 families, together with the more recent and careful 
 studies of Estabrook and Davenport on the Nam 
 Family and of Danielson and Davenport on the Hill 
 Folk. Let us hope that there are not many such de- 
 generate families, but doubtless there are many more 
 than we would expect. 
 
 In a recent investigation in a region in New Jersey 
 known as the " Pines," it was found that i out of 
 every 155 of the inhabitants was a dependent. One 
 degenerate woman, known as " Mag," had furnished 
 to the State 292 descendants of which 174 were de- 
 generates of various types, imbeciles, criminals, drunk- 
 ards, sexual degenerates, and the like. 
 
 The evidence regarding the inheritability of various 
 neuropathic diseases shown by the families studied by 
 Davenport and Weeks, will form an interesting sum- 
 mary to this part of our discussion. 
 
 INHERITANCE OF MENTAL CHARACTERS 
 
 Feeble-minded X feeble-mindedi42 children, all feeble-minded. 
 Feeble-minded X feeble-minded 21 children, 16 feeble-minded, 
 
 5 epileptic. 
 
 10 Southard, E. E. " Notes on the Geographical Distribution of 
 Insanity in Massachusetts, 1901-1910." Am. Breeders' Mag., Vol. Ill, 
 
 pp. I1-80. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 
 
 159 
 
 Feeble-minded X insane 15 children, 9 normal, i 
 
 epileptic, 4 feeble-minded, 
 and I neurotic. 
 
 Feeble-minded X normal 17 children, 7 normal, 10 
 
 defective. 
 
 Feeble-'minded X alcoholic... 61 children, 5 normal, 10 
 
 epileptic, 17 feeble-minded, 
 5 neurotic, i sexually im- 
 moral and 23 died early. 
 
 Epileptic X feeble-minded.... 21 children, 5 epileptic, 16 
 
 feeble-minded. 
 
 Epileptic X epileptic 3 children, all epileptic. 
 
 Epileptic X neurotic 53 children, 22 normal, 15 
 
 epileptic, 3 feeble-minded, 
 9 neurotic, 2 alcoholic, and 
 2 sexually immoral. 
 
 Epileptic X normal 35 children, 16 normal, 19 
 
 defective. 
 
 The association of alcoholism, syphilis and tuber- 
 culosis with mental degeneracy leads to the question as 
 to whether such degeneracy is not stimulated or caused 
 by these poisons acting in the system. Dr. Mott states, 
 " I have many pedigrees which seem to indicate that a 
 perfectly sound stock may degenerate from a combina- 
 tion of pathogenic factors, viz., stress of town life, al- 
 coholism, syphilis and tuberculosis, occurring in the pro- 
 genitors in successive generations." ^^ 
 
 Davenport and Weeks,^^ in discussing alcoholism as 
 a cause, derive evidence that alcoholism is an actual 
 cause of defective offspring rather than merely an ac- 
 
 11 Dr. F. W. Mott, F.R.S., "Heredity and Eugenics in Relation to 
 Insanity." " Problems in Eugenics." pp. 400-428. 1912. 
 
 12 Davenport, C. B. and Weeks, David F. I.e. p. 35. 
 
i6o VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 companying mental weakness that cannot resist the 
 temptation of alcohol, from the fact that the propor- 
 tion of defective offspring exceeds the Mendelian ex- 
 pectation. Families studied by them gave the follow- 
 ing increase in defectives over the expected number: 
 
 Matings Per cent. Per cent, 
 
 defective expected 
 
 Alcoholic X defective 87 instead of 50 
 
 Alcoholic X tainted 32 instead of 25 
 
 Alcoholic X normal 36 instead of 25 
 
 They conclude, however, that the hypothesis that 
 alcohol is a " race poison," demands further investiga- 
 tion. 
 
 Dr. Mjoen, of Norway, gives a very interesting case 
 of the increase of feeble-minded in Norway when free- 
 dom was given to the distillation of brandy. In some 
 districts almost every farmer distilled brandy from his 
 own corn and potatoes and the number of feeble- 
 minded in such districts increased from 18 16 to 1835 
 almost 100 per cent. The country was alarmed and 
 in 1848 the house distillation was stopped. "The 
 enormous increase in idiots came and went with the 
 brandy." ^^ 
 
 Dn Mjoen cites the results of Bertholet and Simmonds 
 as showing the degeneracy of the germ cells in chronic 
 cases of alcoholism. " Bertholet examined the testicles 
 of 75 persons; 39 of them were habitual drunkards, 
 and in 37 cases he found the testicles of the drunkards 
 more or less atrophied. He sums up, ' The hurtful in- 
 
 isDr. John Alfred Mjoen. "Effect of Alcohol on the Germ 
 Plasm." "Problems in Eugenics." Vol. II, pp. 173-182. 1913. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST i6i 
 
 fluence of chronic alcoholism upon sexual glands is not 
 to be denied.' " 
 
 Dr. Mjoen, however, is inclined to doubt whether 
 alcoholism has any influence on the offspring when the 
 parents come from sound stock, except when taken by 
 mothers during maternity or lactation. He apparently 
 believes that its action is in weakening and bringing out 
 defects in an already tainted stock. 
 
 It is clearly evident that one of the most important 
 eugenic problems is to determine whether such poisons 
 have an active influence in causing mental defects as is 
 certainly indicated by much of the evidence. 
 
 The evil effects of consanguineous matings have been 
 recognised by the laws of many States and are well 
 founded. The inbreeding of corn results in lack of 
 vigour as shown by greatly reduced size and finally if 
 continued, in complete sterility. Incestuous breeding 
 in rats has been found to produce a large, per cent, of 
 crippled and deformed individuals and finally leads to 
 sterility. ,In poultry it produces disease and sterility. 
 In man the evil effects are shown in the increased num- 
 ber of imbeciles, insane, epileptic, and the like, and by 
 dwarfing in size, deafness, and various diseases. In 
 almost all of the degenerate families that have been 
 studied such as the Jukes, Zero and Nam families, and 
 the Hill folks, consanguineous matings and incest are of 
 common occurrence. The knowledge obtained from 
 plants, animals and man is in accord on this point. 
 Darwin has summarised this law in plants in his 
 aphorism " nature abhors self-fertilization." The eu- 
 genic statement would be, consanguinity abhorred by 
 nature leads to deformity, disease and early death. 
 
i62 VL WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 Reference only can be made to the inheritance of 
 other human characters. The rapidly accumulating 
 evidence indicates that such characters as deaf-mutism, 
 colour-blindness, night-blindness, cataract, hemophilia, 
 cerebral hemorrhage, hernia, cancer, tuberculosis, and 
 the like, are in many cases heritable, or at least the 
 weakness that predisposes the offspring to attacks of the 
 disease is heritable. 
 
 Many cases of physical deformities such as club- 
 foot, brachydactyly, syndactyly, extra fingers and toes, 
 hare-lip, and the like, also run in families and are in 
 considerable degree heritable, as are also peculiar forms 
 of various organs. Punnett says, " The Hapsburg lip 
 was as unmistakable in King Alfonso and his children 
 as in the Emperor Maximilian." 
 
 Fortunately it is not only defects and peculiarities 
 that are heritable, but desirable traits, as is well known, 
 are inherited in a similar way in families. Musical 
 ability, mechanical ability, and the like, show almost the 
 same type of inheritance as neurotic defects. The his- 
 tory of many great families furnishes indisputable evi- 
 dence of the importance of the hereditary transmission 
 of such traits. 
 
 The Crossing of Dif event Races. — The problem 
 presented by the crossing of different races has as yet 
 been little studied and in this country is one of very 
 great importance. The laws of most of the States of 
 the Union declare as illegal marriages between whites 
 and negroes, or descendants of negroes having more 
 than one-fourth or one-eighth of negro blood. The 
 laws of Oregon declare as void the marriages of white 
 persons with persons having one-fourth or more, blood 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 163 
 
 of negro, Chinese or Kanaka, or more than one-half 
 Indian blood. Already the race problems of the south 
 and west have assumed alarming proportions. We 
 cannot but recognise the negro as an inferior race and 
 the blending of a lower with a higher race, judging 
 from our present knowledge must necessarily result in 
 debasing or lowering the general standard. The negro 
 in Africa to-day, as emphasised by Alfred Holt Stone ^* 
 is " just what we know him to have been since he first 
 appeared on that continent." The average negro in 
 the United States to-day, is contented, happy and un- 
 ambitious, desiring only sufficient food to supply his 
 needs. Judging from my own observations in the 
 south, which have been somewhat extended, indulgence 
 in alcoholic drinks is the negro's besetting sin, as it is 
 unfortunately with the weak minded of other races. 
 The negroes are lax in morals and think little of the 
 marriage bond. According to Wilcox, the eleventh 
 census showed that " in the southern States there were 
 six white prisoners to every ten thousand whites and 
 twenty-nine negro prisoners to every ten thousand 
 negroes, while in the northern States there were twelve 
 white prisoners to every ten thousand whites and sixty- 
 nine negro prisoners to every ten thousand negroes." ^^ 
 Many causes such as the low moral tone of the family 
 life, doubtless contributes to this excess of negro crimi- 
 nals, but when all factors are considered I think we 
 cannot deny that a considerable portion of this greater 
 percentage of criminality is due to a distinct racial dif- 
 
 14 "Studies in the American Race Problem." New York, 1908. 
 
 15 Wilcox, Walter F. " Negro Criminality." Published as appen- 
 dix in Stone's "Studies in the American Race Problem." 
 
i64 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 ference. Wilcox concludes that " the causes may be 
 grouped as defective family life, defective industrial 
 equipment and ability in comparison with their com- 
 petitors, increasing race solidarity among the negroes, 
 and increasing alienation from the whites." 
 
 It has been pointed out by a number of students that 
 the great majority of the negroes that achieve distinc- 
 tion, as for instance, Douglass, Bruce, Lynch, DuBois, 
 Washington, and others, are mulattoes. Among pure 
 negroes, however, there is great variation in ability and 
 occasionally a superior individual Is produced that even 
 judged by the most severe standards must be considered 
 as great. The race, however, must be judged as a 
 whole and the effect of the mixture from actual cases. 
 The admixture of white blood clearly improves the off- 
 spring in mental efficiency but there is no evidence to 
 Indicate that such offspring is better In any way than 
 the white parent, and it is reasonable to assume that 
 they would be inferior. The claim has been made that 
 the progeny of such a cross are physically inferior to 
 either race and more susceptible to disease, but the evi- 
 dence on this point Is far from conclusive. Dr. Taylor 
 states that " It is demonstrated by well attested facts 
 that these hybrids of black and white are vastly more 
 susceptible to certain Infections; their moral as well as 
 physical stamina Is lower than that of either original 
 race." " 
 
 I cannot agree with Davenport who in an address at 
 the International Eugenics Congress stated " Forget 
 unessentlals, like skin colour, and focus attention on 
 
 "Dr. J. Madison Taylor. "The Negro and Hii Health Prob- 
 lems." Medical Record, Sept. 12, 1912, 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 165 
 
 socially important defects. Then by sterilisation or 
 segregation prevent the reproduction of the socially 
 inadequate. Thus will mentally incompetent strains be 
 eliminated and the good physical traits of some of the 
 black races be added as a valued heritage to enhance 
 the physical manhood of the south." ^'' It is hardly to 
 be presumed from this statement that Dr. Davenport 
 would advocate the crossing of whites and blacks under 
 the existing social conditions. Doubtless he meant 
 merely to emphasise that in the abstract the most im- 
 portant problem is to prevent the reproduction of the 
 incompetent of both races. It would seem to the writer 
 that the crossing of the whites with the negroes, unless 
 followed by the most rigorous selection, would result 
 in general deterioration of our population. By no pos- 
 sible means could the crossing be limited to the best 
 class of either race. On the contrary, It is certainly 
 true that the crossing would be limited to individuals of 
 the lowest classes. The most inefficient and vicious in- 
 dividuals, without pride or moral stamina, would be the 
 only ones to mate. In general the same may be said 
 regarding the mating of any different races. Pride of 
 country and racial pride will prevent, except in rare 
 intervals, the mating of individuals other than those be- 
 longing to the lower grades of society. 
 
 During slavery times the illegitimate crossing of 
 whites with negroes was condoned and even favoured 
 in some instances, because of the greater value of the 
 mulatto slave. Following slavery for a considerable 
 
 " Davenport, C. B. " Marriage Laws and Customs," published in 
 " Problems in Eugenics. Papers communicated to the First Inter- 
 national Eugenics Congress." London, 1912. 
 
1 66 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 period we sought some consolation from the shame of 
 such continued illegitimate crossing in the thought that 
 by such means the two races would become gradually 
 amalgamated and the great preponderance in numbers 
 of the white race would lead to the swamping of the 
 black and its effectual obliteration. The advarice in 
 knowledge of the laws of inheritance has now led to the 
 conclusion that no such swamping of characters ever 
 occurs in crossing. Present knowledge leads to the 
 conclusion that unit characters such as are concerned in 
 the two races are practically indestructible and will crop 
 out in various degrees of perfection and mixture in the 
 progeny. 
 
 Nothing would seem to the writer more regrettable 
 than the general amalgamation of the races of the 
 world. Different races have different ideals of life, 
 different methods of living and in most cases occupy 
 different countries. Customs, habits and mental atti- 
 tude have been fixed by centuries and are not likely to 
 change greatly. Marriages of people of different races 
 are rarely happy and the offspring of such marriages 
 are in most civilised countries, regarded with suspicion 
 and as individuals set apart from the ordinary. They 
 carry with them the stigma of their parentage and can- 
 not escape from it. [They are like the physically de- 
 fective at whom we stare with vulgar curiosity. How 
 pitiful and dissatisfying must be such a life ! 
 
 The only factor that would justify the general cross- 
 ing of any two distinct races would be the achievement 
 of some definite gain. If the amalgamation of two 
 races could be shown to produce an offspring superior 
 to either it might be justified, but there is no evidence 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 167 
 
 that the crossing of any two human races would yield 
 such superior offspring. If we attempt to derive evi- 
 dence on the point from the facts of animal and plant- 
 breeding, the conclusion would be against the crossing 
 of human races under the conditions that must there ob- 
 tain. The most superior individuals among cattle, 
 horses and all domestic animals are those of pure breed, 
 and the best breeders are strongly opposed to the cross- 
 ing of breeds. The general inferiority of a mongrel 
 lot is well recognised. It is true that by crossing two 
 races and securing numerous hybrids and then carefully 
 selecting similar types for a number of generations we 
 might produce a new race of fixed characters which 
 would be superior to either of the parental races. Such 
 individuals with superior combinations of characters are 
 exceedingly rare, however, and can only be fixed into a 
 race, propagating true, by the most careful selection. 
 No such selection would ever be possible in the case of 
 human crosses and probably among human races, as 
 among animal races, where there would be one good 
 hybrid there would be nine hundred and ninety-nine 
 poor or mediocre individuals. 
 
 In the plant kingdom the same is true to a marked 
 degree. The crossing of superior with inferior races 
 without selection can only reduce the general average. 
 In wheat and oats the hybrids of two good races even 
 on an average are much inferior to either race though 
 a superior hybrid race may be secured when accom- 
 panied by selection. 
 
 The Indian is respected and in a sense admired but 
 the viciousness of the half-breed is notorious in litera- 
 ture and experience. The half-breed Malay, I am in- 
 
i68 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 formed, is in general regarded in the same way. The 
 Mongolian-Caucasian cross so far as I am informed 
 cannot be considered inferior but is certainly to be 
 pitied. 
 
 To disbelieve in the crossing of races does not neces- 
 sarily mean that we regard one race as inferior to an- 
 other. Each race may be highly intellectual and well 
 developed physically and be equally successful in the 
 world's struggle for national supremacy, and yet their 
 amalgamation without selection might result in inferior 
 people. It cannot be successfully maintained that the 
 Jersey breed of cattle is superior to the Holstein, or 
 vice versa, but the unselected mixture of the two would 
 certainly be inferior to either. 
 
 Practical Eugenics. — The study of human heredity, 
 while of intrinsic scientific interest, would be emascu- 
 lated of its most interesting and vital function if it were 
 impossible to apply the principles discovered to the im- 
 provement of the race. True, it is impossible to attack 
 this problem as one would the breeding of animals and 
 plants, where the individual is of little value and has no 
 rights that must be observed. It is impossible to select 
 and mate simply the best human individuals, thus at- 
 tention must be given primarily to negative eugenics or 
 the prevention of the reproduction of the lowest classes 
 and defectives. Positive constructive eugenics is 
 mainly limited to the encouragement that can be given 
 to the production of large families among the better 
 classes. Unfortunately the lowest and most degraded 
 hereditary strains reproduce rapidly, the best repro- 
 duce but slowly. " The fertility of the helpless is 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 169 
 
 alarming; the procreation of their kind seems to be 
 their only industry." 
 
 The first and most vital step in the improvement of 
 the human race is to prevent the reproduction of such 
 defective classes as the weak-minded, insane, epileptic, 
 pauper, and criminal. Humanity demands that we 
 must care for these classes of unfortunates. They are 
 our wards and must be treated with all kindness. How- 
 ever, human kindness and Christian spirit viewed from 
 any standpoint cannot but consider that in permitting 
 such classes to reproduce further litters of unfortunates, 
 we are inhuman and unchristian. We will not allow a 
 cruel father to beat his child but we will allow the weak- 
 minded, sexually degenerate, drunken sot to freely bring 
 into the world a brood of possibly eight or ten poor 
 innocent defective children, a burden to themselves 
 throughout life, living in squalor and misery, and finally 
 burdening humanity with their care. Humanity should 
 no longer endure the rapidly increasing burden of their 
 care. Caring for such degenerates creates more pov- 
 erty and sui generis more incompetents demanding cus- 
 todial care because of the greater burden life must 
 carry. Such action will finally bankrupt the world. 
 
 It seems clear that the reproduction of such defective 
 classes must be prevented. How then shall It be accom- 
 plished? The two methods that have been suggested 
 are ( i ) isolation during the reproductive period and 
 (2) desexing. Isolation is certainly possible and if 
 no other measure is feasible surely this should be fol- 
 lowed and far more extensively and completely than has 
 yet been considered. Desexing has been looked upon 
 
170 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 with suspicion and in any case should be very carefully 
 applied. In the case of males where the desexing can 
 be accomplished so easily by the method of vasectomy, 
 which is a very minor operation performed with a local 
 anaesthetic, this method would seem even more desirable 
 and more humane than the continued isolation that 
 would otherwise be necessary. In the case o f females all 
 methods of desexing that have been devised are rather 
 serious operations and it would seem that here we might 
 better, at present, use isolation as our principal method. 
 Already eight States have adopted special laws legalis- 
 ing the desexing of certain classes of defectives, but 
 these laws are as yet largely ineffective. In Indiana, 
 the pioneer State in this movement, about 500 have 
 been so treated but in almost every case with the con- 
 sent of the individual concerned. 
 
 Dr. Hurty, the State Health Commissioner of In- 
 diana, in describing the effect of vasectomy says, 
 " Vasectomy is simple, scarcely more serious than vac- 
 cination. Is without the slightest danger, is not attended 
 with mutilation and may be performed In three minutes 
 without a general ansesthetic. The patient spends not 
 one minute in bed, but immediately goes about his 
 duties." ^* Dr. Hurty makes the very positive state- 
 ment that the patient Is improved physically and in tem- 
 perament as a result of the operation, but further in- 
 formation regarding this matter is much needed. Cer- 
 tain it is, however, that the patient Is not seriously in- 
 jured by the operation and whether improvement results 
 
 18 Dr. J. N. Hurty. "Practical Eugenics in Indiana." Ohio State 
 Medical Journal, February, 19 12, 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 171 
 
 is not a matter of importance as long as there is no 
 serious detrimental effect. 
 
 This willingness on the part of so many unfortunate 
 individuals and of their relatives to have their troubles 
 end with themselves, indicates the possibility of a modi- 
 fied law providing for strict isolation of mental de- 
 fectives but permitting freedom to those harmless ones 
 that undergo the operation of desexing. As the benefits 
 of this method become known doubtless all of those 
 fitted to be at large, male and female, would voluntarily 
 submit to the operation of desexing. In this way might 
 be avoided any conflict or complication arising because 
 of the prejudice of the people against any law punish- 
 ing, as it were, by personal mutilation. 
 
 Other important factors in the solution of the prob- 
 lem are restrictive marriage laws. Only persons of 
 good mental qualities that can present a clean bill of 
 health after actual examination, should be allowed to 
 contract marriage. Consanguineous marriages of first, 
 or even second cousins, should not be permitted when 
 there is taint of weakness in the pedigrees. 
 
 Improvement is desired in all grades of people. 
 The whole network of human heredity is contaminated 
 with traits and minor weaknesses that should be elim- 
 inated. Here it would seem that education is the only 
 means at our disposal. Many men and women marry 
 knowing that they have characters that should not be 
 reproduced and that render them unfit as parents. Yet 
 they desire a home and are thus led to marry even 
 though hoping that their union will not be fruitful. 
 To such high class defectives modern surgery has given 
 
17* VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 the eugenic method in vasectomy and there are doubt- 
 less thousands that would adopt this method if they 
 were informed regarding it. 
 
 Dr. Hurty describes a case of this sort which is of 
 profound interest. " At a certain college in Indiana 
 I met a young man of twenty-two who had a club foot 
 and whose education had been delayed by poverty. He 
 was very serious in his manner, at times almost melan- 
 choly, but of bright mind and easily led his class. He 
 confessed to me that he had several times contemplated 
 suicide because of his deformity. ' No whole person 
 can know,' said he, ' the mental torture suffered by those 
 who are deformed. I have gone to the cellar, the attic, 
 and the barn, and cried by the hour over my misfortune. 
 I have cursed my parents for bringing me into the world 
 and have sworn never to marry.' His distress of mind 
 and suffering was very considerable. I learned he had 
 shown some attentions to a young woman who had not 
 repelled him, but he had suddenly dropped her and the 
 matter was a subject of remark among his school fel- 
 lows. I made inquiries and after a short acquaintance 
 resolved to tell him he could have a home and no fear 
 of perpetuating his deformity. He accepted, and now 
 he has a home with its increase of happiness in his life. 
 He and his wife are content and both bless the good 
 which science brings to mankind." ^® 
 
 Again there are certain individuals that because they 
 each carry certain defects in a recessive or latent form 
 should not marry each other but may very properly 
 marry some other individual not carrying the character. 
 
 In considering eugenic methods attention has mainly 
 
 i» Dr. J. N. Hurty. I.e. 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 173 
 
 been given to what has been termed negative eugenics 
 or the prevention of the reproduction of the undesirable 
 classes and physical and mental defectives, as discussed 
 above. So far as the control of matings among per- 
 sons of superior and medium ability, no methods other 
 than persuasion seem to be applicable under our social 
 monogamic system. Education thus becomes the main- 
 spring of constructive eugenics. Only by educating the 
 individual in the laws of heredity so that he may have a 
 clear understanding of the action of these laws, can we 
 hope to make progress. The control of breeding 
 among the higher and most able classes in general, 
 means but little other than to avoid or eliminate defects. 
 If we could so control reproduction that only superior 
 mated with superior, there would be formed class dis- 
 tinctions based on real rather than fictitious differences 
 and the creation of such classes differing in ability would 
 probably not lead to increased happiness and content- 
 ment, or to any average increase of intelligence on the 
 part of the population as a whole. True, we want 
 more individuals of very superior ability to advance the 
 world's knowledge, but it is of far greater importance 
 to increase the average ability of the masses and render 
 our population as a whole self-supporting and more 
 capable of enjoying the benefits of civilisation. 
 
 To do this means ( i ) stopping the production of 
 degenerate classes of all types; (2) recognising un- 
 desirable traits and educating the people to avoid 
 matings with people possessing such traits; (3) dis- 
 couraging the rapid reproduction of the lower classes 
 and (4) encouraging through every possible means the 
 reproduction of the better classes of fit matings. 
 
174 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 It seems clear that any aid given indiscriminately to 
 mothers of large faipilies, as has been suggested, would 
 only serve to increase the size of families among the 
 shiftless lower types. Premiums for parenthood 
 should be given not as charity but as a reward for the 
 production of able offspring of good heritage. Too 
 large a number of the best people do not marry until 
 late in life and this is a serious limiting factor on the 
 size of families of many of the most fit matings. 
 
 One of the most important needs is some new stand- 
 ard or method of judging ability early in the life of the 
 individual so that reward would come earlier. If this 
 could be accomplished proper means would be furnished 
 for the support of a family and prevent much of our 
 now too common celibacy in early life. As a corollary 
 to this a more careful study of children is demanded 
 that we may so provide for their education and nurture 
 as to prevent degeneracy in the inherently able. 
 
 As an aid to the development of the human race the 
 writer would urge the great importance of establishing 
 an adequate system of human registration similar to 
 that used in the registration of pure bred stock. At 
 least all of the good eugenic classes could be led to seek 
 registration in such a register. 
 
 Such a human registration would serve many useful 
 functions. First and primarily it would stimulate pride 
 in family and the desire on the part of any individual 
 whose ancestors were in the Register to measure up to 
 or surpass that standard. I believe that family pride Is 
 the most potent influence in restraining the individual 
 from error and in stimulating him to greater effort. 
 True it is, that occasionally such pride becomes snob- 
 
AND THE GENETICIST 175 
 
 bishness but fortunately this Is not common and the in- 
 dividual would derive little comfort from his own reg- 
 istration unless his record measured well up to that of 
 his ancestors. 
 
 Such a register would include only good and superior 
 individuals, as mediocre or poor grade individuals 
 would never seek to be included in such a pedigree 
 record. 
 
 Once started I believe such a registration would be 
 sought by all of the best individuals of society and soon 
 it would come to be almost universal among good fam- 
 ilies having pride or confidence in their ancestry. Soon, 
 if one is not registered or his family is not registered, 
 the question would arise, why are they not registered? 
 In this way I believe all individuals and families that 
 have not very serious defects in their pedigrees would 
 be led to register and thus the object would be accom- 
 plished as we could then be certain that unregistered fam- 
 ilies could not be considered good constructive eugenic 
 material. Such a register would have great value, 
 doubtless, as a guide to marriage. Suppose a father 
 notices a growing intimacy between his daughter and a 
 young man of apparently good character but of unknown 
 ancestry. The registration number of the young man's 
 father or mother could be obtained and from this, for 
 a small fee, the girl's father could secure a brief out- 
 lining of the young man's family history. If this his- 
 tory were bad doubtless it would serve to check any 
 growing intimacy between the two and would save the 
 family much trouble and worry. 
 
 For a certain fee we obtain a certificate of title for 
 any piece or tract of land in the country, showing all 
 
176 VI. WEBBER: EUGENICS 
 
 transfers and history of the various transactions. Why 
 is it not feasible then, to obtain certified pedigrees of 
 men? The value of such records in furnishing data for 
 scientific studies cannot be over-estimated and in legal 
 and other ways, they would be of great service. 
 
 In closing this lecture I desire to impress upon 
 you the importance of studying the subject of eugenics. 
 The science is still in the formative stage and while 
 naturally much difference of opinion exists, nevertheless, 
 very much information of the greatest value has been 
 secured. Study the subject carefully and sympa- 
 thetically, with the aid of the best available literature. 
 Give at least some of your time and your encourage- 
 ment to the development of an improved and better 
 humanity. Dr. Saleeby, one of England's most famous 
 eugenists, has declared, " I am of nothing more certain 
 than that the choice for Great Britain to-day is be- 
 tween national eugenics or the fate of all her imperial 
 predecessors from Babylon to Spain." What is true 
 of Great Britain is doubtless equally true of our beloved 
 Republic. Decadence and disruption will follow un- 
 less the present degenerating tendencies can be checked. 
 I have full confidence, however, in the nation's ability 
 to overcome these difficulties. We lead the world in 
 practical knowledge. The necessary knowledge to 
 avoid degeneration is certain to be obtained and out 
 of and from this knowledge will arise a purer, a 
 stronger and a more able population. 
 
VII 
 
 THE FIRST LAW OF CHARACTER-MAKING 
 
 ARTHUR HOLMES 
 
 PART I 
 
 The Greeks were the last nation interested in them- 
 selves. For ages people have been too busy doing 
 things to stop and consider the subject and object of their 
 ceaseless activity. But to-day we are taking breath and 
 beginning to pay attention to ourselves. Biology, 
 psychology, sociology, and the human sciences gener- 
 ally, are coming to large places of importance. The 
 human individual is being studied as if he were worth 
 something in himself. His happiness is seen to spring 
 from what he is, not what he owns. 
 
 The child especially is assuming his place as the end 
 and purpose of all social arrangements and not as a 
 painful incident in human growth. He is put where 
 nature puts him — as all-important. His care comes 
 first. He must be well-born though women leave their 
 looms and factories stand idle. His health must be 
 preserved though business be revolutionised and the 
 world be sterilised. He must be improved though city 
 blocks are razed and playgrounds take the place of 
 court houses. He is recognised as the greatest single 
 asset of the nation. 
 
 Almost the latest movement in his favour is the 
 organisation of a Eugenics Society. Eugenics itself 
 lays claim to the dignity of a science. " Eugenics " 
 
 177 
 
178 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 says Davenport, " is the science of the improvement of 
 the human race by better breeding or, as the late Sir 
 Francis Galton expressed it : — ' The science that deals 
 with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of 
 a race.' The eugenical standpoint is that of the agri- 
 culturalist who, while recognising the value of culture, 
 believes that permanent advance is to be made only by 
 securing the best ' blood.' Man is an organism — an 
 animal; and the laws of improvement of corn and of 
 race horses hold true for him also. Unless people 
 accept this simple truth and let it influence marriage 
 selection human progress will cease. 
 
 " Eugenics has reference to offspring. The success 
 of a marriage from the standpoint of eugenics is meas- 
 ured by the number of disease-resistant, cultivable off- 
 spring that comes from it. Happiness or unhappiness 
 of the parents, the principal theme of many novels and 
 the proceedings of divorce courts, has little eugenic 
 significance ; for eugenics has to do with traits that are 
 in the blood, the protoplasm." ^ 
 
 Eugenics is, by its very nature, prophylactic. It 
 seeks to prevent much of the world's sorrow and sin 
 by going back of marriage to the selection of life part- 
 ners. Eugenics does not teach marriage without love, 
 but it does suggest the Herculean task of commanding 
 love. It believes that love can, amongst normal peo- 
 ple at least, be ordered. It is not blind to the fact 
 that mere propinquity decides more love affairs than 
 any one other factor. Couples attending the same col- 
 lege, the same church or mixing in the same social set, 
 
 1 " Heredity in Relation to Eugenics," C. B. Davenport, Henry Holt 
 & Co., New York, p. i. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 179 
 
 by contiguity choose mates they sublimely believe were 
 predestined for them. Let even a confirmed maid and 
 bachelor be thrown together in an isolated companion- 
 ship for three weeks and the result is almost surely 
 fatal. Young men and women do not fall in love for 
 high and holy reasons but on the most frivolous and- 
 flimsy excuses. 
 
 The fact is the present method of mate-choosing 
 reaches the limit of human foolishness, as seen in the 
 divorce courts, where (contrary to the last chapter of 
 the best seller) about one in ten American marriages 
 ends ; in the countless f ragilely maintained homes where 
 bitterness reigns; and worse than all in the misborn 
 children who go to increase our criminal, feeble- 
 minded, insane, crippled, and pauper population. 
 
 After all remember that eugenics is interested In 
 marriage only secondarily. iThe children are its pri- 
 mary interest. Davenport gives the point of view 
 in these well-chosen sentences : 
 
 " To get at the facts It is necessary to study the 
 progeny of human marriages. Now marriage can be 
 and is looked upon from many points of view. In 
 novels, as the climax of human courtship ; in law, largely 
 as a union of two lines of property-descent; in society, 
 as fixing a certain status; but In eugenics, which con- 
 siders its biological aspect, marriage is an experiment 
 in breeding; and the children, In their varied combina- 
 tions of characters, give the result of the experiment. 
 That marriage should still be only an experiment in 
 breeding, while the breeding of many animals and 
 plants has been reduced to a science, is ground for re- 
 proach. Surely the human product is superior to that 
 
i8o VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 of poultry; and as we may now predict with precision 
 the characters of the offspring of a particular pair of 
 pedigreed poultry so may it sometime be with man. 
 As we now know how to make almost any desired com- 
 bination of the characters of guinea-pigs, chickens, 
 wheats, and cottons so may we hope to do with man." ^ 
 
 In 1904 Sir Francis Galton introduced the word 
 eugenics to the London Sociological Society in his ad- 
 dress which proposed the study of race culture. His 
 definition of " Natural Eugenics " was as follows : 
 " The study of agencies under social control that may 
 improve or impair the racial qualities of future genera- 
 tions, either physically or mentally." 
 
 First, it Includes both physical and mental better- 
 ment of the race within Its scope. It will be noted 
 that the definition Is comprehensive. Secondly, it is 
 optimistic in that it believes Improvement is possible. 
 It specifically mentions those forces under "social con- 
 trol." 
 
 Eight years after Galton's address the first Interna- 
 tional Eugenic Congress was held In London. It was 
 composed of noted scientists, statesmen, philanthropists 
 — eminent in politics, education, literature and reli- 
 gion, gathered from six nations of the world. The 
 programme consisted of thirty-two papers followed by 
 discussions covering the widest possible range of 
 eugenic subjects. 
 
 To-day eugenics Is everywhere. It Is discussed seri- 
 ously and facetiously. It claims the attention of the 
 deepest thinkers and has achieved the supreme popu- 
 
 2 "Heredity in Relation to Eugenics," Charles B. Davenport, 1911, 
 p. 7. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 
 
 i8i 
 
 larity of mention in the comic papers. Evidently it 
 has come to stay. It behooves us as students to con- 
 sider it as a new factor in social uplift. To-night we 
 will study for a short time just a small phase of the 
 whole subject, namely, the Eugenics of Character mak- 
 ing. 
 
 PART 11 
 
 The end of life is character, 
 The crown of work is worth. 
 
 Among all the works of man the greatest is himself. 
 The empires once graced with cities of capital splen- 
 dour, sleep with the dead bodies of the past. Sublime 
 works of marble lie buried like bones in a graveyard. 
 The columns of Karnac, themselves but the porticoes 
 of more wondrous buildings, are falling one by one. 
 The Sphinx, still rearing its sadly disfigured countenance 
 above the biting sands of the desert; and its companion 
 mysteries, the Pyramids, more primitive and least ar- 
 tistic of all man's architectural work remain with us to- 
 day, but they stand as melancholy monuments to the 
 transiency of man's achievements and not as testimonials 
 of their imperishableness. Empires, cities, dynasties, 
 palaces, works of art, — all are gone. 
 
 " The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power 
 And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave 
 Await alike the inevitable hour 
 The paths of glory lead but to the grave." 
 
 Man's work disappears but he himself endures. 
 
 Granting that Character is this supremely valuable 
 asset, can it be bred? Eugenics says it can and un- 
 dertakes to tell us how to do it. 
 
i82 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 Is eugenics asking something possible? Or, is it 
 urging us to pursue will-o'-the-wisps that will even- 
 tually lead us lost and helpless in the bogs of mechanical 
 evolution? Or, asking us to fly after transcendental 
 vagaries that w}]l vanish in the attenuated ether of 
 super-experiential nothings? Either end would be a 
 calamity. Before embarking then so lightly upon the 
 quest of a new race by the road of reason, let us ex- 
 amine our chances of success. 
 
 If we adopt certain definitions of character, we are 
 defeated at the outset.* If character is that non-ma- 
 terial, detached spiritual entity ruling over and direct- 
 ing all our acts yet itself unchanging and unchangeable, 
 it cannot be bred. Consciously or unconsciously many 
 hold such a view. Emerson is the great exponent of 
 it. Out of the sublimated elements of pure abstraction, 
 he gathers his notion of this unknowable and im- 
 palpable thing, and like a sculptor, embodies it in ma- 
 terial form and sets It before his readers. 
 
 " This is that which we call character — a reserve 
 force which acts directly by presence and without means. 
 It is conceived of as a certain undemonstrable force, a 
 Familiar or Genius, by whose impulses the man is 
 guided, but whose counsels he cannot Impart; which is 
 company for him so that such are often solitary, but 
 can entertain themselves very well alone. The purest 
 literary talent appears at one time great, at another 
 time small, but character Is of a stellar and undlmlnlsh- 
 able greatness. What others affect by talent or by elo- 
 
 *NoTE. — This discussion of character is taken from the author's 
 Principles of Character-Making. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 183 
 
 quence, this man accomplishes by some magnetism. 
 Half his strength he put forth. His victories are by 
 demonstration of superiority and not by crossing of 
 bayonets. He conquers because his arrival alters the 
 face of affairs. ' O, lole I How did you know that 
 Hercules was a god?' 'Because,' answered lole, 'I 
 was content the moment my eyes fell upon him. When 
 I beheld Theseus I desired that I might see him offer 
 battle, or at least guide his horses in a chariot race ; but 
 Hercules did not wait for contest ; he conquered whether 
 he stood, or walked, or sat, or whatever thing he did.' 
 Man, ordinarily a pendant to events, only half attached 
 and that awkwardly, to the world he lives in, in these 
 examples appears to share the life of things, and to be 
 an expression of the same laws which control the tides 
 and the sun, numbers and quantities." ^ 
 
 You will note, when your enthusiasm for the exalted, 
 kindled by the cumulative power of fine phrasing, has 
 cooled to calm and practical analysis that the man of 
 " character " owes what he is to a " Familiar " a 
 " Genius " a Greek " daimon " or demon. All that is 
 splendid, and some heroes of history, like Socrates, who 
 felt himself possessed by such a spirit, may have owed 
 all their effect to that kind of spiritual essence em- 
 bodied in their otherwise quite ordinary beings. But 
 we are dealing with the transmission of traits in 
 Johnny Joneses and Mary Smiths, who in all prob- 
 ability would not recognise a " daimon " if they met it 
 anywhere, much less possess one in all their humble 
 lives. Hence while we find no fault with the inspiring 
 
 3 Emerson's "Essay on Character." 
 
i84 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 message of the New England prophet, we are not able 
 to use it for throwing any light on the hereditary trans- 
 mission of character. 
 
 A step removed from this transcendental idea, but 
 equally impossible to reduce to the reign of law, is the 
 " being " contrasted with the " doing," so comforting 
 to poets especially. Lowell voices the pith of that 
 idealism in his lines: 
 
 " The thing we long for that we are 
 For one transcendent moment." 
 
 Such transcendent moments Browning extends and ex- 
 alts above the vicissitudes of time and space, — 
 
 "What I aspired to be, 
 And was not comforts me,"— j 
 
 and fixes forever the longing, if not in the character 
 of earthly generations, then in some other world, — 
 
 " All that is at all, 
 
 Lasts ever past recall. 
 
 Earth changes, but thy soul and God stand sure. 
 What entered into thee 
 That was and is and ever shall be." 
 
 While such aspirations do not transcend human ex- 
 perience as Emerson's character does, they still are 
 contrasted in Browning's mind with their baser and 
 more vulgar supplements, external actions. 
 
 " Not on the vulgar mass 
 
 Called work must sentence pass. 
 
 Things done that took the eye and had the price, 
 
 O'er which from level stand 
 
 The low world laid its hand, 
 
 Found straightway to its mind, could value in a trice." 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 185 
 
 Such noble stanzas as these must arouse in the 
 reader's breast the truest motives to endeavour. 
 Every word rings with encouragement. Not one good 
 resolution Is to be lost. The remotest and most ob- 
 scure emotion toward the vaguest virtuous act must 
 forever work its beneficent will. " Think finely," is 
 its message, " if that is all you can do. Dream noble 
 dreams, though the will is ever too weak to translate 
 them into acts. Fear not; they cannot be lost. All 
 are gathered up into that permanent matrix of spiritual 
 life called ' character ' and abide there forever safe." 
 
 Yet there is another mood, less poetical perhaps, and 
 we confess humbly, less inspired, but much more every- 
 day and usable; a mood that calls in stentorian tones 
 for a translation of high purposes into acts. Char- 
 acter, after all, if it does but dream noble dreams lacks 
 something. The gossamer threads of the loftiest ideal- 
 ism will not sustain the weight of daily living. " Do 
 or die," comes as a mandate of the real world. " You 
 cannot dream yourself into character," says Froude, 
 " you must forge and hammer yourself Into one." 
 And the forging and the hammering is just that " vul- 
 gar mass called work " upon which the world Is so 
 eager to lay its hand. 
 
 So almost reluctantly we turn away from the poets 
 with their assurance of the eternity of our dreams, and 
 even from our transcendental philosopher and his 
 " Thinking is living " to that sternly morose but, after 
 all, common-sense Scotchman, Carlyle, with his strident 
 call to the calloused duties of this world. " Know thy 
 work and do it," he cries, and when he thinks of these 
 speculating Greeks, his Scotch temper gets the better 
 
i86 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 of him, and he adds vindictively, " ' Know thyself ' : 
 long enough has that poor self of thine tormented 
 thee; , . . think it not thy business, this of knowing 
 thyself; thou art an unknowable individual; know what 
 thou canst work at; and work at it like Hercules I 
 That will be a better plan." . . . And then having re- 
 lieved himself by this ebullition, he brings us close to 
 our subject by telling us how he thinks character is 
 made. " Consider how even the meanest sort of la- 
 bour, the whole soul of man is composed into a kind of 
 real harmony the instant he sets himself to work. . . . 
 The man is now a man. . . . Labour is life." * 
 
 Which shall it be? Whrch shall it be? Doing or 
 dreaming? The outer or the inner? In which shall 
 we find the essence of true character ? Well, I suspect 
 that it resides wholly in neither, and that the epigram- 
 matic finality of the apostle of work is as far wrong 
 one way as the dreaming dolce far niente of the poet 
 is the other. True character must be formed in a just 
 and righteous balance between these two tendencies. 
 
 Character, then, is not body, nor physical perfections. 
 Neither is it all mind in the sense of intellect. Neither 
 is it mere emotion, nor soul, though it may possess 
 both. Nor yet is it " strength of will " which is 
 merely one of its attributes, possibly a necessary one. 
 It is all of these and yet more, for it is composed of 
 all these elements mixed and mingled in a single indi- 
 vidual in due and balanced proportions. 
 
 Character must be as broad and as inclusive as the 
 idea of full and rounded manhood or womanhood, as 
 objective as a man or a woman, as non-metaphysical as 
 
 * Thomas Carlyle, "Past and Present." 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 187 
 
 the phenomena of biology and psychology, and as pos- 
 sible of achievement as the objects of ethics or peda- 
 gogy. With this appreciation of our needs, and with 
 some knowledge of the impossibility of fully defining 
 character, we offer this working definition: Character 
 is the total customary reaction of an individual to his 
 environment. By total we mean to include all he is 
 internally and externally, his dreaming, his doing, and 
 his being; by customary we emphasise the usual, 
 habitual nature of the reactions constituting his char- 
 acter ; a;id by reactions we seek to limit his character to 
 those processes, physiological and psychological, which 
 are aroused by stimuli from his environment, and which 
 are open to observation. 
 
 With this broad definition of character as those total 
 reactions, or total traits of an individual, I feel sure 
 that nobody need quarrel. In fact, it is exactly what 
 the every-day man means by it. Let us look at it an 
 instant from his point of view. 
 
 Grant for a moment that character must and does 
 imply an independent, self-existent, imperishable spirit- 
 ual entity connected with each human being. Very 
 well, who is concerned about that abstraction? No- 
 body, really. What everybody is anxious about is how 
 the man Jones re-acts inside and out to circumstances. 
 When he presents a " character " to an employer, for 
 instance, the paper tells what he has done, does now 
 and is likely to do. His employer wants to know — 
 not his transcendental character — but how he re-acts 
 to the beginning whistle, to a novel piece of work, or 
 an extra pile of correspondence ; whether these give him 
 a headache, or backache, or periods of peevishness, or 
 
i88 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 act as stimuli to tap new sources of energy and make 
 him buckle down to work with extraordinary vigour. 
 Habitual re-actions — fits of temper, blues, good-hu- 
 mour, attention to duties, regularity, seriousness or 
 frivolity, energy or slothfulness, lying, stealing, cheat- 
 ing drinking, gambling, courtesy, and a thousand-and- 
 one other so-called expressions of character — are what 
 the great public is interested In and what bring the indi- 
 vidual into harmony or into discord with his environ- 
 ment. 
 
 In all these, not the mythical substratum, but the 
 customarlness of the acts is what is final in the last 
 analysis. What we mean when we say " a man has 
 character " is either that he does act so and so, or that 
 he will act so and so, and we predict his future actions 
 by the regularity or customariness of his past actions 
 under similar conditions. Whether he really has some 
 spiritual substratum determining his future action or 
 not, is entirely immaterial. The fact that he has done 
 predicts that he will do. What he has done presages 
 what he will do. This is really all that is ordinarily 
 and necessarily involved in the common usage of the 
 word character. This notion of character ought to ap- 
 peal to the practical man. Unlike the poet he is not 
 so much interested in what " enters into a man " as 
 what comes out of the man in the shape of work. He 
 asks, "What is a man worth?" meaning the man's 
 cash value in productivity measured by dollars and 
 cents. 
 
 Now, to measure the standard of all measures is 
 manifestly impossible. But, still a man's earning 
 power tells somewhat his worth to himself. Dr. Farr 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 189 
 
 of London tried to find the worth of an average Eng- 
 lish working man. He calculated the cost of his main- 
 tenance in babyhood and old age and his earning power 
 as boy and man, and found the average English work- 
 ing man was worth just twenty-five dollars net. He 
 concluded that it would pay England a million times 
 over to import first class babies instead of raising mid- 
 dle class babies. Yankee conceit is sure we could fur- 
 nish the babies. No American mother would mark 
 down her child to twenty-five dollars. Most parents 
 would not take a fortune for theirs. They are like the 
 father who, when asked about his twelfth born said 
 " I would not take a million for this one, — nor give 
 ten cents for another just like it I " 
 
 If an American has only character enough to make 
 a wage earner, according to the Census Bureau, he 
 earns $518.00 a year. If his character is strong 
 enough to make him a salaried man, he earns $1187, 
 more than twice as much. The average man works 
 thirty years. The wage-earner is worth to himself 
 $15,540 for a life time, the salaried man $33,610. 
 Character counts. 
 
 The loss to the nation in loss of character in its citi- 
 zens is well presented in Captain Hobson's temperance 
 lecture. He estimates that alcoholic drinking — just 
 one trait in character — costs this nation 21 per cent, of 
 its efficiency. A sober man is worth $8000 a year. 
 The 700,000 cut off by drink every year cost us $5,- 
 600,000,000. Those killed and those weakened in 
 character by alcoholic drinking last year cost this nation 
 the unbelievable sum of $14,000,000,000. Instead of 
 producing $32,000,000,000 of wealth this nation, with 
 
190 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 character unaffected by drink, would produce yearly 
 $46,000,000,000. Character, then, in cold dollars and 
 cents pays. It pays the individual and the nation to 
 develop strong, sober, industrious and efficient char- 
 acters in its men and women. 
 
 If character means this perfectly plain and common 
 sense kind of conduct — and I am sure it does — most 
 certainly it can be bred. If organs and peculiarities of 
 organs can be transmitted from generation to genera- 
 tion then the reactions or functions of, and consequent 
 feelings from those organs can be transmitted. At 
 least, no one can a priori deny such possibility. There- 
 fore, not only bodily traits but their complements, 
 mental and moral attributes, are legitimate subjects for 
 eugenic research. They ought to be bred. The good 
 ones ought to pass from generation to generation as 
 organic heritages for surpassing in value the tawdry 
 things of material possessions, and every intelligent 
 man and woman ought to be as much interested in lay- 
 ing up treasures of spiritual wealth in their off-spring 
 as they are of dowering them with silver and gold. 
 
 PART III 
 
 To many people there appears to be no fixed relation 
 between the parents and the characters of their chil- 
 dren. Good sons and good daughters or bad sons and 
 bad daughters seem, in the minds of the masses, to 
 come and go without law. Every one is ready on the 
 instant to point out examples of bad children sprung 
 from the best of parents, and with equal readiness to 
 point out good children sprung from the worst parents. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 191 
 
 They will tell you that blood does not count, that an- 
 cestry determines nothing, that training has little effect. 
 The whole matter of rearing children is guess work. 
 Chance, or Providence, or Fate determines the out- 
 come. That good sons and good daughters, fair in 
 form, noble in bearing, strong in intellect, can be born 
 and bred with the certainty of a tree bearing fruit after 
 its own kind, never occurs to the average parent. 
 
 Yet the sources of human character are not remote or 
 numerous. All character is inherited or acquired; that 
 is, it comes from ancestors or- environment. " Stu- 
 dents of biography," says Henry Drummond, " will ob- 
 serve that in all well-written ' Lives ' attention is con- 
 centrated for the first few chapters upon two points. 
 We are first introduced to the family to which the sub- 
 ject of memoir belonged. The grandparents, or even 
 the more remote ancestors, are briefly sketched and 
 their chief characteristics brought prominently into 
 view. Then the parents themselves are photographed 
 in detail. Their appearance and physique, their char- 
 acter, their disposition, their mental qualities, are set 
 before us in a critical analysis. And finally we are 
 asked to observe how much the father and the mother 
 respectively have transmitted of their peculiar nature 
 to their offspring. How faithfully the ancestral lines 
 have met in the latest product, how mysteriously the 
 joint characteristics of body and mind have blended, 
 and how unexpected, yet how entirely natural, a recom- 
 bination is the result — these points are elaborated 
 with cumulative effect until we realise at last how lit- 
 tle we are dealing with an independent unit, how much 
 
192 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 with a survival and reorganisation of what seemed 
 buried in the grave." ® 
 
 " In the second place," he goes on to say, " we are 
 invited to examine more external influences — schools 
 and schoolmasters, neighbours, home, pecuniary cir- 
 cumstances, scenery, and, by and by, the religious and 
 political atmosphere of the time. -These also we are 
 assured have played their part in making the individual 
 what he is. We can estimate these early influences in 
 any particular case with but small imagination if we 
 fail to see how powerfully they also have moulded 
 mind and character, and in what subtle ways they have 
 determined the course of the future life." . . . 
 " Thus what Biography describes as parental influ- 
 ences. Biology would speak of as Heredity; and all 
 that is involved in the second factor — the action of 
 external circumstances and surroundings — the natural- 
 ist would include under the single term Environment. 
 These two. Heredity and Environment, are the mas- 
 ter-influences of the organic world. These have made 
 all of us what we are. These forces are still ceaselessly 
 playing upon all our lives. Arid he who truly under- 
 stands these influences; he who has decided how much 
 to allow each; he who can regulate new forces as they 
 arise, or adjust them to old, so directing them as at 
 one moment to make them co-operate, at another to 
 counteract one another, understands the rationale of 
 personal development." ^ 
 
 Which one of these factors is the more important in 
 
 •■ " Natural Law in the Spiritual World," Henry Drummond, pp. 
 253-354. 
 
 *" Natural Law in the Spiritual World," Henry Drummond, pp. 
 aS3-S4-SS- 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 193 
 
 its effect has been endlessly argued. It is as hard to 
 settle as to decide which wing of a bird is the more im- 
 portant for flying. Both are essential. Both are al- 
 ways present in a growing organism. " The fertilised 
 egg-cell," says Thomson, " implicitly contains, in some 
 way we cannot image, the potentiality of a living crea- 
 ture. ... If this rudiment is to be realised, there 
 must be an appropriate environment. . . . Surround- 
 ing influences . , . begin to play upon the developing 
 germ, and without these influences the inheritance could 
 not be expressed, the potentialities could not be realised. 
 Thus the organic inheritance implies an environment, 
 apart from which it means nothing and can achieve 
 nothing." ' 
 
 Of these two powerful factors moulding the destinies 
 of men, eugenics emphasises the hereditary. It 
 insists first that born-character is at least as im- 
 portant as acquired character, and second, that 
 born-character is not left in the hands of an in- 
 scrutable Providence nor an arbitrary Fate. Laws, 
 fairly orderly, and possible to be known, control the 
 hereditary transmission of traits that blend themselves 
 together for the making of a new creature. How 
 these laws operate upon the primitive bits of germinal 
 protoplasm, how chromosomes seem to convey and 
 mingle paternal and maternal characteristics, and how, 
 down among the ids and determinants of Weismann 
 are balanced the spiritual traits of men unborn, is one 
 of the most absorbingly fascinating studies in modern 
 biology. Time compels us to pass these studies by and 
 devote ourselves to the consideration of their gross 
 
 TJ. Arthur Thomson, "Heredity," 1909, p. 6. 
 
194 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 effects as exhibited in the first great law of heredity: 
 Like begets like, or more accurately expressed; Like 
 tends to beget like. 
 
 Familiar as this expression is, it still needs emphasis 
 and enforcement upon the consciousness of people. Its 
 operation could be illustrated by hundreds of examples 
 taken from the commonest traits of men. Upon two 
 classes of human defects I will draw; first, be- 
 cause they concern human character most closely; and 
 secondly, because the examples are so striking they will 
 be remembered. The first class of defects is feeble 
 mindedness and the second is moral imbecility. 
 
 Yet striking examples of biologic law as these de- 
 fects are, parents, actual and prospective, will persist in 
 believing that such inflictions are Providential or acci- 
 dental. Even among physicians the truth was not fully 
 accepted until recently. Expert opinion is now over- 
 whelmingly on the side of the theory that feeble-minded- 
 ness in all its degrees, blighting and perverting the 
 minds of children from birth, is an infliction from par- 
 ents who never should have been permitted to bear such 
 mentally misshapen creatures. Providence is no more 
 to blame here than for the over-growth of weeds in a 
 lazy farmer's field; or for the pestilential bacteria in 
 the lungs of slum dwellers. Society, blind, ignorant, 
 selfish society, permitting Its own endangerment for 
 temporary ease, Is to be blamed. For these things are 
 not accidental and unavoidable, but hereditary and pre- 
 dictable. Hear the testimony of the Royal Commis- 
 sion on the subject. " Among thirty-five witnesses (be- 
 sides many others who have merely touched on the 
 subject) who have expressed opinions on the part played 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 195 
 
 by heredity in the production of mentally defective indi- 
 viduals, twenty-five attach supreme importance to the 
 fact that in a very large proportion of cases of mental 
 defect there is a history of mental defect in the parents 
 or near ancestors. . . . 
 
 " Professor Sir T. Clifford Allbutt, says : ' I regard 
 feeble-mindedness (if not accidental) as always heredi- 
 tary, or in other words, it is a ratio of variation. I 
 have never met with a case of manufactured feeble- 
 mindedness apart from some accident either at birth 
 or afterwards. . . .' 
 
 " Dr. Ashby says that ' in at least 75 per cent, of 
 the children with amentia that I have examined there 
 was a strong possibility that the amentia was heredi- 
 tary and primary (i.e., spontaneous — not due to ex- 
 ternal influences).' 
 
 " Dr. Bevin Lewis regards heredity in the strict sense 
 as playing a very large part in the causation of feeble- 
 mindedness : ' There is no doubt of it in my mind. 
 I look upon feeble-mindedness as a germinal variation 
 just as all " variations " are.' 
 
 " Dr. Tredgold, from an extensive study of the an- 
 tecedents of mental defectiveness, states that over 80 
 per cent, of the cases are connected with neuropathic in- 
 heritance, the remainder being due, in his opinion, to 
 causes such as alcoholism and tuberculosis incident on 
 the parents; or to other influences affecting the chil- 
 dren themselves. He has never seen a normal child 
 born of two feeble-minded persons." 
 
 These statements can be further buttressed and spe- 
 cialised by statistics gathered In institutions by unbiased 
 specialists. Three great classes of mental defects 
 
196 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 stand out conspicuously as fore-runners of imbecility in 
 children. One Is epilepsy. Remembering that epl 
 lepsy appears in Innumerable forms; as spells, fits, 
 spasms, and regular nervous attacks, and that the pa 
 tients are frequently highly intellectual, talented 
 brilliant and attractive, we see that the eugenic warn, 
 ing against this class is especially needed. Writers 
 vary in their estimates of Its frequency as a hereditary 
 cause of feeble-mlndednCss In children. The lowest, 
 3.02 per cent., is given by Dr. Barr, who looks upon it as 
 a symptom of other causes ; and the highest, 50 per cent, 
 by Hall. One family history published by the New 
 Jersey School for Feeble-minded at Vineland, Is all that 
 time permits me to quote though literature is full of 
 such histories. An epileptic mother with six feeble- 
 minded brothers and sisters married a normal man with 
 an Insane mother. Fourteen children were born. Lis- 
 ten to the terrible catalogue: one was still-born, one 
 insane, five neurotic and seven feeble-minded; not a 
 whole or wholesome human being in that prolific nest. 
 What appears here with such extremity of force, can 
 appear in a lesser degree In any marriage tainted on 
 either side with any kind of epilepsy, no matter how 
 much wealth, beauty, culture or refinement may christen 
 it the disease with a euphemistic name. 
 
 Insanity in any form Is another cause of Imbecility. 
 The percentage varies from 7 per cent, to 42 per cent. 
 Dr. Barr mentions one family of 173 persons, 26 of 
 whom are pronounced neurotics, 9 are insane, 3 are 
 imbecile, 10 were still-born; In all 50 abnormal descend- 
 ants, whose abnormalities can be traced to one insane 
 man. Who would venture to assert that this man's 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 197 
 
 bride ever dreamed of becoming the mother of such 
 an awful brood? 
 
 When we come to the third cause of feeble-minded- 
 ness, namely, feeble-mindedness itself, there is practically 
 no doubt of its power to work harm. The percentages 
 run all the way from Dr. Barr's 27.38 per cent, through 
 Dr. Tregold's 80 per cent, to the 100 per cent, of 
 some experts already quoted on the Royal Commission. 
 We can afford to be conservative. One-half of our chil- 
 dren, or one-quarter, yes, even one, — feeble-minded, 
 is enough to cloud like a hanging pall all the happiness 
 we will ever get out of married life. The facts can 
 be stated tersely. Two feeble-minded parents never 
 produce normal children. High grade, or very light 
 feeble-mindedness, combined with other weakness, may 
 produce imbecility and idiocy of low degree. This is 
 almost sure to happen when a feeble-minded person 
 marries a tubercular or alcoholic mate. One feeble- 
 minded in about every 300 of population, or about 
 300,000, is the estimate for America. Dr. Barr tells 
 of three families with three imbeciles each; two, with 
 five each; one with four; one man with nineteen de- 
 fective children, another with twelve ; three generations 
 defective — the grandmother, feeble-minded; mother, 
 epileptic; father, a shiftless vagabond unable to provide 
 for seven imbecile children; another family, all im- 
 becile. 
 
 During an experience of four years in the Psy- 
 chological Clinic at the University of Pennsylvania, I 
 had the opportunity of seeing some of the dead statis- 
 tics take on life and stalk forth in living horror. I saw 
 a feeble-minded pauper girl, whose brother is in Spring 
 
198 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 City, feeble-minded, and whose infant brother died an 
 idiot, whose mother is in a Blockley Insane ward and 
 whose father is a feeble-minded tinker; an Italian and 
 his wife bringing in one day two idiots out of five chil- 
 dren ; a feeble-minded boy whose father, himself proba- 
 bly feeble-minded, was once a legislator in a certain 
 State; the president of a college with his feeble-minded 
 daughter; the rich and poor, the learned and the ig- 
 norant, the good and the bad with their forlorn and 
 defective children, all shadowed with the same pall of 
 eugenic ignorance. 
 
 I have seen a grey-haired mother, when told that her 
 son upon whom she depended was a hopeless imbecile, 
 totter and fall like a stricken tree, and tremble from 
 head to foot with broken sobs. There was insanity in 
 her family but nobody had told her that she should not 
 marry. Good people might have feared to break her 
 young heart. A thousandfold better would it have 
 been to have suffered the broken heart at sixteen while 
 life was plastic than to have the awful blow^ fall at 
 fifty when the storms of life had weakened the heart 
 and will and when old age began to depend upon the 
 strong arm of the son that this day is in a state asylum 
 for idiots. It is high time that the outspoken state- 
 ment was made that mere sentimental attachment, 
 largely a thing of instinct, is not enough basis for a 
 happy marriage; love is not the lofty, fixed and im- 
 mutable thing novelists tell us it is, but changeable like 
 every other instinct, — accidental, flighty, fitful, flitting; 
 that it does not possess natural and inalienable rights 
 above reason and common-sense but is thoroughly amen- 
 able to laws of development and can and ought to be 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 199 
 
 cultivated, suppressed and deflected like a vine upon 
 a trellis. With neurotics and erotics, love may be su- 
 preme, but with common-sense people, it obeys law. 
 
 Now, I've said enough to be thoroughly despised by 
 the poets and by the young person in love for the first 
 time, but I trust the rest of you will take the matter se- 
 riously. It is a subject almost always too lightly 
 treated, even when the treatment resolves the audience 
 into tears. Falling in love is at least as serious a step 
 as crossing a railroad track. There you are bidden to 
 " Stop, look and listen." That you should do here. 
 Then if you must, fall in love, but for heaven's sake, 
 see more in the young lady than a retrousse nose and a 
 lisp, or in the young man, than a cow-lick and a smooth 
 knobbed cane. You may think that you can marry the 
 nose and the lisp, or the cow-lick and the cane alone but 
 unfortunately you can not. The woman or the man is 
 thrown in with the bargain. You have to live with 
 one or the other. 
 
 That, however, is not the whole calamity. You 
 can't marry a retrousse nose without marrying the girl 
 and her father and mother, and grandfathers and 
 grandmothers and all her uncles and her cousins and 
 her aunts in the jail, the poor house, the asylum, and 
 the graveyard. If you smile at that now, some day 
 you may bitterly rue your smile when you see in your 
 child some weakness or waywardness that you can trace 
 to your wife's relations with the fatality of cause and 
 effect. 
 
 Marriage possesses so few possibilities for the uni- 
 versally expected foolish happiness, so many possibili- 
 ties of untold woe, and so many potentialities for the 
 
200 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 largest, strongest, teriderest life two people can live 
 on earth that it deserves the sincerest consideration pos- 
 sible to be given it. 
 
 So closely allied to feeble-mlndedness that many ex- 
 perts insist that it cannot occur without its mental cog- 
 nate, stands moral imbecility. Here we enter upon a 
 real study of character by heredity. Moral obliquity 
 must affect character whether we believe nervous de- 
 rangements, or mental aberrations do or not. In the 
 words of die Royal Commission, quoted by Dr. Tred- 
 gold, " The moral imbecile is a person who by reason 
 of arrested development or disease of the brain dating 
 from birth or early years displays at an early age vicious 
 or criminal propensities which are of an incorrigible or 
 unusual nature, and are generally associated with some 
 slight limitation of intellect." * 
 
 Whether such a disease existed or not was a matter 
 of long dispute, but writers like Rush, Pinel, Prichard, 
 Maudsley, Tuke, Kerr, Suttleworth, Ireland, Berkley, 
 Barr, Tredgold, Lombroso, Ferri, and the Royal Com- 
 mission experts have set the question of its existence 
 at rest. 
 
 Little doubt seems now to exist that the moral im- 
 becile is a type as distinctive as the mental imbecile and 
 both are defective from birth. The moral imbecile 
 may be deficient either in moral sense, meaning by that 
 he cannot intuitively distinguish between right and 
 wrong; or, he may not have mental power enough to 
 choose the right means to a known ethical end; or, 
 lastly, he may so lack certain social impulses or possess 
 
 8 " Report of the Royal Commission on the Care and Control of the 
 Feeble-minded," Vol. VIII, 1908, p. 189. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 201 
 
 such over-developed selfish impulses that he cannot by 
 the utmost training be made fit for modern society. 
 He was born defective, as defective as if he lacked 
 arms or legs or was possessed of an enormous head. 
 Education can no more remedy his moral defects than 
 it can put on arms or reduce hydrocephalic craniums. 
 Such unfortunates crave the excitement of wrong do- 
 ing. That is their supremest pleasure. They feel no 
 pains of conscience. Their intelligence is too limited 
 to make the thought of consequences vivid. Such a boy 
 at Vineland, New Jersey helped to build a hay barn; 
 then stole matches, waited his chance, set the barn on 
 fire, saw that it had a good start, then gave the alarm, 
 and assisted in the fruitless endeavours made to save 
 the building. All this he did " just to see a blaze." 
 Dr. Barr tells of another boy adopted by a well-to-do 
 couple, taken with the boy's fine appearance, who 
 treated him as their son. He promptly repaid their 
 kindness by burning down their mill and reducing all 
 of them, himself included, to poverty. Dr. Tred- 
 gold mentions the extreme case of the moral idiot who 
 decapitated a sleeping man to see what he would do 
 when he waked up. 
 
 Not only do the acts of the imbeciles possess a certain 
 character of moral irresponsibility, but according to 
 many writers, the persons themselves are, Cainlike, 
 marked out from the rest of mankind by physical stig- 
 mata. This was the especial emphasis of Lombroso 
 and his famous school. With him the moral imbecile 
 became the born criminal, one born for evil and marked 
 from birth with the signs of his predestined trade upon 
 him. " In general," he says, " low criminals have pro- 
 
202 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 jecting ears, thick hair, a thin beard, projecting frontal 
 eminences, large cheek bones and frequent gesticula- 
 tion." The theory was carried so far that even differ- 
 ent kinds of criminals were to be distinguished by their 
 physical traits. Thus thieves have mobile features, 
 eyes and hands, thick, close eyebrows, crooked noses, 
 thin beards, receding foreheads, pale yellowish com- 
 plexions, and cannot blush. Some incendiaries have a 
 peculiarly delicate skin, an infantile aspect, and an 
 abundance of hair, sometimes resembling a woman's. 
 All these peculiarities apply, of course, to the Italian 
 nation. 
 
 Recently a decided reaction has set in against the ex- 
 tremes of Lombroso's views, though it is still accepted 
 in substance by many anthropologists. There is a born 
 criminal, a being brought into the world to do violence, 
 to spend his time hunting, hunted or trapped behind 
 prison bars. More than that his type is so fairly well 
 marked that his physical characteristics plus his early- 
 developing and persistent career in crime, make him 
 unmistakable. And finally, what is more important to 
 the eugenist, since the man is a born criminal, he has 
 the fatal power of transmitting his moral birth-marks 
 to his posterity. Let it be remembered that we are 
 not now discussing the ordinary bad boy, nor the " de- 
 generate " man, nor the habitual criminal, all of whom 
 may be products solely of environment. We are dis- 
 cussing the moral imbecile, the " born criminal," the 
 fated unfortunate, upon whom more unfortunate par- 
 ents have wrought their work and then too late for 
 any improvement have turned him over to long-suffer- 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 203 
 
 ing society. In the existence of such beings and in 
 their beneficent extermination every intelligent citizen 
 should have the liveliest interest. 
 
 Statistics on moral imbecility vary. This is due 
 to the fact that penal institutions do not distinguish be- 
 tween born-criminals and other criminals. Of course, 
 the prevalence of crime through several generations of 
 the same family argues and argues strongly, for heredi- 
 tary transmission of criminal tendencies, especially if 
 the persistence of crime occurs in a community other- 
 wise fairly good. However, this cannot always be 
 assured and the figures must be accepted more to estab- 
 lish the gruesome fact that crime breeds crime, rather 
 than an accurate measure of how much crime crime 
 breeds. 
 
 Lombroso himself, in 1871-72 studied 2800 
 criminals, 7.4 per cent, with drunken parentage. Vir- 
 gilio found a criminal parentage of 26.8 per cent, of his 
 criminals. Mettray found that out of 3580 criminals 
 707 were children of prisoners and 308 of persons liv- 
 ing in unlawful relations. ^'^ Probably Travis has made 
 the most definite effort to estimate the percentage of 
 born criminals among ordinary institutional inmates. 
 He made widespread researches both in America and 
 abroad and has no disposition whatever to magnify the 
 influence of heredity over other factors. 
 
 He sums up his figures for several institutions as fol- 
 lows : ^^ 
 
 la " Twentieth Century Practice of Medicine," Vol. XII, pp. 406-407. 
 "Thomas Travis "The Young Malefactor," 1908, p. 9. 
 
204 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 Place Nat. Abnormal Nat. Criminal 
 
 Elmira Reformatory, N. Y..... i8 percent. 9 percent. 
 Caldwell Penitentiary, N. Y... ] ■ 
 
 Rahway Refuge, N. Y. lis per cent. 7.5 per cent. 
 
 House of Refuge, N. Y. J . 
 
 N. Y. Juvenile Asylum 8.7 per cent. 2.9 per cent. 
 
 Juvenile Court OfEenders 2.0 per cent. i.o per cent. 
 
 These figures are probably more conservative than 
 otherwise, and for that very reason gather power when 
 applied to population masses. 
 
 But let us vary this grey and melancholy waste of 
 figures with one or two scarlet illuminations. The 
 Jukes and the Ishmaelites, and more recently the Nams, 
 appear as families of hereditary criminals wherever 
 literature on the subject appears. Their general his- 
 tory is much alike. All spring from worthless parent- 
 stock. They lived apart, largely segregated by lo- 
 cality or by choice from the rest of men ; intermarried 
 and inter-bred until they developed into colonies or 
 tribes of degenerates of every variety. 
 
 The Jukes will give us the best idea of what may 
 happen when the law of heredity combines with environ- 
 ment in the promotion of crime. " From one lazy 
 vagabond nicknamed ' Jukes,' born In 1720, whose two 
 sons married five, degenerate sisters, six generations 
 numbering about 1200 persons of every grade of Idle- 
 ness, viciousness, lewdness, pauperism, disease, Idiocy, 
 Insanity and criminality were traced. Of the total 
 seven generatiohs, 300 died In Infancy (and one can 
 say It devoutly with a ' Thank God! ') : 310 were pro- 
 fessional paupers, kept in alms houses at total of 2300 
 years ; 440 were physically wrecked by their own ' dis- 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 205 
 
 eased wickedness ' ; more than half the women fell into 
 prostitution; 130 were convicted criminals; 60 were 
 thieves; 7 were murderers; only 20 learned a trade, 10 
 of these in State Prison, and all at a state cost of over 
 $1,250,000." " 
 
 One compacted summary like that cannot for a mo- 
 ment give an adequate impression of the ghastly cor- 
 ruption into which this intertwined colony of degener- 
 ates fell. A few segregated and magnified germs are 
 interesting objects of agreeable study but a colony of 
 the same germs becomes a horrifying mass of cancerous 
 corruption. So figures of crime often convey less of the 
 motive power to sane action than one concrete example 
 coming straight home. May such an example never 
 come to any of you. May your heart never be bur- 
 dened with a son or daughter hopelessly bad. 
 
 Here let us pause to say we are not talking about 
 mere badness, no matter how exasperating or vicious 
 that badness may be. Mere badness in a child is al- 
 ways palliated in the parents' mind by the thought of 
 its transiency. " Johnny is too young to understand," 
 " He will learn better," " He will do better when he 
 grows older," " Give him another chance," " While 
 there's life, there's hope," are all formulae of cheer in 
 the most heartwringing moments of fathers' and 
 mothers' lives when children go wrong. What stays 
 are they from utter desolation, what tintings of hope 
 seen through agony of tears they paint, let those par- 
 ents tell who have felt their power. " Hope springs 
 eternal in the human breast " and nowhere more 
 blithely than for an erring son or daughter. But, sup- 
 is Dugdale, "The Jukes," 1878. 
 
2o6 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 pose in the midst of a father's or a mother's anguish 
 for the waywardness of a child, the hard black doom 
 must be pronounced, " He will never do better because 
 he cannot. His mother married a scapegrace, possibly 
 because she fancied a rake, possibly to reform him, and 
 upon her son has fallen the father's moral blight." 
 
 Lest the hearer think this situation overdrawn or 
 limited to fanciful pictures of Zola's " Dr. Paschal " 
 or Ibsen's " Ghosts," let me give one incident from real 
 life. 
 
 A young woman married a rich man who had 
 escaped from rigid home discipline and sowed his wild 
 oats with a prodigal hand in widely scattered fields. 
 His dissipations did not stop with marriage, but took 
 this opportunity to add new transgressions to the list. 
 The man ran through the whole gamut of vices that 
 eat through a wife's social veneer and let the world 
 stare in upon her bared soul. Her face took on the 
 hopeless look of the bound prisoner. Her woman's 
 heart hunger for happiness suffered to the limit and 
 then died. She neither sorrowed nor rejoiced when 
 the man ran through one last awful debauch and 
 escaped public disgrace by blowing out his poor dis- 
 eased brains. Then his widow turned wholly to her 
 sons and saw them grow into two physically handsome, 
 sturdy boys, full of life and promise. But, at about 
 twelve years of age, the older began to exhibit the first 
 evidences that his mother had married a rich young 
 man who had led a wild life. The boy shirked study, 
 became disobedient, forsook his rightful companions 
 and sought fellowship with low fellows, black and 
 white, played truant and finally developed an uncon- 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 207 
 
 troUable habit of stealing money. He himself said 
 that something seemed to make him take it. Needless 
 to say the money went for nothing good. 
 
 What will become of this fine-faced lad, I do not 
 know. I hope for the best. This I do know. The 
 wife's grief-deadened soul revived in the infinitely 
 sharper anguish of the mother. She found that fate 
 could wring agony from new chords when old ones 
 ceased to vibrate. She learned that a girl who binds 
 her own life to a man by human laws at the same time 
 binds by infinitely sterner laws beings for whom she 
 would gladly later lay down her wretched life to free. 
 This is the judgment of Life upon men and women 
 who marry only with the thought of their own im- 
 mediate happiness. 
 
 But finally, I would in no wise be true to the high 
 calling of eugenics, if I left you with such a gloomy 
 picture. Eugenics does not only ask you to avoid or- 
 ganically tainted partners. It listens to race-suicide 
 sermons indulgently. It is not interested in preserv- 
 ing a mediocre string of generations filing across the 
 level desert of existence. It aims to improve the race, 
 to raise the standard of productive efficiency, to fill up 
 the measure of happiness for each and having done that 
 dares to believe that that capacity can be indefinitely 
 increased till men become angels and the earth becomes 
 the Kingdom of Heaven. 
 
 You see then that eugenics has a bright side. Even 
 so does the Law of Uniformity: Like begets like, cut 
 both ways. Bad comes from bad, but also good comes 
 from good. Galton has shown us in his pioneer 
 works: "Heredity Genius," "English Men of 
 
2o8 VII, HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 Science," and " Natural Inheritance," that all brilliancy 
 of intellect does not flash out in one generation and 
 leave the sons of a bright father a little worse than 
 others. Galton found in studying 207 fellows in the 
 Royal Society, all of them men of brains, that they had 
 noteworthy fathers twenty-four times more frequently 
 than would have been true without the law of heredity, 
 noteworthy grandfathers twelve times and worthy 
 brothers thirty-one times. The Autocrat was right in 
 preferring the man with a comfortable line of cele- 
 brated ancestors over the self-made man of no parent- 
 age. Brains beget brains. Sterling character can be 
 passed on from generation to generation with a little 
 more certainty than entailed estates. 
 
 This double-edge of the eugenic sword is revealed 
 most clearly in the recent description of the Kallikak 
 family studied so thoroughly by Dr. Goddard of Vine- 
 land, New Jersey. Somewhere back in Revolutionary 
 times, a young man of normal mentality became the 
 father of a child by a feeble-minded girl. From that 
 unfortunate union came 480 known descendants only 46 
 of whom were known to be normal. 
 
 The same young Colonial ancestor of this blackened 
 line later married a normal woman. Note now the 
 impassable gulf fixed between these two lines of chil- 
 dren. From the latter pair came 496 known descend- 
 ants. In all that line no illegitimates, no criminals, no 
 epileptics and no feeble minds are found; while the gen- 
 erations are ornamented with respectable doctors, 
 lawyers, judges, educators, business-men and land- 
 owners. 
 
 This case is remarkable ; for, in a limited way, and as 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 209 
 
 far as our ordinary social conditions will permit it, it 
 was a controlled experiment. As the environments of 
 the two lines as far as topography, climate and in some 
 Instances, home conditions, were the same, it stands as 
 the clearest case of hereditary effect so far studied. It 
 shows admirably and terribly the potentialities for good 
 or for evil residing in one human being and illustrates 
 how these potentialities can be turned to the right or 
 the wrong side by mating. 
 
 To show that this is true of goodness and to offset 
 poor suffering humanity incarnated in the Kalllkaks and 
 Jukes, let us study the posterity of another bit of hu- 
 man clay, Jonathan Edwards, living and giving life 
 under the same organic laws as the worthless old Max 
 Juke. In his book on " Social Direction of Human 
 Evolution," Kelllcott gives a summary of this man's 
 descendants, a crown of glory fit to honour the head of 
 any founder of a royal family. Turn your back for a 
 moment upon the little lake shore of the New York 
 hills and the pitiful huts of the Jukes while you hearken 
 to the roll-call of the heroes. At their head stands 
 Jonathan Edwards, and behind him an array of his de- 
 scendants numbering in 1900, ,1394, "of whom 295 
 were college graduates; 13 presidents of our greatest 
 colleges; 65 professors in colleges, besides many princi- 
 pals of other Important educational institutions; 60 
 physicians, many of whom were eminent; 100 and more 
 clergymen, missionaries, or theological professors; 75 
 were officers In the army and navy; 60 prominent au- 
 thors and writers, by whom 135 books of merit were 
 written and published and 18 important periodicals 
 edited; 33 American States and several foreign coun- 
 
2IO VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 tries, and 92 American cities and many foreign cities 
 have profited by the beneficent influences of their 
 eminent activity; 100 and more were lawyers, of whom 
 one was our most eminent professor of law; 30 were 
 judges; 80 held public office, of whom one was vice- 
 president of the United States; 3 were United States 
 Senators; several were governors, members of Con- 
 gress, framers of state constitutions, mayors of cities, 
 and ministers of foreign courts; one was president of 
 the Pacific Mail Steamship Company; 15 railroads, 
 many banks, insurance companies, and large industrial 
 enterprises have been indebted to their management. 
 Almost if not every department of social progress and 
 of the public weal has felt the impulse of this healthy 
 and long lived family. It is not known that any one of 
 them was ever convicted of crime." ^® 
 
 When into a home for the first time comes the 
 heavenly visitor, father and mother bend over the little 
 body and scan it from head to foot for some physical 
 defect. Happy are they if the child is physically per- 
 fect. It is all that it can be. They are satisfied. 
 
 By and by comes the dawning time of intelligence. 
 Faint sparks of the human begin to gleam through the 
 merely physical activities of their precious little animal. 
 Affection, faint-dawning as deceptive morning twilight, 
 begins to show itself and turns maternal duties into 
 joy. Words come. The little mind grapples with 
 sentences. Questions by the hundred pour out of the 
 exploring mind and baby learns a thousand new things 
 a day. Through all this time father and mother have 
 
 18 " The Social Direction of Human Evolution," Wm. E. Kellicott, 
 pp. 187-188. 
 
OF CHARACTER-MAKING 211 
 
 watched the growth with anxious hearts, agonising in 
 hope that their child will not be stupid nor defective, 
 but sound and bright. The day comes when a clean- 
 faced six year old swings bravely off to school. Re- 
 ports come and the family is proud because their boy 
 stands at the head of his class. He is bright, quick, 
 brainy. They're sure he can make his way and begin 
 to plan for college. Then the teens come and the boy 
 begins his real self-making. New impulses rise in him 
 like waves. Most anxiously through those trying days 
 do father and mother pray on bended knees, " O God, 
 make our boy a good man." They can only watch the 
 battle afar, trusting ultimately that the something bred 
 in their boy will at last carry him through and set his 
 feet firmly on the rock of young manhood. 
 
 In some way or other the crisis comes. The boy 
 leaves home for college, and they begin to hear from 
 'him. His gait becom.es steadier. He sticks to his 
 tasks. His grades are good. He enters a first class 
 fraternity. He takes a lead in college activities. He 
 is foremost for clean living, for the square deal, 
 for fair play, for all those activities that raise the 
 standards of college life and help the weaker fel- 
 low. He is popular. The President knows him and 
 can rely upon him in all campaigns for strong 
 righteousness. The poor, tempted college fellow 
 knows him too, and slips up to his room at night 
 and slides sheepishly in to the hearty " Come." Com- 
 mencement Day arrives at last and father and mother, 
 sure that their boy has done fairly, go up to see him 
 graduated. What they see nobody can tell, the little 
 things, the life their boy lives in the open, his visitors, 
 
212 VII. HOLMES: THE FIRST LAW 
 
 their easy greetings, their clean faces and evident breed- 
 ing, the boy's prominent position in everything good, 
 his place on the programme, the frank admiration of 
 the professors and the great words of the discerning 
 president who holds the mother's hand and says, " You 
 ought to be proud and happy. You have a good son." 
 Shall we leave them there, the two heads touched with 
 grey, bowed under the happiest fruitage of age, the 
 knowledge that the boy of their heart Is strong and 
 bright and good? 
 
 Accidental, is It? Yea, say rather that the glowing 
 story of the orchard-trees in autumn Is accidental ; that 
 fruits of fall need no spring; that men can harvest 
 without sowing; that figs grow on thistles; that night 
 and day may reverse themselves; that the solid orb 
 may make itself a new path and the planetary heavens 
 declare anarchy, as to relegate the ultimate product of 
 all creation — a good man or good woman to the Irre- 
 sponsive and Irresponsible forces of senseless chance- 
 Man from the dust and woman from the bone — 
 But oh, we were not wrought of these alone ! 
 God with his heavenly spirit breathed thereon. 
 
VIII 
 
 THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT FROM THE 
 STANDPOINT OF SOCIOLOGY 
 
 CHARLES A. ELLWOOD 
 
 On May i6, 1904, Sir Francis Galton, cousin of 
 Charles Darwin, delivered a lecture before the newly 
 formed Sociological Society of London, on " Eugenics: 
 Its Definition, Scope and Aims." Defining eugenics as 
 " the science which deals with all influences that im- 
 prove the inborn qualities of a race," he set forth the 
 desirability of a eugenics programme in human society. 
 The time proved ripe for such an idea. A Eugenics 
 Education Society was soon organised in London and 
 similar movements were started in various parts of the 
 world. Thus was born the eugenics movement, the 
 growth and vitality of which were evidenced last sum- 
 mer ( 1912) when the First International Eugenics Con- 
 gress met in London with representatives from nearly 
 all civilised countries. 
 
 The idea, of course, was not new. Sir Francis Gal- 
 ton himself had frequently set forth the idea of eugenics 
 in his earlier writings, first using the word in his " In- 
 quiries Into Human Faculty," published in 1883. In- 
 deed, as far back as we can go in the history of man's 
 thought concerning his social life, we find similar ideas. 
 Thus we find a quite fully developed eugenics pro- 
 gramme set forth in Plato's " Republic." As to 
 modern movements in a similar direction it should not 
 
 213 
 
214 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 be forgotten that in the United States, for a generation 
 or more, many social and philanthropic workers have 
 advocated the permanent segregation of the hopelessly 
 defective classes, which is of course a negative eugenics 
 programme. 
 
 The sociologist sees much to commend in this eu- 
 genics movement, even though like all new movements 
 it may have its cranks and extremists. From a socio- 
 logical standpoint, the eugenics movement is to be com- 
 mended, in the first place, because it calls attention to 
 the great importance of the factor of heredity in human 
 social life. Heredity is a factor which has too often 
 been overlooked in the past by social thinkers and 
 leaders. The advance of modern science, however, 
 makes it more and more evident that the biological 
 factors in man's social life must not be overlooked; and 
 among these factors heredity, or the genetic relation 
 between generations, is of paramount importance. 
 
 Again, the eugenics movement is to be commended 
 sociologically because it tends to call attention to the 
 fact that the character of the mass is more or less de- 
 rived from the character of the individual unit. Some 
 recent sociological thinkers have tended to neglect and 
 even to deny this old truth, asserting that human so- 
 ciety can be adequately understood by paying atten- 
 tion simply to its general traits and mass movements. 
 It is safe to say, however, that there is nothing in hu- 
 man society which does not derive ultimately from the 
 biological and psychological nature of the individual. 
 In other words, individual character is the ultimate 
 problem in human society, and this eugenics emphasises 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 215 
 
 by calling attention to the part which inborn traits play 
 in the formation of the character of the individual. 
 
 Finally, the eugenics movement is to be welcomed, 
 from a sociological standpoint, because it throws em- 
 phasis upon the importance of marriage and the family 
 as institutions in human society. It teaches that these 
 institutions are central in determining individual char- 
 acter, and so also in determining the general character 
 of our social life. It is the quality of the mating, or 
 the marriage. In other words, which determines the 
 heredity of the child; and so the institution of marriage 
 becomes central in the whole problem of eugenics. 
 
 Here It may be remarked that the problem of eu- 
 genics Is essentially a sociological problem. This Sir 
 Francis Galton himself recognised by his final definition 
 of eugenics as " the study of agencies under social con- 
 trol which may improve or Impair the racial qualities of 
 future generations, either physically or mentally." 
 From this definition it is evident that Galton conceived 
 of eugenics as an applied or practical science, resting 
 on biology on the one hand, and on sociology on the 
 other. At any rate, it is evident that as long as the 
 institution of marriage remains in human society the 
 stream of life must flow through this institution. Prac- 
 tically, therefore, the eugenics movement aims at the 
 control of this institution in the interest of improving 
 the racial qualities of future generations. That is, the 
 problem of eugenics in our present social order is simply 
 the problem of securing wise marriages in society, — 
 wise, that is, from the biological standpoint. In order 
 to solve the problems of eugenics, therefore, there 
 
2i6 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 must be a thorough understanding of biology on the 
 one side, and of sociology on the other. 
 
 While the sociologist sees much to commend in the 
 eugenics movement, he also sees many dangers and 
 difficulties connected with the movement. The chief 
 danger is perhaps to be found in the over-emphasis of 
 the importance of heredity, and of the biological ele- 
 ment generally, in human society. If it has been a 
 mistake of some social thinkers in the past to fail to 
 see the. importance of this element, it may easily hap- 
 pen that in the future as great a mistake may be made in 
 the over-emphasis of heredity. Human society is not 
 strictly a biological affair, nor is social evolution the 
 same thing as organic evolution. On the contrary, hu- 
 man society is primarily a psychological matter, and 
 social or cultural evolution is only based on and condi- 
 tioned by organic evolution. We are not justified, 
 therefore, in taking a strictly biological view of human 
 society. In so far as some of the eugenics literature of 
 the present seems to imply a purely physical view of 
 our social life, it may be discarded as worthless. There 
 is no excuse for the eugenist overlooking the spiritual 
 factors in our social life. Beside the hereditary or in- 
 born traits of individuals, there are, of course, also 
 acquired traits, or habits. In civilised human society 
 these latter are much more numerous, and, from a 
 moral standpoint, much more important than the in- 
 born or hereditary traits. So far as we know, the in- 
 born traits do not adjust the individual to civilisation 
 or produce high moral character. Civilisation and the 
 more specialised features of individual character, in 
 other words, are acquired traits. Thus both scientific 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 217 
 
 psychology and sociology show the vast part played in 
 individual and social life by acquired habits; and as 
 yet we have no scientific evidence to show that heredity 
 determines in any hard and fast way what acquired 
 habits the individual shall take on. While inborn 
 qualities or capacities must furnish the basis for the 
 acquired character or habits of the individual, ap- 
 parently in the normal human individual habits of many 
 varied sorts may be built upon the basis of the inborn 
 traits. 
 
 The danger of eugenics, then, is in overlooking the 
 importance of the environment in civilised human so- 
 ciety. Yet this danger does not necessarily inhere in 
 the eugenics movement. While eugenics emphasises 
 the inadequacy of all attempts at social reform through 
 paying attention merely to the environment, yet a sanely 
 developed eugenics movement will undoubtedly recog- 
 nise the inadequacy, from a social standpoint, of paying 
 attention to the factor of heredity alone. In other 
 words, recognition of the importance of heredity is per- 
 fectly compatible with recognition of the importance 
 of nurture or environment. The stream of life can be 
 polluted in two ways, either at its source, or along its 
 course. While the pollution of life at its source may 
 be more serious than any later pollution, yet the eu- 
 genist, just because of his interest in keeping the spring 
 of life uncorrupted, may well have a more vital in- 
 terest in the forces in the environment which affect 
 life and character than others. For if such things as 
 alcoholism and disease are to undo his work, what is the 
 profit of attempting it at all? There is nothing, there- 
 fore, in rational eugenics which forbids the widest and 
 
2i8 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 most intelligent interest in the things in the environ- 
 ment which affect individual life and character. On 
 the contrary, rational eugenics will make no claim that 
 it is any more than one of many agencies which may be 
 employed for the improvement of human social life. 
 
 The practical difEculties which are in the way of 
 carrying out a rational eugenics programme, in human 
 society, are even greater, it must be admitted, than the 
 theoretical dangers which have just been pointed out. 
 Modern civilisation has developed individualism to a 
 high degree, and perhaps nowhere is this individualism 
 seen more than in the relations involved in marriage 
 and the family life. The control of these relations for 
 the advantage of society is a delicate and difficult prob- 
 lem, as yet very far from solution. This, as we have 
 already pointed out, is the real social problem involved 
 in a rational eugenics programme. It would be a great 
 mistake, however, to assert at the beginning that mar- 
 riage could not be controlled in the interest of a stronger 
 and better race. In all ages and practically among 
 all peoples, as Sir Francis Galton pointed out, the in- 
 stitution of marriage has been subjected to numerous 
 regulations, some of them, even of the most absurd 
 character. If this is true, it must be evident that there 
 is no insuperable difficulty in the way of the regulation 
 of marriage in the interests of eugenics, even in as in- 
 dividualistic a society as our own. The methods of 
 social control over marriage in such a civilisation as ours 
 must, however, be manifestly different from methods 
 of control used in the past. They must be less through 
 the coercion of law and more through the power of 
 education, ideals and public opinion. 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 219 
 
 The value and limitations of a eugenics programme 
 in modern society must now be evident. Its value con- 
 sists in its emphasis on the importance of the conserva- 
 tion of our racial stock, to which hitherto we have given 
 less attention than to the preservation of the purity of 
 the breed of our domestic animals. It puts in the fore- 
 front of our social problems the problem of securing a 
 good birth, a right start in life, for every child. This 
 is surely a step in the right direction, for the chief pur- 
 pose of all social institutions is to produce men and 
 women fitted to carry out the great tasks of civilisa- 
 tion, and this they will scarcely be able to do unless 
 they enter into life sound in body and mind. On the 
 other hand, the chief limitations of eugenics lies in the 
 fact already pointed out that social improvement is by 
 no means the same as racial improvement; that the di- 
 rect action of eugenics is limited to the biological ele- 
 ment, whereas social progress is an outcome chiefly of 
 intellectual and moral forces brought to bear on the in- 
 dividual through education and other methods of social 
 control. Another, though temporary, limitation of eu- 
 genics is, of course, to be found in the fact that our 
 knowledge of human heredity is as yet far from com- 
 plete; and that we are even not in agreement, so pro- 
 foundly do modern ideals of life conflict, as to what 
 are desirable human qualities. We must understand, 
 then, both the laws of heredity and the principles of so- 
 cial welfare before a eugenics programme can become 
 practicable in human society. Assuming, however, that 
 we are in agreement about the desirability of certain 
 fundamental human qualities, such as health, intelli- 
 gence, energy, and self-control, let us see, without going 
 
220 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 into technical details, what light modern biology can 
 give us on the laws of human heredity. 
 
 We all understand what heredity is in a general way. 
 We plant seed in the ground, and from it expect a 
 plant of a certain type to be produced. We know 
 that as much depends upon the seed as upon the soil, 
 moisture, temperature and light, the factors in the en- 
 vironment. We do not expect a superior type of cab- 
 bage, say, to grow from an inferior kind of seed; 
 neither do we expect the cabbage to grow without the 
 proper conditions of soil, moisture, temperature and 
 cultivation. Now the seed stands for the hereditary 
 elements involved in such a situation. The heredity, 
 in other words, is what is given in the germ, and it is 
 manifest that no attention to environment can possibly 
 develop anything but the potentialities of the germ. 
 Now, the case with human beings is not different from 
 what it is with plants. As in the plant world, so in the 
 human world, heredity is alone creative of individual 
 qualities. The environment can only modify those 
 qualities, though, so far as his behaviour is concerned 
 man is probably the most modifiable of any species.^ 
 Now if heredity is what is given in the germ, it is evi- 
 dent that nothing can be inherited except the traitsi 
 which are inherent in the germ cells. These cells, out 
 of which the new individual arises, modern biology 
 teaches, are a separate series of cells distinct from and 
 more or less independent of the body cells. Hence, 
 the impossibility of parents transmitting to offspring 
 traits which they have acquired during their lifetime, 
 
 iNote: Of course in this statement only normal man is referred 
 to. See in general Thomson's " Heredity," pp. 242-249. 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 221 
 
 for there is no way by which specific modifications in 
 the cells of the body can possibly reproduce themselves 
 in the germ cells. This fact of the nontransmissibility 
 of acquired traits is known as Weissmann's law of the 
 non-inheritance of acquired characters. Though there 
 has been much debate of this law, rightly understood 
 it seems self-evident when we remember that the germ 
 cells are separate and distinct from the body cells. 
 Under such circumstances it is impossible to conceive 
 that a bodily mutilation could be transmitted from par- 
 ent to offspring; likewise, that a functionally produced 
 modification in the body of the parent organism, could 
 be transmitted. A clear grasp, therefore, of the truth 
 that nothing is inherited except the characteristics of 
 the family stock, the traits which are inherent in the 
 germ plasm itself, will save many questions. Weiss- 
 mann's law is, however, often misunderstood by peo- 
 ple generally to be the doctrine that the life of the 
 parent organism in no way affects the life of the off- 
 spring; that no matter what the individual parent does, 
 it will not affect his offspring. This is, of course, a 
 gross misunderstanding of Weissmann's doctrine. 
 Weissmann knew, as well as every one, that the germ 
 cells receive their nutrition from the blood, and hence 
 may possibly be influenced in many ways by the charac- 
 ter of that nutrition without there being any transmis- 
 sion of specific bodily modifications. As yet, however, 
 scientific evidence is lacking, as to the amount and char- 
 acter of the influence upon the germ plasm through 
 nutrition. The evidence seems to point mainly in a 
 negative direction, that is, that the germ cells may be 
 influenced by poisons and by mal-nutrition, but prob- 
 
222 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 ably not in the opposite direction. Thus, the evidence 
 seems to be fairly sufficient to warrant the conclusion 
 that a large amount of alcohol in the blood, sufficient 
 to poison the whole system, will poison the germ cells 
 and set up degenerative changes in them. The off- 
 spring of confirmed alcoholics are, therefore, apt to be 
 under-vitalised or afflicted with various forms of de- 
 generacy, such as feeble-mindedness, epilepsy and in- 
 sanity. This is, at least, the most conservative, scien- 
 tific view at the present, though it is still much debated. 
 It will be noted, however, that in this case there has 
 been no inheritance of any specific acquired traits. The 
 poison of alcohol has simply set up degenerative 
 changes which affect the germ cells themselves. It is 
 highly probable that the toxins, elaborated by certain 
 diseases, may produce similar results; certain statistics, 
 at any rate, seem to indicate that to parents in the 
 advanced stages of such a disease as tuberculosis nor- 
 mal children are seldom born. As an example of the 
 effect of mal-nutrition on the germ cells, it is only 
 necessary to say that the mal-nutrition which accom- 
 panies advanced age, shows itself especially clearly in 
 this connection. According to Dr. Bertillon of Paris, 
 who has made elaborate investigations along this line, 
 fathers above the age of sixty years, rarely beget per- 
 fectly healthy children. Much investigation is, how- 
 ever, still necessary before we can fully decide how 
 far the life history of the parent organism may influ- 
 ence biologically, that is, by heredity, the life of the 
 offspring. It is certain, however, that we are not war- 
 ranted in assuming that no matter how we live it will 
 not affect the physical constitution and health of our 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 223 
 
 children. Rather it would seem that the only safe 
 conclusion for the present is that we should live on the 
 highest physical plane, not only for the sake of our 
 own efficiency, but also for the sake of our descendants. 
 Another fact which should always be remembered in 
 connection with heredity is that inheritance is equal 
 from both parents, but traits are seemingly transmitted 
 as units. This fact gives rise to what is known as 
 Mendel's law, according- to which there is no perma- 
 nent blending of different traits in a series of genera- 
 tions, but on the contrary contrasted traits tend to segre- 
 gate in definite and regular proportions after the first 
 filial generation. For example if feeble-minded per- 
 sons intermarry with normal persons, their children in 
 the first generation will be apparently all normal per- 
 sons.^ But if these children of feeble-minded and nor- 
 mal persons intermarry among themselves, their off- 
 spring will be found to be one-fourth feeble-minded and 
 three-fourths apparently normal persons. But if these 
 latter intermarry it is found that two-thirds of them 
 will again have offspring in the proportion one-fourth 
 feeble-minded and three-fourths apparently normal, 
 while only one-third will have wholly normal offspring. 
 This shows that in the second generation one-fourth 
 were pure normals, one-fourth feeble-minded, and one- 
 half hybrids which appeared normal, but which were 
 in fact not so, so far as their germ cells were con- 
 cerned. Mendel's law thus shows us the manner of 
 transmission of hereditary traits in individual cases. 
 It is a highly important law for eugenics, especially 
 
 2 Assuming, of course, that feeble-mindedness behaves like a sim- 
 ple recessive unit character. 
 
224 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 because it shows us the results of the crossing of nor- 
 mal with abnormal stocks. It will be noted that ac- 
 cording to Mendel's law, no secure knowledge of hered- 
 ity can be gained from the observance of just two con- 
 secutive generations, but only through the study of 
 three or more generations. In human society, on ac- 
 count of the crossing of numerous stocks, or biotypes, 
 as they are called, practically every mating results in 
 hybrid offspring. Hence the full result of such mating 
 may not be seen until the second, third, or even fourth 
 filial generation. 
 
 One further fact should be mentioned in connection 
 with the modern doctrine of heredity, and that is, that 
 apparently merely quantitative variations or fluctua- 
 tions, as they are termed by biologists, are probably 
 not inherited. Only variations in quality, not in de- 
 gree, are clearly transmissible. Minute personal traits 
 of the individual, in other words, though they may do 
 much to make personality, are not transmissible, bift, 
 as we have said, only the characteristics of the family 
 stock, the traits which are inherent in the germ plasm. 
 These hereditary traits, however, affect every quality 
 of the individual, not only his bodily make-up, but, also, 
 in lesser degree, his mental and moral character. 
 
 Perhaps the best study which has yet been made, to 
 illustrate the working of these principles of heredity In 
 human society, is that by Dr. H. H. Goddard, in his 
 work on " The Kallikak Family," recently published. 
 In this work Dr. Goddard shows, In the clear- 
 est possible way, the difference between the In- 
 fluence of environment, and the influence of hered- 
 ity, and, also shows how the particular factor of 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 225 
 
 feeble-mindedness is transmitted in accordance with 
 Mendel's laws. The book must be regarded as epoch- 
 making in the study of human heredity, because it dem- 
 onstrates beyond reasonable doubt the very great role 
 which heredity plays in our social life, and, incidentally, 
 therefore, the need of a rational eugenics programme 
 in human society. 
 
 For a long time, indeed, there has been no doubt, 
 in the' minds of careful students of social conditions, as 
 to the need of artificial selection, or a eugenics pro- 
 gramme, in human society. The long cessation of nat- 
 ural selection brought about among certain classes by 
 wealth, unwise charity, and other means, has resulted in 
 the gradual production of an enormous number of he- 
 reditary defectives, among practically all civilised peo- 
 ples. In the United States for example, there are over 
 one-half million mental defectives alone. Including in 
 that term not only the feeble-minded, but also the 
 chronic Insane and epileptic. In a large majority of 
 these cases, heredity is responsible for their condition. 
 If we add to these mental defectives all those who suffer 
 from serious physical defects, the total number of de- 
 fective stock In this country can not much fall short 
 of three million persons. Of this number, something 
 over one-half million are cared for In institutions, plac- 
 ing a burden upon the normal population of probably 
 about a hundred million dollars annually. When we 
 consider that the defective persons outside of institu- 
 tions, are also frequently a burden upon the normal 
 population, we can see the Immense financial burden 
 which our defective stock imposes upon our nation, to 
 say nothing of the enormous total burden which must 
 
226 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 rest upon the whole family of civilised nations by rea- 
 son of die existence of a large per cent, of defective 
 individuals in their population. Moreover, when we 
 reflect that a very large per cent, of these defectives are 
 married and become parents, arid that the lower types 
 of defectives, especially the feeble-minded, have a 
 much higher birth rate than the normal population, we 
 can readily see that the peril of diffusing throughout 
 our general population the traits of these defective 
 strains is not exaggerated by eugenists. Dr. Goddard's 
 study of " The Kallikak Family " demonstrates this 
 very clearly in a single instance. 
 
 What is to be done? As soon as we turn to this 
 practical question, the dangers and difficulties which con- 
 front a eugenics programme in human society, become 
 again manifest. Especially is there danger of prema- 
 ture legislation forbidding marriage to certain classes 
 of defectives. The American people are particularly 
 prone to forget what the law can do and what it can 
 not do. There is no reason to suppose that the mere 
 forbidding of legal marriage to certain classes of de- 
 fectives will prevent their propagation in society, be- 
 cause it is probable that many of these defective indi- 
 viduals will find means of reproducing their kind out- 
 side of the marriage bond. Unwise laws, In other 
 words, may not prevent the reproduction of the unfit, 
 but only add to the burden of defectiveness the further 
 burden of Illegitimacy. It may be worth our while 
 to pause for a moment to see what the law can do in 
 specific cases, and what it can not do. It is in gen- 
 eral a safe principle to lay down that society should 
 not forbid marriage to any class of persons unless it 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 227 
 
 is prepared to care for that class in institutions segre- 
 gated from free social life, or, unless it is confident 
 that public conscience and public opinion will be strong 
 enough in its influence over that particular class to pre- 
 vent even secret infractions of the law. We often 
 hear it said that legal marriage should be forbidden 
 to the insane, the epileptic, and the feeble-minded. 
 This is, of course, a correct theoretical position, but 
 such a law would do little good unless it were backed 
 up by provisions to care for and segregate these classes 
 in institutions. The same remark, of course, applies 
 to criminals and vicious persons ; it would do little good 
 to prohibit marriage to these unless provision for their 
 segregation were made. We hear much now-a-days 
 also, of laws to prohibit marriage unless both parties 
 can present a physician's certificate showing reasonable 
 soundness in body and mind. But, again it must be 
 said that the State is not prepared to enforce such a 
 law as yet, because in present society many of the per- 
 sons who need theoretically such control would be prac- 
 tically least amenable to any form of legal control. 
 On the other hand, while the State is not prepared to 
 enforce such a law as yet, on account of the low con- 
 dition of public morals, the church, which is supposed 
 to set the standard in ethical conduct, might very well 
 require, it seems to me, of all who come before it and 
 ask for the sanction of religion upon their union, that 
 they present some evidence to show reasonable sound- 
 ness in body and mind. For how can the church, the 
 institution which stands for ideals in society, give its 
 sanction to a marriage which, according to humanitarian 
 doctrine, is essentially unethical ? As a matter of fact. 
 
228 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 the Episcopal diocese of the city of Chicago, has al- 
 ready established such regulations for the marriages sol- 
 emnised by that denomination in that diocese, and they 
 seem to work well. 
 
 It must not be supposed from what has been said that 
 eugenic regulation of marriage by law is impossible. 
 All that has been said merely implies that such legal 
 regulation of marriage, for the more defective classes, 
 must be backed up by adequate institutional and other 
 social provisions. Eugenic regulation of marriage for 
 the normal population by law is, of course, entirely 
 possible where there is adequate backing of such laws 
 by public opinion. As examples of such laws, we 
 might instance the laws forbidding marriage between 
 first cousins and other near relatives. Careful inves- 
 tigation seems to show that the warrant for such laws, 
 from a eugenic or biological standpoint, is ample. On 
 account of the fact that many families have slight 
 hereditary defects, cousin marriages multiply the 
 chances of these defects being perpetuated, and even 
 intensified. Hence, statistics show that cousin mar- 
 riages result in the production of a very much larger 
 percentage of defectives than marriages between per- 
 sons more distantly related. Again, a law forbidding 
 marriages between widely unlike races, such as the 
 negro and the white race, may be regarded as a eugenic 
 law fi-om the standpoint of the more advanced race. 
 At least until we know more definitely the results of 
 the crossing of races, such laws should be regarded as 
 wise for the present. Other laws of a eugenic char- 
 acter, of course, are possible of enforcement, provided 
 public opinion sufficiently sanctions them. Such a law 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 229 
 
 for example, would be a wise law restricting the class 
 of immigrants admitted to this country. While it may 
 be very difficult for us to determine by law, for the 
 people who are already here, who shall be permitted 
 to be parents of future Americans, it ought not to be 
 particularly difficult for us to act upon this principle 
 with regard to the admission of our foreign immigrants. 
 While we have immigration laws already which ex- 
 clude certain dependent and defective classes, in the 
 opinion of experts these laws are relatively ineffec- 
 tive. This is shown, for one thing, by the high per- 
 centage of the insane among our foreign born. Dr. 
 C. B. Davenport is of the opinion that an adequate se- 
 lection could be made among our immigrants to ex- 
 clude hereditary defectives at comparatively small 
 expense and with comparatively little administrative 
 machinery. He estimates that $500,000 a year, paid 
 for adequately trained field workers, would keep out 
 effectively all hereditary defectives. If this is so, we 
 might better put a little money into this work which 
 is now being spent for other purposes, as it would save 
 the nation many millions in the long run. 
 
 Another legal measure, widely advocated at the pres- 
 ent time, in the name of eugenics, is the sterilization 
 of habitual criminals and defectives. Eight or ten 
 States have already passed laws to provide for this, al- 
 though only one State, Indiana, has as yet had the cour- 
 age to attempt to put the law into execution. The gen- 
 eral opinion of those who have made the most careful 
 study of this measure is that it is a dangerous, or, at 
 least, a questionable law. The sterilization of criminals 
 and defectives does very little to solve the real problems 
 
230 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 which thosie classes occasion in society. On the con- 
 trary, such a measure may intensify other evils. Thus, 
 the sterilisation of a feeble-minded woman leaving her 
 at liberty in society, would in no way remove the men- 
 ace which she is to the community, save it would pre- 
 vent her becoming the mother of children. The un- 
 wisdom of such a half-way measure as this must, 
 therefore, be manifest. Of course, there is no objec- 
 tion to the programme of the sterilization of markedly 
 defective persons if it is accompanied by their segrega- 
 tion in institutions; but in such a case sterilization be- 
 comes unnecessary.* 
 
 We come, therefore, to the permanent segregation 
 in institutions of the more hopeless types of defectives 
 as the only policy which society can afford to endorse 
 in its war against racial deterioration. The usual ob- 
 jection to this policy, which has been advocated for 
 over a generation by enlightened social workers, is that 
 it is too expensive; that it would imply an enormous 
 multiplication of institutions. The reply is, that while 
 the immediate expense of such a programme of institu- 
 tional development for defectives might be great, yet 
 it would be a saving to society in the long run, an enor- 
 mous saving if the principles of eugenics are true. 
 Again, the expense is often exaggerated. Society has 
 already undertaken the permanent segregation of one 
 of these classes, namely, the insane, without any very 
 great expense. The segregation of the feeble-minded 
 would entail, if anything, less expense because many of 
 these individuals can be made largely to support them- 
 
 *FoT a discussion of State sterilization laws see Bulletin Eugenics 
 Record Office, lo and lob. 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 231 
 
 selves in properly managed institutions of the farm col- 
 ony type. It is estimated that there are, at least, 200,- 
 000 feeble-minded persons in the United States," a large 
 per cent, of whom should be cared for in institutions. 
 As yet, however, only five States require feeble-minded 
 persons to be committed to institutions just as the in- 
 sane are committed by public authorities. Provisions 
 for the chronic epileptic class, a very dangerous defec- 
 tive class, are even more deficient. It may be re- 
 marked that wherever the policy of segregation has 
 been tried it has proved effective. Thus, in northern 
 Italy in the province of Aosta, there existed for cen- 
 turies a class of hereditary defectives known as Cre- 
 tins. These Cretins suffered from a peculiar form of 
 idiocy or imbecility associated with the degeneration 
 of the thyroid gland which was hereditary. For a 
 time, owing to their marriage being encouraged by the 
 church, their numbers greatly increased. In 1890, 
 however, a policy of segregation was adopted, and by 
 1 9 10 only a single Cretin and three demi-Cretins were 
 left where hundreds had existed before. American 
 society can not enter too soon, therefore, upon this 
 policy of segregation of pronounced defectives. There 
 can be no question, moreover, as to the humanitarian 
 grounds for such a policy, because it has been demon- 
 strated that such defective persons are nearly always 
 happier and better cared for in institutions than they 
 would be outside, and they do not entail future genera- 
 tions with the burden of their defects. 
 
 Such is the extent to which the law can go wisely in 
 aiding the eugenics movement. What law can not ac- 
 complish, however, can be accomplished oftentimes by 
 
232 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 public opinion and public sentiment. Thus, it might 
 be unwise, for example, at the present, either to forbid 
 marriage to or provide for the segregation of certain 
 classes in our population suffering merely from hered- 
 itary physical defects. But because these persons are 
 normal mentally we might expect through the pressure 
 of public opinion to bring them to forego marriage 
 and parenthood. Such a class, for example, is the class 
 of congenital or hereditary deaf-mutes. This is a de- 
 fect which is highly transmissible if persons of this 
 class intermarry. On the other hand, many congen- 
 ital deaf-mutes are highly intelligent persons. It 
 would seem desirable, neither to segregate this class 
 nor to forbid them legal marriage, but to develop in 
 them, through education and the pressure of public 
 opinion, a eugenic conscience which, under ordinary 
 circumstances, would probably lead the person suffer- 
 ing from such a defect, not to marry. Here, of course, 
 questions may be raised which it is impossible as yet 
 to answer with definiteness. Most hereditary defects 
 behave, as the biologists would say, as recessive char- 
 acters, that is, they do not appear in the first generation 
 of children when persons having such defects inter- 
 marry with the normal population. Therefore, it has 
 been said by some eugenists that if defective persons 
 would continually marry outside of their defective class, 
 these defects would gradually disappear from the germ 
 plasm, and there would be, therefore, no eugenic ob- 
 jection to such marriages. But the danger of such a 
 doctrine is obvious. There are so many defective 
 stocks in existing society that the chances would be great 
 that some of the children of the first generation who 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 233 
 
 appeared normal might intermarry with a stock hav- 
 ing a similar defect, then the defect would reappear 
 in individuals. In this way defectiveness would be 
 scattered in society rather than eliminated. The safe 
 counsel would, therefore, appear to be that persons hav- 
 ing themselves marked physical or mental defects 
 should forego marriage altogether, while persons who 
 come from family stocks in which it is known such de- 
 fects exist, should be careful to inter-marry only with 
 normal persons. In this case there would be no dan- 
 ger of the defect reappearing in later generations. 
 
 Here again it must be said, that much work still re- 
 mains to be done in the scientific investigation of hu- 
 man heredity, before any hard and fast rules can be 
 made for such cases as we have just discussed. For 
 the present, therefore, the safe policy would seem to 
 be to leave such matters to enlightened individual con- 
 science to decide. 
 
 Such, then, is the negative programme of eugenics. 
 It would be a great mistake, however, to think of the 
 eugenics movement as entirely, or even chiefly, nega- 
 tive, aiming simply at the elimination of hereditary 
 defects in human stocks. On the contrary, the founder 
 of the eugenics movement. Sir Francis Galton, himself 
 considered the movement to be primarily positive, aim- 
 ing at the encouragement of marriage and parenthood 
 among the classes of superior endowments. In his 
 own language " The aim of eugenics Is to bring as 
 many influences as can be reasonably employed, to 
 cause the useful classes In the community to contribute 
 more than their proportion to the next generation." 
 At the present time the birth rate has fallen greatly 
 
234 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 among the socially more fortunate classes, those best 
 fitted to meet the burdens of parenthood, in other 
 words, if not best endowed with ability. The result 
 is that at the present time one-fourth of the married 
 population produce one-half of the next generation, 
 and there is much evidence to show that a large pro- 
 portion of this prolific one-fourth is made up of indi- 
 viduals of mediocre, if not defective, natural endow- 
 ments. The problem of positive eugenics becomes, 
 therefore, how society can encourage its better en- 
 dowed men and women to contribute more than their 
 proportion to the next generation. In other words, 
 how it can encourage marrislge and parenthood among 
 the truly better elements of society. Here, again, the 
 eugenics movement Is beset by many practical difficul- 
 ties. It has been suggested that the State, in certain 
 instances, should compensate parents for the birth and 
 rearing of children. It has often been truly said that 
 the mother who bears and rears children is serving the 
 State not less than the soldier who serves upon the bat- 
 tle field. Hence we hear a great deal nowadays about 
 pensions to mothers and mothers' compensation. 
 There can be no doubt, of course, about the service to 
 society of a mother who bears and rears normal chil- 
 dren. The only question is whether such a service as 
 this should be compensated In a financial way. Are we 
 going to put every service which individuals render 
 to society upon a monetary basis? Or, are there not 
 some services which we can not pay adequately for with 
 money, and which we should not attempt to pay for 
 with money because it degrades them? Is not parent- 
 hood such a service? Would not the women who 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 235 
 
 would accept compensation for motherhood be the very 
 sort of women whom we might least desire to be 
 mothers? Of course society should not penalise mar- 
 riage and parenthood on the part of its men and women 
 of ability, through industrial, political or other arrange- 
 ments, as it doubtless does, to some extent, at the pres- 
 ent time. But, on the other hand, society can not 
 safely enter upon any pecuniary method of encouraging 
 marriage and parenthood even among those elements 
 that might meet the test of certain qualifications, be- 
 cause such methods would defeat the very end at which 
 they are aimed. 
 
 We, then, must give up for the present, at least, 
 the idea of the encouragement of parenthood in any 
 material way. The whole question, therefore, of posi- 
 tive eugenics reduces itself at once to the question of 
 the ideals of life which we should encourage in the 
 young. It, therefore, becomes primarily a matter of 
 education rather than of legislation. The question in- 
 volved is evidently that of moral education along the 
 lines of sex, marriage and the family. " The general 
 programme of the eugenist," says Dr. C. B. Davenport, 
 " is to improve the race by inducing young people to 
 make a more reasonable selection of marriage mates, 
 to fall in love intelligently." This means, of course, 
 that young men and women must, even at a very early 
 age, be given right ideals of marriage and parenthood. 
 If they are to make a more reasonable selection of 
 mates, not only must the widest acquaintance between 
 young people be encouraged by society, but they must 
 also be given somewhat different standards of selection 
 than most of them have at the present time. The 
 
236 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 ideals of good manners, social popularity, good looks, 
 and wealth, must be replaced with the ideals of health, 
 intellectual ability, and moral character. When these 
 latter qualities come to be put first in the mutual choice 
 of the sexes in marriage, there can be no doubt that 
 the benefit to society will be incalculable. However, 
 something more than the development of right ideals 
 in our young people regarding marriage is necessary 
 for the progpamme of positive eugenics. That some- 
 thing more is education for parenthood. We hear 
 much of education for good citizenship, but is not a 
 most important part of good citizenship the right ful- 
 filling of the duties and responsibilities of parenthood? 
 By education for parenthood, we mean not so much 
 education in the care and rearing of young children, 
 important as that may be, but, also, instruction of the 
 proper sort along the lines of heredity, sex morality, 
 and the social importance of the family. Hitherto, 
 such education has been mainly left to the family itself, 
 but on account of the fact that many families do not 
 function educationally in this matter, it would seem 
 necessary to introduce. In a wise way, some of this in- 
 struction In our public schools, from the kindergarten 
 up. At any rate, there can be no question that some 
 public educational agency must supplement the home 
 along these lines. Of course, the church, as the In- 
 stitution charged with the conservation arid propaga- 
 tion of moral Ideals in society, is best fitted to be this 
 agency; only the church fails to reach great masses of 
 our population, and as yet is not fully awake to its 
 duties along these lines. Sir Francis Galton's ppin- 
 
AND SOCIOLOGY 237 
 
 ion, indeed, was that the eugenics movement could 
 scarcely reach the masses without the development of 
 a eugenic religion. Eugenic religions have already ex- 
 isted, to some extent, in the past, notably Judaism. 
 Christianity, with its doctrine of the love of humanity 
 and the service of man, ought to be especially fitted to 
 aid a rational eugenics programme In modern society. 
 At any rate, eugenics can not succeed without the de- 
 velopment of a eugenic conscience, and such a con- 
 science can best be developed In the masses probably 
 through the aid of religious agencies. 
 
 In conclusion, then, we must attach a high value to 
 the eugenics movement. Not only has It insisted upon 
 certain vital truths which society can not afford to ig- 
 nore, but it has brought a great, new hope Into the 
 world. When I was an undergraduate, I was told in 
 my course in sociology that heredity was a factor be- 
 yond human control; that the most man might aspire 
 to was the control over certain forces in the environ- 
 ment. Such' a statement was perhaps justified at the 
 time; but the progress of our scientific knowledge of 
 heredity and the rise of the eugenics movement give 
 grounds for the hope that mankind may yet exercise in 
 some degree a rational control over Its own heredity; 
 may, in other words, intelligently modify the qualities 
 of the race itself, rather than leave these to be de- 
 termined simply by the blind forces of physical nature. 
 Moreover, the whole trend of the eugenics movement 
 is to place marriage and the family upon a much higher 
 basis than it has hitherto been in human society; upon 
 a basis, that is, not of the mere individual happiness 
 
238 VIII. ELLWOOD: EUGENICS MOVEMENT 
 
 of the married parties, but of service of " the human- 
 ity which is to.be." The eugenics movement is, there- 
 fore, decidedly humanitarian; and if society will heed 
 its message, it will find its life lifted to a higher plane, 
 not only physically, but also mentally and morally. 
 
IX 
 
 EUGENICS AND ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 
 
 ALBERT G. KELLER 
 
 One time last year, when the big league season was at 
 its height, and the merits of this and that player or 
 manager were being hotly discussed, some one is said 
 to have asked a Detroit man : " What do you think 
 of this eugenics?" To which was retorted in heat: 
 " Think about Hugh Jennings 1 Know about him ! 
 Well, I guess yes ! He's all to the good ! " Thus 
 may a great humanitarian plan become confused with 
 the leader of an enterprise of quite another sort. 
 
 When a word like " eugenics " gets to be as current 
 as that word now is, it is well for the discreet man to 
 find out just what it means — or better, what it does 
 not mean. A term like that, by reason of being sono- 
 rous and of Greek derivation, is likely to attain a vogue 
 that fills the judicious with dismay. " Eugenics " is a 
 mouth-filling word. When a half-educated person 
 utters it, he seems to himself to be saying something 
 — something that hints of stretches of erudition and 
 smacks of vigils of brooding meditation. He falls, as 
 it were, into a hypnotic state, attended by a mood of 
 exaltation and by illusions of grandeur. And a re- 
 sounding name like " eugenics " (or pragmatism, or 
 pre-Raphaelite) comes to live apart from the thing to 
 which it has been attached, lending to the latter a sort 
 of unearthly pervasiveness, but also not seldom com- 
 
 «39 
 
240 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 pletely misrepresenting it. It seems to me sometimes 
 that eugenics has come to be used by some people to 
 designate any sort of philanthropic endeavour that may 
 be afoot. 
 
 What I am here for to-day is to explain to any one 
 who wishes to hear, what eugenics legitimately and sci- 
 entifically means. I intend then to suggest to you the 
 nobility of the ideal which it involves (whether it be 
 realisable or not) and to consider the limits and the 
 possibilities attending its realisation, as I see them. 
 
 Allow me to approach the question of what eugenics 
 really means, in a somewhat indirect manner. There 
 are few of you who do not know something about the 
 breeding of plants or animals. I doubt if all of you 
 realise how much skill and pains are needful to attain 
 success in it. Let us see what that observer of ob- 
 servers, Charles Darwin, has to say about this mat- 
 ter. Speaking of merino sheep he says that " the 
 sheep are placed on a table and are studied, like a pic- 
 ture by a connoisseur; this is done three times at in- 
 tervals of months, and the sheep are each time marked 
 and classed, so that the very best may ultimately be 
 selected for breeding." This is no easy task — to se- 
 lect the very best; probably no one here would be fit 
 to pass judgment upon even one of the details that the 
 experience of the breeder has proved to be vital ones. 
 For the breeder is a professional and detects differ- 
 ences absolutely inappreciable by an uneducated eye — 
 differences, says Darwin, " which I for one have vainly 
 attempted to appreciate." " Not one man in a thou- 
 sand," he goes on, " has accuracy of eye and judgment 
 sufficient to become an eminent breeder. If gifted 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 241 
 
 with these qualities, and he studies his subject for years, 
 and devotes his lifetime to it with indomitable perse- 
 verance, he will succeed, and may make great Improve- 
 ments; if he wants any of these qualities, he will as- 
 suredly fail. Few would readily believe in the nat- 
 ural capacity and years of practice requisite to become 
 even a skilful pigeon-fancier." 
 
 You can readily see that the skill and care expended 
 upon animal breeding compares very well with that 
 devoted to any other difficult profession, as, for ex- 
 ample, surgery and medicine. The same is true in 
 the case of plant breeding. People call Luther Bur- 
 bank of California, who has done some wonderful 
 work in plant breeding, a wizard — one avaricious man 
 wanted him to cross bees with fireflies, so they could 
 work all night; another complained that he did noth- 
 ing practical, and wanted him to rear square peas, 
 which would lie in stable equilibrium on the implement 
 used by this man to convey them to their goal. All 
 reports, both grave and gay, about any great plant- 
 breeder, extol in some way the skill and industry put 
 in by him in producing better races of plants. 
 
 But what about man-breeding? Are any such skill 
 and industry and study expended upon this enterprise? 
 We are keen about having thoroughbred animals; we 
 want large and juicy fruits and palatable vegetables; 
 but are we demanding human thoroughbreds? Not if 
 our proverbs about marriage being a hit-or-miss affair 
 — a lottery with many blanks — are true. Unless one 
 is optimistic enough to believe that thoughts that 
 " turn lightly to love " are somehow under the domina- 
 tion of some elemental beneficent law, he can not es- 
 
242 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 cape the conviction that human mating is, to say the 
 very least, a less scientific matter than the mating of 
 domestic animals by the breeder. " Excepting in the 
 case of man himself," says Darwin, " hardly any one 
 is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed." 
 And men not only allow the worst of their fellows to 
 breed, but, if we are to believe what some critics as- 
 sert, men permit the progeny of the worst to increase 
 totally in disproportion to that of the " fittest." 
 
 Selection, whether done by nature — when it is 
 called natural selection — or by the breeder — when it 
 is called artificial selection — aims to prevent the mat- 
 ing of the unfit and to favour that of the fit. A form 
 of selection which would place the fit at a disadvantage 
 as respects the production of the next generation, is 
 called contra- or counter-selection. It is the survival 
 of the unfit. Now, some of the severest critics assert 
 that counter-selection is rife in human society and that 
 we must work against it. They designate certain coun- 
 ter-selective agencies in our modern life; let us look 
 at these for a moment. 
 
 War and the military organisation are taken to form 
 a strong counter-selective factor in a nation's life. Re- 
 cruits are picked out on the basis of physical superiori- 
 ties ^nd the defective are rejected. But then these 
 " fitter " men are led out to battle, to be the " food 
 of the bullets," while their less perfect fellows incur 
 no such danger. Even if there is no war, barracks 
 life is shown to be fraught with dangers to health and 
 morals which do not exist in the home. Further, it is 
 said the unfitter get an earlier and better start in their 
 careers, while too often the fitter are delayed in get- 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 243 
 
 ting on their feet and sometimes handicapped for good 
 and all by a distaste for the sameness and tameness of 
 ordinary life, after the more diverting and irregular 
 military existence. And at the very least, the men 
 who are in military service are obliged to put off mar- 
 riage, leaving the weaker ones to marry earlier and so 
 have larger families. 
 
 Naturally there Is another side to all this; war has 
 had and still has important functions in the life of soci- 
 ety. I do not intend, however, to balance these cases 
 off; that the military organisation has Its counter-se- 
 lective side — that it leads to the handicapping of the 
 fit to the advantage of the unfit, along the lines I have 
 indicated — can scarcely be denied. 
 
 The same is true of the modern economic organisa- 
 tion. In olden times, when a living was got by the 
 chase, he had the best chance who was strongest, or 
 quickest, or most speedy. But now there are many 
 ways of getting on in the world (and so of becoming 
 well-to-do and founding a family) in which physical 
 superiorities are not indispensable. The nearsighted 
 get on ; even the blind earn a living, — as masseurs, for 
 example. Wealth sometimes enables a woman to get 
 married and have a family where without It she would 
 stand a vanishing chance of passing on her particular 
 style of non-perfection to future generations. Thus 
 may the less fit prosper over against the more fit. 
 
 Again it Is shown how celibacy, deferred marriage, 
 and the deliberate limitation of offspring preponderate 
 in those classes which stand highest in the social scale. 
 Demonstrations of these points include tables showing 
 that lateness of marriage and number of children to 
 
244 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 a marriage so vary with position in society that we 
 seem to be breeding from our lowest strata. 
 
 Yet again the triumphs of surgery and medicine may 
 tend to preserve the physically unsound until they can 
 reproduce their kind, thus handing down a heritage of 
 weakness and disease. The unfit are not allowed to 
 die, as under nature, carrying with them their defects 
 and insufficiencies. It is fair to say that no one, so 
 far as I know, has proposed to kill off the defective; 
 but not a few abject to having them breed. 
 
 Finally, an emotional and unreflecting benevolence 
 is responsible for a great deal of counter-selection. The 
 struggle is eased for the weak at the expense of the 
 strong; the latter are taxed to provide for the former, 
 and by just the amount of resources of which the strong 
 are relieved are they handicapped in favour of the less 
 fit. Then the latter are enabled to provide coming 
 generations with a burden of the unfit: the imbeciles, 
 criminals, and other defectives. You can not run a 
 prison or an asylum on nothing; but who pays? It is 
 too often the hardworking, self-respecting man of mod- 
 erate means, who can ill afford it. It is the pennies 
 of the poor rather than the dollars of the rich that 
 pay for humanitarian institutions. Doubtless it is part 
 of the price we pay for our rights as members of soci- 
 ety that we shall assist the unfortunate — but the con- 
 tention is that charity is counter-selective if it is not 
 rationally and scientifically ordered. 
 
 Certain aspects of these contentions are too true to 
 be waved aside by pious reference to the brotherhood 
 of man, to the sin of invading the personality of 
 others, or to a variety of tenuous ethical considera- 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 245 
 
 tlons. If not now, when the world is only partially 
 peopled, sometime at least, when the ratio of men to 
 land has undergone great alteration, these contentions 
 will have to be faced. 
 
 Sometime, also, we shall be obliged to apply our 
 reasoning powers to a test of the proposition that a 
 large national birth-rate means national prosperity and 
 a smaller one adversity. Our ears have been dinned 
 with denunciations of Malthusianism and with woeful 
 complaints and slashing diatribes about race-suicide. 
 And yet it can not be denied that it would have been bet- 
 ter for us all, and for themselves, if thousands of our 
 incapable and suffering fellow-beings had never been 
 born. " It is not the maximum number (says Bate- 
 son) but the optimum number • . . that it should be 
 the endeavour of social organisation to secure. To 
 spread a layer of human protoplasm of the greatest 
 possible thickness over the earth — the implied ambi- 
 tion of many publicists — in the light of natural 
 knowledge is seen to be reckless folly. . We need not 
 more of the fit," Bateson goes on, " but fewer of the 
 unfit. A high death rate is often associated with a 
 high birth rate, but happily a low birth rate and a low 
 death rate are quite compatible with each other." 
 
 But now, while I have been talking about the fit and 
 the unfit, some of you hav-e doubtless been thinking 
 that physical and mental fitness or unfitness have got- 
 ten somewhat confused, where they ought to be kept 
 distinguished from one another. But that can not be 
 done. Even in the animal world mental quickness is 
 a prime criterion of selection; and how much more so 
 must it be in human life! A statuesque and brawny 
 
246 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 idiot can not be classed as fit. In spite of this, how- 
 ever, fitness jnust be founded upon a certain measure 
 of physical superiority; the anasmic and rickety bard is 
 scarcely more desirable for the race than the afore- 
 mentioned imbecile. Generally the combination of 
 mens sana in corpore sano is summed up in the phrase 
 " biological fitness " ; and these counter-selective fac- 
 tors are thought to militate against the biologically fit. 
 Strictly speaking, it is very difficult to define the fit, 
 and easier to identify the unfit. The case Is more- 
 approachable, that is, in its negative than in its posi- 
 tive aspect. One writer spurns the idea of social po- 
 sition being an indication of fitness, and sees the future 
 of the race In what he calls the " swarming, spawning 
 multitude " ; another thinks that the attainment or the 
 maintaining of social position is proof positive of su- 
 periorities, at least In the family — though they may 
 be impossible to detect in the individual. If a scion 
 of a family, whose members in former generations have 
 lifted it into a high social position, looks and acts like 
 a degenerate, he perhaps has latent In him the heritage 
 of force and ability of his antecedents. This is a 
 pretty thin strand of reasoning to risk much weight 
 of argument upon; it is almost safer to go in with the 
 advocate of the swarm and spawn. But I repeat that 
 it Is relatively easier to fix upon the unfit than to iden- 
 tify the fit. Two men might disagree as to the rela- 
 tive fitness of a sturdy, but Ignorant immigrant and a 
 delicate, but cultured gentleman, to hand on their qual- 
 ities to succeeding generations; but both would unite 
 in excluding from procreation a hopelessly deranged 
 or degenerate person. 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 247 
 
 To this negative aspect of the matter we shall later 
 return. It is time now that I mention eugenics, or it 
 may seem that, instead of approaching it indirectly, as 
 I said I should, I have been wandering about and not 
 approaching it at all. Eugenics is a science and an 
 art of breeding human thoroughbreds; such thorough- 
 breds as are not being raised,, if a tithe of what has 
 been said about human marriage and about counter- 
 selection is true. Eugenists want to put some such 
 study and scientific method into human breeding as are 
 expended in plant and animal breeding. It would 
 therefore do away so far as possible with the handi- 
 capping of the fit in the matter of producing the next 
 generation, and those to follow, throughout an indefi- 
 nite, limitless future. It aims, in brief, at an improve- 
 ment of the human breed, through the control of hu- 
 man mating. It is, therefore, an ambitious project 
 and also a truly high-minded and lofty one. 
 
 There are many human ills that are congenital — 
 born with us — ills that flesh is " heir " to. In the strict 
 sense of that word. Suppose that that heritage of ill 
 could be eliminated. There would still be plenty of 
 evil that we could bring on ourselves, to be sure; but 
 the burden of the race would be immensely lightened 
 if we could get rid of all the congenital defects and 
 weaknesses, which handicap human beings before the 
 race is even started. It would be a boon to humanity 
 if it could be relieved of no more than the worst forms 
 of these inherited ills — for instance, hereditary feeble- 
 mindedness — and if eugenics aimed no higher than to 
 secure such relief, it would be a noble ideal. Suppose 
 all children to be thoroughly normal and healthy at 
 
248 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 birth, of good blood and free from hereditary taint, — 
 the offspring of the union of sound and healthy par- 
 ents, — what a different place this world would be to 
 live in! What a weight of pain and sadness would 
 have been removed from men I Eugenics plans, 
 through careful breeding, to eliminate such congenital 
 ills. 
 
 Part of the imposing sweep of the eugenics pro- 
 gramme lies also in the fact that it takes in a more than 
 local perspective — in fact, it aims at the improvement, 
 not of a section of humanity, but of the race of men ; and 
 the realisation of its object is sought, not now, nor yet 
 in the course of many generations to come, but in the 
 far distant future ; — at a time when we are all dust 
 and forgotten, it is hoped that our thought and work 
 will inure to the benefit of those who can never hold 
 more than a sort of abstract and impersonal relation 
 to us. The eugenics enterprise is not one aimed at 
 quick results and immediate profits; it is all sacrifice 
 and labour now that the race may sometime be happier. 
 You will see that such an ideal is calculated to demand 
 high qualities of mind and soul, including a certain 
 broad unselfishness. It is a wholesome sort of ideal 
 to hold, if enthusiasm for it can help one to be patient 
 with the day of small things; or even to be courageous 
 before the conviction that the conditions of human life 
 forbid the hqpe of more than partial realisation. In 
 short, it is a good ideal to have if one, while he cher- 
 ishes it, can keep his feet on the ground of actuality. 
 The question at issue is : what can and can not be done, 
 here and now, toward race-betterment? 
 
 One of the strongest guarantees of the practical value 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 249 
 
 of the programme of eugenics lies in the character of its 
 author. The man who set it before the world was 
 Francis Galton, a cousin of Darwin's, and one of the 
 noteworthy scientific figures of the nineteenth century. 
 When Darwin came out with the Origin of Species, 
 there was no candid critic who could accuse him of su- 
 perficiality as a scientist, for a great deal of solid and 
 accepted work lay already to his credit. He was not 
 one of the "bright idea" scientists; in fact, he had 
 been working on the topic of species for considerably 
 over two decades before the Origin of Species was pub- 
 lished. Similarly with Galton. He had the idea of 
 eugenics long before he first coined and used the term, 
 in 1883; but it was not until the early years of the pres- 
 ent century that the matter caught the attention of the 
 civilised world. Galton was then one of the seasoned 
 Nestors of science and had reached an age (he was 
 born in 1822) not often characterised by unreflecting en- 
 thusiasm. Consequently his programme was a modest 
 and reasoned affair, at least for the most part, and 
 was in no sense the utterance of a fanatic, heated to the 
 point of vapourisation by the combustion of flimsy men- 
 tal materials kindled by one lurid idea. A cautious 
 scientist learns after a while to know whom he can 
 trust; and Galton, however much we may disagree with 
 him, is one of the trustworthy. This impression is 
 gotten very clearly from the little collection of " Es- 
 says in Eugenics " published just before his recent 
 death. 
 
 In this collection will be found Galton's programme 
 of eugenics. He defines it as " the science which deals 
 with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of 
 
250 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 a race ; also with those that develop them to the utmost 
 advantage." I want to direct your attention to one 
 phrase in this definition before we go farther — that 
 is, the phrase " inborn qualities." What are the " in- 
 born qualities " ? Here we face a diiEcult question 
 indeed — one around which sharp scientific battles 
 have been fought. Galton was not in complete agree- 
 ment with his more famous cousin in this one impor- 
 tant theoretical issue.- The disputed point was as to 
 whether characteristics acquired by the individual dur- 
 ing his lifetime could or could not be transmitted to 
 offspring, and become " inborn " in them. Darwin be- 
 lieved to a considerable extent in the inheritability of 
 such "acquired characters"; Galton swung the other 
 way; and because his position in this matter was deter- 
 minative of his programme of race-betterment, we must 
 try to set the issue before us at this point. 
 
 Perhaps the best example of an acquired character 
 would be a scar or mutilation. Again, a disease, a 
 mental habitude, a moral stamp may be acquired, where 
 they could not have been inborn. The question is as 
 to whether such acquired characters, or any others, 
 may at length come to be transmitted to offspring, and 
 so become " inborn " or congenital in them. It is al- 
 most necessary for any one who considers social theory 
 or sets out to do social service, to come to some con- 
 clusion upon this matter — at least provisionally. For 
 it will largely determine how he Is to go to work. Let 
 us suppose that a man believes that the life experience 
 and resulting acquired characters of parents are reg- 
 istered in their offspring as inborn characters — as a 
 part of their natural inheritance. ' Then race-improve- 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 251 
 
 merit becomes relatively easy. To secure desirable 
 qualities in offspring it is only necessary to evoke de- 
 sirable qualities in the preceding generations. You do 
 this by providing the proper environment : good food, 
 absence of germs of disease, mental training, moral 
 discipline. Out of this desirable environment of the 
 parents will come desirable qualities in the offspring. 
 If this is true, then, in the uplifting of the race, the 
 proper environment, or life-conditions, — or to use 
 Gallon's term, " nurture," is determinative. The ac- 
 quired characters being good, the transmitted ones 
 must be, and presently we are several parasangs on 
 toward the super-man. This is a theory almost pe- 
 culiar to social visionaries; it flourishes in a soil that 
 is rather thin, and when the heat of the day comes on, 
 it wilts. This is called the " nurture-theory." 
 
 The opponents of the " nurture-theory " believe that 
 each person is a combination of the " natures " of his 
 parents, the " nature " of these latter being combina- 
 tions of the congenital elements in their ancestors, 
 nearer and remoter. They believe, of course, that the 
 individual may acquire personal characteristics and 
 traits during his lifetime, but they deny that these can 
 so enter or transform the ovum and spermatozoon as 
 to come to constitute a congenital part of the embryo 
 or of the growing and finally adult individual. Your 
 scars can not be inherited; nor your diseases, though 
 your children may inherit a feeble physique predispos- 
 ing them to take them. Your mind is not going to be 
 strong and keen by reason of the mental discipline un- 
 dergone by your parents, though if they inherited a 
 good brain you are likely to inherit it from them. The 
 
252 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 fact that parents are of lofty or of doubtful morality 
 is not going to affect their offspring through heredity 
 (whatever it may do as the result of contact) unless 
 the immorality, sex-perversion for example, is a result 
 of a congenital defect. Hence the opponents of the 
 " nurture-theory," viewing the matter of improvement 
 from the standpoint of the whole race of men, and 
 over generations, think it can be accomplished only by 
 determining who shall live in the future. But that 
 means : who shall mate in the present. They have no 
 objection, it is understood, to the effort to uplift the 
 present generation and cause it to acquire, for its life- 
 time, desirable personal characters of all kinds; but 
 they hold that, so far as the progress of the whole 
 race of men is concerned, it is, in the case of the pres- 
 ent generation, already too late to do much of any- 
 thing. It is to them a question of who shall be born ; 
 as to what shall be the " nature " of the two streams 
 of heredity which join. This throws " nature " into 
 contrast with "nurture"; and we have here a "na- 
 ture-theory " over against the " nurture-theory." In 
 the one case you plan to operate on environment — 
 the betterment of conditions; in the other you operate 
 on heredity — the betterment of human mating. The 
 former is obvious and relatively easy, and so it is pop- 
 ular. The latter is beset with the most formidable 
 diiSculties. 
 
 Thus a belief in the non-inheritability of acquired 
 characters leads one to accept the nature-theory; to em- 
 phasise heredity rather than environment. Galton's 
 early studies on genius (embodied in his noted book: 
 "Hereditary Genius") convinced him that genius 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 253 
 
 either is or is not in a person according as it is or is not 
 already in the streams of heredity of whose union his 
 being is the result. There has been waged a strenu- 
 ous warfare over this whole matter of the inheritance 
 of acquired characters, with, as it seems to me, decided 
 gains by the party denying such inheritance. The su- 
 preme champion of this party has been the German 
 biologist Weismann. 
 
 As I have stated the opposing positions of the " na- 
 ture " and " nurture " theories rather in the extreme, 
 for the sake of contrasting them, perhaps I had better 
 pause a moment to qualify. I can do this best by giv- 
 ing a few words to Weismann's theory. Weismann 
 looks on the body as a vehicle for the preservation and 
 transmission of the germ-plasm, or the heredity-ele- 
 ments. While the germ-plasm lodges in the body it 
 can be influenced in no way by what happens to the 
 body, for instance, the loss of a limb. But the germ- 
 plasm itself may be affected, for instance by the general 
 alcoholic poisoning of the whole body; for in such a 
 case the germ-cells are likewise poisoned and degraded. 
 If the whole physique is strong and healthy, the germ- 
 cells will share in this wholesome condition; and of 
 course the offspring will profit thereby. But all this 
 does not change to any extent the real character of 
 the germ-cells — only their health — and they con- 
 tinue to carry forward the qualities lodged in them, 
 largely irrespective of what happens to the body-vehi- 
 cle which carries them. They do not seize upon and 
 carry forward qualities developed by their receptacles 
 during life. 
 
 The assumption which we must go on, in examining 
 
2S4 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 Galton's programme of Eugenics, is that acquired char- 
 acters are not inherited — that it is "nature" rather 
 than " nurture " that is determinative in the racial life. 
 Galton proposes that the stream of heredity shall be 
 cleared, not by improving the lower stretches of the 
 stream, but by the cutting .off of turbulent confluents 
 so that they shall not contribute to a future race. He 
 believes in operating upon the " nature " of coming 
 generations rather than upon the " nurture " of the 
 present one. To him the great question is: What 
 shall succeeding generations be? That is, put more 
 definitely: Who shall or shall not marry whom? 
 Hence the plan of eugenics is to control human mat- 
 ing, in order to produce a better race, much as animal 
 mating has always been controlled, if improvement in 
 the breed was to result. 
 
 Some one will say at once: But all human mating 
 does not take place within the marriage institution. 
 That is true, of course; but it is also fortunately true 
 that a large proportion of the extra-marital relations 
 are unfruitful. In any case, the State, to say nothing 
 of the church, has long wrestled with this matter. 
 Something has been and is being done, while there has . 
 been little, if any, thought of race-improvement by 
 changes within the recognised institution. It is to this 
 latter aspect of the matter that eugenics gives its chief 
 attention. 
 
 One does not look for inconsiderate enthusiasm in 
 an octogenarian, and Galton does not show it. Any- 
 thing which he proposes deserves the most serious at- 
 tention. However, the attitude taken by a reflecting 
 man toward any programme involving radical alteration 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 255 
 
 of long-standing social procedure should justly be a 
 critical one. One of the distinguishing marks of the 
 educated man should be that he does not believe a 
 thing to be so, simply because he wants it so. Scien- 
 tific scepticism is what the advocate of any revolution- 
 ary social programme should accept and, indeed, invite ; 
 your persuaded sceptic is your greatest and most com- 
 forting asset. In any case, in considering Galton's 
 programme, I wish to emphasise the limits of eugenics 
 as a practical project rather than to discant upon it as 
 a lofty ideal — any one can see that it is the latter. 
 It is becoming popular and is firing considerable unin- 
 telligent enthusiasm, as I intimated at the beginning 
 of what I have had to say to you ; it should, therefore, 
 in its own interest, be tested and criticised in the light 
 of that sublimated common-sense, which — we have 
 Huxley's word for it — is the same as science. 
 
 Eugenics, says Galton, is " the science which deals 
 with those social agencies that influence mentally or 
 physically the racial qualities of future generations." 
 And the programme of eugenics, as proposed by Galton, 
 is: (i) a historical inquiry into the rates of contribu- 
 tion to population of the several classes of society; (2) 
 a systematic collection of facts showing the circum- 
 stances under which large and thriving families have 
 most frequently originated; and (3) a study of the 
 influences affecting marriage, that is, of social and other 
 factors that tend to control the strength of passion. 
 Here is some work laid out for the social scientists, 
 comprising economists, anthropologists, and sociolo- 
 gists; but beneath and fundamental to social investiga- 
 tions of whatever sort there must. In this field, lie con- 
 
256 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 siderations to be emphasised and clarified, if at all, out 
 of the experience and reflections of medical men. 
 
 There is nothing in this investigation-programme 
 that can not be attempted with hope of result. The lim- 
 its of eugenics do not inhere in the study of eugenics, 
 but in its applications. Let us follow Galton yet a 
 little into his programme for the popularisation of eu- 
 genics as a national policy; it must, he says, be made 
 familiar as an academic question until its exact impor- 
 tance is understood and accepted as a fact; it must be 
 recognised as a subject whose practical development 
 deserves serious consideration; and "it must be intro- 
 duced into the national conscience like a new religion." 
 
 This programme does not strike one as quixotic, ex- 
 cept for the last point. Galton realises that he is at 
 the beginning, and that the campaign must be laid out 
 over long decades and with reserve. He evidently 
 holds the view that most grand enterprises begin by 
 being academic questions, and there is a good deal of 
 evidence to support him; it is generally conceded that 
 it is worth while to know something, and, if so, the 
 academic reasoner has his function in life. As for the 
 second point, it seems likely that it can be proved, and 
 that readily, to most thinking men, that the " practical 
 development " of the question " deserves serious con- 
 sideration." But the making of eugenics into a reli- 
 gion is a different matter. What Galton means by this 
 expression is, in reality, that feeling — sentiment — 
 apart from intellect shall be enlisted in the estab- 
 lishment of eugenics; that some sort of motive beyond 
 and above reason, be it fear or what not, must sanc- 
 tion what has been reasoned out in the threshing-over 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 257 
 
 of the new idea, before the latter can become a real- 
 ity. 
 
 In this latter proposition is the heart of the whole 
 matter of popularisation, for we might well say that 
 if eugenics can be lent the sanction of religion, or a 
 sanction comparable in weight to that of religion, it is 
 sure to prevail; but that if, on the other hand, it must 
 take recourse to rational sanction alone, it is sure not 
 to prevail, at least for long ages, except among very 
 limited groups and classes. Here is a question whose 
 clarification plainly falls to the student of human soci- 
 eties and of their evolution ; and' since this is the vital 
 issue, within it must lie all the serious " limits of eu- 
 genics " — which is now the specific subject before us. 
 
 It is easy enough to talk about eugenics getting 
 " into the national conscience like a new religion," and 
 many an ardent soul may be fired by the idea. But 
 in reality the correct and definite conception of what 
 is involved in that attractive phrase carries us back at 
 once into general principles of social evolution and of 
 the science of society. Galton knows this and takes 
 recourse at once to anthropological instances to show 
 that there has been exerted, in the past of the race, a 
 control over sex-passion — and that that control lay, 
 in good part, in religion. Early religion exercised its 
 disciplinary power chiefly through prohibitions, or, to 
 use the anthropological term, now becoming generally 
 current, through taboos. These taboos, as Galton cor- 
 rectly states, prevented the mating of certain men with 
 certain women. For instance, unions between near 
 kin were effectively tabooed. Further it was pre- 
 scribed that a man must not marry within, or without, 
 
258 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 certain definite groups. Later the freedom of union 
 was restricted, at least in the case of woman, to that 
 with one man. In some cases, indeed, sex-association 
 was prohibited altogether, and strict celibacy was en- 
 joined, as, for instance, upon priests. All sorts of 
 taboos lay upon the sex-relation; there were no laws 
 about this, but obedience to the dictates of custom, 
 sanctioned in most cases by religion, was enforced by 
 the imposition of the uttermost penalties upon disobedi- 
 ence. Nobody thought of rebelling against these 
 taboos; as Galton says, people grew up under them 
 and knew them as part of life, as one knows gravita- 
 tion. 
 
 He is entirely correct in stating that these are cases 
 of almost absolute control of one of the strongest, and 
 on many occasions, by far the most powerful of human 
 passions ; and what is more to his point, here are cases 
 of control of the very passion which the eugenists are 
 most bent upon controlling. Incestuous union, for ex- 
 ample, is regarded by many peoples with a horror that 
 precludes the thought even of sex-attraction as between 
 those close of kin. And Galton need not stop with 
 primitive peoples, nor with the restraint of one passion 
 alone. Consider the case of the Hebrews in respect 
 to the food-taboo and the taboo upon unions within 
 certain degrees of blood-kinship. Consider the 
 strength of the taboos lurking in present-day conven- 
 tions respecting, say, the eating of human flesh or the 
 marriage of the closest kin. If the same distaste were 
 present to forbid non-eugenic unions which exists to 
 prevent the eating of the flesh of cats, the aim of the 
 eugenists would be in large part attained. All these 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 259 
 
 taboos, primitive and modern, are evidently of the same 
 sort; they are not based upon reason, nor are they 
 capable of being changed by reason, but they rest upon 
 something far more primitive and compelling than 
 reason — upon sentiment and emotion, custom and 
 habitude. This point cannot be over-emphasised. 
 Let us take a more frivolous case of the same thing out 
 of our own life. Some years ago it became fashion- 
 able for men to wear short trousers — golf trousers — 
 a great deal. College grounds were covered with 
 young fellows in that costume. Now nobody wears 
 them; you cannot buy them at the clothing stores — 
 which sold out their last stock several years ago, at a 
 few cents per pair, to be made into golf caps. There is 
 now a taboo — perfectly irrational in almost every 
 aspect — upon this style of clothing. If non-eugenic 
 unions should become as infrequent for a dozen years 
 as golf trousers have been for that time, the eugenists 
 could point to a golden era. 
 
 But, returning now to the more serious, lasting and 
 elemental taboos, let us see what Galton was driving 
 at when he spoke of " conscience " and " religion " in 
 this connection. It is plain enough from the foregoing 
 that these taboos lay in custom, but it is perhaps not 
 so clear, except in the case of the Hebrews above cited, 
 that conscience or religion had anything to do with 
 them. But they did. When an Australian boy by 
 some error ate the flesh of the emu, which was tabooed 
 to all save the old, he is reported to have died of 
 fright. This is not far from saying that he died from 
 the pricks of conscience, rendered mortal by fear of the 
 ghosts and spirits who sanctioned the broken taboo. 
 
26o IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 The case of Oedipus is a parallel one on a higher stage. 
 Despair in both cases was the result of fear — the con- 
 science of the race was never, historically, awakened 
 by any other sentiment than fear. Furthermore, this 
 fear was the intangible and helpless fear of the super- 
 natural. It is plain that the taboos of primitive peo- 
 ple, as recounted by Galton, satisfy him as to their 
 connection with the group-conscience and with religion. 
 If now, we wish to place eugenics under such sanction, 
 we must try to find out how the effective taboos gained 
 their power, for in all probability eugenics must go the 
 same way to attain a like control. 
 
 Parenthetically, it may be remarked that Galton 
 seems to mean by a " new religion " a sort of religion 
 of rationality, a sublimated intellectual faith. But this 
 is not the style of religion that ever lent any sanction to 
 any taboo worth mentioning; and it is far from being 
 the kind of religion invoked in the cases derived from 
 primitive life. Such a " religion " lacks real and ele- 
 mental strength, being bereft of that control over ac- 
 tion which feeling wields practically alone. Of this 
 more presently — here and now it is understood that 
 we are dealing with religion as it has been known by 
 and has controlled man throughbut the ages. 
 
 So far as we are able to reconstruct the remote 
 past — for all the strongest social taboos were in 
 operation before history began — the line of develop- 
 ment was, briefly, as follows: Men acted first and 
 thought afterward — long afterward. In the effort 
 to live men reacted upon their environments in various 
 ways, some advantageous and some disadvantageous. 
 By the activity of unconscious selection, operating upon 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 261 
 
 human groups through the annihilation or subjugation 
 of those possessing less fit ways, certain social habitudes 
 became prevalent, persisting with the persistence of 
 those practising them. For instance, a tribe will not 
 eat fish, for superstitious reasons. Other neighbour- 
 ing tribes will. The latter, especially in time of 
 drought, become stronger and more numerous, than 
 the first tribe. Conflict ensues and the first tribe is 
 annihilated or subjugated. The fish superstition van- 
 ishes; it is thus selected away unconsciously. Nobody 
 set out to destroy it. This is along the familiar Dar- 
 winian lines. Then, certain ways having succeeded for 
 a group, they were gradually enforced upon it by the 
 living authorities, and at length by the authority of 
 the dead, which, by reason of the stock primitive be- 
 liefs, was infinitely more powerful than that of the liv- 
 ing. What the patriarch when alive had enforced by 
 temporal means, he did not cease, when he had be- 
 come a spirit, to enforce by his now supernatural and 
 irresistible power. These ways then came to include 
 a judgment that they were good for the society in ques- 
 tion, and became fixed and inalterable. Men were as 
 unconscious of their restrictions as we are unaware of 
 the tension of the atmosphere. When habitudes have 
 arrived at this stage, they become the folkways or 
 mores, as Professor Sumner called them, and as such 
 formed the basis and germ of all our later developed 
 social institutions. 
 
 It Is particularly to be noted, however, that they 
 had become custom before ever they joined relation 
 with religion or law. Religion and law sanction the 
 folkways ; they do not make them, and neither religion 
 
262 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 nor law can long exist in contravention of them. To 
 get eugenics from religion into custom, as Galton at 
 times seems to wish, would save much time but would 
 reverse the order of evolution. Religion, as a student 
 of its origins and history will readily admit, and as a 
 dispassionate observer of contemporary life will have 
 noticed, but rarely lends effective and enduring sanction 
 to anything that has not time out of mind existed in 
 custom; even written law may long precede religious 
 sanction. The Middle Ages demonstrate the attempt 
 to proceed from dogma to the regulation of practical 
 life and its customs and ways. In general, religion 
 can lend effective sanction to custom only. But a thing 
 that becomes a custom — a folkway — must have been, 
 in origin, a tried and proved expedient in living. If 
 this is the only kind of thing to which religion can 
 lend effective sanction, then eugenics if it is to be " in- 
 troduced into the national conscience like a new re- 
 ligion," must first pass into the body of habitudes and 
 traditions. 
 
 How can this be done? Or, to put it more con- 
 cretely, how can unfortunate unions be effectively 
 tabooed, as incest is tabooed? Applying the princi- 
 ples we have developed, and their implication, it 
 might be answered: Not by rational prescription, but 
 by sad experience; not by persuasion, but by pain. 
 The conviction that such and such unions are evil must 
 be brought home to the masses, if at all, not by the 
 microscope or the statistical table, but by actual, tan- 
 gible misfortune, and on the large scale. This alone 
 will cause them to distrust their accepted " ways," and 
 to tolerate the thought of other ways. There must at 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 263 
 
 least be personal suffering to be compared with the 
 weal of others; or, since this is a social matter, there 
 must at least be a comparison of the destinies of socie- 
 ties practising, respectively, good and bad systems of 
 man-breeding. "At least," I say, for such an out- 
 come, though it looks slow and hard, would be far too 
 easy a way. It is doubtful, contemplating in the light 
 of the past, if a process even thus tardy would be 
 practicable; reform in such manner suggested and ra- 
 tionally adopted would appear too cheaply bought to 
 be a human purchase. To judge by the past, indi- 
 viduals and societies are not introspective or rational 
 enough to perform such a feat of pain-economy as this; 
 anticipatory convictions arrived at by the comparative 
 method have played little part In the moulding of the 
 race. For a people to become rationally eugenic, 
 would be a performance certainly far eclipsing in 
 grandeur the changing of folkways presented in the 
 recent history of Japan ; and yet assuming that the latter 
 development was purely rational in its origin and prose- 
 cution, it stands to all as a sort of latter-day wonder of 
 the world. It could not have been accomplished in the 
 absence of a discipline to which Europe and America 
 are strangers. It does not seem possible that eugenics 
 could thus be realised ; a convention or habitude such as 
 eugenics would demand for its general and unques- 
 tioned acceptance would probably have to go back for 
 its origin to the destructive efficacy of group-conflict, to 
 annihilation or subjugation of those practising non- 
 eugenic mating. It is thus only that the expediency of 
 the folkways has been proved — without reasoning, but 
 beyond peradventure. 
 
264 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 A baneful custom — close and continued inbreeding, 
 for example, Is driven from the world, persisting only 
 in out-of-the-way stations. How? Because inbreed- 
 ing groups have succumbed In the conflict with those 
 whose blood and Ideas are freshened by mixture, or 
 they have persisted solely in isolation from such com- 
 petition, in the corners of the earth. In competition 
 they have lost their lives, or their group-identity. In 
 general, societies prosper as they give up close inbreed- 
 ing; a tendency towards exogamy or outbreeding has 
 been an advantage in the conflict of races. For this 
 reason It has passed naturally Into the folkways. 
 
 How might eugenics take a similar course? Sup- 
 pose that the races of the present day differ in their 
 observance of eugenic principles, in their toleration of 
 counterselectlve agencies, and the like. If then. Ill- 
 breeding and counterselection are great handicaps, the 
 races that depart from them already possess a sub- 
 stantial advantage, which must some day tell. If it 
 does, then eugenics is sure to crystallise into a policy of 
 successful living, that is, to get Into the customs and 
 habitudes of controlling groups. Having become by 
 demonstration a heritage of unquestioned value, it Is 
 then a candidate for religious sanction. It is hard to 
 see how eugenics can receive wide-spread acceptance 
 without some such conflict and survival. Perhaps in 
 these later ages, It will not be necessary to go through 
 all the crudity and cruelty of the race-struggle; per- 
 haps such selection can be avoided or anticipated by 
 the taking of thought. But If eugenics can, even within 
 centuries, as a result of rational analysis and demon- 
 stration, and of propaganda based thereon, come to 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 265 
 
 stand for a " national religion," then it must be ad- 
 mitted that there has come about a qualitative change 
 in the ways of men — the folkways. For it is into 
 the body of these that eugenics must penetrate, if it is 
 to become such a force as its founder hopes. 
 
 This is the great and vital limit of eugenics as a 
 grand human policy. It would seem, in thinking of 
 certain of the folkways — for example fashion — that 
 their alteration might be possible without invoking such 
 an elemental process as the one described; and this is 
 true. But the folkways are alterable in proportion as 
 they are new and superficial and are the more persist- 
 ent as they are the more inveterate, deep-seated, and 
 elemental. But eugenics deals ultimately with one of 
 the most elemental of things — with the union of the 
 sexes ; with the establishment of new ways in that which 
 has to do with the great elemental passion that ensures 
 society's self-perpetuation. Here we should expect 
 folkways to be inveterate, deep-seated, and elemental. 
 Hence it seemes reasonable to draw the case at its hard- 
 est; and I believe experience would here support 
 theory. 
 
 It is not meant to say, however, that nothing can be 
 done. Some advocate a let-alone policy, but that is not 
 man's way; he seems to be under the sway of a nature- 
 force which impels him into rational efforts to control 
 nature-forces of many kinds. All civilisation is really 
 a collection of maxims and methods for mitigating or 
 evading the action of nature-forces, so that man will 
 try to do something, however forlorn the hope — and 
 not every forlorn hope has come to a melancholy end. 
 If we cannot get at the matter on the large scale and 
 
266 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 positively, we can do something by assailing the ex- 
 treme cases of bad mating. Non-eugenic practises can 
 be crippled, if they are not eradicated, and may be held 
 within bounds, narrower or wider. In any society the 
 wiser and more powerful are constantly handing down 
 the ways of their group to the more ignorant and less 
 powerful, and by virtue of their superior intelligence 
 they are able, through the control of the societal or- 
 ganisation, to set up regulations which, if they do not 
 have the force of prohibition sanctioned by religious 
 fear, have at least the power of the State behind them. 
 Such regulations, as everybody knows, are effective in 
 proportion as they are negative and concrete in form, 
 like the primitive taboo; contrast the laconic, "Thou 
 shalt not kill " with the diffuse, " Thou shalt practise 
 eugenics (if by some chance thou canst gain any ade- 
 quate conception of the same) ." This latter sort will 
 not do — societal control must be more rude and per- 
 emptory, and more definite. It must make utterance 
 more as follows : " Thou shalt not, being an idiot, 
 marry and beget thine own kind; nor yet, being rela- 
 tively sane, marry an idiot." Eugenic legislation must 
 turn resolutely to the heavy-handed prohibition of the 
 grosser, more obvious and undeniable cases of counter- 
 selection. Very likely an almost general consent could 
 be gained to the prohibition of the union of imbeciles; 
 in fact laws now exist forbidding it, and they are not 
 so foreign to the feelings and prejudices of the masses 
 as to be dead letter. 
 
 I say that we can assail the worst cases of non- 
 eugenic union — that - we can practise " negative eu- 
 genics," as it has been called. But when we try to do 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 267 
 
 much more than this, we encounter, again, the limits 
 set by the folkways, for the latter have a certain con- 
 sistency among themselves, and an attempted alteration 
 of certain conventions may wreck on the opposition of 
 certain others, which are apparently, at times, only 
 rather distantly correlated with the ones assailed. The 
 recent law of Connecticut providing for the sterilization 
 of certain sorts of dangerous persons horrifies many 
 sensible people; and to justify such a horror there is 
 always a reservoir of argumentation, illustration, and 
 interpretation, to be drawn upon. As the gross and 
 obvious is left behind and an attempt is made, for ex- 
 ample, to insist upon a physical examination of those 
 who propose to contract matrimony, the ranks of the 
 objectors (and so, of course, of the evaders) fill up. 
 Such objection may be most natural — based, for ex- 
 ample, upon the sentiment of modesty. Here are, 
 again, the limits of eugenics as set down in conventions 
 or folkways. These limits are, after all, very nar- 
 row; and it is not needful to remind the present au- 
 dience that they are not overcome when once the law is 
 inscribed on the statute book. 
 
 To sum up : The inevitable limits of eugenics lie in 
 these mysterious conventions, habitudes, and prejudices 
 which seem to rise and to change with something of 
 the elemental deliberation of the seasons — unhurried 
 by man, invulnerable to his argumentation. They are 
 not rational in nature and as a consequence do not ad- 
 mit of rational discussion or alteration. The folkways 
 are a matter of " second-nature " — of feelings — and 
 those folkways which are connected with so elemental 
 a function as the procreative, are very deep-seated. 
 
268 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 All fruitful agitation for change must confine its aspira- 
 tions within discreet limits. It must enlist sentiment 
 if it can, rather than reason; and the great compelling 
 sentiment is fear. Fearlessness is not seldom the re- 
 sult of pure ignorance, and the discreetly fearful man 
 is generally the wise one. By combating the ignorance 
 of the more highly endowed — those of greater oppor- 
 tunity who may become the leaders — a beginning can 
 be made. This is one of the reasons for this lecture. 
 Further, fear must be brought home. Some men are 
 able to fear and worry for the far generations of 
 mankind, but not many of us can get up much excite- 
 ment over the fate of even our great grandchildren. 
 Fear must be brought home, I say; and to the indi- 
 vidual. Here is where the layman falls short, and 
 where the doctor should come in; if, for example, any 
 young man of reasonable sense knew what the doctor 
 does about the manifold ills of an unchaste life, fear 
 would deter him from incurring many and serious dan- 
 gers both for himself and for his descendants to come. 
 One of the not unimpregnable limits of eugenics is the 
 ignorance that nobody but the doctor can enlighten. 
 Doctors need not name names, nor break professional 
 reticence, but they should speak out. If certain of the 
 counterselective, factors are really injuring the race, 
 their noxious action should be insisted upon and 
 reiterated; if there is an error in these matters — if, 
 for example, we are mistaken in listing certain items 
 as counterselective — then they should be dropped off 
 our list. 
 
 The medical men must have their duty and oppor- 
 tunity to promote societal betterment ever before them. 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 269 
 
 Medical schools should educate their students to 
 a realising sense of their social responsibilities, and fit 
 them to see, beyond the patient in the chair, into the 
 perspective of the millions of human beings struggling 
 to live, and of the other millions yet unborn. Eu- 
 genics is a grand idea. The barriers that rise before 
 its even partial realisation are certainly high, and per- 
 haps insuperable. But there is one human instrument 
 available for the assault upon any human difficulty, and 
 recourse to its use is never fruitless — for even though 
 the particular object fails, it will be of use somewhere 
 else — and that is education. The eugenics pro- 
 gramme at the very least opens up a series of questions 
 on which light is needed; and this light can be given 
 only by the enlightened, laborious, and fearless. Peo- 
 ple need to be made afraid of what is unwholesome and 
 disastrous in society. The preacher used to inculcate 
 this fear by various means, such as the threat of eternal 
 fire, now no longer available; his only effective suc- 
 cessor in this societal function is the doctor. Let the 
 doctor speak out what he knows! Then let us take 
 what he says and pass it on, in the measure in which it 
 can be received, to the rising generation. It is not 
 right for the young to grow up in Egyptian darkness as 
 respects the life of sex. It is the duty of their natural 
 protectors to inform them, shifting this obligation 
 neither to the unqualified school-teacher nor yet to the 
 knowing comrade. Our folkways prescribe a senseless 
 squeamishness in regard to one of the two great func- 
 tions of any individual or society. We inculcate all we 
 can concerning self-maintenance — making a living; but 
 we are unduly reticent about self-perpetuation — the 
 
270 IX. KELLER: EUGENICS 
 
 procreation of the next generation. And yet we know 
 that there is scarcely another topic upon which the 
 curiosity of youth, be it natural or morbid, focuses so 
 sharply. Nature herself has provided that this shall 
 be so. If coming generations shall have been educated 
 up to the keen issues of the future, they may not, it is 
 true, succeed in securing general felicity — in breeding 
 a race of super-men — but they should be able to 
 mitigate some of the extremer forms of manifest evils 
 under which society groans and labours in the present. 
 It is not my object to detail to you the scattering and 
 sometimes whimsical efforts at reform which appear in 
 the newspapers under the name " eugenics." I hope 
 I have discouraged nobody from doing, now and in the 
 future, everything and all that he can, in reason, to- 
 ward the realisation of Galton's magnanimous idea. 
 I repeat that I do not advocate a let-alone policy, but 
 a policy of activity within the limits of a reasonable 
 hope of success. Above all I urge an intelligent study 
 of these matters, in all their aspects. They are vital 
 things Indeed. And we know so little yet about them. 
 What we need is to get into our heads the conception 
 of the race's interests — the broad view of humanity 
 through the ages, labouring and struggling on, under 
 heavy burdens — an infinitely pathetic spectacle. If 
 a man can see that long procession, in his mind's eye, 
 he will feel that it is a crime for him to add, even a 
 little, to its melancholy. Chastity of life will seem to 
 him, when he views the smirch of unchastity carried 
 over and visited upon the innocent for generations, to 
 the weakening of body and mind — chastity will seem 
 to him less a thing to be proud of than a thing whose 
 
ITS SOCIAL LIMITATIONS 271 
 
 absence is unpardonable. He will feel that sin is not 
 an individual matter, but concerns and wrongs those of 
 time to come. In short, he will get outside his petty 
 self and see that he is swimming in the world-currents 
 and is part of them in their cosmic course. He will 
 feel that he has no right to withhold what he can do 
 in renunciation or in a positive way to improve the 
 hereditary outfit of future generations. As Faust says : 
 
 Es kann die Spur von meinen Erdetagen 
 Nicht in Aeonen untergehn. 
 (The imprint of my earthly day 
 Cannot in ages pass away). 
 
 This is no sermon. I do not wish to seem horta- 
 tory. I esteem at the highest the attitude taken by 
 Galton and the scientific eugenists. I would have it 
 as it is — austere and cool rather than sentimental and 
 heated. Therefore I have confined myself to an ex- 
 position of that attitude and have warmly advocated 
 it, rather than any specific measures. If one sees the 
 point of that sort of eugenics, he will proceed at once 
 to inform himself, and with knowledge will come the 
 proper interest in specific projects, and also the ca- 
 pacity to judge of them. With it will also come, I 
 trust, the nerve to insist upon what common sense de- 
 mands, despite the discordant cries of the multitude, or 
 the protests of a sickly sentimentality. 
 
 Eugenics is a story that cannot be told in an hour. 
 Here you have what I think to be its essence; and 
 with this I must close. 
 
X 
 
 SELECTIONS FROM AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS ^ 
 W. H. CARRUTH 
 
 Long before the alarmed cry of Theodore Roosevelt 
 against " race suicide " called public attention in America 
 to this subject, thoughtful students had begun to point 
 out appalling tendencies toward degeneracy in the breed- 
 ing of civilised nations. In so far as the warning 
 against " race suicide " was merely an indiscriminate 
 appeal for more children, a revival of the Biblical ad- 
 monition to "be fruitful and multiply " without fore- 
 thought and safeguards, it was only a blind summons 
 to more " race suicide." What the world needs is not 
 indiscriminately more children, but more children from 
 the best stock and fewer from the worst stock. 
 
 What Francis Galton and his friends pointed out 
 in this connection was, that the world is increasing 
 from its worst elements more rapidly than from its best 
 elements: The first and simplest observation in this 
 field is that one-fourth of the married people in any 
 recent generation are producing. one-half of the com- 
 ing generation. This is, indeed, somewhat more strik- 
 ing than the mere statement that some families have 
 more children than others. Yet it is only the statisti- 
 cal formulation of that commonplace observation. 
 
 ^ Given at the University of Kansas, May 8th, 1913. This lecture 
 has been reduced in length by the omission of paragraphs on biology 
 the sense of which had been set forth earlier in the volume. 
 
 ay* 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 273 
 
 And it illustrates the importance of statistical study. 
 For after reading that portentous statement: One- 
 fourth of the present generation is producing one-half 
 of the next, the question naturally suggests itself: 
 Which one-fourth is it, that thus dominates the coming 
 generation? If the answer to this question should be: 
 This one-fourth averages for vigour and health and de- 
 sirable qualities as high as the entire population, we 
 might drop the matter and say: It is then a matter of 
 personal concern only, what families shall bear children 
 and what families shall not. But the facts gathered 
 by the great statistical offices of the world reveal a 
 different state of affairs, and this is sufficiently sum- 
 marised for our purpose in the statement that the un- 
 desirable fraction of the world's population is contribut- 
 ing much more than its share to the future generations ; 
 that there is a distinct and direct ratio between civic 
 undesirability and high fertility, not a necessary, but an 
 actual one; which means also, that the desirable frac- 
 tion of society is contributing less than its share to the 
 coming humanity. It should be said, to guard against 
 suspicion of snobbery or aristocratic squint, that " un- 
 desirable " has here no social connotation, but means 
 solely, the parents least likely to produce sound and 
 fit children. 
 
 In the face of these simple but deeply significant 
 facts, the question of human breeding, of what classes 
 and what families shall produce more and what classes 
 less children, the question of reversing this destructive 
 tendency in the development of civilised humanity, be- 
 comes forthwith a public question of the first magni- 
 tude. 
 
274 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 The Impressiveness of this problem is rendered 
 more so by a consideration of the facts regarding the 
 defective classes. In England and America the num- 
 ber of children per family in these classes is greater 
 than in the average middle-class family, being from 
 5.7 to 7, while in the families of normal working 
 classes the number is about S-S^ in English intellectual 
 classes 1.5 and among Harvard graduates 2.0. In 
 England it is reported that " the greater the number 
 of professional men or of servants employed in a com- 
 munity, the lower the birth-rate; while the more pawn- 
 brokers, child labourers, pauper lunatics, and tuber- 
 culosis the higher the birth-rate." In London sixty 
 years ago, the more professional men and weU-to-do 
 families the community contained, the higher the birth- 
 rate; while for ten years past this has been reversed, 
 and the more of these desirable families in the com- 
 munity the lower the birth-rate. 
 
 In England the ratio of defectives to normals more 
 than doubled between 1874 and 1896. The ratio of 
 the known insane doubled in the decade preceding 1901. 
 In Great Britain in 1901 there were 65,700 idiots and 
 lunatics legally married and multiplying. In the 
 United States between 1880 and 1903 the ratio of de- 
 fectives increased one- fourth. In 19 10 the number of 
 insane and feeble-minded, blind, deaf and dumb, 
 paupers, criminals and juvenile delinquents In institu- 
 tions in the United States was 841,244, and the esti- 
 mated total of such 3,000,000, or one in every thirty 
 of our population, i ' 
 
 Similar figures could be cited from other countries. 
 French physique has declined since the Napoleonic 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 275 
 
 wars so that the average height of Frenchmen has 
 fallen two inches, and the physical requirements for the 
 arniy have been reduced more than once. In " The 
 Human Harvest " David Starr Jordan has pointed out 
 impressively the physical decline of Spain, of certain 
 Swiss cantons, of Italy and Greece, of Ireland and per- 
 haps England, due largely to the elimination of the 
 fittest men by various factors that reverse natural selec- 
 tion — chief among them War. 
 
 So long as no connection was recognised between 
 heredity and the existence and increase of the defective 
 classes, we could calmly look upon them as visitations 
 of Providence, and complacently explain their greater 
 prominence in these later days as the evidence of our 
 own growing Christian philanthropy. But with the 
 defective classes increasing more rapidly than the sound 
 and normal, no amount of Christian benevolence will 
 prevent the decline and decay of the nation. Time and 
 a percentage to the bad of 51 will bring about ultimate 
 ruin of any people or institution. Not all the blood 
 of beasts on Jewish altars slain, nor any amount of 
 self-satisfied contemplation of our superior humane- 
 ness as compared with the pagan past, can stay the de- 
 cline of a nation which breeds predominantly from its 
 worst fraction. It is time to recognise that the only 
 blood which can effectually save an individual or a race 
 in this world is the blood which flows in the veins of the 
 parents of the coming generation. 
 
 Now the air is full of eugenics. What does it mean ? 
 Within the past three years a score of books have 
 been published with this or related titles. The 
 magazines devote more or less space to it every month 
 
276 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 and the press syndicates find it very filling food. 
 Quite a number of University courses primarily and 
 secondarily dealing with the subject, have been intro- 
 duced in this country within the past three years. 
 What is it all about? 
 
 So far as interpretation of words goes it is an easy 
 matter. Eugenics means the science of being well 
 born. It is the study of the good or right breeding of 
 human beings, or to use the expression of Francis Gal- 
 ton, regarded as the father of the subject, " It is a 
 study of the agencies under social control, that may im- 
 prove or impair the racial qualities of future genera- 
 tions, either physically or mentally." 
 
 How difficult it is to deal with the subject is illus- 
 trated by the fact that the phrase " good breeding " 
 was long since pre-empted for another and much more 
 limited sense, to wit : Good rearing and fine manners. 
 
 Yet it seems justifiable to insist upon using the good 
 Saxon word in its original sense, the same that it has in 
 speaking of the breeding of animals, that is, the knowl- 
 edge and practice of the ways and means for producing 
 and rearing the best possible offspring, in a word, right 
 breeding. Only in so far is this nsw science, as it is 
 sometimes called, differentiated from animal breeding 
 that the" latter often looks to the improvement of the 
 last set of offspring only, looks narrowly at the market 
 value of the immediate product, while human eugenics 
 aims fundamentally at the improvement of the race 
 and looks into the future " far as human eye can see." 
 
 The improvement of the human race by breeding, 
 as well as by education, is certainly no new programme. 
 Wise men and women and national leaders from the 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 277 
 
 earliest dawn of history have recognised that there was 
 here a problem and have given more or less random 
 suggestions toward its solution. 
 
 The breeding of stock and of plants has become a 
 practical art. But the recognition of the need of 
 thorough scientific study of the subject before writing 
 out a plan of operation seems to belong to very mod- 
 ern times. Francis Galton, who died only the past 
 year, a cousin of Charles Darwin, was the voice of one 
 crying in the wilderness to call his countrymen of Eng- 
 land and the world to repent the neglect of the great 
 problem : the future of the English and the human race. 
 In "Hereditary Genius," 1869, as well as in certain 
 papers in journals going back to 1865, he called atten- 
 tion to the fact that mental as well as physical qualities 
 are inherited and later he shaped the problem more 
 definitely with his " Inquiries into Human Faculty," 
 1889, and again in the famous Huxley lectures of 1901, 
 " The Possible Improvement of the Human Breed un- 
 der the Existing Conditions of Law and Sentiment." 
 Finally in the address before the Sociological society of 
 1904 and 1905 he promulgated the title for the science, 
 "Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope and Aim." Aside 
 from his own publications Galton inspired younger men 
 to take up this study and supported the beginnings of 
 scientific investigation by the formation of the Eugenic 
 Laboratory in the University of London which is pre- 
 sided over by Karl Pearson, Galton's chief disciple, 
 while these investigations are being zealously pushed 
 by Bateson, Lankester in England, Davenport and Cas- 
 tle and McClung and Kellogg, in America, De Vries 
 in Holland, Cuenot, in France, and practically all the 
 
278 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 biologists of the world who are working in the field 
 of evolution and heredity and contributing to the de- 
 velopment of the science proclaimed and christened 
 by Galton. Several journals devote their entire space 
 to the discussion and publications of the Science, such 
 as the Archiv, fiir Rassen-u. Gesellschafts-Biologie and 
 others. The Eugenic Educational Society in Eng- 
 land, the Committee on Eugenics of the American 
 Breeders' Association and the Eugenic Record Office at 
 Cold Spring Harbor in America are among the institu- 
 tions devoting themselves to the accumulation of truth 
 in this field. The First International Eugenics Con- 
 gress, devoted to the discussion of this problem, was 
 held in London last summer, one of our own alumni. 
 Prof. V. L. Kellogg, taking a prominent part in the 
 programme, as well as two of our sons-in-law : Prof. W. 
 E. Castle, of Harvard and Prof. C. B. Davenport, 
 of the Carnegie Institution at Cold Spring Harbor. 
 
 It Is plain, at a glance, that the programme of good 
 breeding may deal with the individual both before birth 
 and after birth. Hitherto the greater part of human 
 effort applied to the betterment of Individuals, and in- 
 directly of the race, has been applied to the child after 
 birth, to what is called in homely language, " raising " 
 the child. The new science and art will, perhaps, not 
 Ignore this field altogether, but it lays most stress upon 
 the Influences which surround the parentage, the con- 
 ception and the pre-natal life of the child. This pur- 
 pose is quite clearly based upon the assumption that 
 heredity Is a very important factor In determining the 
 character of Individuals and races. There are eu- 
 genists, indeed, who seem to ignore the importance of 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 279 
 
 environment almost wholly, laughing at the old saw, 
 " Just as the twig is bent, the tree's inclined," unless, 
 perhaps, they find the bend before conception. 
 
 So far as it presents comparatively new problems, 
 then eugenics, or stirpiculture, as the subject was once 
 more fittingly named, deals with the breeding of human 
 beings, the getting of them better born. 
 
 This work, obviously, again involves two fields: 
 The life of the individual after conception, and the de- 
 termination of the conditions of conception itself; or, 
 we might say: pre-natal influences, and mating condi- 
 tions. 
 
 Here again, it is plain that pre-natal influences 
 belong at bottom to the same field as post-natal influ- 
 ences, — that both are elements of education, or of rear- 
 ing. Thus, if the size of a calf or a child can be in- 
 fluenced by feeding after birth, it can also be influenced 
 by the food of its mother before birth of the young. 
 The temper of a colt or a child can be affected by the 
 way the mother is handled before the young is born. 
 All this has not always been recognised fully and 
 clearly, but I believe it is undisputed to-day. 
 
 The startling thing about the new science and art is 
 the proposal to study and modify the conditions of 
 mating for the benefit of the offspring and the race. 
 
 In nature, aside from civilised man the progress of 
 species among the vertebrates is determined by com- 
 paratively simple factors: Mating, fertile mating, is 
 limited by the species boundaries, and by geographical 
 propinquity, and within the species and neighbourhood 
 it is largely restricted to the strongest or most cunning 
 or most beautiful among the males, the latter factor 
 
28o X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 coming into play to determine the choice by the female. 
 Survival of the young when brought forth is deter- 
 mined by natural vigour and cunning, succoured by the 
 protective guardianship of the parents during earlier 
 infancy. I call attention here to a great restriction 
 upon the law of the survival of the strongest and cun- 
 ningest, to which, it seems to me, due attention has not 
 been given in its place: The young survive despite 
 their weakness and lack of cunning; parental sacrifice 
 and guardianship is the first great interference with 
 the law of the survival of the strongest and most cun- 
 ning. Not the fittest at the time, but the potentially 
 fittest, survive in the case of infant animals as competi- 
 tors with their parents. When we come to speak of in- 
 terference with the laws of Nature, this primary inter- 
 ference in species below man is not to be forgotten. 
 
 Nevertheless, as said already, the conditions of 
 propagation and survival are comparatively simple 
 among vertebrates below civilised man. But it has 
 been declared that man, civilised man, has violated 
 and reversed the laws of Nature in this field. Certain 
 it is, that he has greatly modified those simpler condi- 
 tions of survival, although we should hesitate to speak 
 of reversing the laws of Nature. Caution bids us hesi- 
 tate about speaking of reversing the laws of Nature. 
 It would be better to say that Nature has here other 
 laws. 
 
 While among civilised men strength, intelligence and 
 beauty are still leading factors in the selection of mates, 
 a large number of other factors have come into play 
 which sometimes quite outweigh these primitive ones, 
 as: race prejudice, religious, political and social bar- 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 281 
 
 riers, prudence, ambition, war, the last factor not as a 
 deliberate constraint upon individuals, but as an un- 
 natural elimination of those fittest for mating. It will 
 be noted that these new factors in determining mating 
 are all restrictive in their operation. The only ex- 
 tensive positive Impulses to breeding given under 
 civilisation, so far as I can discover, have been the 
 breeding of negroes and hybrids for slaves, the breeding 
 of women for concubines in Oriental countries, and 
 the subsidising of the breeding of men for cannon-food 
 in various great imperial countries. 
 
 Again, while with vertebrates below civilised man, 
 mating having been accomplished under guidance of 
 the factors of strength, cunning and beauty, the opera- 
 tion of the law led to the production of the greatest 
 possible number of offspring and the gradual elimina- 
 tion of the weakest during infancy; it will be observed 
 that the operation of these new factors of civilisation 
 in human kind has been : first, to accomplish the mating 
 for many objects not calculated to favour the develop- 
 ment of the strong and the beautiful; next to restrict 
 the number of offspring, and last, to check, through 
 Christian compassion, the elimination of the physically 
 unfit, while directly furthering through war, the elimina- 
 tion of the bravest and fittest. 
 
 *' The aim of eugenics," wrote Galton, " is the pro- 
 duction of a more healthy, and vigorous and more 
 able humanity." But, for that matter, so is it the aim 
 of education. 
 
 " The aim of eugenics is to represent each class by 
 its best specimens; that done, to leave them to work 
 out their common civilisation in their own way ; to bring 
 
282 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 as many influences to bear as can be reasonably employed 
 to induce them to contribute more than their present 
 proportion to the next generation," and to cause the 
 useless, vicious classes to contribute to the next genera- 
 tion less than their present proportion. 
 
 The proposal to modify the conditions of mating for 
 the benefit of the race rests absolutely upon the trite 
 assumption that the offspring " take after " their par- 
 ents or their forbears; that the better parents produce 
 the better children, — rests in a word upon the belief in 
 what is vaguely called " heredity." 
 
 In fact, comparatively little is known about heredity, 
 and especially about the method of heredity. Every- 
 body knows that the nature of the offspring is deter- 
 mined in certain fundamentals by the nature of the par- 
 ents. Species begets species. But nobody knows, as 
 to a large number of qualities or traits, whether they 
 are inherited, still less how. 
 
 Here arise part of the problems of the new art. 
 If the offspring were in all respects copies of one or 
 the other parent, or if they combined in known and 
 definite proportions the traits of the parents, it would 
 be an easy matter to prepare a handbook for the pro- 
 duction of a race of a certain character, provided we 
 could find parents anywhere with the traits desired 
 in the new race and persuade them to mate accord- 
 ingly. 
 
 But we are only beginning to learn what traits are 
 transmitted and what not transmitted, and in accord- 
 ance with what laws. In this portion of the field, the 
 problem, the present problem, of eugenics is purely a 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 283 
 
 biological problem: the establishment of the detailed 
 laws of heredity. 
 
 It becomes obvious that the programme of eugenics 
 covers, first, a comparatively small field in which we 
 may be guided by very definite knowledge and that this 
 field is one largely of negative action, second, a very 
 much broader and perhaps more important field, but 
 one within which we have not yet sufiicient knowledge 
 for safe guidance. The first field has to do largely with 
 the prevention of the mating of the absolutely unfit; 
 the second with the possibility of positive breeding for 
 definite good causes. In the first field, the restriction 
 of defective offspring, immediate action may be found 
 wise and steps taken by individuals, societies and gov- 
 ernments. In the second, the possibilities of positive 
 breeding, the call at present is for scientific study. Mr. 
 Galton has formulated here the following educational 
 and scientific programme: 
 
 Dissemination of knowledge of the law of heredity. 
 
 Historical inquiry into the rates with which various 
 classes of society have contributed to the population. 
 
 Systematic collection of the facts, showing the con- 
 ditions under which large and thriving families have 
 originated. 
 
 Influences affecting marriage. 
 
 Persistence in setting forth the national importance 
 of eugenics. 
 
 Men of science, in general, despite their failure to 
 agree on some fundamental elements of the problem, 
 are hopeful of attaining definite and vastly beneficial 
 results in this second line in the future but at present 
 
284 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 recommendations for a definite action in this field 
 should be received with caution if not scepticism. 
 
 In any case, there is enough of the eugenics pro- 
 gramme left for present action to make it of the ut- 
 most importance to discuss it in all responsible and in- 
 telligent circles, to make it familiar as an academic 
 question and to introduce its ideals into the national 
 conscience as Mr. Galton has said " like a new religion." 
 
 " The improvement of the stock is one of the highest 
 objects that we can reasonably attempt." 
 
 Assuming the facts of heredity to be established, or 
 building merely on those which are already established, 
 we may say, that the parents transmit at least a portion 
 of their qualities in accordance with definite laws. 
 
 Now comes the real problem of eugenics, as the 
 science and art of Race Breeding. It will fall, in its 
 practical applications into the following branches : 
 
 1. The prevention of marriage or at least of pro- 
 creation on the part of the hopelessly unfit, as of the 
 insane and feeble-minded, or those with otherwise hope- 
 lessly impaired physiques. 
 
 2. The education of the intelligent and self-controlled 
 so as to enable them when mated to either abstain from 
 begetting altogether, or to beget so as to transmit their 
 desirable and suppress their undesirable qualities. 
 
 3. The encouragement of mating with the aim In 
 view of begetting the best possible ofiEsprIng, or at least, 
 of making this a conscious factor in the consideration of 
 marriage. 
 
 It Is obvious that the first of these proposals is vastly 
 more tangible and feasible than the other two. Pub- 
 lic opinion would be practically united on the proposi- 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 285 
 
 tion that imbeciles and the hopelessly insane should 
 not be permitted to reproduce their kind. Moreover, 
 since the insane are usually in custody they are prac- 
 tically prevented from so doing. But when we recall 
 that insane people are released from custody and pro- 
 nounced " cured " ; that there are milder forms of 
 mental deficiency which do not usually require custody; 
 that there are mental or temperamental conditions 
 which, while indeed they foretell insanity or feeble- 
 mindedness, are not commonly regarded as defects at 
 all, and to all of which the eugenic programme would 
 or should apply, we recognise that there are serious 
 difficulties even in this first field. 
 
 Under i, the remedies to be considered are: 
 
 Isolation or Segregation, or placing under state con- 
 trol during the reproduction period. 
 
 Sterilization: (Vasectomy or Oophorotomy) In 
 Indiana, Connecticut, Oregon and nine other States. 
 ( Contrast with these devices the old Greek method, the 
 killing off of defective children.) 
 
 The remedies proposed under 2, are: 
 
 Study of the laws of heredity in great detail. 
 
 Teaching of self-control, and, possibly, sterilization. 
 Why may not at least the negative part of the eugenic 
 programme be imposed by growing judgment upon the 
 sentiment of coming generations? Perhaps later the 
 positive part of the problem may also become possible. 
 The positive programme already appears in one form 
 in the protest against the avoidance of parentage by 
 the fit ; — and against celibacy. 
 
 It is easy to acquire and spread confusion regarding 
 the significance of inheritability. Let us try to state 
 
286 X, CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 the practical side of the laws already known, bearing 
 in mind that only a beginning has been made in the 
 field, but that much is to be hoped from long and 
 patient study. The results obtained by statistical meth- 
 ods such as those pursued by Galton serve only to em- 
 phasise the fact of inheritability and the enormous im- 
 portance of this fact for the individual and the race. 
 The practical side of the matter lies in the establish- 
 ment of the laws regarding the bequeathal of the 
 qualities from a given pair of parents with known or 
 potential characters. In a word: If A has a certain 
 character and mates with B who has, or has not, the 
 same character, what are the laws of certainty or proba- 
 bility regarding the transmission of this quality to im- 
 mediate or remote descendants? 
 
 Here science distinguishes between what is called 
 " unit-characters " and those which are not " unit- 
 characters " ; the latter, being complex, cannot, as such, 
 be called inheritable. So far as unit-characters have 
 already been determined, well and good. But what 
 is a unit-character can be determined only by the fact 
 of its being inherited. That is to say, the distinction 
 does not help us to distinguish, but is merely a con- 
 venient phraseology when the distinction has been de- 
 termined. 
 
 Species and sex characters are unit characters: the 
 tail of the dog, the beard of the man, the breast of the 
 female, are regularly bequeathed, to some as dominant, 
 to others as recessive. The mother has not the 
 father's black beard dominant, but she inherits it re- 
 cessive, since she may bequeath it to her son. 
 
 Certain other characters, also unit characters, as 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 287 
 
 eye colour, polydactylism, corpulence, hysteria, deaf 
 mutism, are regularly bequeathed but some may be latent 
 or " recessive " and not come to light in the descendant 
 for one or more generations. When such a recessive 
 character again becomes dominant in a pure, or potent, 
 late descendant the phenomenon is sometimes called 
 atavism, that is, a return to an earlier ancestral char- 
 acter. Thus the strong dominant characters of most 
 domestic animals, which make them desirable and use- 
 ful, often disappear after a number of generations in 
 a wild state, in favour of the characters of the wild type 
 from which they sprung. 
 
 The precise laws of individual inheritance for the 
 good and normal qualities of human kind are but lit- 
 tle known. Most of our present knowledge has to do 
 with the inheritance of abnormalities and diseases. 
 This is due to the great difficulty of carrying on experi- 
 ments with human beings and to the fact that abnor- 
 malities are more obvious and more easily studied than 
 the normal phenomena. This means, moreover, that 
 for the present our practical wisdom in human breed- 
 ing is chiefly along the lines of what to avoid rather 
 than of what positively to cultivate ; of who should not 
 marry and mate, rather than of who should and how. 
 
 And now it may be said, that the latest investigators 
 are inclined to conclude regarding most inheritable 
 diseases: that not so much the specific disease is in- 
 herited, as that a susceptibility to the disease or group 
 of diseases may be bequeathed ; or it may be the opposite 
 case : that immunity to a specific disease is bequeathed, 
 just as it can be imparted through serum treatment. 
 The method of this inheritance need not concern us 
 
288 X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 so much, since it Is still a matter of hypothesis. Suf- 
 fice it to say, that such inheritability is assumed to be 
 due, not to the transmission of a specific taint, or germ 
 or poison, or organic defect, but to the absence of cer- 
 tain elements in the germ-plasm, called " determiners," 
 mysterious chemical molecules which transmit normal 
 control and directive powers. When these are absent, 
 the organism with which they are related fails to re- 
 act soundly to the appeals and assaults of its environ- 
 ment, fails to resist, grows weak, breaks down and de- 
 stroys the sound balance of the individual. 
 
 As a further illustration of how this works out, con- 
 sider any one of the germ-diseases, as tuberculosis. 
 This disease cannot exist save through the specific ac- 
 tion of the tubercular bacillus. And to one who has 
 looked into the microscopic minuteness of germ struc- 
 ture it is easy to accept the assurance of the scientist 
 that this tubercular bacillus cannot itself be transmitted 
 by way of a germ-cell. It must be lodged in the or- 
 ganism from without. And this particular bacillus is 
 omnipresent. No one of us is free from its assaults. 
 But it succeeds in its destructive work only where it 
 finds favourable ground, low vitality, weak tissues. 
 Now weak tissues, in this case, let us say, of the mucous 
 membranes, are inheritable, and thus a susceptibility to 
 consumption may be bequeathed. Add to this, that the 
 tubercular parent furnishes to the child's atmosphere 
 much more than the normal number of bacilli and very 
 often, too, the most favourable outward conditions for 
 their development, and we have practically, if not quite 
 literally, the inheritability of consumption. 
 
 As has been said, when both parents are afflicted 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 289 
 
 with an inheritable weakness we are fairly sure that 
 their children will manifest the same weakness, or a 
 related one. When the germ plasms of both parents 
 are free from a given inheritable weakness we may be 
 equally certain that their children will be free from it. 
 Such is the general practical teaching regarding in- 
 heritable diseases. It Is a serious mistake to assume 
 that either Nature or Nurture wholly determines the 
 fate of our children. Nature, indeed, furnishes the 
 essential elements. Nurture cannot expect to develop 
 fundamental and genuine capacities for what Nature 
 has furnished no substratum for. But, on the other 
 hand, Nurture, or the lack of Nurture, can thwart Na- 
 ture, can suppress, blunt, stunt, distort, mislead, the 
 gifts of Nature that were Intended as blessings for the 
 individual and the race. Or on the positive side. Nur- 
 ture, recognising the potentialities furnished by Nature, 
 can prepare to furnish the most favourable conditions 
 for their growth. The best soil in the world and the 
 best tillage cannot produce a heavy corn-crop from poor 
 seed, though they will get better results than will come 
 from a combination of poor seed and neglect. Neither 
 will the best seed in the market produce great crops 
 on poor soil and under poor tillage. Great results 
 are to be obtained by carefully selecting the best seed 
 and then giving it the best possible care on the best 
 possible soil. So it is with men. Yet how strange 
 that we have given to the man-crop, of such Infinitely 
 greater importance to the future world, so much less 
 attention, so much less study, so much less expenditure 
 of funds, than to the corn-crop or the potato-crop or 
 the hog-crop, or any other! 
 
ago X. CARRUTH: SELECTIONS FROM 
 
 Probably the first thought of most people on the 
 subject of deliberate mating for improvement of the 
 human breed is that it is impossible if not undesirable, 
 or even abhorrent to refined civilised instincts. But 
 second thought shows that what is called " natural 
 selection " among lower animals is modified by a great 
 number of factors among human beings, which may con- 
 veniently be spoken of as constituting " artificial selec- 
 tion." 
 
 Aside from the very natural restriction of geo- 
 graphical confines, which limit mating in all animals, 
 man included, the subjective restraints of religion, clan, 
 tribe, race, social and financial caste, economic prud- 
 ence, arid many others, draw more or less solid and 
 permanent barriers between men and women who might 
 otherwise mate. Tradition has made most of these 
 restrictions automatic and made the subjects unconscious 
 of their operation. But they are restrictions imposed 
 upon natural instinct by the more or less wise opinion 
 of mankind. Monogamy. is not a law of nature, but 
 of certain human societies. The forbidden degrees of 
 consanguinity are only half effectual when they reach 
 cousinship. The barrier between white and negro 
 marriages is a purely social and economic, perhaps even 
 political one, as is witnessed by the enormous number 
 of mulattos and other hybrids in our country. There 
 may or may not be sound biological reasons against 
 the crossing of these or other races. Nature, at least, 
 does not forbid them, as she does the crossing of 
 species. Much less thoroughly ingrained are the bar- 
 riers of religion and creed. Only a constant priestly 
 domination checks the marriages of Hebrews with 
 
AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS agi 
 
 Aryans, or Catholics with non-Catholics. The king 
 may not marry his subject ; the day labourer is not a wel- 
 come suitor for the hand of the millionaire's daughter; 
 the common soldier may not even call upon the captain's 
 family. Consider, further, all the numberless circum- 
 stances, such as duty to an invalid mother, ambition for 
 a career, unwillingness to endure privation, disapproval 
 of friends, which interfere transiently or permanently 
 with mating. 
 
 But It will be observed and objected that all these 
 are barriers and restrictions upon the mating instinct, 
 not attempts to direct It in positive channels. We 
 cherish the fond illusion that true love must always be 
 " fallen into " ; that It is a divine, and therefore im- 
 perious arid not-to-be-dlsclpllned impulse which directs, 
 or should direct, human matings. Divine It surely is. 
 But the divlnest Instincts are made more divine by the 
 divine guidance of reason and consideration. Most of 
 us are able to tell some, if not all, the reasons that 
 guided us to the choice of our mates. Great classes 
 of people have learned to direct their affections along 
 certain definite parallels of taste and circumstances. In 
 the old world, the wealthy plebeian's daughter instinc- 
 tively loves a uniform, while the young officer as in- 
 fallibly loves above the level of a six thousand dollar 
 dowry. The penniless European count finds daugh- 
 ters of millionaires fascinating while a title is the finger 
 of Providence which guides the longing heart of many 
 a rich American's daughter. We middle-class Amer- 
 icans look at such domination of the affections with 
 some cynicism. But in fact we are all guided positively 
 by our more or less unconscious ideals in the opposite 
 
292 X. AN ADDRESS ON EUGENICS 
 
 sex, most of them, I fondly believe, loftier than those 
 of rank and income. The ground for these observa- 
 tions from the eugenic standpoint is this : 
 
 Romantic love, the divinest of our passions, is not, 
 purely, a blind, animal mating instinct, but the refine- 
 ment of this instinct through age-long traditions of rea- 
 son and sentiment and duty and aspiration. Some of 
 these traditions have been deliberately created. Why 
 is it, then, blasphemy of this divine instinct to propose 
 to train it along the lines of duty to the coming race ? 
 Why should not the same tradition, which for the sake 
 of the race, trains us to hesitate over marriage with 
 cousins, lead us to incorporate into our ideals of a fit 
 marriage the factors which will guarantee the best pos- 
 sible offspring, a perfected humanity? 
 
XI 
 EUGENICS AND ECONOMICS 
 
 MORTON A. ALDRICH, PH.D. 
 
 Professor of Economics and Sociology and Professor or Industrial 
 Hygiene in Tulane University of Louisiana. 
 
 My shortcomings as a lecturer on eugenics are obvious 
 to you all. The well-equipped eugenist must be at 
 once a biologist and a sociologist, and if I were to pose 
 as a biologist, you would know that I was speaking 
 under false pretences. At least, however, I can lay 
 claim to a genuine and earnest sense of the profound 
 importance of the teachings of eugenics. Three years 
 ago, when I had the honour of an invitation to deliver 
 the annual oration before the Louisiana State Medical 
 Society, I chose as my subject the science and art of 
 eugenics because of what seemed to me their over- 
 whelming importance to human welfare and human 
 progress. 
 
 The object of my present talk is to picture to you in 
 a comprehensive way the subject and the purpose of 
 eugenics and to arouse in your minds a just sense of its 
 practical significance ; and I may add that the study of 
 eugenics is so interesting and so fascinating that it is 
 wholly my fault if I do not succeed. Some of the prob- 
 lems of eugenics are highly controversial, but the most 
 helpful attitude of mind is not usually that of the at- 
 torney for the prosecution or for the defence, and I 
 shall try to speak about the character and aims of 
 
 »9i. 
 
294 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 eugenics, not in the form of one-sided argument, but 
 of impartial exposition. 
 
 Every one is interested in eugenics because it deals 
 with race progress and with parenthood which is the 
 central fact in race progress. If we are all alert to the 
 importance of the conservation of our natural resources, 
 we are bound to be still more alert to the importance 
 of the conservation of our people and of our race. 
 
 You are interested in eugenics, too, because you are 
 interested in children. The word eugenics comes 
 from the Greek word meaning well-born; and if sci- 
 ences had mottoes, the motto of eugenics would be: 
 For the Children's Sake. As young men who, I hope, 
 are going to marry and have children before long, you 
 have no deeper wish than that your children may be, 
 both in mind arid body, well-born. And what you 
 want for your own children you want for all children. 
 Out of this desire and this high sense of responsibility, 
 as good parents, for your own sons and daughters 
 grows your interest as good citizens in the well-bom- 
 ness of all the children of the race. 
 
 The formal definitions of the science will mean more 
 to you, perhaps, if I first ask you to consider for a mo- 
 ment a curious paradox. At the same time that we 
 have been accustomed, as a matter of course, to look 
 to heredity for the explanation of improvements in the 
 breed of our domestic animals, we have been equally 
 accustomed to look chiefly to the influence of environ- 
 ment and education for the improvement of our race 
 of men. When you say, for example, that our domestic 
 animals are far superior to those of by gone times, 
 you mean that in their in-born qualities they are su- 
 
AND ECONOMICS 295 
 
 perior at birth, but when you speak of the progress of 
 the human race, most people have something quite 
 different in mind. They think of this progress as a 
 matter, not of heredity, but of better surroundings and 
 better training. In other words, we have been neg- 
 lecting the possibility of the improvement of the hu- 
 man race by better inheritance as well as by better en- 
 vironment. It is this neglect which has made possible 
 the assertion that the infant of to-day is neither physi- 
 cally nor mentally superior to the infant of centuries 
 ago. 
 
 Eugenics asks why we do not give at least as much 
 consideration to the parentage of human beings as we 
 give to that of our horses and our cows. Sir Francis 
 Galton, who coined the word, defined eugenics as " the 
 study of agencies under social control that may improve 
 or impair the racial qualities of future generations, 
 either physically or mentally." More simply, eugenics 
 is " the science which deals with all influences that im- 
 prove the inborn qualities of a race." It is the study 
 of human and racial welfare in so far as this welfare 
 depends on the inborn qualities of men and it leads to 
 the " systematic endeavour to improve the nature of 
 man." Dr. Futcher defined eugenics the other day as 
 " the science of the improvement of the human race by 
 better breeding," and Professor Keller calls it " the 
 science of rearing human thoroughbreds." 
 
 Eugenics, then, deals with human progress. This 
 progress is many-sided, and it may help us to place the 
 science and the art of eugenics in their relation to other 
 arts and sciences concerned with the progress of man 
 if, before coming to closer quarters with our subject. 
 
^96 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 we pause for a moment to divide students of human 
 progress into two groups, the biological and the social. 
 On the one hand is the group of thinkers, like the bio- 
 logists and the psychologists, who are devoting their 
 lives to a study of the laws which explain the physical 
 and mental development of individual human beings. 
 On the other hand there is the group of thinkers, — 
 students of morals and of religion, philosophers, jurists, 
 historians, economists, sociologists, educators, — which 
 looks to the first group for its data as to men biologic- 
 ally, and concerns itself with the inter-relation and in- 
 ter-action and inter-dependence between men in society. 
 The task of the biological group will not be achieved 
 until all men and women have sound minds in sound 
 bodies. The task of the sociological group will not 
 be achieved until it has established right relations 
 among men. As a pure science, eugenics lies wholly 
 within the first group; but as an applied science or 
 art — in its applications to human progress — it calls 
 on the sociologist as well as the biologist. In this ad- 
 dress I shall discuss separately the science and the pro- 
 posed art of eugenics. 
 
 The investigators in this so-called new science — 
 there is some question as to how far it is really new — 
 are, then, a group of biologists engaged in the study of 
 man and his progress from the same standpoint as that 
 from which Darwin and his followers studied the lower 
 species. At the same time, they are earnestly hoping 
 to use their knowledge for the promotion of human 
 welfare, and they offer some far-reaching advice which 
 I shall discuss a little later. But, as investigators, they 
 
AND ECONOMICS 297 
 
 are nothing more or less than biologists whose subject 
 matter is the racial character of man. 
 
 They fully realise that their first effort must be to 
 amass facts. The official statement of the Francis Gal- 
 ton Laboratory for National Eugenics, at the Uni- 
 versity of London, reads : 
 
 " It is the intention of the founder that the Laboratory shall 
 serve 
 
 1. As a storehouse of statistical material bearing on the 
 mental and physical conditions in man, and the relation of these 
 conditions to inheritance and environment; 
 
 2. As a centre for the publication or other form of distri- 
 bution of information concerning national eugenics; 
 
 3. As a school for training and assisting research workers 
 in special problems of eugenics." 
 
 The research workers of the Galton Laboratory have 
 already published, among other papers, studies on 
 " The Inheritance of Ability," " The Inheritance of 
 Psychical Characters," " The Inheritance of the In- 
 sane," and an interesting memoir entitled " The Prom- 
 ise of Youth and the Performance of Manhood," which 
 undertakes to trace the relation between success in the 
 examinations for the B.A. Degree at Oxford arid sub- 
 sequent success in professional life. A " Treasury of 
 Human Inheritance," containing pedigrees of various 
 types of intellectual ability, of tuberculous stocks, of 
 epilepsy, physical depravity, and so on, has also been 
 published; and the Director of the Galton Laboratory, 
 Professor Karl Pearson, is also directing a series of 
 " Studies in National Deterioration." These publica- 
 
298 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 tions, you will notice, aim to carry further the earlier 
 studies of Galton on hereditary genius and natural in- 
 heritance. 
 
 In this country, the Eugenics Record Office (estab- 
 lished three years ago at Cold Spring Harbor, New 
 York, by the Eugenics Section of the American 
 Breeders' Association) is undertaking a similar work. 
 It " aims to fill the need of a clearing house for data 
 concerning ' blood lines ' and family traits in Amer- 
 ica." By means of correspondence, the acquisition of 
 family records on special forms, and the inquiries of 
 field workers investigating either in conjunction with 
 institutions or independently, it seeks to accumulate 
 and study the records of physical and mental charac- 
 teristics of human families, and to educate the public 
 as to classes of fit and unfit marriages. 
 
 If you are interested, the Eugenics Record Office 
 will send you one of its blank schedules for the use of 
 those who wish to preserve a record of their family 
 histories. 
 
 Some of the publications of this Office are: studies 
 on the heredity of feeble-mindedness, insanity, and 
 epilepsy; "The Hill Folk," a report on a rural com- 
 munity of hereditary defectives ; a handbook and guide 
 for those who wish to do field work in eugenics; " The 
 Trait Book," an attempt to catalogue human traits; 
 and " The Family History Book," giving sample fam- 
 ily histories and showing how they are prepared. 
 
 Investigators in eugenics are seeking to assemble 
 any facts which may throw light on the hypotheses of 
 Darwin and Mendel as applied to man, which tend to 
 prove or disprove Weismann's (and Galton's) teach- 
 
AND ECONOMICS 299 
 
 ing that acquired characters are not transmitted, or 
 which tend to show whether children inherit the mental 
 characters of their parents to the same degree as they 
 inherit their physical characters. They are studying, 
 too, the so-called racial poisons which, whether in- 
 jurious or not to the individual who takes them are 
 liable to injure his or her offspring. In a word, they 
 are engaged in studying the laws of heredity as ap- 
 plied to man in all their aspects, and the influences of 
 environment so far as they affect heredity. 
 
 In all this study they are not only asking the ways in 
 which the physical and mental stamina of man are pro- 
 gressing or deteriorating and the laws of human devel- 
 opment which explain this progress or retrogression; 
 they are also " looking for light on human destiny." 
 As Professor Karl Pearson says, they are asking " how 
 a nation becomes physically and mentally more vigor- 
 ous," and the influences which " can make " or " mar 
 national life and racial character." 
 
 There can be no two opinions about the value of new 
 light on questions of such moment. The earlier bio- 
 logists dodged, to a considerable degree, the study of 
 man. Thus we find Darwin writing Wallace in 1857 : 
 " You ask whether I shall discuss ' man.' I think I 
 shall avoid the subject, as so surrounded with preju- 
 dices, though I fully admit it is the highest and most in- 
 teresting problem for the naturalist." To-day investi- 
 gations such as I have been describing may compel 
 hap-hazard observation and vague speculation as to 
 human development to give place to more exact knowl- 
 edge. As yet we are " only on the threshold of such 
 knowledge." We want the whole truth, both for its 
 
300 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 own sufficient sake and because we recognise that, in 
 the fine words of Mr. John Morley, " truth is no pale 
 abstraction, but a vital force in human progress." 
 
 At the same time, however, we must constantly bear 
 in mind the pitfalls of possible error in the acceptance 
 and interpretation of the facts from which the laws of 
 this biological science of mankind are to be deduced. 
 While we engage to welcome, open-mindedly, what- 
 ever facts the investigators may bring, we must at the 
 same time insist that the workers in eugenics be them- 
 selves open-minded. They must exercise the great- 
 est care in the collection of facts. They must state 
 the evidence fairly. They must not assume as facts 
 hypotheses favourable to their conclusions; and they 
 must guard both themselves and their followers against 
 the temptation to put their best foot forward by claim- 
 ing a little more than the facts warrant. Let me pic- 
 ture briefly two or three of these pitfalls. 
 
 One is the pitfall of an unduly simple application 
 to man of conclusions reached from a study of lower 
 forms of life. We are interested in the plant experi- 
 ments of De Vries and Burbank, and in the prodigious 
 successes of racehorses sired by Eclipse or Electioneer; 
 and we are right in asking if these achievements have 
 lessons for the human species. But the truth is quite 
 as likely to be hindered as advanced by any rash gen- 
 eralisations from imperfect analogies of plant and ani- 
 mal breeding. Almost necessarily, biologists acquire 
 their methods and training and habits of thought 
 through study of forms of life below man. They are 
 peculiarly liable, therefore, to underestimate the need 
 of- extreme caution in applying to man conclusions of 
 
AND ECONOMICS 301 
 
 evolution in its application to the lower animals, and 
 to be carried too far by incomplete analogies. 
 
 Do not misunderstand me here. My point is not at 
 all that the fundamental influences of inheritance com- 
 mon to the lower animals and to man should be denied 
 due recognition, but that due emphasis should also be 
 given to the influences of the complex superstructure of 
 society peculiar to man. It is not that very many con- 
 clusions from animals to man are not true, but that they 
 represent only a part of the truth. 
 
 Again, there is the pitfall of an unwarranted use of 
 the statistical method. The physician knows only too 
 well the shortcomings of statistics concerning the 
 physical and mental nature of man. He knows how 
 difficult it is to collect vital statistics accurately, with 
 just discrimination, and how easy it is in interpreting 
 them to overstep the line between their use and their 
 abuse. The investigators in eugenics praise nothing 
 so much as their exact method, this method of statistics. 
 We agree that vital statistics will be used to render far 
 greater service than they do to-day ; but such confidence 
 must not blind us to the permanent limitations of the 
 method of statistics In Its application to individual men 
 and women in human society. 
 
 Statistics are, at best, a crude method of knowing 
 so highly differentiated and so elusive a creature as 
 man; and there is no field concerning the development 
 of man where statistics are more often inconclusive 
 than the field of battle between the partisans of the 
 influence of environment and the partisans of the in- 
 fluence of heredity. Here the same facts may often 
 be interpreted either way, though in either case in- 
 
302 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 conclusively, because of the impossibility of isolating 
 the results of inheritance from the results of environ- 
 ment. 
 
 This brings me to one other pitfall which we should 
 not overlook, namely, the very human temptation to 
 exaggerate the importance of eugenics by explaining by 
 inheritance characteristics of individuals that may 
 equally well be accounted for by environment. The 
 tone of some writers of the eugenic school does not al- 
 together assure that they will collect and interpret 
 statistics with all possible caution, nor that they will 
 never attempt to make statistics prove conclusions re- 
 garding man which cannot be proved by statistics. 
 
 Some of us feel that Galton himself, in his famous 
 volumes on " Hereditary Genius " and " Natural In- 
 heritance," provides us with an example both of the 
 misinterpretation of statistics and of the tendency to 
 claim too much for the influence of inheritance, when 
 he asserts that genius finds expression so inevitably that 
 no adversity of circumstance can keep it down. IWith 
 an assumption like this you might prove even Huxley's 
 assertion that " an ounce of Heredity is worth a ton of 
 education." Few of us question the large importance 
 of human inheritance, but Galton's assumption that 
 genius is irrepressible begs the whole question. We 
 should be on our guard against the tendency of Galton's 
 followers to make the same or similar assumptions. 
 
 I have tried to give equal attention to the truth and 
 to the liability to error of eugenic investigations. We 
 need to note the pitfalls; but it is still more necessary 
 to note that the value of facts like those gathered in 
 the Galton Laboratory and the Eugenics Record Office 
 
AND ECONOMICS 303 
 
 is not diminished because this or that individual hap- 
 pens to misinterpret them. 
 
 Thus far we have considered eugenics as a science, 
 concerning itself solely with the advancement of knowl- 
 edge. Let us now turn to consider the problem of the 
 application of this knowledge to human welfare. Ear- 
 nest men like Galton and Pearson and their followers 
 do not stop with asking what influences in human so- 
 ciety are making for race progress and what influences 
 are making for race decay. They go further and ask : 
 In the light of this knowledge, what steps should an 
 intelligent society take to prevent such deterioration and 
 to promote such progress? And they believe pro- 
 foundly that their knowledge entitles them to an im- 
 portant part in the direction of endeavours for the per- 
 manent advancement of the physical and mental powers 
 of mankind. They propose, in a word, that society 
 shall undertake, by every wise means in its power, to en- 
 courage parenthood of the fit and to discourage parent- 
 hood of the unfit. Recent writers on eugenics frequently 
 classify its practical applications under two heads: 
 " Constructive eugenics, or the endeavour to promote 
 the multiplication of the more fit, and restrictive " (or 
 negative) " eugenics, or the endeavour to diminish the 
 numbers of the less fit." 
 
 By what means is society to approach these desirable 
 results? By the gentle influence of public opinion or 
 by the harsh prohibitions of positive law? The re- 
 sponsible leaders of this propaganda for applied eu- 
 genics are thoroughly moderate and sane in their choice 
 between these means. It is grossly unfair to carica- 
 ture them as relying chiefly, for the success of their 
 
304 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 proposals, on the prohibitions of positive law. They 
 see the difficulties suggested by the question, Who 
 would be the legal judge capable of separating the fit 
 from the unfit? They understand, as much as we do, 
 that enforcible law must rest on a broad and firm 
 foundation of public opinion. The suggestion of Gal- 
 ton that the State might subsidise wedlock of the ex- 
 ceptionally fit is not, you will note, a prohibition nor a 
 compulsion, but a bounty dependent on voluntary choice. 
 
 The few legal prohibitions favoured by advocates of 
 applied eugenics are such as apply only to those who, 
 under any sane standards, are obviously unfit, — to 
 idiots, insane, feeble-minded, and the most depraved 
 criminals, in whom it seems hopeless to develop a sense 
 of personal moral responsibility. 
 
 To men and women of these classes parenthood must 
 be effectively and permanently denied. In the words 
 of Mr. Winston Churchill, they deserve all that can be 
 done for them by a Christian and scientific civilisation 
 now that they are in the world, but their curse must 
 die with them and not be transmitted to future genera- 
 tions. In self-protection, society owes it to the future 
 to prevent these obviously unfit from bringing into the 
 world others like themselves. 
 
 There are two and only two ways of preventing 
 parenthood on the part of the hopelessly unfit, — the 
 method of segregation and the method of sterilization. 
 They must be segregated, or sterilized, or given their 
 'choice between freedom with sterilization and perma- 
 nent segregation. I shall not undertake to discuss the 
 relative advantages of these alternative methods. As 
 writers on the subject have pointed out, individuals 
 
AND ECONOMICS 305 
 
 whose chief menace to society is their capacity for 
 propagating their kirnd might be safely at large, if ren- 
 dered sterile; and sterility may be for them a very de- 
 sirable alternative to permanent confinement. But un- 
 less they are sterilized, individuals of these classes must 
 be subjected to kindly but permanent segregation as 
 long as they are capable of procreation. 
 
 Fortunately, such segregation is usually also war- 
 ranted (as Dr. A. M. Gossage has said) on other than 
 eugenic grounds. The feeble-minded, for example, are 
 better and happier when kept under proper control in 
 institutions, and the majority of these classes of inca- 
 pables and criminals are a constant public menace and 
 expense while at large. 
 
 The only effective alternative to segregation of these 
 hopeless degenerates is their sterilization. Eight 
 American States have laws authorising or requiring 
 sterilization of certain classes of defectives and degen- 
 erates, and other States are considering the passage of 
 similar laws ; but except in Indiana and California these 
 laws have not yet been seriously carried into effect. 
 
 Speaking of sterilization by the present method of 
 vasectomy, Dr. R. R. Rentoul says, this operation " is 
 very simple, practically painless, makes no difference at 
 all to the bodily functions, and has no ill effects of any 
 kind. It prevents nothing but the power to procreate. 
 It is the outcome of modern scientific knowledge, and 
 must not be confounded with the older and much more 
 drastic methods." (Eugenics Review, II, 74-76.) 
 
 Mr. Bleeker van Wagenen, chairman of the com- 
 mittee on the Eugenics Section of the American Breed- 
 ers' Association to study and report on means of pre- 
 
3o6 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 venting the multiplication of defectives, and degener- 
 ates, states: 
 
 " I. That the sterilization of the adult male by vasectomy 
 is a simple, practicable method of preventing procreation by 
 him, without otherwise interfering with his sexual functions, 
 but that it is not certainly permanent in this respect. 
 
 " 2. That sterilization of the adult female — is never wholly 
 free from danger to life or disturbance of other bodily and 
 mental functions. Modern surgery and hospital care have 
 greatly reduced these dangers, but they still exist." 
 
 In California, the sterilization law was introduced in 
 1909. The persons subject are the inmates of state 
 hospitals and homes for the feeble-minded and inmates 
 of state prisons committed for life, or showing sexual 
 or moral perversion, or twice committed for sexual of- 
 fences, or three times for other crimes. Under this 
 law, 220 persons have been operated on, of whom 94 
 were women. They seem to have been taken exclu- 
 sively from the state hospitals for the insane. Com- 
 pulsory powers were rarely enforced, as it was decided 
 in all cases to obtain beforehand the consent either of 
 the relatives or of the patient, if sound enough mentally 
 to form a reasonable judgment. 
 
 Indiana led the way in this type of legislation in 
 1907. The Indiana act is entitled " an act to prevent 
 procreation of confirmed criminals, idiots, imbeciles, 
 and rapists." The motive of the State in this enact- 
 ment is purely eugenic. The act provides that 
 " Whereas, Heredity plays a most important part in 
 the transmission of crime, idiocy, and imbecility," ( i ) 
 Each institution of the State entrusted with the care 
 
AND ECONOMICS 307 
 
 of confirmed criminals, idiots, rapists, and imbeciles 
 shall appoint upon its staff, in addition to the regular 
 institutional physician two skilled surgeons. (2) If, 
 in the judgment of this committee of experts and the 
 board of managers, procreation is inadvisable and there 
 is no probability of improvement of the mental and 
 physical condition of the inmate, it shall be lawful for 
 the surgeons to perform such operation for the pre- 
 vention of procreation as shall be decided safest and 
 most effective. But this operation shall not be per- 
 formed except in cases that have been pronounced un- 
 improvable. 
 
 Dr. H. C. Sharp writes : " As to the workings of 
 this law in the State of Indiana, I must say that they 
 have been most satisfactory. Our commission has 
 been very careful in its selection of men who come un- 
 der the provisions of this law beyond question. How- 
 ever, in many instances we have operated on many 
 against their will and over their vigorous protest; but 
 in every instance, in the course of a few months fol- 
 lowing, they have either communicated to me verbally 
 or by writing their hearty approval of the opera- 
 tion . . . 
 
 "... After the vas deferens has been severed you 
 may by a second operation repair it and re-establish the 
 original function. 
 
 "Since October, 1899, I have been performing 
 an operation known as vasectomy. . . . This op- 
 eration is indeed very simple and easy to per- 
 form. I do it without administering an anaesthetic, 
 either general or local. It requires about three min- 
 utes' time to perform the operation, and the subject 
 
3o8 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 returns to his work immediately, suffers no inconven- 
 ience, and is in no way impaired for his pursuit of life, 
 liberty, and happiness, but is effectively sterilized. I 
 have been doing this operation for nine full years. I 
 have 236 cases that have afforded splendid opportunity 
 for post-operative observation, and I have never seen 
 any unfavourable s)miptom. . . . There is no dis- 
 turbed mental or physical condition following, but, on 
 the contrary, the patient becomes of a more sunny dis- 
 position, brighter of intellect, . . . and advises his fel- 
 lows to submit to the operation for their own good. 
 
 " And here," Dr. Sharp goes on to say, " is where 
 this method of preventing procreation is so infinitely 
 superior to all others proposed — that it is endorsed 
 by the subjected persons. All the other methods place 
 restrictions — and therefore punishment — upon the 
 subject; this method absolutely does not. There is no 
 expense to the State, no sorrow or shame to the friends 
 of the individual, as there Is bound to be in the carry- 
 ing out of the segregation Idea." 
 
 I want to emphasise the fact that It is not doubtful, 
 border-land, cases which we are discussing here, but 
 cases where the need of sterilization or segregation is 
 unmistakably clear. Mr. John Haines, writing on 
 The Degenerates, cites the case of one (English) 
 workhouse In which sixteen feeble-minded women gave 
 birth to one hundred and sixteen children.* 
 
 " Few realise how pitifully inadequate is society's protection 
 of the feeble-minded. The New York State Board of Charities 
 says in its last report: 
 
 2 Cited in the Eugenics Review, IV, ziz.) 
 
AND ECONOMICS 309 
 
 'There are about 30,000 feeble-minded persons in the State 
 of New York, of whom 4,000 are intermittently sequestered, 
 while 26,000, who are a menace to society, are at liberty and 
 may reproduce the unfit.' 
 
 " Then follows a chart of one pair of these ' at liberty,' 
 showing eleven offspring, one of whom, a daughter, gave birth 
 to ten children. The fertility of the others is not shown. 
 Every one surviving of those twenty-one children was feeble- 
 minded. 
 
 " Says the last Massachusetts report : 
 
 ' We have been obliged to refuse a very large number of 
 applicants for the admission of feeble-minded women — many 
 of whom have given birth to one or more children. . . . The 
 prolific progeny of these women almost without exception are 
 public charges from the date of their birth.' " ' 
 
 In the face of facts like these and facts derived from 
 studies on the " Jukes," the " Hill Folk " and the 
 " Nam Family," and in the face of the knowledge that 
 society has it in its power very greatly to diminish the 
 number of defectives and degenerates in the next and 
 succeeding generations, we can not continue to shirk 
 our duty of preventing the multiplication of the cer- 
 tainly unfit. 
 
 While I have wanted to give you a clear under- 
 standing of these methods of negative or restrictive 
 eugenics, at the same time I earnestly ask you not to 
 carry away the mistaken impression that eugenics is 
 solely or chiefly concerned with these legal prohibitions 
 which would reach only a small fraction of the popula- 
 tion. 
 
 ' (Quoted from Seth K. Humphrey, "Parenthood and the Social 
 Conscience," The Forum, April, 1913.) 
 
3IO XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 The proposed social control of marriage and of par- 
 enthood is to be chiefly a control through the pressure 
 — conscious or unconscious, and far better if uncon- 
 scious — of public opinion. The heart of the science 
 of eugenics is the relative importance of nature and 
 nurture. The heart of the art of eugenics is the answer 
 to the question: How far is it possible for a body of 
 thoughtful men, with an earnest conviction of the value 
 of their eugenic teaching, to influence the formation 
 and growth of a public opinion powerful enough to en- 
 courage parenthood of the fit and to discourage parent- 
 hood of the unfit? The problem of applied eugenics, 
 then, is almost wholly a problem in the guidance of pub- 
 lic opinion. 
 
 While, as I have just said, the leaders in the prac- 
 tical proposals of eugenics are thoroughly sane in their 
 reliance on public opinion rather than on law, some of 
 them are not so sane, perhaps, in their sanguine faith 
 that this body of opinion may somewhat readily be cre- 
 ated. When advocates of eugenics permit themselves 
 to see visions of the rapid ascendency of patriotic eu- 
 genic opinion — nay, even of a eugenic religion — they 
 show a quite inadequate understanding of how the com- 
 pulsion of public opinion and the sanctity of religion 
 are born and grow strong. A public opinion insistent 
 enough to exercise a large degree of control over mar- 
 riage and parenthood, over the most fundamental ex- 
 periences of life, must necessarily follow only slowly, 
 after a world of sane and patient effort. Man is not 
 wholly a rational animal, and controlling opinions and 
 religions do not rest on rational considerations alone. 
 
AND ECONOMICS 311 
 
 however sound these may be, but on the outcome, also, 
 of age-long experiences of pleasure and of pain. 
 
 Consider again the magnitude of the task which the 
 advocates of eugenics set public opinion to do — a task 
 compared to which Mr. Roosevelt's propaganda against 
 race suicide is an easy and modest proposal. For Sir 
 Francis Galton and his followers ask not only that the 
 fit marry the fit and have larger families, but that the 
 pressure of public opinion become so controlling that 
 unfit individuals would be influenced to deny themselves 
 children at all. To a large group of the people of our 
 generation such opinion would appear in direct opposi- 
 tion to self-interest. None the less, the advocates of 
 eugenics set themselves the task of converting a public 
 opinion which permits the evils they combat into a 
 public opinion which will restrain them. 
 
 They would establish chairs of eugenics in the uni- 
 versities. They would have every agency which in- 
 fluences ideals work to arouse in men a pride in their 
 organic inheritance of good physical, mental, and moral 
 stamina — a pride greater even than that men take 
 to-day in their inheritance of the external circum- 
 stances of wealth or of conventional social position. 
 At the same time they would have us work for the 
 further growth of that individual sense of moral re- 
 sponsibility on which all our progress — moral, politi- 
 cal, and industrial — has depended, until it includes a 
 keen sense of the individual responsibility of each hu- 
 man being for the organic soundness of the generations 
 yet to come. 
 
 I would not belittle the difliculties of the task; but 
 
312 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 neither would I have them appear more Insurmountable 
 than they are. 
 
 Choice in marriage is now, and always has been, in 
 all stages of civilisation, very largely restricted by pub- 
 lic opinion. We have only to think of the power of 
 opinion In making effective monogamy, or the narrow 
 limits of royal marriages, or the restriction of marriage 
 within the prohibited degrees, or the curious and intri- 
 cate taboos of the low Australian tribes. The pressure 
 of such opinion. Indeed, Is so customary and so ac- 
 cepted as a matter of course that It is not often felt as 
 a hg,rdshlp, and usually not felt at all. The problem, 
 therefore, Is not the creation of control of marriage by 
 public opinion. It is rather the substitution of a more 
 wholesome opinion for a less wholesome one — the ele- 
 vation of existing opinion where It Is at present un- 
 sound, and the strengthening of existing opinion where 
 it Is already sound. 
 
 In the words of Major Leonard Darwin, " Affec- 
 tion should no doubt always point the path to marriage. 
 But, though we often seem to act on the pure impulse 
 of the moment, yet in reality our actions are ever in 
 large measure the result of all those innumerable Im- 
 pulses in the past which have been instrumental in 
 moulding our minds and informing our characters. 
 Our affections in their earlier stages are, therefore, 
 largely guided by our preconceived ideas." 
 
 Much is even now being done, and more can be done 
 In the Immediate future, to promote intermarriage be- 
 tween sound men and sound women, and perhaps — 
 though this is less certain — to influence them to have 
 larger families. 
 
AND ECONOMICS 313 
 
 But, granting that society can do much to promote 
 marriage and parenthood among the fit, can it be suc- 
 cessful also in restricting parenthood among the un- 
 fit? Among the unsound there has always been an 
 honourable minority of men and women who denied 
 themselves the great happiness of children because their 
 sense of their responsibility was too high to allow them 
 to take the risk of transmitting to their children the 
 weaknesses of their own constitutions. Wise education 
 of public opinion would add largely to the numbers of 
 this honourable minority. 
 
 There still remain the classes of the unfit who would 
 probably marry and have children just the same. If 
 any task could be more difficult than to determine at 
 what point to draw the line between the fit and the 
 unfit and to determine who would fall below this line 
 of minimum fitness for parenthood, it would be the 
 task of persuading the individual that the decision that 
 he was unfit was just. And if he were persuaded, how 
 generally could public opinion drive home a sense of 
 responsibility firm enough and constant enough to lead 
 him to forego children? But where the unfit continue 
 to marry and have children, the desired result — fewer 
 children of the unfit — may still be reached, indirectly 
 and more slowly, by the influence of ideals of sound 
 marriage. As Professor Irving Fisher points out in 
 his wonderfully sane and comprehensive " Report on 
 National Vitality," if a considerable percentage of the 
 population once shall come to regard vitality as an es- 
 sential endowment, healthy persons will marry, chiefly, 
 healthy persons; and unhealthy persons, in so far as 
 they marry at all, will do so among themselves. The 
 
314 XI. ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 necessary consequence will be that the number of chil- 
 dren of unhealthy couples will decrease, especially after 
 the first generation. 
 
 And Professor Fisher concludes : " It would be 
 folly, of course, to expect any change in ideals so com- 
 plete that there would not be numerous exceptions to 
 hygienic mating, but, once the bulk of mankind are 
 guided by a truer principle in forming marriages, the 
 effect on racial development will make itself distinctly 
 felt within a generation." 
 
 The worst criticism that can be levelled against these 
 eugenics proposals is that their results will be slow. 
 But so is the progress of civilisation slow. When we 
 consider the few years since the beginning of any sys- 
 tematic and wide-spread eugenic effort, arid the diffi- 
 culties in the way, the striking fact is that so much 
 progress has already been achieved. Investigations in 
 human heredity are being carried on as never before. 
 Students are being offered instruction in the subject at 
 many universities. Eugenics societies are at work in 
 England, in the United States, and in the continental 
 countries. An International Eugenics Congress was 
 held a year ago. The Eugenics Review is in its fifth 
 year. The newspapers are discussing eugenic ideals 
 and eugenic methods. 
 
 Last year the Dean of the Episcopal Cathedral of 
 Chicago (the Rev. W. T. Sumner) " announced that 
 the clergymen of that Cathedral would not marry any 
 couples unless they were able to produce a certificate, 
 signed by a reputable physician, declaring that both 
 parties were physically and mentally equipped to con- 
 tract marriage " ; and this requirement was widely en- 
 
AND ECONOMICS 315 
 
 dorsed both by other clergymen and by laymen. A re- 
 quirement like this not only makes it possible for the 
 clergyman " to avoid solemnising the marriages of per- 
 sons suffering from venereal disease " but also makes it 
 impossible for a person " to contract a marriage with- 
 out having his attention directed to his or her fitness 
 to do so." 
 
 I do not think that any observer of American life 
 will disagree with me when I say that there is already 
 a marked tendency among the young men and women 
 of this country to look more carefully than they used to 
 do to the physical and mental fitness of those whom 
 they choose as their husbands or their wives. 
 
 Finally, we are breaking up the " conspiracy of si- 
 lence " and making progress in the difficult and delicate 
 problem of instruction In sex hygiene and race hygiene. 
 
 In the great work for the upbuilding of a sound 
 and powerful public opinion, all thoughtful and earnest 
 men must co-operate. 
 
 The students of eugenics, and all biologists, have 
 their important part to perform. We need not pause 
 to ask how far the teachings of Galton and his follow- 
 ers are new. The apostles of eugenics delight over- 
 much, I think, in picturing their science as a thing apart, 
 and in emphasising what they add rather than what 
 they borrow from earlier thought, — from the propos- 
 als of Plato, from the actual regime of ancient Sparta, 
 and from a considerable group of later thinkers. 
 What is new is less important than what is true; and 
 originality is often a poor thing. Neither need we 
 dwell on their tendency to belittle the achievement and 
 helpfulness of workers for human progress in other 
 
3i6 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 fields, — a pastime of which some of them are over- 
 fond. 
 
 Such individual vagaries are of trivial importance; 
 they can do no permanent harm. They may amuse 
 us for a moment, but they should not divert our minds 
 from the essential fact that the leaders in eugenics have 
 seized a fortunate moment to hasten our entrance into 
 a wholesome period of unbiased investigation of the 
 laws of heredity as applied to man. They offer us the 
 outlines of a plan of research and of a proposal for 
 the education of public opinion which promise to be 
 fruitful both in knowledge and in human character. It 
 would be wholly unfair to ask that the investigators 
 of the Galton Laboratory and the Eugenics Record 
 Office show any considerable results so soon. We may 
 expect them to do more, but already we are their debt- 
 ors because they have centred our attention, in a strik- 
 ing way, on the need of the knowledge they are seeking 
 and on the value of the services it may later render. 
 
 All the students of society, too, in whatever field, 
 must contribute their share toward the establishment 
 of a sounder public opinion. " Eugenics must pass 
 from science into practice." The success of the eugenic 
 movement depends no less upon the effective utilisa- 
 tion of the knowledge we already have than upon the 
 acquisition of new knowledge. It is as essential that 
 the truth concerning race improvement through hered- 
 ity shall influence the many as that it be discovered by 
 the few. When the advocates of eugenics enter the 
 field of practical proposal, they must join hands with 
 all good citizens who are seeking the wisest means for 
 promoting better relations among men, if they are to 
 
AND ECONOMICS 317 
 
 gain for their teachings the widest and deepest influ- 
 ence on human conduct. 
 
 At the outset of this talk I suggested a contrast be- 
 tween the work of the sociologist and the work of the 
 biologist. But the essential point is that they do not 
 compete, but co-operate. In the intellectual division 
 of labour each approaches the central question of the 
 progress of man with an inevitably lop-sided equip- 
 ment, and each must have the help of the other. 
 
 I like to think of the science and art of eugenics, and 
 you will like to think of them, not as something aloof, 
 but as important aspects of a large and richer whole, 
 as parts of a group of movements united in seeking 
 one noble common end, as parts of a work which will 
 prove, I believe, to be the one contribution of this gen- 
 eration most potent for the good of all the generations 
 which are to come. I refer to our effort to conserve 
 and to increase our national health and our permanent 
 national vitality. 
 
 To you individually, the largest significance of this 
 effort is that you are so fortunate as to be permitted 
 to have a part in it, both as parents and as citizens. 
 Your own personal sense of race responsibility does 
 not need to wait on that of others. As prospective an- 
 cestors, you will not forget that while it is essential, 
 it is not enough that you be fit. You must take care 
 that the mother of your children is equally sound. If 
 the Adams's, for example, have preserved the vigour 
 of their family stock and remained an exceptionally able 
 family through five generations, it is no more because 
 the men were able than because they have shown wis- 
 dom in the choice of their wives. 
 
3i8 XL ALDRICH: EUGENICS 
 
 At the same time, as citizens, you want to be one 
 of those who help to make more general and more real 
 this feeling of responsibility for the children and for 
 the generations yet to come. 
 
 The problem of eugenics is twofold: To know the 
 truth about the influence of inheritance, and to apply 
 this truth to the benefit of the future generations of 
 our race. The goal is high; the certainty that it is 
 also distant should not daunt us. It is enough that we 
 know that public opinion, based on sound eugenic teach- 
 ing can do much, and that how much it will do depends 
 on each individual one of us. The citizen who per- 
 forms his part in the formation of this public opinion 
 will be content if he will learn of nature the lesson of 
 quiet work : 
 
 " One lesson of two duties kept at one, 
 Though the loud world proclaim their enmity^ 
 Of toil unsevered from tranquillity; 
 Of labor, that in lasting fruit outgrows 
 Far noisier schemes, accomplished in repose, 
 Too great for haste, too high for rivalry." 
 
XII 
 
 EUGENICS: WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO IN- 
 TELLECT AND CHARACTER 
 
 EDWARD L. THORNDIKE 
 
 By eugenics is meant, as you all know, the Improve- 
 ment of mankind by breeding. It has been decided 
 by those responsible for this lecture that its topic 
 shall be the intellectual and moral, rather than the 
 physical, improvement of the human stock. 
 
 Common observation teaches that individuals of the 
 same sex and age differ widely in intellect, character 
 and achievement. The more systematic and exact ob- 
 servations made by scientific students of human nature 
 emphasise the extent of these differences. Whether we 
 take some trivial function — such as memory for iso- 
 lated words, or delicacy of discrimination of pitch — 
 or take some broad symptom of man's nature, such as 
 his rate of progress through school, or ability in tests 
 of abstract intellect, or even his general intellectual and 
 moral repute — men differ widely. Samples of the 
 amount and distribution of such differences are given 
 in Charts i, 2 and 3. Chart i relates that of 732 chil- 
 dren who had studied arithmetic equally long, one 
 could get over a hundred examples done correctly in 
 fifteen minutes, while others could not get correct an- 
 swers to five. Even If we leave out of account the top 
 three per cent., covering all the records of 60 or over, 
 
 319 
 
320 
 
 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 we have some children achieving twenty-five times as 
 many correct answers as other children. 
 
 en- 
 
 Examples done correctly in 15 minutes. 
 
 Chart i. The Relative Frequencies of Different Degrees of 
 Ability in Addition in the Case of Fourth-grade Pupils. 
 
 I I — i percent 
 
 1 
 so 
 
 I 1 -| 1 1 i 1 1 1 
 
 10 ZJO 30 40 
 
 Gam made in examples done correctly in 10 minutes 
 Chart z. The Relative Frequencies of Different Amounts of 
 Gain from Fifty Minutes of Practise in Division, in the Case 
 of Pupils of the Same School Grade. 
 
 Chart 2 shows that when four hundred children who 
 had had similar school training were given each the 
 same amount of practice in certain work in division, 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 321 
 
 some improved not at all, and others enormously. 
 Chart 3 shows that of children in the same city all 
 of the same year-age (thirteen), some have done the 
 work of the eight grades of the elementary school and 
 of one or two years of the high school, while others 
 have not completed the work of a single year. Still 
 less competence at intellectual tasks could be found by 
 including children from asylums for imbeciles and idiots. 
 
 I I •» l'|jer cent 
 
 I n nr H r m JE V Tin ijts. nH.s. 
 Grade reached a\ the age o[ 15. 
 
 Chart 3. The Relative Frequencies of Different Amounts of 
 Progress in School of Thirteen-year-old Children. 
 
 The differences thus found amongst individuals of 
 the same sex and age are due in large measure to orig- 
 inal, inborn characteristics of the intellectual and moral 
 constitutions of the individuals in question. They are, 
 it is true, in part due to differences in maturity — one 
 thirteen-year-old being further advanced in development 
 than another. They are also due in part to differences 
 In environment, circumstances, training — one sort of 
 
Saa XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 home-life being more favourable than another to pro- 
 gress through school, for example. Each advance in 
 the study of individual differences, however, shows that 
 differences in maturity and differences in the circum- 
 stances of nurture account for only a small fraction of 
 the differences actually found in individuals of the 
 same general environment of an American city in 1900- 
 19 1 2. Long before a child begins his schooling, or a 
 man his work at trade or profession, or a woman her 
 management of a home — long indeed before they are 
 born — their superiority or inferiority to others of the 
 same environmental advantages is determined by the 
 constitution of the germs and ova whence they spring, 
 and which, at the start of their individual lives, they 
 are. 
 
 Of the score or more of important studies of the 
 causes of individual differences which have been made 
 since Francis Galton led the way, I do not find one that 
 lends any support to the doctrine of human initial equal- 
 ity, total or approximate. On the contrary, every one 
 of them gives evidence that if the thousand babies bom 
 this week in New York City were given equal oppor- 
 tunity they would still differ in much the same way and 
 to much the same extent as they will in fact differ. 
 
 We find, for instance, that the children of certain 
 families rank very much higher in certain psychological 
 tests of perception, association and the like, than the 
 children of certain other families. Now if this differ- 
 ence were due to the difference between the two groups 
 of families in environment — in ideals, customs, hy- 
 gienic conditions and the like — it should increase 
 greatly with the age of the children in some rough pro- 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 323 
 
 portion to the length of time that they are subject to 
 the beneficent or unfavourable environment. It does 
 not. One family's product differs from another nearly 
 as much at the age of 9 to 1 1 as at the age of 12 to 14. 
 Again, if inequalities in the environment produce the 
 greater part of these differences, equalising opportu- 
 nity and training should greatly reduce them. Such 
 equalisation is found by experiment to reduce them 
 
 I 
 
 
 Group I Group n 
 Initial Ability 
 
 Group 1 Group n 
 
 GaiHi from equal 
 practice 
 
 Group 1 Group n 
 Ability after equal 
 practice 
 
 Chart 4. The Relation of the Gains from Equal Amounts of 
 Practise in the Case of Individuals of High and Low Initial 
 Ability. 
 
 very little, if at all. Chart 4 shows, for example, the 
 result of equal amounts of training applied to two 
 groups of adults whom life in general had previously 
 brought to the conditions shown at the left of the chart. 
 The trait chosen was addition ; from life in general one 
 group had gained the ability to do twenty-seven more 
 additions per minute than the other group, accuracy 
 
324 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 being equal, in the two groups. At the end of the spe- 
 cial training the superior individuals had gained on the 
 average 28 additions per minute, while the inferior in- 
 dividuals gained only 10 additions per minute. As a 
 result of this partial equalisation of opportunity, the 
 superior individuals were farther ahead than everl If 
 equality of opportunity has no equalising effect in so 
 easily alterable a trait as rapidity in addition, surely 
 it can have little power in such traits as energy, stabil- 
 ity, general intellectual power, courage or kindliness. 
 
 Men differ by original nature. With equal nurture 
 of an inferior sort they progress unequally to low sta- 
 tions; with equal nurture of a superior sort they pro- 
 gress unequally to high stations. Their absolute 
 achievements, the amounts of progress which they make 
 from zero up, are due largely to the environment which 
 excites and directs their original capacities. Their 
 relative achievements — the amounts of progress which 
 they make, one in comparison with another — are due 
 largely to their variations one from another in orig- 
 inal capacities. 
 
 The man's original nature, too, has large selective 
 power over his environment. The thousand babies" 
 will in large measure each create his own environment 
 by cherishing this feature and neglecting that, amongst 
 those which the circumstances of life offer. As Dr. 
 Woods has well argued, the power of the environment 
 to raise or lower a man is very great only when the en- 
 vironment is unavoidable. We must remember that 
 one of these babies, if of mean and brutal nature, can 
 by enough pains avoid industry, justice and honour, no 
 matter how carefully he is brought up; and that one 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 325 
 
 of them of Intellectual gifts can, if he cares enough, 
 seek out and possess adequate stimuli to achievement 
 in art, science, or letters, no matter how poor and sor- 
 did his home may be. 
 
 If, a hundred years ago, every boy in England could 
 have had as good opportunity — each of the sort fitted 
 to his capacities — as Charles Darwin had, the gain for 
 human welfare would probably have been great; but 
 if every boy then could have had as good inborn capac- 
 ity for science, art, invention, the management of men 
 — or whatever his strongest capacity was — as Charles 
 Darwin had for science, the gain for welfare would 
 certainly have been enormous. 
 
 The original differences in intellect, character, and 
 skill which characterise men are related to the families 
 and races whence the individuals spring. Each man's 
 original mental constitution, which so largely deter- 
 mines how much more or less he will do for the world's 
 good than the average man of his generation, is the 
 product of no fortuity, but of the germs of his par- 
 ents and the forces which modify the body Into which 
 they grow — is the product, as we are accustomed to 
 say, of heredity and variation. The variation within 
 the group of offspring of the same parents is large — 
 a very gifted thinker may have an almost feeble- 
 minded brother — but the variation between families 
 is real. A feeble-minded person's brothers will be 
 feeble-minded hundreds of times as often. 
 
 The general average tendency of the original In- 
 tellectual and moral natures of children to be like the 
 original natures of their ancestry Is guaranteed before- 
 hand by the accepted principles of biology. Direct evi- 
 
326 XII. TtlORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 dence of it is also furnished by investigations of the 
 combination of original and acquired differences which 
 human achievements, as they stand, display. The same 
 studies which find differences of nurture hopelessly in- 
 adequate to account for differences of ability and 
 achievement, find that original capacities and interests 
 must be invoked precisely because achievement runs in 
 families, and in a manner or degree which likeness in 
 home training can not explain. Galton found that the 
 real sons of eminent men had a thousand times the or- 
 dinary man's chance of eminence and far excelled the 
 adopted sons of men of equal eminence. Woods has 
 shown that, when each individual is rated for intellect 
 or morals, the achievements of those sons of royal fam- 
 ilies who succeeded to the throne by paternal death and 
 thus had the special attention given to crown princes 
 and the special unearned opportunities of succession, 
 have, in the estimation of historians, been no greater 
 than those of their younger brothers. 
 
 Children of the same parents resemble one another 
 in every mental trait where the issue has been tested, 
 and resemble one another nearly or quite as much in 
 such tests as quickness in marking the A's on a sheet 
 of printed capitals or giving the opposites of words, 
 to which home training has never paid any special at- 
 tention, as they do in adding or multiplying, where pa- 
 rental ambitions, advice and rewards would be expected 
 to have much more effect, if they have any anywhere. 
 
 Mr. Courtis, who has been assiduously studying the 
 details of ability in arithmetic in school children, finds, 
 as one sure principle of explanation, the likeness of 
 children to parents — arid this even in subtle traits and 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 327 
 
 relations between traits, of whose very existence the 
 parents were not aware, and which the parents would 
 not have known how to nurture had they known of 
 their existence. 
 
 Dr. Keyes has recently made an elaborate study of 
 various possible causes of the rate of progress of a 
 child through the elementary school. He traces the 
 effects of defective vision, of sickness, of moving from 
 one school to another, and so on, but finds nothing of 
 great moment until he happens to trace family relation- 
 ships. Then it appears that certain families are thick 
 with " accelerates," or pupils who win double promo- 
 tions, whereas other families are thick with retarded 
 pupils, who require two years to complete a normal 
 year's work. Of 168 families, only 30 contain both 
 an " accelerated " and a " retarded " pupil, whereas 
 138 show either two or more accelerates or two or 
 more retarded pupils. The differences in home train- 
 ing are here not allowed for, but, in view of what has 
 been found in other cases, it appears certain that the 
 rate .at which a child will progress In school In com- 
 parison with his fellows Is determined In large meas- 
 ure before he Is born. 
 
 In intellect and morals, as In bodily structure and 
 features, men differ, differ by original nature, and dif- 
 fer by families. There are hereditary bonds by which 
 one kind of intellect or character rather than another 
 Is produced. Selective breeding can alter a man's ca- 
 pacity to learn, to keep sane, to cherish justice or to be 
 happy. 
 
 Let the lines LJI^ and L^H^ In Chart 5 be Iden- 
 tical scales for the original capacity for Intellect, or 
 
328 
 
 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 virtue, or any desirable human trait. Let the surface 
 above line L^Hi represent the distribution of this orig- 
 inal capacity amongst men to-day. There is every rea- 
 son to believe that wise selective breeding could change 
 the present state of affairs, at least to that shown above 
 L2H2, within relatively few generations. Perhaps it 
 
 Chart 5. The Improvement Possible by Selective Breeding. The 
 upper surface being taken to represent the existing distribution of 
 intellect, the lower surface represents vrhat might be expected 
 from, say, ten or twenty generations of breeding exclusively from 
 the apparently best tenth of human intellects. 
 
 could do even more. There is every reason also to 
 believe that each step of improvement in the original 
 nature of man would, in and of itself, improve the en- 
 vironmental conditions in which he lives and learns. 
 
 So much for the general possibility of eugenics in 
 the case of intellect, morals and skill — for what should 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 329 
 
 soon be in every primer of psychology, sociology and 
 education, and be accepted as a basis of practise by 
 every wise family, church and State. 
 
 The next question concerns the extrinsic effects of se- 
 lective breeding for intellect or for morals, the possi- 
 bility of injuring the race indirectly, by a change in, 
 say, intellect, which in and of itself is desirable. If we 
 breed horses for speed, they are likely to lose in 
 strength and vigour; do we run such risks in breeding 
 men for intellect, or for morals, or for skill? This 
 question has been neglected by the hortatory type of 
 enthusiasts for eugenics. It has also not received the 
 attention which it deserves from the real workers for 
 racial improvement, probably because the psychological 
 investigations which answer it are little known. They 
 do, however, give a clear and important answer — that 
 there is practically no chance whatever of injury from 
 selective breeding within a race for intellect, or for 
 morality, or for mental health and balance, or for en- 
 ergy, or for constructive ingenuity and skill — no risk 
 that the improvement of any one of these will cause 
 injury to any other of them, or to physical health or 
 happiness. The investigations have found that, within 
 one racial group, the correlations between the diver- 
 gences of an individual from the average in different 
 desirable traits are positive, that the man who is above 
 the average of his race in intellect is above rather than 
 below it in decency, sanity, even In bodily health. Chart 
 6 shows, for example, the average intellect of each of 
 the groups, when individuals are graded i, 2, 3, 4, etc., 
 up to 10 on a scale for morality, according to Woods's 
 
330 
 
 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 measurements of royal families. I may add that the 
 effect of chance inaccuracies in Woods's ratings, 
 whereby one individual is rated as 8 or lo when he 
 should have been rated 9, or is rated 4 or 8 when he 
 should have been rated 6, is to make this obtained 
 
 I 234 56769 10 
 
 TTlorality — 
 
 Chart 6. The Relation between Intellect and Morality in 
 European Royal Families. After Woods. 
 
 and shown relation of intellect to morals less close than 
 it really is. 
 
 Nature does not balance feeble-mindedness by great 
 manual dexterity, nor semi-insane eccentricities by great 
 courage and kindliness. Correlation of divergences 
 up or down from mediocrity is the rule, not compensa- 
 tion. The child of good reasoning powers has better, 
 not worse, fnemory than the average; the child su- 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 331 
 
 perior in observation is superior in inference; scholar- 
 ship is prophetic of success out of school ; a good mind 
 means a better than average character. The fifty 
 greatest warriors of the world will be above the aver- 
 age man as poets. The fifty greatest artists of the 
 world will be better scientists than the average. Genius 
 of a certain type does, via the nervous temperament, 
 ally itself to eccentricities of a certain type; and very 
 stupid men can not be rated as insane because they are 
 already idiots ; but on the average the most intellectual 
 tenth of the population would, under equal conditions 
 of strain, furnish fewer lapses into insanity than its 
 proportional quotum. 
 
 Selective breeding for superior intellect and char- 
 acter does not then require great skill to avoid injurious 
 by-products or correlatives of intrinsically good traits. 
 Intrinsically good traits have also good correlatives. 
 Any method of selective breeding, then, which increases 
 the productivity of intellectually or morally good stock 
 over that of poor stock, will improve man, with one 
 possible added requirement — that breeding should be 
 for fertility as well, should not be suicidal, should not 
 make the race better but at the same time put an end 
 to it altogether! 
 
 It might be that there was a necessary inverse cor- 
 relation in human nature between fecundity and high 
 intellectual and moral station whereby, the better men 
 became, the fewer offspring they would have; and 
 whereby, at a certain limit of super-manhood, reproduc- 
 tion would cease. Certain changes of the birth-rate 
 with time, and certain variations in it amongst groups, 
 have given some students the impression that intellect, 
 
332 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 at least, is, by natural necessity, inversely correlated 
 with fecundity. 
 
 It is hard to find the facts by which to either verify 
 or refute the notion, current in superficial discussions 
 of human nature and institutions, that such is the case. 
 Sad testimony to man's neglect of the question which 
 of all questions perhaps concerns him most — the sim- 
 ple question of which men and women produce the men 
 
 _: 4— _ 
 
 on 
 
 •I 3- 
 
 2 — 
 
 I and 2. sandA- sonde rand 6 9andlO 
 IHorQlitj* of mother*. 
 
 Chart 7. The Relation of Morality of Mother to Number of 
 
 Children. 
 
 and women of the future — is given by the fact that 
 almost no clear and reliable evidence is available con- 
 cerning the relations of fecundity to intellect, moral- 
 ity, energy, or balance. The most significant evidence 
 is that collected by Woods in the case of royal fam- 
 ilies. Woods gives the number of children living till 
 21 in the case of each individual of the royal families 
 which he studied. From them I have made the sum- 
 maries noted on Charts 7 and 8. Each of these sets 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 333 
 
 of facts is of course the result of the constitutional fe- 
 cundity of the women in question plus certain very in- 
 tricate co-operating circumstances; and neither can be 
 taken at its face value. What the birthrate would have 
 been had the constitutional capacity of each woman 
 worked under equal conditions, can only be dubiously 
 inferred. My own inference from relevant facts con- 
 cerning the studies of differentiated birthrates with 
 
 _ 4- 
 
 c 
 ■,2 5- 
 
 
 1, 2,5. and 4 s 6and'7 a,9,andio 
 
 Jntellecl of mother. 
 
 Chart 8. The Relation of Intellect of Mother to Number ov 
 
 Children. 
 
 which I am acquainted is that morality, mental health, 
 energy, and intellect perpetuate a family, and that 
 wherever the really better, or saner, or stronger, or 
 more gifted, classes fail to equal the really worse, ill- 
 balanced, feeble or stupid classes, it is a consequence 
 of unfortunate circumstances and customs which are 
 avoidable and which it is the business of human policy 
 to avoid. Society may choose to breed from the bot- 
 tom, but it does not have to. 
 
334 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 No great ingenuity or care then seems necessary to 
 make fairly rapid improvement in the human stock. 
 The task is only the usual one of any rational idealism 
 
 — to teach people to want a certain thing that they 
 ought to want, and to change social usages so as to 
 satisfy this new want. The same sort of tuition 
 whereby men are learning to want those who are alive 
 with them to be healthier, nobler and more capable, 
 will serve to teach us to want those who are to live 
 with our children's children to be healthier, nobler and 
 more capable. Provided certain care is taken to fa- 
 vour the sane, balanced type of intellect rather than 
 the neurotic, any selective breeding which increases the 
 fecundity of superior compared to inferior men, and 
 which does not produce deterioration in the physical 
 and social conditions in which men live, will serve. 
 
 The danger of deterioration in physical and social 
 conditions from breeding for intellect and morals is 
 trivial. The eifect is almost certain to be the opposite 
 
 — an improvement in physical and social conditions. 
 The more rational the race becomes, the better roads, 
 ships, tools, machines, foods, medicines and the like 
 it will produce to aid itself, though it will need them 
 less. The more sagacious and just and humane the 
 original nature that is bred into man, the better schools, 
 laws, churches, traditions and customs it will fortify it- 
 self by. There is no so certain and economical a way to 
 improve man's environment as to improve his nature. 
 
 Each generation has of course to use what men it has 
 to make the world better for them ; but a better world 
 for any future generation is best guaranteed by making 
 better men. Certain worthy customs of present civ- 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 335 
 
 ilisation may be endangered by rational control of who 
 is to be born, though this seems to me unlikely. In any 
 case, we may be sure that if the better men are born 
 they will establish better customs in place of those 
 whose violation made their birth possible. 
 
 It is not by a timid conservatism sticking to every 
 jot and tittle of the customs which gifted men of the 
 past have taught the world, that we shall prevent back- 
 sliding : it is far safer to trust gifted men of the present 
 and future to keep what is good in our traditions, and 
 to improve them. The only safe way to conserve the 
 good wrought by the past is to improve on it. 
 
 It is beyond the province of this lecture to devise 
 biologically helpful and socially innocuous schemes of 
 selective breeding, but I may be permitted to record 
 my faith that if mankind to-day really wanted to im- 
 prove the original nature of its grandchildren as much, 
 say, as it wants to improve the conditions of life for 
 itself and its children, and believed certain facts 
 of biology and psychology as effectively, say, as it be- 
 lieves that wealth gives power or that disease brings 
 misery, appropriate schemes for selective breeding 
 would be devised well within the span of our own lives. 
 
 Any form of socially innocuous selective breeding 
 will improve the stock by reproducing from those mem- 
 bers of it who have shown, by ancestral and personal 
 achievement, with due allowance for favourable or un- 
 favourable circumstances, the superiority of the germ 
 plasm which they bear. But some forms may be far 
 more effective than others according to the way in 
 which the original components of intellect, character, 
 energy, skill, stability, and the like in the germs are 
 
336 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 constituted. Suppose, for example, that the original 
 germinal basis for human intellect consisted in the pres- 
 ence of a certain constant something, call It " /n, the 
 determiner for intellect," in the germ or ovum. The 
 fertilised ovum, which is the human life at its begin- 
 ning, could then have /„ double, if both the germ and 
 ovum had it; I^ single if one or the other had it; or 
 could lack /„ as it must if neither had it. Suppose 
 that the consequences of these three conditions were 
 that the /„/„ individuals would tend, with fair condi- 
 tions in life, to be specially gifted; that the In individu- 
 als would tend to be of "normal" intellect; that the 
 individuals lacking /„ would tend to be feeble-minded. 
 It is then the case that of the germs produced by the 
 individual who had IJn at the start of his life, each 
 contains !„, that of the germs produced by the individ- 
 ual who had /n at the start of his life, half have la 
 arid half lack It, and that of the germs produced by 
 the individual who lacked I^ at the start of his life, no 
 one has In- Consequently, by discovering the individ- 
 uals who lacked /„ at the start of life and preventing 
 them from breeding, we could rapidly reduce feeble- 
 mindedness. By discovering the Individuals who had 
 /„/n at the start of life and breeding exclusively from 
 them, we could eradicate feeble-mlndedness and ordi- 
 nariness both, leaving a race of only the specially 
 gifted. The discovery could L\ made in a few genera- 
 tions of experimental breeding; and the exclusion, of 
 course, could be made one generation after the discov- 
 ery. 
 
 This supposition will be recognised by many of you 
 as a simplified case of Mendelian inheritance of a unit 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 337 
 
 character due to the presence or absence of a single 
 determiner which can either be or not be in a germ or 
 ovum, and which " segregates." 
 
 No case quite so simple as this can be true of human 
 intellect but something approximating it has been sug- 
 gested as perhaps true. 
 
 Suppose, on the other hand, that the germinal basis 
 for intellect consists in the presence, in the germ or 
 ovum, of one or more of four determiners — /j, /g, 
 I3 and I4 — contributing amounts i, 2, 3 and 4 of in- 
 tellectual capacity. The fertihsed ovum could then 
 have any one of 256 different constitutions ranging 
 from the entire absence of all these determiners to the 
 presence of each one " duplex " — i.e., in both germ 
 and ovum. If such duplex presence meant that the 
 two contributions combined additively, the original in- 
 tellect of the individual could range from o to 20. In- 
 dividuals, all of one same original intellect — 10 — 
 might be of very different germinal constitutions, and 
 so of very different possibilities in breeding. If two 
 individuals, each of original intellect 10, were mated, 
 it might be the case that their possible offspring would 
 range in intellect from o to 20, or it might be that they 
 could not go below 8 or above 12. 
 
 If the number of germinal determiners of intellect 
 is increased to five or six, the task of telling the con- 
 stitution of the germs produced by any individual of 
 known original intellectual capacity is enormously in- 
 creased ; and the research needed to guide the best pos- 
 sible breeding of man is very, very much more labori- 
 ous. Moreover, instead of hoping to bring man to the 
 best possible status (subject to the appearance of new 
 
338 XIL THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 desirable mutations) by a few brilliant rules for mar- 
 riage, we must then select indirectly and gradually by 
 parental achievement rather than directly by known 
 germinal constitution, just as animal and plant breeders 
 had to do in all cases until recently, and just as they 
 still have to do in many cases. Only after an elaborate 
 system of information concerning family histories for 
 many generations is at hand, can we prophesy surely 
 and control with perfect economy the breeding for a 
 characteristic which depends on the joint contributions 
 of five or six determiners. For it is just as hard to 
 " breed in " a determiner that raises intellect or moral- 
 ity only one per cent, as it is to " breed in " one which 
 raises it a hundred per cent. — provided, of course, the 
 latter determiner exists. And it is thousands of times 
 harder to discover the distribution of a determiner in 
 the human race's germs when it is one of ten that de- 
 termine the amount of a trait, than when it is one of 
 two. 
 
 The germinal determination of intellect, morality, 
 sanity, energy or skill is, so far as I can judge, much 
 more like the second complex state of affairs than the 
 first simple one. Important observations of the in- 
 heritance of feeble-miridedness and insanity have been 
 made by Davenport, Goddard and Rosanoff, which they 
 interpret as evidence that original imbecility is due to 
 the absence of a single determiner, and that an orig- 
 inally neurotic, unstable mental organisation is explain- 
 able almost as simply. It is with regret that I must as- 
 sure you that these observations are susceptible of a 
 very different interpretation. Much as I should like 
 to believe that these burdens on man's nature are each 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 339 
 
 carried in heredity in a single package, which selective 
 breeding can shuffle off in a generation or so, I can not. 
 A eugenics that assumes that intellect, morality, sanity, 
 and energy are so many single niches in the germs which 
 selective breeding can, by simple transfers, permanently 
 fill, is, I fear, doomed to disappointment and reaction. 
 I dare to believe that the time will come when a human 
 being idiotic by germinal defect will be extinct like the 
 dinosaur — a subject for curious fiction and for the 
 paleontology of human nature; but I have no hope that 
 such a change can be made with the ease with which 
 we can change short peas to tall, curly-haired guinea 
 pigs to sleek, or plain blossoms to mottled ones. 
 
 There is another fundamental question whose answer 
 is needed for the most economical selective breeding 
 of human nature, a question which time permits me only 
 to mention, not to describe clearly. Stated as a series 
 of questions, it is this: Do the germs which a man 
 produces — his potential halves of offspring — repre- 
 sent a collection peculiar to him, or only a collection 
 peculiar to some line, or strain, or stock, or variety, of 
 mankind of which he is one exemplar? 
 
 Suppose a hundred men and a hundred women to 
 exist, each with identical germinal constitutions, so that, 
 say. In every case one-tenth of the germs (or ova) 
 would be of quality 5 ; one-fifth, of quality d; two-fifths, 
 of quahty 7 ; one-fifth, of quality 8 ; and one-tenth, of 
 quality 9. Suppose that they mated and had five hun- 
 dred offspring. Suppose that the best fifty of this sec- 
 ond generation married exclusively among themselves; 
 and similarly for the worst fifty. Would the offspring 
 of these two groups differ, the children of the best fifty 
 
340 XII, THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 being superior to the children of the worst fifty? Or 
 would this third generation revert absolutely to the con- 
 dition of the grandparental stock whence they all came ; 
 and be alike, regardless of the great difference m their 
 parentage? 
 
 Does the selection of a superior man pay because his 
 superiority is, in and of itself, a symptom of probable 
 excellence in his germs; or only because his superiority 
 is a symptom that he is probably of a superior " line " 
 or strain? 
 
 That the second answer of each pair may be the true 
 one, is a natural, though not, I think, an inevitable, 
 inference from the work of Johanssen, Jennings and 
 others. They have found selective breeding within any 
 one pure line futile, save when some peculiar and rare 
 variations have taken place within it. Their work is 
 of very great importance and forms the best introduc- 
 tion to the general problem of the limits to human ra- 
 cial improvement. I regret that time is lacking to de- 
 scribe these studies of heredity within one " pure line." 
 It is from such that eugenics may hope to learn val- 
 uable lessons in economy of effort and exactness of 
 expectation. I have, however, already taken too much 
 of your time with the problems of the exact laws 
 whereby good men have good offspring and whereby 
 breeding for strength, wisdom and virtue may be most 
 effective. 
 
 In the few minutes that remain let me sum up what 
 might perhaps have been entitled the A B C of eu- 
 genics in the realm of mind. 
 
 I have tried to show that, in intellect and character, 
 men differ, by original nature, in some sort of corre- 
 
INTELLECT AND CHARACTER 341 
 
 spondence to the ancestry whence they spring, so that 
 by selection of ancestry the intellect and character of 
 the species may be improved ; to show also that injuri- 
 ous by-products of such selective breeding are very eas- 
 ily avoided, if indeed they occur at all; and, finally, to 
 state some of the problems whose answers will inform 
 us of just how the original intellect and character of 
 one man does correspond with that of his ancestors, 
 and so of just the best ways to discover the best strains 
 and to perpetuate them. 
 
 I hope to have made it clear that we have much to 
 learn about eugenics, and also that we already know 
 enough to justify us in providing for the original in- 
 tellect and character of man in the future with a higher, 
 purer source than the muddy streams of the past. If 
 it is our duty to improve the face of the world and 
 human customs and traditions, so that men unborn may 
 live in better conditions, it is doubly our duty to im- 
 prove the original natures of these men themselves. 
 For there is no surer means of improving the conditions 
 of life. 
 
 It is no part of my office to moralise on these facts. 
 But surely it would be a pitiable thing if man should 
 forever make inferior men as a by-product of passion, 
 and deny good men life in mistaken devotion to pallia- 
 tive and remedial philanthropy. Ethics and religion 
 must teach man to want the welfare of the future as well 
 as the relief of the cripple before his eyes; and science 
 must teach man to control his own future nature as well 
 as the animals, plants, and physical forces amongst 
 which he will have to live. It is a noble thing that 
 human reason, bred of a myriad unreasoned happen- 
 
342 XII. THORNDIKE: EUGENICS 
 
 ings, and driven forth into life by whips made aeons 
 ago with no thought of man's higher wants, can yet 
 turn back to understand man's birth, survey his jour- 
 ney, chart and steer his future course, and free him 
 from barriers without and defects within. Until the 
 last removable impediment in man's own nature dies 
 childless, human reason will not rest. 
 
INDEX 
 
INDEX 
 
 Names in caps are considered as subjects, those in italics as authors. 
 
 .Abnormalities, 6, 55, 15*, 287 
 Acquired Cbaract^s, 22, 114, 217, 
 220, 250, 299 
 See also Weismann, Char- 
 acters. 
 Alcoholism x, 52, 62, 113, 125, 
 
 iS3i IS9. 189, I9S, 222, 2S3 
 Amer. Genetic Assn., 2 
 
 BACH, 124 
 Barker, 137 
 Bateson, 3, 245, 277 
 Bell, 3 
 
 Breeding Methods, 32, 79, 84, 126, 
 240, 242, 276, SCO, 329, 338 
 See also Variation, Selec- 
 tion. 
 
 Castle, 3, 29 
 Cattell, 131 
 
 Character, 181 et seq., 319 et seq. 
 Characters, abnormal, 6, 162 
 blending of, 28 
 
 acquired (see Acquired 
 Characters) 
 
 mental (see mental charac- 
 ters) 
 
 positive, 5 
 Child, the, 177, 210, 278, 318, 327 
 Chromosomes, 19, 20, 193, 220 
 Consanguineous Marriages, 3, 63, 
 
 64, 100, 125, i6i, 257, 290 
 Cousin Marriages, 63-290 
 
 Cretins, 231 
 
 Crime, 53, 75, 94, 201, 306 
 
 See also Moral Imbeciles, 
 Moral Sense. 
 
 Darioiit, 115, 124, 240, 249, 250, 
 277, 296, 298, 299 
 
 DARWIN, 32s 
 
 Deaf Mutes, 232, 274 
 
 Determiners, 46, 149, 288, 336 
 
 De Fries, 25, 44, 277 
 
 Disease, prevention of, 75, 77, 81 
 inheritance of, 287 
 
 See also, abnormalities, 
 characters, abnormal. 
 
 Danielson, 158 
 
 Davenport, xii, 34, 36, 43, 47, 48, 
 49. 53, 56. 58. 86, 96, 116, 
 121, 124, 143, 151, iss, 158, 
 159, 164, 16s, 178, 179, 329, 
 
 235. 277. 278. 338 
 Dominance, 26, 45, 122, 286 
 Dugdale, 56 
 
 EDWARDS, 34, 124, 209 
 
 Education, xiii, 13, 39, 76, 92, 
 173, 201, 218, 235, 262, 269, 
 281, 284, 294, 310, 334 
 
 Efficiency, human, 70, 79, 112, 140 
 
 Ellis, 3 
 
 Environment, 22, 82, 92, 109, 115, 
 127, 141. »9i, 217. 224, 237, 
 
 252, 289, 294, 301, 321, 326 
 
 Epilepsy, 49, 50, 119, 155, 196, 231 
 
 345 
 
346 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Estabrook, 158 
 
 Eu demies, no 
 
 Eugenics, ix, i, 36, 41, 82, 8$, 108, 
 III, 177, 207, 213, 239, 247, 
 Z55, 276, 88i, 294, 319 
 Congress, ni, 180, 213, 278, 
 
 314 
 Education Soc, 2, 213, 278 
 Record Office, 3, 36, 58, 152, 
 
 278, 298, 302, 316 
 Research Assn., z 
 Euthenics, 33, 37, 109, 143 
 Evolution, 79, 80, 21 6. See also 
 
 Variation, Selection. 
 Eye Color, 45, 149 
 
 Family Records, 10, 60, 174, 191, 
 298 
 
 Feeble-Mindedness, 49, 96, 99, 
 119. 153, i94> I97> 22i, 230, 
 247. 274, 285, 305, 308, 325. 
 330. 336> 338. See also Men- 
 tal Defect. 
 
 Fertility, 11, 119. See also Vari- 
 ation, Selection, Feeble-Mind- 
 edness. 
 
 Folkways, 261, 263, 265 
 
 Gallon, ix, 41, 48, 79, 85, 93, 105, 
 108, 117, 119, 123, 124, 145, 
 178, 180, 207, 213, 215, 218, 
 233. 237, 249, 250, 252, 254, 
 25s. 256, 270, 271, 272, 276, 
 277, aSi, 283, 284, 286, 29s, 
 298, 302, 303, 311, 315, 322, 
 326 
 Laboratory, ix, 297, 302, 316 
 Law of Ancestral Inheritance, 
 43. 123, 148 
 Germ Plasm, 19, 24, 86, 92, 114, 
 193. 253. See also Weis- 
 mann. 
 
 Genius, 124, 207, 208, 209, 252, 
 
 302, 331 
 Goddard, X, 55, 36. 95. 97. 98. 
 
 100, 102, 108, 109, 153, 208, 
 
 224, 338 
 
 Hare-Lip, 162 
 
 HARRIMAN, Mrs., 3 
 
 Hering-Semon, 115 
 
 Heredity, 22, 109, 115, 193, 216, 
 
 220, 224, 234, 2J2, 282, 294, 
 
 301, 32s 
 
 See also Mendel's Law, 
 Galton's Law. 
 Hill Folk, 124, 298, 309 
 Hurst, 121 
 Huxley, 78, 80, 82, 84, 103, 255, 
 
 302 
 
 Imbeciles. See Feeble-Minded- 
 ness, Mental Defect, 
 moral, 200, 206 
 
 Immigration, 13, 99, 229 
 
 Insanity, 49, 96, 156, 196, 230, 
 274, 285, 338. See also 
 Mental Defect. 
 
 Jordan, D. S., xii, 275 
 
 Jordan, H. E., 3 
 
 Jukes, 34, 56, 94, 125, 204, 309 
 
 Kallikak, 35, 55, 98, 125, 208, 
 
 224 
 Kellicott, xii, 3, 209 
 
 Law of Ancestral Inheritance, 43, 
 
 123, 14s 
 Left Handedness, inheritance of, 
 
 120 
 Lombroso, 201, 202, 203 
 Love, 103, III, 178, 198, 199, 236, 
 
 291 
 
INDEX 
 
 347 
 
 Marriage certificates, 104, 105, 
 «7i 314 
 customs, 258, 290 
 individualism and, 21 S 
 laws, 73, 136, 162, 171, 226, 
 
 267, 304 
 regulations, 258, 312 
 riches and, 69, 70 
 and success, 8-9 
 Mathematical Ability, 320, 323 
 Mendel's Law, 26, 44, 36, 96, 108, 
 109, 120, 150, 223, 298, 336 
 Mental Characters, 49, 84, 85, 103, 
 112, 124, 127, 189, 209, 224, 
 24s. 319. et seq. 
 Mental Defect, 225, 244, 274, 284, 
 304. See also Feeble-Mind- 
 edness. 
 Micegenation, 64, 162, 228, 290 
 Miller, xii 
 Mjden, 160 
 Mora! Sense, 79, 112, 123, 194, 
 
 200, 224, 330 et seq. 
 Moral Imbeciles, 194, 200, 206 
 Morons, 66, 69, 98 
 Mott, 159 
 
 Musical Ability, 124 
 Mutations, 24, 151 
 
 Nams, 124, 204, 305 
 Nervous System, 69, 70, 71 
 
 Parenthood, age of parents and, 
 222 
 education for, 236 
 happy, 210 
 
 premiums for, 39, 133, 174, 234, 
 304 
 Pauperism, 52, 94 
 Pearson, xii, 3, 85, 103, 109, 132, 
 
 146, 277, 297, 299, 303 
 PLATO, 15, 73, "7. 3x5 
 
 Plato, 213 
 
 Prenatal influences, 279. See also 
 
 Acquired Characters. 
 Psychology, 216, 296, 329 
 Punnett, 3, 162 
 
 Race, 3, 270, 276 
 
 suicide, 272 
 Recessiveness, 26, 27, 45, 122, 126, 
 
 232, 286 
 Religion, 14, 64, 109, 117, 134, 
 
 227, 237, 2s6, 259, 260, 284, 
 
 290 
 Right handedness, inheritance of, 
 
 120 
 ROCKEFELLER, J. D., 3 
 Roose-velt, 1240., 272, 311 
 Rosanoff, 49, 156, 338. 
 Royal Commission, report, 194, 
 
 197, 200 
 
 Saleeby, 4 
 
 Segregation, 10, 74, 95, loi, 137, 
 
 227, 230, 285, 304 
 Selection, 261, 280, 290, 329, 331, 
 
 338 
 rational, 118, 210 
 Sex Hygiene, i, 269, 315 
 Sex Linkage, 6, 89 
 Social position, 246, 273. See also 
 
 Environment. 
 Sociology, 14, 296, 317 
 Southard, 158 
 Statistical Methods, 301 
 Stature, inheritance of, 48 
 Sterilization, 10, 74, 90, 95, loi, 
 
 137, »69> 239. 267, 28s, 304 
 
 et seq. 
 Superman, 71, 72 
 Survival of unfit, x, 141, 242, 280, 
 
 313. 333 
 
348 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Thomson, 193 
 Thorndike, 146 
 Tredgold, 195, 197, aoi 
 Tribe of Ishmael, 56, 94, 304. 
 Tuberculosis, 113, 195, 222, 274, 
 288. See also Disease. 
 
 Unit Characters, 26, 46, 48, 60, 87, 
 122, 12311., 148, 223, 286, 336 
 
 Variation, 24, 325, 340. See also 
 Selection. 
 
 Venereal Disease, fit, 104, 130, 
 
 315 
 Walter, 3 
 
 War, 39, 128, 242, 27s, 281 
 Weeks. 49, 53, 158, IS9 
 Weismann, 114, 253, 298. See 
 
 also Acquired Characters, 
 
 Germ Plasm. 
 Whetham, in 
 Wilcox, 163 
 
 WILSON, MRS., xii, 4 
 Woods. X4S, 146, 324, 326, 329, 
 
 33*