evolution through the operation of natural forces must be superseded by conscious evolution through the intelligent direction of social forces. Until this has occurred society will be in danger of progressive deterioration of its stock. Briefly stated the aim of genetics is reproduction from the best; but for modern societies complicated by class distinctions and varied standards of living, such a simple statement requires elaboration. In our discussion of the problems of population it appeared that the rates of reproduction for different classes and individuals were governed by quite diverse motives; and that the task of insuring reproduction from the best presented not a single problem but a set of interrelated problems. One of these problems is concerned with the relative rates of reproduction of individuals within each social class, and another is concerned with the relative rates of multiplication of the different classes. But, further, within this general problem of relative multiplication, reproduction of abnormals présents a very different problem from the multiplication of normals. As an ideal of genetic selection, it would appear desirable that the degenerate and those who are seriously defective germinally, should not reproduce at all, that each class should be represented by the best within that class, and that the superior classes should reproduce at least as rapidly as the inferior. However, in practice this general ideal may require some modification, for racial interests are not the only ones to be considered. Society is a complicated mechanism and due regard for the claims of its present welfare as well as for its future development must be shown in formulating a workable program The means of attaining the genetic ideal belong to the art, or the applied science, of Eugenics, which has for its object the improvement of the innate qualities of the race. The method of eugenics is both positive and negative. It seeks to stimulate the natural increase of the superior elements in society on the one hand, and it attempts to check the reproduction of the inferior elements on the other hand. The Fertility of the Unfit. A brief review of the actual rate of increase in different classes in the population will make clear the dangers involved in a laissez-faire method, and the need of an active program of reform. And, first, the multiplication of degenerates and defectives presents a serious problem. These classes ought to be gradually disappearing from the population, yet actually they are increasing more rapidly than the population as a whole. Mr. H. H. Laughlin, of the Eugenics Record Office, gives the following estimate of the numbers of the various defective classes in the United States for three decades. TABLE XXIII 1890 1910 12.2 16.8 8.4 22.5 118.2 204.2 131.5 121.4 23.7 27.2 116.6 91.5 179.8 431.I 590.4 914.7 Although these figures show a rather startling increase of subnormals they may over-emphasize the actual increase, because in each succeeding decade a larger proportion of the total number were being cared for in institutions. The aggregate for all defectives for different periods is not known, but a more accurate count has been kept of the insane than of others. The Census for 1880 reported 40,902 insane in hospitals, and 51,017 outside; and in 1903, 150,151 were cared for in hospitals, and 30,000 were estimated to be outside hospitals. Thus, while the number of insane in institutions has increased more rapidly than the total number, the total doubled during these years. So long as these classes are kept in institutions, they are not a racial menace; but, as the average period of custody was found to be actually less than five years, institutional life is not a complete racial safeguard. The estimated number of defectives in the population is about 3%, but the total number which it would be desirable to eliminate Laughlin calculates to be not far from 10% of the population. 1 National Conference for Race Betterment, 1914. The probable increase in the subnormal class suggested in the above table, finds confirmation in other estimates. Kellicott says that the number of insane in the United States increased from 183 per 100,000, in 1888, to 225, in 1903. In Great Britain the “officially certified " insane increased from i in 319 in 1896, to i in 285 in 1905. And in Ireland the insane numbered 1 in every 657 in 1851, and 1 in 178 in 1896. England's defective classes increased between 1874 and 1896 from 5.4 to 11.6 per 1,000 of the population. Undesirables are produced in two ways; first, through individual causes, such as sickness, accident, or other deleterious environmental forces acting on the individual; and, secondly, through inheritance. The latter for practical purposes might be subdivided. In some cases, the defects are inherited from parents who are themselves normal but who carry defects as recessive traits. Such cases are of course particularly hard to control. But in the majority of instances defects are inherited from parents who themselves show the defect. This kind of multiplication of subnormals is the most inexcusable of all, yet the chief increase occurs in this irresponsible way. Goddard estimates that about two-thirds of the cases of feeble-mindedness are inherited. TABLE XXIV FECUNDITY AND INFANT MORTALITY DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN NORMAL AND SUBNORMAL FAMILIES Normal Subnormal Number of Matings 701 1,054 Total Numbers of Children 3,227 4,640 Average Numbers of Children per Family. 4.6 4.4 Infant Mortality, Male 131 463 Female 109 237 Unknown 27 106 Total 806 Percentage, Infant Mortality 17.4 267 8.3 The point of greatest significance for genetic selection is the rate of reproduction of the unfit, and all estimates show that it is alarmingly high. Laughlin gives an interesting comparison of the fecundity of normal and subnormal families in the United States. The normal families are represented by professional and business men; and the subnormal comprise families who have one or more members in one or more institutions for the insane, epileptic, feeble-minded, or criminalistic classes. The above figures give a slightly smaller rate of increase for the subnormal than for the normal; but a similar table, compiled by the Galton Laboratory of National Eugenics, gives a higher average rate for subnormals.2 TABLE XXV Nature of Marriage Av. Size of Family 66 6.2 6.1 5.7 5.9 6.0 6.1 7.0 Deaf Mutes (England) Schuster Probably Completed (America) Heron Incomplete Completed 25 Edinburgh Normal Artisan, Eugenics Laboratory Incomplete London Normal Artisan, Eugenics Laboratory 66 5.9 Average of pathological stocks 6.2 It appears that there is considerable variation in results both according to the source of authority and according to districts 1 National Conference for Race Betterment, 1914. 2 K. Pearson, Scope and Importance to the State of the Science of National Eugenics. 1 2 3 studied. Gini says ? that in New South Wales the insane and the tubercular increase at a lower rate than the normal. March found ? that in France prisoners and vagabonds increased at a medium rate. They had fewer children than unskilled laborers, but more than some of the wealthier classes. The feeble-minded seem to be more prolific than other subnormals. Havelock Ellis found 3 from a study of 100 feeble-minded and 100 normal families that feeble-minded families are one-third larger than normal families. It would appear from these figures that the numbers of the pathological classes were at least being maintained by reproduction alone; and, if the numbers produced by environmental causes and by individual variations are added, the relative increase in the population of undesirables is easily accounted for. The Relative Fertility of Different Classes. The relative rates of reproduction of different classes in the population have already been presented in connection with the discussion of the birth rates. The figures showed that in general the birth rate declines quite uniformly with improvement in social status, but the more detailed studies of occupational groups disclose sig. nificant departures from the principle that fecundity varies inversely with wealth. For example, in France, March found that salaried employees had smaller families than manufacturers whose incomes were larger. And Stevenson showed that textile workers in England have a much smaller rate of increase than other unskilled laborers. Some other minor variations in the birth rate according to occupation may be seen from another table compiled by Stevenson and given below.* 1 Contributions of Demography to Eugenics, International Eugenics Congress, Vol. II. 2 Fertility of Marriage according to Profession and Social Position. International Eugenics Congress, Vol. I. 3 The Problems of Race Regeneration, p. 32. 4 Report of the National Birth Rate Commission. |