ISSN 1359-9321 The Galton Institute NEWSLETTER
Galtonia candicans Issue Number 73 March 2010
eugenics movement from its conception Contents in the late 1800s to the end of World War II. It explores the meanings of ‘positive Tracing the Trajectory eugenics’ in the early conception of Tracing the Trajectory of of ‘Positive Eugenics’ eugenics, how and when it originated, who supported this style, to what degree it ‘Positive Eugenics’ in in Britain overlapped with, and diverged from, Britain 1 ‘negative eugenics’; what traits its by proponents considered when planning for Anthony J. Dellureficio a practical program; what its goals were Dr Peter Diggory 9 and how its proponents planned to achieve those goals, and how the wider
What follows is Part 1 of a disserta- social, political, cultural, and religious tion submitted to The University of trends in Britain shaped the successes and Galton’s Composite of the Manchester for the degree of Master failures of the ‘positive eugenics’. This Two Sisters 10 of Science in the Faculty of Life article sheds light upon the largely hidden Sciences. effect that ‘positive eugenics’ has had on Part 2 will appear in the next News- the British eugenics movement. In doing Integrating Genetic and letter. The bibliography will appear in so, it reveals that ‘positive eugenics’ was Cultural Evolutionary the next issue and the General Secre- much broader and more diverse Approaches to Language 11 tary will be happy to send it to anyone than it has previously been given credit who may need it before then. for.
Abstract Chapter 1: Introduction Galton Institute Conference 2010 12 When Francis Galton coined the term Recent advances in genetics and ‘eugenics’ in 1883, he envisioned a biotechnology have brought eugenics voluntary secular religion in which back to the forefront of bioethical debates. humanity could control its own evolution Although germ-line gene therapy is not through selective breeding. As eugenic yet legal, the growing sales of DNA- Published by: theories developed, their proponents diagnostic kits suggest that biotech The Galton Institute 19 Northfields Prospect divided into two factions; those who companies will find a growing market- Northfields advocated selective breeding by stripping place of eagerly awaiting, well-to-do LONDON SW18 1PE out the undesirable traits (‘negative parents. In a recent paper by the Brazilian Telephone: 020-8874 7257 eugenics’) and those for whom the nurses/bioethicists Lilian Mai and Emília propagation of positive traits was more Angerami, the authors have suggested a General Secretary: promising (‘positive eugenics’). eugenic component in many of the most Mrs Betty Nixon notable genetic and medical advances, Newsletter Editor: This article investigates the develop- including in-vitro fertilization, human David Galton ment of ‘positive eugenics’ in Britain and cloning, genetic engineering, DNA Web site: the role this style of eugenics played vaccines, genetic therapy, genetic se- www.galtoninstitute.org.uk within the framework of the British quencing, and transgenic foods.1 Much of
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 1 MARCH 2010 the bioethical debate over these advances, War, eugenics conjures up associations sight, a lack in the literature, or perhaps however, relies on comparisons between with forced sterilization, immigration an indication of the general interests in modern biotechnology advances and restriction, marriage laws, and the the United States where little, if any, classical eugenics from the first half of atrocities of Nazi medicine. Historically, positive eugenic interest existed? This the twentieth century. This is now eugenics was more diverse and an work does not constitute an authoritative perceived almost exclusively as ‘negative important, but a neglected aspect of its and exhaustive gathering of all publica- eugenics’, associated with sterilization, ideas is ‘positive’ eugenics. Previous tions on the topic, and it is limited in its incarceration, and the ‘Final Solution’. studies on ‘positive eugenics’ usually scope, having been published in the midst Given the frequent references in the discuss it as a side-note to ‘negative of the popularity of the major interna- media to ‘designer babies’ and the desire eugenics’ or as historical background tional eugenic movements. This work for new technologies to prevent disease, a which was touted by the earliest eugenics does, however, provide some indication comprehensive study of the character and theoreticians, such as Francis Galton. of the perceived interests and progress of impact of ‘positive eugenics’ may be the eugenic movements in the United valuable in giving perspective to current States up to that time. The lack of debates and policy formulation. Literature Review ‘positive eugenics’ representation Survey of British ‘Positive Eugenics’ continued in the early studies on Ameri- When Francis Galton coined the term can eugenics which were largely the basis The existing literature on eugenics ‘eugenics’ in 1883, he envisioned a for British eugenics studies. generally has little to say about ‘positive voluntary secular religion in which eugenics.’ Since many of the key early humanity could control its own evolution There were few, if any, historical works have focused on the American through selective breeding. As eugenic publications on eugenics following the movement, positive eugenics has been theories developed, their proponents end of World War II during the late largely left in the margins. Furthermore, divided into two factions; those who 1940s and early 1950s. In 1963, Mark those policies which resulted in the advocated selective breeding by stripping Haller produced a study of American extreme, coercive tactics of Nazi medi- out the undesirable traits (‘negative eugenics in his Eugenics: Hereditarian cine and American eugenics sprang from eugenics’) and those for whom the Attitudes in American Thought. In his ‘negative eugenics’. Works focusing on propagation of positive traits was more work, Haller cites the fears of a falling the British movement tend to pay more promising (‘positive eugenics’). While birth rate in America and all over Europe heed to ‘positive eugenics’ since it was ‘negative eugenics’ is the type most as a main cause for popular interest in an integral part of the overall eugenics 3 familiar to historical studies, ‘positive eugenics. He adds to this that Americans movement in Britain, though they still eugenics’ which took root in Britain, generally agreed that the nation faced a lack a full exploration of the extent and 4 enjoyed widespread support from rising tide of crime and mental disease.” significance of ‘positive eugenics’. In influential individual eugenicists, the He then describes how this fear, com- the case of American eugenics, for Eugenic Education Society, and a wide bined with increased immigration and example, the zoologist Samuel J. Holmes constituency of social reformers. In 1907, fears of the negative influence of immi- published a bibliography of eugenics in when the Eugenic Education Society was grant genes, led American eugenicists to the 1924. His work was the result of formed, its members had hopes for the a largely negative eugenic course of studies undertaken while preparing the development of a practical eugenics action, although they acknowledged the publication of his The Trend of the Race. program. Whereas ‘negative eugenics’ same differential in birth rates observed The bibliography is divided into group- provided the foundation for controversial in Europe. Haller provides little mention ings by topic. Among the topics is yet quite specific programs, ‘positive of ‘positive eugenics’ except to write that ‘Negative Eugenics’ for which he has eugenics’ was more diffuse, working a number of eugenicists thought it gathered several hundred citations. There through numerous direct and indirect, possible to provide financial incentives is no section for Positive Eugenics nor is compulsory and voluntary methods to for some families to have children, but it included as a sub-category of any of the support both eugenic legislation and that these ideas were quickly dismissed others, yet he admits that he even 5 eugenic education of moral duty. It was as ineffective and slow. The main focus includes publications of dubious quality largely concerned with incentives to have of his work is the predominance of and relevance to the topic. “There is a children, such as family allowances, birth practical ‘negative eugenics’ programs in great deal of rubbish written on this as control, and income tax reductions for the Unites States. upon most other topics, and I have children. perhaps included too much of it in the Haller’s work was followed by other 2 Since the end of the Second World present bibliography.” Is this an over- studies on American eugenics, such as
MARCH 2010 2 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER that by Kenneth Ludmerer. In 1972, the United States, and it took a particular breeding. Essentially, however, they Ludmerer’s Genetics and American look at the financial, administrative, and were doing no more than pointing out Society investigated the social and organizational formation of the Eugenics that the human race was a part of the scientific interactions of eugenics in the Education Society and the Galton organic world and thus, from the United States. Like Haller, Ludmerer’s Laboratory as the two most important biological point of view, subject to the brief mention of ‘positive eugenics’ is organizations in the British eugenics same laws of selection and variation.” 11 mainly designed to describe an aspect of movement. Farrall’s dissertation, From his perspective ‘positive eugenics’ eugenics which had little hope of support however, contains no sections on was just another technique used by and no hope for successful implementa- ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ eugenics’ animal breeders to achieve a particular tion. He indicates that “the social and policies. This is likely because his phenotypic expression and was seen by technical difficulties facing positive dissertation focuses on the organiza- early eugenicists apart from the social eugenics were so great, most felt no tional interests of the Eugenics Educa- implications of the wider eugenics more could be done than to educate the tion Society and the Galton Laboratory movement. public on the ‘facts’ of heredity in the rather than the precise theories they were hope that ‘superior’ couples would promoting. While he mentions that the In 1981, also following Farrall’s voluntarily heed the message to have Eugenics Education Society encouraged example of interest in interactions more children. Some eugenicists were members deemed worthy to beget more between British Eugenics and other quite pessimistic and felt that the children, Farrall considers the major social movements, Donald MacKenzie implementation of ‘positive’ programs influence of the society as supporting authored his Statistics in Britain 1865- was a hopelessly discouraging task to measures to prevent the propagation of 1930 which investigates the history of which even ‘eugenic education’ could unfit traits.8 statistics and demographics as they make little contribution.”6 Perhaps true related to eugenics in Britain. While he in America, though not in Britain, An example of such a work is Eugen- does not provide a specific section on Ludmerer later states that “most eugeni- ics and Politics in Britain 1900-1914 by ‘positive eugenics’, MacKenzie does not cists from the start were interested in G.R. Searle. In his work, the author’s shy away from inclusion of ‘positive negative rather than positive eugenics”. 7 focus followed the rapid political eugenics’ when discussing the aims of In fact, the earliest eugenicists, such as development of British eugenics from a early eugnicists, such as Galton, Pear- Galton, came to eugenic ideas and small collection of enthusiasts and son, or R.A. Fisher, though he provides philosophy with an interest in ‘positive “cranks” to a monumental movement by little detail on specific techniques eugenics’ and upon reflection developed the start of the First World War.9 He sets embraced to this end. He writes that the approach based on both ‘positive’ out two themes for his monograph: from their perspective, “The only secure and ‘negative’ eugenics. What is clear “interaction between scientific investiga- long-term way to improve society… was from Ludmerer’s work is that eugenics is tion and political speculation” and to improve the characteristics of the a regional study, uniquely applicable to “problems being experienced by the individuals in it, and the best way to do different legal systems, social attitudes, various industrialized societies in which this was to ensure that those in the and national causes. What could be said it took root.”10 Searle’s work does present generation with good character- for the American eugenics movement contain a chapter on ‘positive eugenics’ istics (the ‘fit’) had more children that was not necessarily true for the British although it is mostly concerned with those with bad characteristics (the movement. how Galton and his followers picked the ‘unfit’).”12 MacKenzie’s descriptions of traits that they saw as ideal, what their eugenic theory are largely written from These early publications which views on ‘genius’ were, and what the perspective of statistics, correcting focused on American eugenics did not connection they saw between genius and an equation of imbalanced differential consider British eugenics much beyond genetics. It says very little about births between the ‘fit’ and the ‘unfit’, Galton’s initial discussion of it. In 1970, ‘positive eugenics’ policy and proposal and are based on Galton’s statistical however, Lyndsay Farrall completed an or how or why anyone pursued it. For assessment of societal divisions.13 influential PhD dissertation at the the most part, Searle is critical of MacKenzie differentiates eugenic University of Indiana in which he ‘positive eugenics’ for its stock-breeding techniques by ‘individual’ and ‘mass’ notably investigated the demographics of references. He claims that, “The eugeni- selection, with ‘individual’ selection the Eugenics Education Society in cists would have been less liable to relying on social definitions to label Britain and described the development of misconstruction if they themselves had individuals as ‘unfit’ and, therefore British eugenics. Farrall’s was one of the not so frequently drawn analogies favoring ‘negative eugenics’.14 Con- first studies of eugenics to look outside between human procreation and stock versely ‘mass’ selection would be based
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 3 MARCH 2010 on IQ or earnings to regulate fertility, ‘positive eugenics,’ which aimed to discusses ‘positive eugenics’ as part of thus favoring ‘positive eugenics’.15 foster more prolific breeding among the Galton’s failed initial vision of eugenics While MacKenzie provides few details socially meritorious, and ‘negative which called for “more intellectuals on the ‘positive’ eugenic methods, he eugenics,’ which intended to encourage rather than fewer paupers and imbe- does note family allowances and income the socially disadvantaged to breed less ciles.”25 Paul’s essays in The Politics of tax allowances for families with children – or, better yet, not at all.”20 Kevles Heredity cover a variety of social and as avenues that the Eugenics Education provides little further elaboration of this political topics and their relationships Society explored.16 Mostly, however, his overlap, or of the techniques proposed to with eugenics, such as Leftists, nature/ work is concerned with the development accomplish ‘positive eugenics’, in the nurture, and bioethics. ‘Positive eugen- of statistics for eugenic purposes. rest of his work. ics’ only enters the debates as it is related to these topics and mostly as Perhaps the most influential work on Following the publication of Kevles’ envisioned by the later ‘reform’ eugeni- 26 eugenics since Farrall’s dissertation has book, numerous other historians have cists, like Muller and Haldane.
been Daniel Kevles’ In the Name of addressed eugenics, though few have
Eugenics, a comparative study of provided further elaboration on the Most recently, Elof Carlson notes the eugenics movements in American and methods, plans, or influence of ‘positive lack of exploration into ‘positive Britain published in 1985. One of the eugenics’. In 1988, Benno Müller-Hill eugenics’ in his The Unfit: A History of main theories of Kevles’ work is that the published his Murderous Science which a Bad Idea in 2001. In it he provides a difference in United States’ and Britain’s specifically appraises Nazi eugenics survey of the history of eugenics approaches to eugenics came through leading up the Holocaust.21 His work including a brief synopsis of eugenics legislation. Unlike the United States naturally focuses entirely on ‘negative programs around the world. Carlson during the same period, Britain did not eugenics’. Richard Soloway wrote his provides a discussion of ‘positive pass such compulsory legislation.17 With Demography and Degeneration in 1995 eugenics’ in relation to Galton’s original regard to ‘positive eugenics’, Kevles as a follow-up to his 1982 publication, vision and notes that it did better in integrates discussion of it throughout the Birth Control and the Population Britain than in America, however he work, though he mostly limits interest in Question in England and as a response to concedes that “No historical work on 27 ‘positive eugenics’ to early late-19th and a gap in the literature proposed by positive eugenics has been written.” In early-20th century British eugenics. Kevles for a study of eugenics and his section on international eugenics Initially, Kevles writes that there was demography.22 Both of these works are programs he describes some interesting little separation between the ‘positive’ primarily about birth control and the instances of ‘positive eugenics’ pro- style and the ‘negative’ style, as eugeni- declining birth rate. Most of Soloway’s grams in the United States, Russia, and cists discussed both with the neutral section on ‘positive eugenics’ in Demog- Singapore. The next section contains terminology of ‘selective breeding’.18 He raphy and Degeneration is dedicated to further discussions of these cases. also notes that eugenics enthusiasts in ‘negative eugenics’ and to explaining both the United States and Britain why ‘positive eugenics’ was only useful Survey of ‘Positive Eugenics’ Outside encouraged a focus on women’s health in the minds of the most zealous ‘old- Britain as a way to improve offspring, including liners’.23 This sentiment is consistent avoidance of smoking because of its with his 1982 publication in which he Having seen what the existing litera- deleterious effect on a woman’s repro- claims that “a minority of Eugenics ture says about ‘positive eugenics’ in ductive organs.19 This was a neo- Education Society members… recog- Britain, it would be worthwhile briefly Lamarckian claim about environmental nized the need for both negative and to review the eugenics programs in other effects on genetics which had a dubious positive eugenic policies to achieve a regions of the world, some of which connection to ‘positive eugenics’. racially beneficial balance in the popula- engaged in ‘positive eugenics’ tech- According to Kevles, the terminology of tion.”24 niques. Ultimately, when investigating in ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ eugenics was the international context, the research formalized around the prospect of Diane Paul has also made major turns away from theoretical since the practical eugenic programs rather than contribution to eugenics literature in her eugenics communities of numerous theoretical eugenics, and didn’t become 1995 monograph Controlling Human countries contacted each other and the popularly utilized until after the turn of Heredity and her 1998 essay collection theorists tended to remain in interna- the century. He also writes that “the The Politics of Heredity. She provides a tional academic circles. Instead, discus- courses of action could be divided into survey of the history of eugenics in sion turns to the practical, legal, and two, at times, overlapping approaches: Controlling Human Heredity, and only social situations of their specific national
MARCH 2010 4 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER contexts. For example, where eugenic tion could be used “to counter the attempted to implement his program of communities formed around class dysgenic effects of the Great War.”32 voluntary artificial insemination in the difference in Britain and racial differ- Under her scheme, widows and single USSR, but a letter and Russian transla- ence in America, the Finnish eugenics women who were unable to find suitable tion of his work failed to convince Stalin program rose out of the Finnish- mates due to the war would be able to that the program was worthwhile. In speaking/Swedish-speaking divide of the receive eugenic artificial insemination. fact, his effort was likely intercepted by early 1900s.28 This language division Furthermore, women consenting to this Stalin’s director of biology, Trofim indicated a political and social rift in the program would be offered financial Lysenko, who objected to any western newly independent country, and led to assistance to cope with raising their genetics including eugenics. Muller was civil war by the 1920s. From this social child.33 Not only war, but fear of a forced to leave the USSR shortly divide, the Finnish eugenics program declining birth rate spurred eugenic thereafter. His ‘positive eugenics’ developed an entirely ‘negative eugenic’ feelings in Australia. In fact, the falling program was finally taken up again in campaign largely centered on degener- birth rate underscored the eugenics the 1960s by Robert Klark Graham, who acy theory resulting in eugenic steriliza- movements across Europe and the founded a sperm bank specializing in tion and education legislation.29 While United States as well. intellectual genius donors based on these actions “did not occur in isolation Muller’s theories in California in 1980. but were closely connected to the In the United States, “Several eugeni- The sperm bank, the Foundation for international eugenics movement and cists toyed with possible government Germinal Choice, closed in 1999 developments,” they were nonetheless schemes to reverse the trend of the birth following Graham’s death but conceived based on the very specific national rates by granting financial advantages to over 215 babies during its existence.37 context of Finland and therefore only couples with children and thus encour- nominally resemble the U.S. and age the prudent and farsighted to breed In Russia, the ‘positive eugenics’ German programs upon which the more freely. But most agreed that there proposals closely resembled those of Finnish movement was based.30 This was no effective way, in a democratic Brewer and Muller largely because the section will specifically examine the society, to make the fit reproduce at a main proponents of ‘positive eugenics’ differences in ‘positive eugenics’ faster rate except through the slow in Russia, such as Alexander Sere- approaches based on national contexts in process of education.”34 These early brovskii, shared Muller’s perspective on Australia, the United States, Russia, ‘positive eugenics’ sentiments were genetics and closely followed his work.38 Germany, France, Italy, Latin America, largely overshadowed by the fact that A battle between two systems of genet- and Singapore. This research does not practical ‘negative eugenics’ programs ics dominated all aspects of eugenics include the considerable eugenics were implemented in America. In 1935 discussions in Russia, with the programs in the Scandinavian states as the British eugenicist Herbert Brewer ‘Morganists’ supporting a Mendelian no evidence for a ‘positive eugenics’ corresponded with the American approach and the ‘Lysenkoists’ taking a component has been found. geneticist H.J. Muller (1890-1967) neo-Lamarckian view. Serebrovskii regarding his eugenic artificial insemina- along with Israel I. Agol, Solomon G. In Australia, the United States, and tion theories, which he called Levit and M.L. Levin led the Russia, ‘positive eugenics’ campaigns all ‘eutelegenesis’. In his 1935 publication, “Morganist” contingent, pitting them- centered on the possibility of artificial Out of the Night, Muller developed his selves against the ‘Lamarckists’ in a bid insemination, and are sometimes referred version of the theory, called ‘germinal for support from the Soviet Marxists.39 to as ‘eutelegenesis’ or ‘germinal choice’, in which donors of above- While this debate was in its infancy, choice’. Artificial insemination was first average intelligence would father Serebrovskii began presenting eugenics suggested as a eugenic tool in France children through artificial insemina- proposals in the 1920s, and discussions during the 1880s by the anthropologist tion.35 Muller had been a long-time at the Communist Academy were deeply and librarian, George Vacher de La- supporter of eugenics though a “critic of mired in political rhetoric and social pouge (1854-1934).31 His theories, negative eugenics” which he philosophy. The Academy had viewed however, were quickly dismissed, and “condemned… as bigoted, sexist, and all previous eugenics proposals as use of artificial insemination in eugenics spurious in his public speeches and bourgeois, reactionary, and trivial. 40 did not re-enter discussions until the writings as early as 1932, but this did not Serebroskii hoped that his program of 1910s or 1920s. During and after the alter the hostile reception from many of ‘positive eugenics’ through artificial First World War, the Australian eugeni- his colleagues and the public in general insemination would be palatable to cist Marion Louisa Piddington (1869- for advocating a voluntary positive Bolshevik ideals. “Serebrovskii dis- 1950) suggested that artificial insemina- eugenics program.”36 He initially dained negative eugenic measures such
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 5 MARCH 2010 as the sterilization of defectives… But project through which unwed German neo-Lamarckian beliefs included he had a programme for selective women would receive benefits for inheritance of acquired traits, human breeding that could be realized in a free themselves and their children, including evolution could be directed through socialist society, and indeed only in improved social status, if they would ‘puericulture’ which attempted to such.”41 His plan called for educating allow their children to be fathered by SS improve environmental and health women to conceive through artificial officers.47 aspects of infants. According to Schnei- insemination by eugenically selected der, ‘positive eugenics’ in France lost sperm. Eventually, with enough educa- While French eugenicists may have support among eugenicists because it tion, this would become common-place been the first to suggest artificial became too complicated to control with and accepted in society. Love and sex, insemination for eugenic purposes in the too many groups having different defined as pleasure, would be separated 1880s, it was never a serious part of their objectives for reform following World from conception, defined as biology.42 ‘positive eugenic’ effort. According to War I. The eugenicists had to rework Serebrovskii’s eugenic ideas, and indeed Elof Carlson, eugenics in France was a their strategy and that, combined with a ‘Morganism’, fell out of favor in the much more general term than in the change in membership, led the group to political circles of Russia, and eugenics United States or Britain. He claims that ‘negative eugenics’.51 was abandoned suddenly in 1930 when French eugenics embraced “classical “the Russian Eugenics Society was negative eugenics… with its sterilization For the Fascist Italian government, the disbanded and the Eugenics Section of programs, racist and anti-Semitic declining population of Italy was at the Kol’tsov’s Institute of Experimental organizations, birth control advocates, heart of Mussolini’s pro-natalist agenda. Biology was abolished.”43 anti-birth control natalists who favored a Rather than true ‘positive eugenics’ larger family for everyone to avoid race which endorses the propagation of ‘fit’ Eugenics in Germany became infamous suicide, puericulturists who believed in a genes, Mussolini endorsed a general through Nazi medicine, but in Wil- Lamarckian favorable environment prior positive population growth, as Italy helmine Germany, eugenics took on a to and during pregnancy to bring about would find it difficult to maintain an much more diverse form following Ernst superior babies, and Lamarckian empire with a relatively low population Haeckel’s popularization of ‘Social socialists who saw good environments as in Europe. Eugenicists in Britain would Darwinism’ and the rise of the hygiene the answer to bad heredity.”48 Mean- also take up this argument. As Anna movement. “Many medically trained while, the historically popular view has Davin explains it in “Imperialism and race hygienists argued that the surest held that France had a distaste for Motherhood,” “The birth rate then was a way to improve the general level of eugenics and that, while it was invented matter of national importance: popula- national health was to upgrade the bodily in Britain and enthusiastically supported tion was power.”52 World War I empha- constitution of all individuals in soci- in the US and Germany, France opposed sized the importance of having a popula- ety.”44 Alfred Ploetz, who circa 1910 it. William Schneider, however presents tion great enough, genetically and first offered a program for German evidence to the contrary. According to quantitatively, to stand up against other eugenics, listed among his goals Schneider, two of the major factors nations. Besides the political rhetoric in “opposition to the two-child system and instigating French eugenics were the Italy, the Fascist government created the fostering ‘fit’ families with huge number continued influence of Lamarck and the ‘Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricer- of children”.45 These were in addition to fear of depopulation, both of which led che’ (CNR) in 1923 which was charged a long list of ‘negative eugenics’ goals. social movements to unite through with the task of investigating ways to Ploetz coordinated both types of eugen- eugenic thought and initially “made it strengthen the population of Italy. They ics without significant separation. With difficult for French eugenicists to accomplished this through a combination the transition to the Weimar government, propose negative measures to eliminate of investigations in hygiene, infectious however, Germany “witnessed an undesirable elements in the popula- diseases, and ‘positive eugenics’.53 The increased emphasis upon reducing the tion.”49 For many years, the eugenicists CNR’s secretary, Dante De Blasi, made social cost of the unproductive” as and the natalists in France shared a clear that the goal of the CRN was not discussion turned from improving the common agenda which combined merely investigative but also to incorpo- race to “preventing the decline of the ‘positive eugenics’ and ‘puericulture’ to rate applied science.54 As in France, German Volk and state.”46 Even at the increase both quantity and quality of the Italian ‘positive eugenics’ closely related height of ‘negative eugenics’ under the population, though they eventually broke ‘race hygiene’ with ‘public hygiene’ and Nazi government, ‘positive eugenics’ ties as the eugenicists began to support sanitation through a belief in acquired maintained some support. Himmler, for ‘negative eugenic’ methods.50 In the traits. The most significant investigations example, implemented the ‘Lebensborn’ view of the French eugenicists, whose in ‘positive eugenics’ funded by the
MARCH 2010 6 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER CNR came through Nicolo Pende’s contrast, “se asoció a un estereotipo que investigate the single graduate problem, studies on the genetic effects of rays on lo eugenistas combatieron por atribuirle and also the introduction of courtship biotypes. Pende believed that a child’s el abandono de sus deberes maternales y classes in the undergraduate curriculum ‘biotype’, a term created by Pende religiosos [was associated with a to hone the would-be suitor’s skills, encompassing “tutti gli aspetti dell’u- stereotype which the eugenicists fought etc.”61 The same fears which drove mana individualitá [all the aspects of by attributing to it the abandonment of Singapore to adopt these drastic eugenic human individuality],” could be influ- motherly and religious duties].”58 In this measures in the 1980s were present in enced by ray bombardment, and as such sense, ‘positive eugenics’ in Latin Britain around the turn of the century. In would not only be of medical value but America was about the image of perfec- the early 1900s, anti-feminism eugeni- could also be “lo strumento fondamen- tion in individuals with the belief that cists in Britain found that “women tale dell’eugenetica positiva di cui egli conforming to an ideal would improve college graduates tended not to marry, era strenuo sostenitore [the fundamental both the genetic stock of the population and that those who did bore – on the instrument for positive eugenics of and the social condition of the popula- statistical average – fewer than two which he was a strenuous supporter].”55 tion. Apart from this nominally eugenic children, less than half the number Interestingly, while Pende maintained a concept, there were few reported necessary to keep up the social stock.”62 strong influence on medical research in ‘positive eugenics’ initiatives in Latin In Britain, these studies were largely Italy, his eugenic theories were more America. used to dissuade women from education embraced in Latin America. “Pende fue towards pursuit of their maternal roles. un importante soporte intellectual y One final, very intriguing case of científico del régimen político instaurado ‘positive eugenics’ developed in Singa- en 1922 en Italia y también supo difundir pore. In early 1980s, Prime Minister Lee This review of the existing literature la biotipología en países latinoamerica- Kuan Yew, fearing for the quality of the on ‘positive eugenics’ both within nos [Pende was an important intellectual future population of Singapore, proposed Britain and outside of Britain shows that and scientific supporter of the political a series of eugenic incentives to change ‘positive eugenics’ has largely been system established in 1922 in Italy and social behavior which he saw as damag- overlooked and that it is more intricately also spread his biotypology to Latin ing to the national genetic stock. He related to local social, political, and countries]”.56 suggested that “women in Singapore cultural developments than previously who attended college became unmar- thought. In Britain the literature supports The Latin American countries were riageable because of a prevailing male the proposal that eugenicists looked relative late-comers to eugenics, import- prejudice against educated women, who more favorably upon ‘positive eugenics’ ing its theories from Europe and the were seen as troublesome, lacking than in other countries and that it United States during the 1920s and obedience, and challenging the value probably played a significant role in the 1930s. Through the influence of Pende, men favored of their making all the development of eugenics, especially in eugenics maintained close ties with financial and other decisions about their the early days, but it does not provide medicine, though it also incorporated family’s welfare.”59 He feared that much detail as to the theories, methods, research from other fields of study. For “these trends, if left unchecked, could and techniques employed, nor does it example, eugenics was also closely only lead to a dilution of human talent in reveal how expansive or influential this related to anthropological studies of race Singapore, a prelude to the certain style of eugenics was. The literature on as well as psychology and criminology.57 demise of the island’s hitherto vibrant eugenics in other countries shows how What little ‘positive eugenics’ existed in economy.”60 In an effort to reverse this broadly applicable the theories of Latin America centered on conforming trend Lee proposed a number of solu- eugenics are and just how specific they the individual to a societal ideal and tions of both a ‘positive’ and a ‘negative’ are to regional political, social, and improved public hygiene and sanitation. eugenic nature. His ‘positive eugenics’ cultural developments and backgrounds. The concept of Nietzsche’s ‘supermen’ solutions included “a computer dating Eugenicists often engaged in the same found favor in Latin America where it service; fiscal and other incentives for arguments in one country as another was re-envisioned in the form of the graduate women to bear more children; although each case produced different ‘hombre nuevo’ or new man, an love-boat cruises (all expenses paid) for goals, methods, and outcomes. More- “expression de virilidad y fuerza con la eligible graduate singles in the civil over, different national eugenics pro- que se identificó plenamente el fascismo service; special admissions criteria to the grams and unique styles of ‘positive [expression of virility and strength with National University of Singapore (NUS) eugenics’ resulted from diverse interpre- which fascism fully identified],” and the to even out the male-female student tations of eugenics. William Schneider, ‘nueva mujer’ or new woman which, by ratio; calls to NUS academicians to writing about the diversity found in
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 7 MARCH 2010 French eugenics claimed that his study paradigm which placed genetics and ‘positive eugenics’ and why it ultimately “demonstrates the advantage of consid- biology at the center of human evolution lost support from the majority in the ering eugenics more broadly: that is, as a and within the grasp of human control. mainstream eugenics movement by the widespread phenomenon found at the From its beginnings, eugenics drew 1930s and 1940s. turn of the nineteenth century in most interest from members of numerous Western industrial societies. Accord- causes who found it malleable enough to The dates encompassing the research ingly, its roots lay in the social class support their own social concerns. When for this article range from the 1880s to differentiation and conflict, economic eugenics coalesced around the two main the mid-1940s. These dates correspond cycles, and increased growth of govern- British eugenics organizations, the to the boundaries within which eugenics ment, as well as the scientific view of the Galton Laboratory and the Eugenics had its most significant influence in universe, that were some of the most Education Society, neither one provided Britain. Francis Galton coined the term obvious features of the new modern much action towards fulfilling eugenic ‘eugenics’ including a description of 63 society.” If true, then a study specific goals. The Galton Laboratory by choice ‘positive eugenics’ in the 1880s but to the development of ‘positive eugen- refrained from political and social following the Trials of Nuremburg at the ics’ in Britain is especially justifiable action, pursuing instead pure research. end of World War II, eugenics largely since the theories of eugenics originate The Eugenics Education Society pro- lost any serious consideration in Britain. from Britain and since ‘positive eugen- vided a voice to anyone interested in Between these dates, Britain provided a ics’, while known to be an integral part eugenics, but supported only those base for the first investigations into of British eugenics, has not been causes upon which the majority would eugenics and its related fields, biometry thoroughly investigated. agree. Both ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ and anthropometry. Furthermore, while eugenics goals suffered because of this eugenics in America and Germany hesitancy, though members suggested surpassed Britain in the embrace of Main Argument numerous proposals for action. As this ‘negative eugenics’ and practical This article will investigate the article will show, the earliest approaches programs, Britain remained the leading development of ‘positive eugenics’ in by the Eugenics Education Society in country in ‘positive eugenics’ research Britain and the role this style of eugenics Britain, treated ‘positive eugenics’ on and investigation. As such, the main played within the framework of the equal standing with ‘negative eugenics’. sources of information for this article British eugenics movement from its The ‘positive eugenics’ proposals were a come from the two major British conception in the late 1800s to the end of fundamental part of the eugenics eugenics organizations and individual World War II. It will explore the program in Britain, and achieved at least British eugenicists. The archival papers meanings of ‘positive eugenics’ in the nominal successes for the movement. of the Galton Laboratory and the early conception of eugenics, how and Eugenics Education Society, including when it originated, who supported this their reports and correspondence style, to what degree it overlapped with This article will explore the different provided significant material on the and diverged from ‘negative eugenics’, styles which ‘positive eugenics’ em- development of ‘positive eugenics’. The what traits its proponents considered braced such as direct and indirect action, Eugenics Review, the publication of the when planning for a practical program, compulsion and voluntarism, and Eugenics Education Society provided what its goals were and how its propo- legislation and personal responsibility. further evidence of the intellectual nents planned to achieve those goals, and Reliance upon individualism and moral development and proposals of the how the wider social, political, cultural, duty in British eugenics was key to the eugenics movement. Finally, the corre- and religious trends in Britain shaped the support of ‘positive eugenics’ and may spondence of important leaders of the successes and failures of the ‘positive help explain why it was more successful eugenics movement provided contempo- eugenics’. in Britain than elsewhere. Another key rary accounts of the range of eugenics concept for ‘positive eugenics’ is its beliefs within the organizations. Many Essential to understanding eugenics in appeal to other social movements and individuals held very strong personal Britain is an examination of the underly- the delicate interactions between the beliefs on what would be the most ing social influences that brought Eugenics Education Society and these effective policies for Britain to adopt. together eugenic-minded people from other movements. While there was much They range from the ultra-coercive to the many different viewpoints. These overlap in membership between these ultra-utopian. Correspondence contains eugenic-minded individuals at times organizations, their direct interactions the individual views of some of the most embraced seemingly opposing styles but were tentative at best. Finally, this article influential eugenicists, though this article were brought together by their common will investigate the objections to will largely focus on the role of ‘positive
MARCH 2010 8 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER eugenics’ and the proposals for ‘positive 24Soloway R.A. (1982), 122. 55Ibid., 162. All translations of foreign eugenics’ which were seriously consid- 25Paul D.B. (1995), 31. texts into English are my own, unless ered by the two major societies in 26Paul D.B. (1998), 25 and 101. otherwise specified. 27 Britain. Carlson E.A. (2001), 14n1. 56Vallejo, G. (2007), 30. 28 Mattila M. (1999), 401. 57 29 Ferla L. (2007), 86. Ibid., 406. 58 References: 30 Vallejo, G. (2007), 33. Ibid., 403. 1 59Carlson E. (2001), 363. Mai L.D. and Angerami E.L.S. (2006), 31Richards M. (2008), 212. 60Chan C.K. (1987), 165. 252. 32Ibid., 212. 2 61Ibid., 166. Holmes S.J. (1924), 2. 33Ibid., 212. 3 62Kevles D.J. (1985), 89. Haller M.H. (1963), 79. 34Haller M.H. (1963), 81. 4 63Schneider W.H. (1990)a, 69. Ibid., 80. 35Richards M. (2008), 214. 5 36 Ibid., 81. Carlson E. (2001), 2. 6 37 Anthony J. Dellureficio is an American Ludmerer K.M. (1972), 8. Richards M. (2008), 219. Also from 7 who has previously worked at the Cold Ibid., 46. Carlson E. (2001), 365. 8 Spring Harbor Laboratory in the US. Farral L. (1970), 203-204. 38Carlson E. (2001), 275. 9 39 His personal interests have long been in Searle G.R. (1976), 1-2. Joravsky D. (1961), 300. 10 the scientific and social work of H.J. Ibid., 2. 40Adams M.B. (1990), 182. 11 Muller, one of the few American Ibid., 75. 41Joravsky D. (1961), 305-306. 12 ‘positive eugenicists’. Anthony believes MacKenzie D.A. (1981), 11. 42Ibid., 306. 13 that Muller developed his theories Ibid., 16-18. 43Adams M.B. (1990), 182. 14 through meetings with his friend Julian Ibid., 19. 44Weiss S.F. (1990), 13. 15 Huxley who was, of course, a Vice- Ibid., 20. 45Ibid., 23. 16 President of The Eugenics Society. Ibid., 21. 46Ibid., 29. 17 Anthony has just taken up the post of Kevles D.J. (1985), 99. 47Carlson E. (2001), 327. 18 Systems Librarian for The New School Ibid., 59. 48Ibid., 274. 19 in lower Manhattan. The School was Ibid., 64. 49Schneider W.H. (1990)b, 8. 20 founded as a specialty school in social Ibid., 85. 50Ibid., 8-9. 21 sciences by British Fabians in the early Müller-Hill, B. (1988). 51Ibid., 284. 22 1900’s and became well known for Soloway R.A. (1995), xxiii. In re- 52Davin A. (1978), 10. sponse to further research proposed by bringing over European scholars during 53Canali S. (2001), 143. Kevles. Kevles D.J. (1985), 392. World War II to what was called the 54Ibid., 150. 23Ibid., 63-73. ‘University in Exile’.
consultant in the 1950s and 1960s he promoting, both in lectures and in a vari- Dr. Peter L.C.Diggory was confronted by many cases of ety of publications, the need for more women needing remedial treatment as a and better organised family planning (1924-2009) result of back street abortions. These services particularly, but not only, within experiences, including numerous cases the NHS and abroad.. where the unfortunate victims died, Within the Galton Institute he brought Peter Diggory, who died recently, was influenced him greatly and he felt that it a wealth of informed knowledge and a highly regarded gynaecologist who was time that abortion, with safeguards, wise counsel to meetings of the Council made notable contributions to the ad- should be legalised. It was, therefore, not of which he was (always with his elegant vancement of women’s reproductive surprising that he assumed a leading bow tie), for many years, an active mem- health. His initial university education position in the Abortion Law Reform ber. The Institute benefited greatly, not was in mathematics but, after wartime Association and this led on to his impor- only from his contributions based on work on radar, he qualified in medicine tant role in providing medical advice in professional experience but also from his at UCL. Thereafter he worked in a num- the campaign, ultimately successful in ability, with acute timing and good hu- ber of London hospitals including 1967 through the Private Member’s Bill mour, to help on occasion to defuse dif- Queen Charlotte’s, Westminster, King- put forward by the then M.P. David ficult situations during meetings. ston and the Royal Marsden as well as Steel, to provide a legal framework for establishing a busy private practice. abortion. In the course of his work as a hospital Peter Diggory was also very active in John Beardmore
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 9 MARCH 2010 the girls for years. He said, ‘Well, it is 2 The Light one of the family for certain, but I don’t know which.’” (p. 9) However the general dismal GALTON’S COMPOSITE impression of bungled work stayed with OF THE TWO SISTERS Although in his Inquiries Galton me- that is, until recently when Brendan reproduced both a front view and profile and I met once again to discuss using by composite of the two sisters, he did not some of our composites for a website we reproduce the particular component 3 David Berman are working on. At this meeting Bren- photos from which they were compo- dan showed me what he called the ‘worst and sited. Hence his readers are not able to composite’, i.e. Galton’s composite of 1 Brendan Dempsey see for themselves how the composites the sisters and how it diverged from compare with its components. However, ours. That was on a Friday. Over the in his richly illustrated biography of weekend, with the dismal feeling in the Galton, Karl Pearson filled this gap with background, there suddenly emerged in 1 The Dismal Discoveries his Plate xxxii, which is partly repro- my mind a totally new possibility: that it duced in this article as Figure 2.2 was not Galton but Pearson who was As someone whose philosophical Here, then, was one sad discovery: (probably inadvertently) responsible for research has been much inspired and that Galton had been grossly mistaken in the confusion. My new thought was that partly based on Galton’s work, I was stating that there were two sisters, since Galton’s apparent two blunders might saddened to make two discoveries which it seems plain from Pearson’s illustration actually cancel each other out; in short, seemed to show how his work could be and caption that there were three, which that only two of the women in Pearson’s both slipshod and even dishonest. The also brings into question the delightful illustration were sisters. discoveries concerned one of the letter from the father, which seems so On Monday, I came to Brendan ‘Specimens of Composite Portraiture’, tellingly to show Galton’s success with that of the Two Sisters (Figure 1), seen with this hypothesis, which he tested by the composites as well as justifying his compositing the two sitters on the right, at the top of the plate facing page 8 in theory of composites . his Inquiries Concerning Human Faculty the result was as I hoped and the hy- (London, 2nd ed. 1907). Galton clearly The second discovery was made in pothesis predicted: that it (Figure 4) was took some pride in this particular collaboration with Brendan Dempsey, the same as Galton’s composite, thus composite. To appreciate why, I should the Trinity College photographer, as part vindicating Galton from both ineptitude say something about his theory. A of a project on Galtonian composites. and dishonesty. composite, according to Galton, is the Using the new computer technology, we But who is the third sitter, i.e. the blending or super-imposing of a number were trying produce some new compos- lady on the left? And why is she in the of photographic representations into one ites as well as duplicating some of plate at all? Probably we shall never representation that is like all of its Galton’s own composites. But when we, know for certain, but our suggestion is components but not like any particular i.e. Brendan, composited the three that she could well be the mother. She one to the exclusion of the others. sisters Plate xxxii, we got a surprising looks physically more developed and Another way Galton characterizes a result, namely, that our frontal composite also seems dressed more appropriately composite is as the visual counterpart of (Figure 3) was different from Galton’s. for an older woman. a mathematical average. Still another This is particularly clear in the neckline, way is as a generic image. Bearing this our composite showing elements from
in mind, we can now appreciate why the portrait on the left which do not Notes Galton believed that he had succeeded so appear at all in Galton’s, whose compos- admirably in the case of the two sisters. ite is also much less messy and hence 1. Professor David Berman is responsi- For, as he tells us, ‘That neither of these more aesthetically pleasing than ours. ble for the text; Brendan Dempsey for [sisters] predominated in the present case Both Brendan and I therefore suspected the composite illustrations. Both work at will be learned from the following letter that Galton had doctored his evidence. Trinity College Dublin. by the father of the two ladies, who is As a careful photographer, con- 2. See Life and Letters of Francis himself a photographer:- cerned with details, this bothered Galton (Cambridge, 1924), vol. 2, after p. 288. As far as I can tell, Pearson “I am [writes the father to Galton] Brendan probably even more than it did makes only one very passing reference exceedingly obliged for the very curious me. I was more disturbed by Galton’s to Plate xxxii; see vol. 2, p. 288. and interesting composite portraits of my bungle over the number of sisters, so that 3. See Experimental Network in two children. Knowing the faces so the other bungle was for me pushed Psychological Philosophy: http:// well, it caused me quite a surprise when somewhat into the background. But my www.tcd.ie/iss/avms/photocentre/ I opened your letter. I put one of the full overall impression was that the whole ENIPP_Project/index.php faces on the table for the mother to pick affair showed Galton’s work in a very
up casually. She said, ‘When did you dismal light. At one stage I even do this portrait of A? how like she is to considered the possibility that the B? Or is she B? I never thought they anonymous letter from the father, which A version of this article originally were so like before.’ It has puzzled so nicely confirmed the theory of appeared last year in Berman's A Manual several people to say whether the profile composites, might actually have been of Experimental Philosophy (Pepyat was intended for A or B. Then I tried written by Galton himself; although on Books, 35 Curzon Street, Dublin 8), one of them on a friend who has not seen balance I thought that was unlikely. pp.56-58.
MARCH 2010 10 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER
Producing a Composite: Using Adobe Photoshop CS4 as my editing software, firstly I create a blank white base canvas. Next- to take the present case- I import the two sister images (fig. 2) into Photoshop, and move them onto the blank canvas, as layered items. A certain amount of 'opacity' must be reduced, so that it allows each image hidden behind the other image to be seen. Now I adjust each image to sit in as near perfect 'register' as possible with one another. Once I am happy with the opacities and register, the image layers can be 'flattened', which blends the layers together onto the canvas. Here one looks for a general or overall effect in which neither of the two component images dominate. If required the brightness and contrast of the composite can be adjusted at this stage to roughly match the tonal range of the component images. The resulting image is the 'composite'. Brendan Dempsey
GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER 11 MARCH 2010 faculty, i.e. how the capacity for lan- just as biologists use sophisticated guage evolved in the first place. The quantitative methods to reconstruct the Integrating Genetic and opening speaker, Professor Tecumseh evolutionary history of different species, Cultural Evolutionary Fitch (University of Vienna), argued that Pagel described how the same phyloge- Approaches to Language while the study of language origins is netic methods can be used to reconstruct often seen as little more than an exercise the evolutionary history of different
in imagination, two important sources of languages. Dr. Fiona Jordan (Max Symposium held 26 February 2010, evidence regarding language evolution Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics) Queen Mary, University of London and are comparative studies of language-like provided an example of this, explaining supported by a grant from The Galton abilities in non-human species and how the current worldwide distribution Institute studies of the genetic basis of language of different kinship terminology (e.g. in humans. The following talks exempli- calling all of your cousins “brothers” and fied these points. Dr Simon Fisher “sisters”) can be explained in historical Language is often thought to be a (University of Oxford) described how a terms. Dr. Dan Dediu (Max Planck uniquely human trait, and one that certain gene, FOXP2, appears to underlie Institute for Psycholinguistics) described fundamentally shapes the way we think in part human language, given that how there may be a genetic influence on and interact with others. Yet many mutations in this gene result in disrup- linguistic change: not a “gene for important questions concerning language tions to speech and language. Dr. Chris Chinese”, but a weak genetic bias that remain unanswered. For example, when Petkov (Newcastle University) took us may make certain languages (e.g. tonal and why did language evolve in our from genes to brains, and showed how languages) easier to learn than other hominin ancestors? Is it truly a uniquely neuroimaging studies of humans, languages (e.g. non-tonal languages). Dr. human trait, or does it have any ana- chimpanzees and macaques are revealing Nick Chater (University College Lon- logues in other species? Why are there unexpected and revealing similarities in don) presented the results of mathemati- so many different languages spoken in how vocalisations are understood and cal models of language change which the world, when this gives rise to so produced in the brains of these species. suggest that languages have culturally many communication problems? What Dr. Gabriel Beckers (Max Planck evolved to fit the brains of language makes languages change so rapidly over Institute for Ornithology) then outlined learners, rather than the reverse, that time, such that modern-day English- the lessons that can be learned from brains have evolved genetically to be speakers find Shakespearean English so birdsong, which shows striking develop- good at learning languages. Finally, Dr. difficult to understand? mental parallels with human language. Kenny Smith (Northumbria University) The aim of this one-day sympo- Finally, Dr. Katie Slocombe (University described a series of experiments that sium was to bring together a diverse of York) discussed vocal communication have evolved languages in the psychol- range of recent research that has studied in non-human primates, allowing us to ogy lab, the results of which reinforce language from an evolutionary perspec- identify those aspects of human language the idea that languages evolve to fit the tive, and is beginning to answer some of that likely evolved before the hominin particular cognitive operations of the questions outlined above. Ten lineage split from other primate lineages language learners. speakers from various disciplinary and those that are unique to human The day finished with a round-table backgrounds gave talks to an audience of evolution. discussion with all of the speakers over 100 attendees. As well as the The afternoon session turned from exploring the potential links between the Galton Institute, the symposium was the origin of the language faculty to the two areas, and an appreciation of supported by the Centre for Ecology and way in which specific languages change evolutionary approaches to the phe- Evolution, the Genetics Society, and the over historical time. As Professor Mark nomenon of language. The symposium School of Biological and Chemical Pagel (University of Reading) explained, will result in a special issue of the Sciences and the Department of Linguis- there are striking parallels between the journal Human Biology to appear in tics at Queen Mary, University of way in which languages change and the 2011 featuring contributions from many London. way in which biological species evolve, of the speakers. such that linguistic change can be said to The morning session focused on Alex Mesoudi and Alan McElligott evolve in its own right. Consequently, the genetic evolution of the language 18 March 2010
GALTON INSTITUTE CONFERENCE 2010 To be held at The Royal Society on Wednesday, 10 November, 2010 EPIGENETICS: Where Life Meets the Genome
Professor Adrian Bird, CBE, FRS, FRSE - Epigenetics and Chromatin Professor Azim Surani, CBE, FRS, FMedSci - Germ cells: The eternal link between all generations Professor Bernhard Horsthemke - Role of Genomic Imprinting in human disease Professor Peter A Jones -The Cancer Epigenome and Epigenetic Therapy Dr Vardhman Rakyan - Epigenetics in multifactorial disease Professor Marcus Pembrey - Summary and concluding thoughts
Admission is free but strictly by ticket, available from The General Secretary - [email protected]
MARCH 2010 12 GALTON INSTITUTE NEWSLETTER