306 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1955 



cists for his feat, it was scarcely an achievement to impress the makers 

 of agricultural 5-year plans. Karpechenko was later liquidated. The 

 method is nonetheless one of great promise, for in some instances the 

 valuable characteristics of two species may thus be combined in a 

 single new one; and today, by means of the drug colchicine, it has 

 become easy to double the chromosomes of a hybrid, just the step where 

 Karpechenko met his greatest difficulty. 



There is, at any rate, no difficulty in controlling the amount of ge- 

 netic intermixture by performing, on the one hand, the desired crosses, 

 and on the other by isolating and otherwise preventing intermixture, 

 just as man in the past has controlled the interbreeding between dif- 

 ferent breeds of dogs or cats. As to the fourth factor, this too is under 

 human control because it depends particularly on the size of popula- 

 tion, which may be readily regulated. 



At this point one might feel like singing, with Swinburne, "Glory 

 to Man in the highest, for Man is the Master of things." But one had 

 better be wary. Problems aplenty remain just as soon as one begins 

 to consider the application of this newfound genetic power to man 

 himself. 



Eugenics, the term Francis Galton applied to this endeavor, was 

 envisioned by him as the safeguarding and improvement of our human 

 heritage. The late Professor W. E. Kellicott of Baltimore defined it 

 as "the social direction of human evolution." This seems to be a very 

 good definition, for it focuses attention on the process as well as the 

 power to control it, on the choice of goals as well as the ultimate 

 chooser. The basis of effective eugenics must include not only an un- 

 derstanding of evolutionary processes and the power to control them ; 

 it must include also a far wider knowledge of human genetics than now 

 exists, and the ultimate consideration by society of many questions of 

 human values. 



The idea of the social direction of human evolution is not new. 

 Many people have practiced infanticide in order to rid their society 

 of abnormal or defective individuals. The ancient Spartans not only 

 did this, but also, in order to maintain ascendancy over the helots, they 

 practiced most of the eugenic measures advocated in recent times. 

 Their emigration was restricted, and marriage within their own order 

 was encouraged. Special taxes were levied on celibates, and the pro- 

 duction of offspring was rewarded by the state. A severe regimen was 

 maintained to promote fitness and to eliminate the weak or deformed. 

 Also, periodically, the helots were massacred, so as to keep that sup- 

 posedly inferior element of the population down. Plato's proposals 

 for a eugenic society are likewise famous. 



There are many misconceptions about heredity. For example, in the 

 strict sense, there are no hereditary characteristics at all. The ferti- 



