164 
more similar, and into activities which 
are growing ever more parallel. 
The idea of the biological equality 
of the two sexes has, in Dr. Riddle’s 
view, been taken altogether too much 
for granted in modern civilization. 
“However definitely an equality may 
exist from social, political or ethical 
points of view, it is doubtful whether 
this can be truthfully asserted from any 
biological standpoint.” Man and 
woman differ in every cell of the body. 
The differences are numerous, and the 
whole problem complicated. Those 
who think they have solved it by lay- 
ing down a “fundamental equality”’ 
of the two sexes may conceivably be 
considerably disturbed by biological 
progress in the future. 
There is one other outlook which 
Dr. Riddle thinks his work opens up 
to the eugenist. 
NEW HOPE FOR EUGENICS. 
“You well know,” he says, ‘that 
eugenics in our day lays chief stress 
upon heredity—upon the transmission, 
intact and unchanged—from parent to 
offspring of weakness or of strength, of 
fitness or unfitness, of the manifold 
characteristics of the organism. And 
the chief remedy suggested rests upon 
an elimination of the bearers of weak or 
unfit germs from the citizenship per- 
The Journal 
of Heredity 
mitted to leave offspring. And it is of 
course wholly right that the emphasis 
now be placed on heredity since it is 
the ready practical instrument—the 
one that can be used, and indeed one 
that the race may never cease to use. 
“But is there not a lot of fatalistic 
philosophy in the conception that man- 
kind’s exaltation and power require 
that mankind eliminate from all share 
in posterity the base and the weak? 
Shall man—a maker of environments— 
when confronted with the problems of 
his own improvement permanently and 
sadly turn to the crude and original 
methods of nature herself? 
‘At least to those biologists and men 
of medicine who believe that life- 
processes are controllable—developmen- 
tal processes along with the rest—that 
conception and that remedy will not 
seem final. To those of us who realize 
that one characteristic, namely sex, has 
already been controlled, indicating that 
in nature all are controllable if our 
industry will but put light where our 
ignorance now enthrones mystery; to 
some of us, the production of strength 
from weakness, of more fit from the 
less fit, and better from the best, will 
seem more in keeping with the present 
general aim of our science, which is to 
secure control over all life-processes.”’ 
Course of Lectures on Eugenics 
The Young Men’s Christian Associa- 
tion of Washington, D. C., is presenting 
a public course of free lectures on 
eugenics under the direction of Paul 
Popenoe, of the American Genetic Asso- 
ciation. The speakers are as follows: 
March 14, Paul Popenoe, ‘Prenatal 
Influences;’’ March 21, Prof. Roswell H. 
Johnson, of the University of Pitts- 
burgh, ‘‘What Feminism May Do;” 
March 28, Alexander Johnson, Field 
Secretary, Committee on Provision for 
the Feebleminded (Philadelphia), ‘“Bad 
Breeding in Washington;” April 4, 
Paul Popenoe, ‘‘Laws of Heredity in 
Man;” April 11, A. E. Hamilton, New 
York, ‘‘What One Baby Did for Race 
Betterment ;”’ April 18, A. E. Hamilton, 
“The Gist of Eugenics;” April 25, Dr. 
Alexander Graham Bell will close the 
course with an address containing the 
unpublished results of some of his 
recent research in heredity. <A similar 
course of lectures was presented last 
year, with the cooperation of the 
American Genetic Association, and 
proved highly successful. 
