EUGENICS THE FUTURE OF MAN 



that, whether or not Mr. Galton has his way, and 

 despite the witty and worthless criticism of the 

 popular critics, the eugenic principle cannot be 

 excluded from its benevolent role in human 

 affairs. 



But it is evident that I have hitherto begged the 

 fundamental question, a fault of which Mr. Galton 

 himself has been accused by certain distinguished 

 medical critics, such as Dr. Henry Maudsley and 

 Dr. Charles Mercier. What is the use, they say 

 in effect, of proposing to improve the human breed 

 by invoking the principle of heredity when our 

 Shakespeare, for instance, was the son of undis 

 tinguished parents, and had five utterly common 

 place brothers ? Now, of all the men to face with 

 such a question, surely Mr. Galton was the last. 

 If the critics would inquire, they would discover 

 that his proposals are the logical outcome, in this 

 his ninth decade, of all his previous life-work. 

 Is not he the author of Hereditary Genius, who 

 has proved up to the hilt that intellect is trans 

 missible and is transmitted? Is not Mr. Galton 

 himself a member of a family which would prove 

 his case if it stood alone, as it does not ? His rela 

 tives number Josiah Wedgwood, Erasmus Darwin, 

 the forerunner of evolution, Charles Darwin, and 

 Professor George Darwin, the president of the 

 British Association for 1905, one of three broth 

 ers, sons of the great Charles, all of whom 

 are fellows of the Royal Society on their own 

 merits. After this there is little need to refer to 



i43 



