132 Life and Letters of Franc'i» Galton 



distinctiou', because they indicate the impression Galton's work made on tlie 

 best minds of that moiety of hiunanity, to which I do not think even later he 

 ever made the great appeal — the uttei-ance of the few words which would 

 have shown he realised their problems'. 

 The letters referred to run as follows : 



TuK CoLLEOR, HiTCHiN. March 7th '70 



Sib, Having just reiwl your remarkalile book on Hereditary (inniim, I ho|)e I may Ix* ex- 

 cused for oiUln-ssing tliuw f»^w lines to say with what extreme interest I liave followed your 

 speculations and how valuable seem to me many of the suggestions you throw out. But what 

 practicid result can we hope from any such theories addressed to a societj' not yet civilised 

 enough to refrain from marriajies and intermarriages in families known to bear the taint of 

 consumption and of ma<lm«s? Money and position are the only influences that we have yet 

 seen powerful enough to counteract the pa«sion of the liour. 



Your Tery able and original remarks on sonic of the causes which tcnde<l under the sway 

 of the church to deteriorate the race of men, especially in Spain and Italy, seem to me to bear 

 with great force upon some things going on around us now in this counti-y, and still more I 

 believe in America. 1 mean the various causes which are combining to turn a large numl)er of 

 the ablest and most active women away from marriage. The luxury of modern life jiernicious 

 in so many ways has made marriage more ditlicult, and at the same time nmde the condition 

 of single women more precarious by making it harder for parents to provide for them. Wider 

 freedom of action and opinion make the conditions of married life with its fearful [wssibilities 

 of legal oppression more revolting to many women, while the just claim they put forward for 

 freedom to work their own way, and the resistance that claim meets with from the majority 

 create a painful and mischievous sense of antagonism against men. No one would hail more 

 gladly than I should a rebellion against the miserable system which has driven women to 

 marry for subsistence or position, but unfortunately the feeble will still be content to do so. 

 Fathers may still reckon on the larger number of their daughters willingly enough living in 

 idleness till a husl>and takes them olf their hands, and saves them the necessity of providing 

 for their respectable independence — while the abler, the more energetic, the most fit to be 

 the mothers of a better generation will revolt against the injustice of our social arrangements, 

 and struggle singly for an independent position ; thereby sacrificing at once the interests of 

 society and some of the highest cravings of their own nature. I hold the individuals to be 

 blameless, but it seems strange that those who watch the workings of society see apparently 

 without an eflbrt at resistance that fatal tide of luxury rise, and rise aided by much that is 

 really refined and by all that is base and coarse in our present civili.sation; and take no heed 

 of the probable effects upon another generation of this 'woman movement,' which judiciously 

 met might be mode productive of almost unmixed good. 



I have written at greater length than 1 at all intended and can only hope you will excuse 

 my following the train of thought rou.sed by your speculations. 



Believe me, Yours sincerely, Emily Shirrkff. 



In a postscript the writer gives a number of corrections for a later 

 edition of the IlereJitai-y Genius. It is a misfortune that we have not 

 Francis Galton's reply, but clearly he asked the writer for information on 

 what was to him a novel point. If he hoped for statistical information, it 

 certainly was not forthcoming in 1870. 



' She was on the first Oirton College Conmiittee and for a short time took charge of the 

 original college at Hitchin. 



* The modern 'master' is bound to disappoint the critical mind of the modem disciple in 

 some one or other aspect, and such an occasion came to the present writer on hearing a lecture 

 by Francis Galton many years later on eugenic propagandism. The only special appeal he made 

 to the modern woman — to whom eugenics is a vital interest — was to throw open her house 

 for drawing-room meetings. The suggestion seemed to bo out of touch with the modern centre 

 of gravity of women's activities and opinions. 



