I'xi/rht)lo(fical Invcufif/dtioHM 267 



iii>|tul8es of man oufjht to be sufficient to erjsure that such wealth should no 

 more be neglected than the existence of any other possession suddenly 

 revealed to man. 



In hiH Cunclusion Galton sums up the third of the various inciuiries in 

 his volume; he jKiinta out the vast variety of natural faculty, lK>th ad- 

 vaiitiij^eous and not, to l)e found in individuals, and the j^reat ilifferences 

 Ix'tween human races. Man is variable and hits changed widely in the course 

 of hundreds of thousands of years. This idea of gi-owth in man hatl not been 

 gnisped by the early cosmogony makers. Its recognition conipels us 



"to reconsider what may Ik? the true place and function of man in the onler of the world." 

 (p. .332.) 



Galton confesses to having examined this question from many points of 

 view, for 



"wliatovor may Ix' tho vclieinoncc with which particular opinions aro insist('<l upon, it.s solution 

 is un(|uestional>ly doulitful. Thcro i.s a wide and growing conviction among trutlistt-king, earnest, 

 hundjl('-niinde<l and thoughtful \iwi\, lioth in this country and abroad, that our cosmic relations 

 aro hy no means so clear and simple as they are p<jpularly sup|xjsed to ho, while the worthy 

 and intelligent teachers of various crec<l8, who have strong persuasions on the character of 

 these relations, do not concur in their several views." (p. 332.) 



He says the results of such inquiries as he has been able to make 

 do not confirm the common doctrines as to our relations with the unseen 

 universe. The one tiling that he can see is that man has immensely motlified 

 humanity by his action, and if he would only consciously take its betterment 

 in hand, as a freeman shaping the coui-se of future humanity, he might achieve 

 great ends far less ruthlessly and more economically than Nature alone. 



"The chief result of these Inquiries has l)een to elicit the religious significance of the 

 doctrine of evolution. It suggests an alteration in our mental attitude, and imposes a new 

 moi-alduty." (p. 337.) 



Thus Galton finally summarised his lalxjurs of more than 12 years. 

 Few of those who, in the following century, have quoted Galton's statement 

 namely that eugenics was a religion, have grasped fully its relation to 

 Darwin and Evolution. Huxley attitcked the old orthodox Ijeliefs l^ecause he 

 thought they fettered the development of science. Galton attacked them 

 because he thought current religion fettered the development of a higher 

 morality and a more rational religion. Huxley spoke at the ripe moment 

 and produced immediate effect. Galton spoke — as he him.self recognised — 

 before he could be understood. But those who know that even Norway, 

 Switzerland and Roumania have now established their Institutes for the 

 Study of Eugenics, realise that Galton's teaching is likely to affect civilised 

 man — now and in the future — in a manner only comparable with the influence 

 of a new religious faith. He brought the logical application of the doctrine 

 of evolution to the betterment of the human race. That in Galton's judg- 

 ment was a science, a morality and the only rational religious faith. 



34—2 



