I 



StfUiMtical Iiii'entigation* 416 



statistical knowledge. The legiHlator — to say nuthing of the politician — too 

 ofU'H failed for want of this knowledj^e. Nay, slu* went furtluT : hIic held timt 

 the iiiiivorae — including human conununitieH — was evolving in accordance 

 with a divine plan; that it was man's husiness to endeavour to understand 

 this plan and guide his actions in synipathy with it. But to uiul' ! 



(Jod's thoughts, she held we must study statistics, for these are the n. j 



of his purpose. Thus the study of statistics was for her a religious duty. 



Those who have drawn from the earlier chapters of this vohune some 

 idea of Galton's religion, will realise how close nmst have heen the sympathy 

 of ideas. For Galton the world was developing; at present under stern 

 lorces a mentally and physically superior human type wjih IxMng evolved, 

 and it wtus the religious duty of man to jus.sist these changes, but for eflective 

 action we nmst study the laws of evolution, we must know and slatistiraUy 

 know before the pace could be hastened. 



"When the desircnl fulliiP8.so{ inforiimtion shall Imvc Ihh-ii ac<|uir<tl, then hikI not till then, 

 will Iw tlic fit munuMit to proclaini a ' Johml,' or Holy War, against custonm and prpjudico.s that 

 inijiHir the phyHical and moral qualities of our race'." 



And again: 



"The ideas have long held my fancy tliat \v(! men may Ijc the chief, and [)erlta{xs the only 

 executives on earth. That we are detached on active service with it may lie only illusory powers 

 of free-will. Also that wo are in some way accountiihle for our success or failure to further 

 certain okscure end.s to bt! guosseil as best we can. That though our iiLstructions are obscure 

 they are sutliciently dear to justify our interference with the pitiless coui-se of Nature, whenever 

 it seems fH)S.sible to attain the goal towards which it moves, by gentler and kindlier ways'." 



Thus it came about that for Galton, and for Florence Nightingale, the end 

 and the means were the same: men must study the obscure purpose of 

 an unknown power, — the tendency behind the univei-se; and the manner of 

 our study must be statistical. 'I herein, according to Francis Galton, lay 

 the way to that luisolved riddle of "the infinite ocean of iK'ing"; therein, 

 according to Florence Nightingale, lay the cipher by which we may read 

 "the thoughts of Gotl." Men of the twentieth century may fail to appreciate 

 the doctrine of either great Victorian, but of one thing they may he sure, 

 the belief in both of them amounted to a religion. And what wjis a religion 

 to both became at once in both a motive for action. Galton was not content 

 with the office of teacher, he devoted a large portion of his fortune to the 

 foundation of a school of eugenics on the Ixisis of probjvbility, that is of the 

 modern theory of statistics. Stiitistics were to be applied in gleaning in- 

 t'ormation as to Nature's immediate purpo.se, which tuuloulitedly lies in the 

 evolution of man's mind, lK>dy, and character towards increfistHl energy, and 

 more efficient co-adaptation. Florence Nightingale strove — possibly with 

 less scientific insight, but with a wider administrative experience and with no 

 less religious earnestness — towards the like end. She sought, before Galton, 

 but with smaller economic resources, to establish a university chair of 

 "Applied Statistics." I have often wondered how far the final form of 



I'rolmbUity the Foundation of Etigenics: Herbert Spencer Lecture. Oxfonl, 1907. p. 30. 

 Ibid. p. 9. 



