538 
competent to speak on the subjects under dis- 
cussion, I regard it as necessary to illuminate 
in a preliminary way the nature of the “ con- 
tribution ” that seeks to brand one of the most 
critical scientific thinkers of the age as an 
irresponsible sensation-monger incapable of 
the most obvious precautions against errors 
of observation and interpretation. J will con- 
fine my attention to two points: (1) Dr. Rado- 
savljevich’s representation of Professor Boas’s 
theory; (2) MRadosavljevich’s refutation of 
“ Boas’s first conclusion.” 
1. Dr. Radosavljevich writes (p. 405): 
On page 32 of his [Boas’s] report* he says that 
no evidence has been collected which would show 
an actual change in type due to the direct influ- 
ence of environment, because the type of immi- 
grants changes from year to year, owing to a 
selection which is dependent upon the economic 
conditions of our country, ‘‘far-reaching’’ changes 
in ‘‘type’’ which ‘‘ean not be ascribed to selec- 
tion or mixture.’’ According to Boas the racial 
characteristics do not survive under the new social 
and climatic environment of America. We may 
therefore call Boas’s theory the environmental- 
economic theory, the first theory of its kind; 
environmental, because it claims that the descend- 
ants of the European immigrants change their 
type ‘‘even in the first generation almost en- 
Gora”? 006 
The theory may be called economic, because it 
claims that the panics of 1893 and 1907 caused a 
‘¢sudden decrease in the general physical develop- 
ment of immigrants’’ and a ‘‘sudden’’ increase 
in the cephalic index. 
A comparison of page 32 of Boas’s report 
with the exposition just quoted at once ab- 
solves Dr. Radosayljevich from the charge of 
morbid devotion to accuracy of statement. 
On page 32 Professor Boas has nothing to say 
of the economic conditions of our country; 
nor is there a word on the causal connection 
between changes due to environment and the 
change in type of immigrants due to economic 
selection. In the first paragraph of page 32 
Professor Boas states that the form of the 
body seems to be the most stable characteristic 
of any given race, but that Gould and Baxter, 
1<(Changes in Bodily Form of Descendants of 
Immigrants,’’ Washington, 1910. 
SCIENCE 
[N.S. Vou. XXXV. No. 901 
Bowditch and others have found indications 
that under more favorable environment the 
physical development of a race may improve. 
Then follows the statement: 
No evidence, however, has been collected which 
would show an actual change in type due to the 
influence of environment. Where changes of this 
kind seem to occur—as, for instance, in a com- 
parison of the types of city population and coun- 
try population in southern Germany and in Italy 
—the inclination of observers has been rather to 
attribute the difference either to the selective 
elimination of the weaker type or to the immigra- 
tion of different types. 
After a brief transitional sentence Boas 
then, in the final paragraph of the page, pro- 
ceeds to characterize the contribution to 
knowledge made through his own investiga- 
tion as compared with the contributions of 
his predecessors as previously summarized: 
while they had collected no evidence showing 
an actual change in type due to environment, 
but were inclined to ascribe changes to selec- 
tion or mixture, Boas has demonstrated “a 
far-reaching change in the type—a change 
which can not be ascribed to selection or mix- 
ture, but which can only be explained as due 
directly to the influence of environment.” 
Our comparison makes it impossible to 
characterize Dr. Radosavljevich’s exposition 
of page 32 in parliamentary language. 
What, then, of Boas’s “ economic” theory? 
This, it may be well to mention, is a favorite 
butt of Radosavljevichian sarcasm (pp. 415, 
490, 426). The fact of the matter is that, on 
page 28 of his “ Report,” Boas states that 
after the panic of 1893 a sudden decrease in 
the general development of immigrants oc- 
curred and persisted for several years; that a 
similar change seems to have occurred after 
the panic of 1907, and that his observations on 
this point have been confined to East Euro- 
pean Hebrews. On page 30 we learn that 
among the questions not yet studied by Boas, 
is “the important problem of the selection 
which takes place during the period of immi- 
gration, and which is indicated by the change 
of type of immigrants after the panics of 1893 
and 1907.” On page 39 Boas again calls at- 
