HEREDITY 37 



rent effect. But to punish the organism for an anti-social or " bad " 

 reaction just because it is " bad " and in proportion to its badness (as 

 we habitually do in the courts) is just as reasonable as the act of the 

 little child who flogs his broken hobby horse because it no longer goes. 



When a crime is committed society's first query is : Who is culpable ? 

 Let us find him and he shall be punished. The police officer bribed the 

 gunman to slay the Jew. Who is culpable ? The gunman ? He reacted 

 to the bribe in a fashion that was predetermined from his make-up and 

 training. In his sordid way the policeman knew whom he could bribe. 

 We can not blame the gunman any more than we blame the tiger. The 

 police officer, then? No, he reacted to the stimulus of greed and fear 

 that was predetermined from his make-up and training; the bear at 

 bay would do the same. The responsibility goes back to society that 

 permits the combinations to be made that react in this fashion and after 

 such combinations are made fails to protect itself against their reactions. 

 But, if these offenders are not culpable may they not be freed? By no 

 means. These organisms are, as their product proves, bad; send them 

 to the scrap heap. In general, if the trespasser has been apprehended, 

 consider both the stimulus and the reaction. If it appears probable that 

 there are undeveloped inhibitors the state should supply the training 

 tbat may develop them. If not, the person should be permanently 

 segregated from society, while his life should be made as happy and 

 useful as possible; or else he should be entirely cut off. Especially 

 should he not be permitted to reproduce his defects. 



A word as to the rewards that society gives to those who are its 

 effective and good members. Wages, salaries, profits, honors are such 

 rewards. Because I am only half as good to society as another I get 

 only half the reward. May I therefore complain ? No, society is justi- 

 fied in making distinctions in its rewards. But I have no claim on a 

 reward for attaining which I have done nothing except what I could not 

 help doing; that I am good in any degree is no virtue of mine. Yet, 

 from another point of view, the organism that is I has a virtue in so 

 far as it reacts socially, and it may well call society's attention to the 

 importance to society of its output and, in that measure, of the impor- 

 tance to society that it should be adequately supported. The man who 

 invented a machine for making horseshoe nails made a fortune out of 

 it, but he had no claim to that fortune; his germ-plasm had the deter- 

 miners for inventiveness — his father also made machinery and was even 

 interested in horseshoe nails. Society should certainly see that so good 

 an inventor is properly supported. Indeed, society should see that the 

 prize of special reward is held up before those who need its stimulus; 

 but society may well fix a limit to such special rewards and not permit 

 profits beyond such a limit. The successful lawyer and physician have 

 no absolute claim to their large fees. Society in general recognizes the 



