Biometric Workers and Statistical Reviewers. 
By E. C. SNOW, M.A. 
The letter which follows this note was sent to the Editors of the Journal of the Royal 
Statistical Society in reply to an editorial criticism in the December number of the Journal 
of my recent memoir "The Intensity of Natural Selection in Man*." The remarks made in 
the course of that criticism seemed to me to be based on an inadequate reading of the memoir 
and a lack of appreciation of the work given to the reduction of the statistical data with which 
it deals. I thought that an immediate reply was desirable, and wrote pointing out the errors 
fact, quotation and opinion into which I considered the writer had fallen. 
As the Editors have seen fit to extract and publish only certain statements out of my letter 
without consulting me in the matter, I take this opportunity of issuing my detailed reply. 
Sirs, 
The writer of the notes on my recent memoir on " The Intensity of Natural Selection 
in Man" in the December number of the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society asks that 
discussion should be given to a certain point involved in that memoir. I gladly take this 
opportunity of initiating that discussion since, in addition to the specific point which it is 
desired to clear up, there is in those notes one flagrant misquotation from the memoir which 
requires correction, and also two or three other matters which it seems eminently desirable to 
place in their proper perspective in order that attention may be directed to the kernel of the 
problem. 
In the first of the three paragraphs dealing with the subject, and before the memoir is 
mentioned, a quotation is given from Mr Yule's Appendix to the Report of the Medical Officer 
of the Local Government Board in which he states that the data he employed were such that 
his conclusions could not be put forward " as anything but a very tentative hypothesis." This 
coming before the title of the memoir or even any connection of mine with the subject is 
announced would lead the casual reader to conclude that I had given more weight to Mr Yule's 
work than he himself would desire. Yet the identical quotation used in the note is given in 
full in the memoir (p. 8) and reiterated on p. 10. As the charge of discourtesy is afterwards 
made against me, I think it might in common fairness have been made clear that I gave no 
greater emphasis to Mr Yule's work than he himself desired. 
The point on which the writer of the note specifically asks for discussion admits of a very 
simple investigation. Before stating this I may point out that in giving an example of my 
method he uses the phrase " the remaining deaths under 5 years of age during 1903 — 7." In 
the original the word "remaining" is italicised (p. 15). This may seem at first sight to be 
* Drapers' Company Research Memoirs. No. VII. Dulau and Co. 
