Art. 3.-THE STUDY OF EUGENICS.

1. Natural Inheritance. Hereditary Genius. By F. Galton. London: Macmillan, 1889, 1892.

2. The Germ Plasm (Walter Scott, 1893). The Evolution Theory (Two vols. Arnold, 1904). Essays upon Heredity, etc. (Two vols. Clarendon Press, 1891). By A. Weismann. 3. Heredity. By J. A. Thomson. London: Murray, 1908. 4. Mental Deficiency. By A. F. Tredgold. London:

Baillière, 1908.

5. The Family and the Nation.

Heredity and Society.

By W. C. D. and C. D. Whetham. London: Longmans, 1909, 1912.

6. Mendel's Principles of Heredity. By W. Bateson. Cambridge: University Press, 1909.

7. Variation, Heredity and Evolution. London: Murray, 1909.

By R. H. Lock.

Local Govern

8. Public Health and Social Conditions. ment Board [Cd 4671]. London: Wymans, 1909. 9. Heredity and Selection in Sociology. Race Progress and Race Degeneracy. By G. C. Hill. London: Black, 1909.

10. The Eugenics Review. Vols I-IV. London: Eugenics Education Society, 1909-1912.

THE immediate causes of the growth and decay of nations have been many and varied. At a period when competition has been keen and when several nations have been strenuously contending for supremacy, the fortune of war, the chance of the day, the advent of famine or pestilence, have been sufficient to turn the scale against one people and in favour of another, and so to alter the course of the world's history. In other instances progression or retrogression has been determined by the form of government and the capacity or incapacity of rulers; and examples are not wanting in which the ship of state has been driven upon the rocks by the ignorance or rapacity of those at the helm. But, while factors such as these

6 York Buildings, Adelphi, W.C. Reference may also be made to the Report of the Royal Commission on the Feeble-minded [Cd 4202; 1898]; to that on the Poor Laws [Cd 4499; 1909]; and to the annual Reports of the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages, of the Lunacy Commissioners, and of the Local Government Board.

may determine, and often have determined, the final overthrow of a nation, they rarely seem to have been the essential cause of national decay.

The history of the human race points to the origin of progress and decline as being much more deeply seated. Advance is dependent upon the gradual evolution of new functions whereby adaptation is secured to an ever-increasing complexity of environment; and, if a people are but strong and vigorous, they appear able to retain their capacity for development under the most adverse conditions. Neither oppression nor misgovernment, nor pestilence, famine, or the sword, nothing indeed short of actual extermination, will prevent that development taking place when the conditions again become favourable. On the other hand, history shows that, if this inherent vitality be materially diminished, if a people lose their initiative and strength of character and become degenerate, then, whatever their wealth and culture, their doom as a nation is irrevocably sealed. It is impossible to doubt that the fundamental cause of national success or failure, progress or decadence, survival or extinction, lies, not in a nation's wealth, its culture, its trade, its government, laws, religion, or social institutions-for these are but means to an end—but in the potentiality for development, in the vitality and state of health, in what may be termed the biological fitness,' of the people themselves.

.

This point cannot be insisted upon too strongly, for, although it is a fact which is at last receiving recognition, it is yet one of which the full significance has by no means been perceived. The important question which confronts every nation is, Are the people showing themselves possessed of, or lacking in, the capacity to advance? are they biologically fit'? In view of the course of history and of the fate which has befallen every supreme nation in the past, this question becomes of vital importance to one which to-day occupies a foremost place; and hence I propose to consider briefly the present condition of the people of England.

Statistics of mortality are commonly adduced as evidence of the vitality or otherwise of a nation; and, in regard to these, the England of to-day probably compares favourably with that of any earlier period. During the

quinquennium 1861-65 the average annual death-rate of England and Wales per thousand persons living was 21.4. Since then it has steadily declined, until in the year 1911 it stood at 14.6. The greatest decline has been in the case of children under five years of age; but there have been fewer deaths at all ages up to 55, and the average expectation of life of the whole community has been considerably increased.

It would be extremely fallacious, however, to conclude that a diminished death-rate is any indication of an increased power of resistance to disease and an improvement in the inherent vitality of a people. We have to remember that during the past fifty years enormous advances have been made in the science of preventive medicine as well as in medical and surgical treatment; and an examination of mortality statistics makes it perfectly clear that it is to these causes, rather than to any heightened vitality of the people themselves, that this decline is due. For instance, between 1850 and 1908 the mortality rate from consumption declined to the extent of 65 per cent. From 1871 to 1908 the deathrate from smallpox fell from 410 to 2 per million; that from scarlet fever from 758 to 91; that from typhoid from 373 to 78, while typhus practically became extinct. It will be observed that all these diseases belong to the microbic group; and it is unquestionably in diseases of this kind that the great reduction in mortality has taken place. It is here that preventive medicine has made such enormous strides ; and there cannot be the slightest doubt that the death-rate has declined, not because the nation is more resistant to disease, but because modern science has lessened its incidence and modern skill in treatment has diminished its fatality.

It may be argued, however, that since disease not only kills but also produces disablement of those who survive, the diminution of its prevalence must of necessity tend to an improvement in the nation's vitality and efficiency. If this were the case, if the vitality of the people had really become augmented, we should expect to find them less prone to sickness, whereas it is a remarkable and important fact that, in spite of the diminished death-rate and of the lessened prevalence of many diseases, the average rate of illness has been steadily increasing for

the past two generations. Unfortunately there is no State record of the prevalence of illness, as there is of its fatality, but some returns obtained from the leading Friendly Societies are sufficient to demonstrate the fact.

The Hearts of Oak Benefit Society has an adult membership of over 300,000. In 1901 the annual average amount of sickness experienced per member was 1.63 days. By 1910 this average had steadily risen to 2:37 days. The National Deposit Friendly Society has a membership of over 200,000. In 1900 the annual average amount of sickness per member was 2.92 days. In 1911 it had increased to 3·34 days. The Manchester Unity of Oddfellows is the largest friendly society in existence, having a membership of nearly 900,000. In 1886 the average payment per member for sick benefit was 17s. 24d. By the year 1910 this sum had steadily increased to 1l. Os. 4ąd.

It is, of course, a fact that illness is more prevalent during the later years of life; and it may be thought that this increase is merely due to the survival of an increasing number of the population to a more advanced and more vulnerable age. That this is not the case, and that there has been a steady increase in the average amount of sickness at all ages, is shown by the following table (showing the changes in thirty years, 1866-97) taken from the Report of the Actuaries appointed in connexion with the National Insurance Act of 1911.

The statistics quoted refer to a more or less selected group, since all members of Friendly Societies have to

pass a medical examination before admission; but there is no reason for thinking that there has been any material change in the class of persons joining these societies, and the figures can only be regarded as indicating an increased liability to sickness on the part of an industrious, thrifty and very extensive section of the community. It is estimated that amongst the workers of the country as a whole the amount of illness is 10 per cent. higher than in this select class.

A study of the causes of death in young infants also points in the same direction. As is well known, since the year 1900 there has been a marked decline in the infant mortality rate. Thus in 1900 out of every 1000 children born 154 died within a year, while in 1909 the number of such deaths was only 109. This decline is clearly due to advances in preventive medicine and to the greater attention which is now being concentrated upon the requirements of child life; and it would be fallacious to look upon it as indicating any improvement in the inherent vitality of the children now being born. On the contrary, the returns of the Registrar-General show that the proportion of deaths resulting from innate defects of constitution is as high to-day as it was thirtyfive years ago. Making due allowances for differences of nomenclature, by considering all such cases together under the general heading of 'immaturity,' we find that out of every 1000 children born to-day there are practically as many who die from this cause as there were in 1873. And the proportion is by no means insignificant; it is now nearly two-fifths of the total number of deaths. But it is certain that many delicate children are reared to-day who would formerly have perished; if, therefore, we find that there are still as many deaths from this cause, it necessarily follows that the number brought into the world must be greater, and that there is an increase of degeneracy. The continued high death-rate from 'immaturity' is capable of no other explanation.

་་

The medical inspection of school-children, which is now compulsory in the case of all scholars in public elementary schools, has not been in force long enough to yield comparative data. Nevertheless it cannot be regarded as otherwise than extremely unsatisfactory