Full text of "The life, letters and labours of Francis Galton"

•5 7-"

THE

LIFE, LETTERS AND LABOURS

FRANCIS GALTON

Cambridge University Press

Fetter Lane, London

Neiv Tork

Bombay, Calcutta, Madras

Toronto

Macmillan

Tokyo

Maruzen Company, Ltd.

THE

LIFE, LETTERS AND LABOURS

FRANCIS GALTON

BY
KARL PEARSON

GALTON PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF LONDON

VOLUME IIIa

CORRELATION, PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION
AND EUGENICS

CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

1930

Q
143

G3Pu
v. 3.*-

Bookplate of Samuel Galton.

rRINTKD IN ORKAT URITAIN

PREFACE

A GAIN after a long interval the third and final volume of this Life appears.
Xx The delay is traceable to the same difficulties as arose in the case of the
second volume, namely the high cost of producing nowadays a work of this
character. As it was the generous help of Mr Lewis Haslam which enabled
the second volume to be printed, so I have to record my gratitude to two
friends who have assisted me to obtain the funds requisite on the present
occasion. In the first place Professor Henry A. Ruger of Columbia University,
New York, a former postgraduate worker in the Galton Laboratory, interested
Miss Dorothy Chase Rowell in Galton's writings, and in the second place
Dr F. A. Freeth reported my need to Mr Henry Mond. I wish to place on
record here my deep gratitude to Miss Rowell and Mr Mond, whose gifts so
far supplemented the proceeds of the sales of the first two volumes that
I ventured to send the third to press.

It may be said that a shorter and less elaborate work would have supplied
all that was needful. I do not think so, and there are two aspects of' the
matter to which I should like to refer. The writer of biographies usually
belongs to the literary world, and is too often a minor light of that world.
I have no claim to literary distinction of any order. I have written my ac-
count because I loved my friend and had sufficient knowledge to understand
his aims and the meaning of his life for the science of the future. I have
had to give up much of my time during the past twenty years to labour
which lay outside my proper field, and that veiy fact induced me from the start
to say, that if I spend my heritage in writing a biography it shall be done to
satisfy myself and without regard to traditional standards, to the needs of
publishers or to the tastes of the reading public. I will paint my portrait of
a size and colouring to please myself, and disregard at each stage circulation,
sale or profit. Biography is thankless work, but at least one can get delight in
writing it, if one writes exactly as one chooses and without regard to the
outside world ! In the process one will learn to know — as intimately as any
human being can know another — a personality not one's own; that is the joy
of spending years over a biography where there is a wealth of material
touching the mental output, the character and even the physical appearance
of the subject.

If a work is to be printed, even twenty years after a man is dead some
things, some strong opinions and some names, must still be omitted. Our
lives are too closely entwined with those of others not to call for some
reticence even after two decades have elapsed. Still I think the reader will
find in these volumes a portrait of Galton which represents without undue
repression, and without uncritical adulation, the man as I knew him, and as
I have learnt from his writings and letters to interpret him.

vi Preface

The farther aspect of the matter lies in the opinion I have formed of what
Galton's influence will be upon the future. Even since his death I see what
strides in public acceptance the doctrine he preached has made. The dominant
race of the future, the leading nation of civilisation, will not be the one with
the greatest material resources, nay, not even the one with the greatest
wealth of tradition; it will be the one which can claim to have the finest
breed of men and women, physically and mentally. Civilisation has gained
nothing from rivalry in destructive warfare; it can gain enormously from
the rivalry of nations in rearing their future generations from the most
efficient of their citizens. Galton was the first to realise this great truth, to
preach it as a moral code, and to lay the foundations of the new science which
it demands of man. In the centuries to come, when the principles of Eugenics
shall be commonplaces of social conduct and of politics, men, whatever their
race, will desire to know all that is knowable about one of the greatest,
perhaps the greatest scientist of the nineteenth century. I have endeavoured
to put together many things of which the knowledge in another fifty years will
have perished, or not improbably the documents on which that knowledge
could be based will be distributed in many directions. I have to the extent of
my judgment and powers given an account of Galton's scientific work and
of his social ideas, so that all that is essential to an appreciation of his labour
and thought will be found in these volumes without the need for continual
reference to widely scattered papers, and in the future to still more widely
scattered letters.

With regard to Francis Galton's letters a word must be said here. I owe
a deep debt of thanks to his relatives and friends for the immense mass of
correspondence which has been placed at my disposal. Galton's own letters
cover a period of at least eighty-five years, and the family letters stretch
over a century. During that time profound changes have taken place in the
manner of thought and in the habits of the dwellers in this country, and
nothing can illustrate these changes better than the letters interchanged
between the members, old and young, of a large family. We learn from such
a century of letters much of the social history of our own country. We pass
from an age when people travelled on horseback or in coaches to an epoch of
aeroplanes and motor-boats; we note that it was once an open question
whether it was wiser to invest in canal or railway shares, and we trace the
changes from private to joint-stock banks. We see brought forcibly before
us the passage from sail to steam ; and — as the chief interest — we grasp how
this evolution influenced the minds of those who were spectators of it. This
century of Galton family letters would in the future be of high value to the
social historian of our country, and it is with grief that I think of its disper-
sion. In a biography like the present there is small excuse for publishing
letters which do not directly bear on the characterisation of its subject, but
in picking out for publication letters from the many placed at my disposal
my delight in social history may have occasionally led me to err in choosing
letters which depict Galton's family environment even more significantly
than they illustrate his keen affection for four generations of his kinsfolk.

Preface vii

While the circumstances detailed in the preface to my second volume led to
a great extension of the original plan of this work, I felt the exclusion of
many of these charming family letters was not justified by the introduction
of so much scientific detail, and thus I have added them as an additional
chapter to this volume. To Galton's niece, Mrs Lethbridge, I owe the privilege
of publishing the selection from letters which, after the death of his sister
Emma in 1904, her Uncle wrote to her almost weekly. They give the most
perfect characterisation of Galton in his relationship to his family.

One apology I must make if the reader feels that in the chapter on the
last decade of Galton's life the biographer has introduced too much of himself.
To me that last decade was essentially bound up with our joint work for a
subject we both had closely at heart; and I believe that for Galton himself our
common aim — the establishment of Eugenics as an accepted branch of science —
was a leading, if not the principal, purpose of those years. My own enthusiasm
may possibly have deceived me, but I believe Galton during that decade lived
more in the struggles and difficulties of our infant Laboratory than in any
other phase of his wide interests. The sympathy and help he always so readily
tendered to his friends may again have misled me, but I think the history
of the Laboratory he founded and finally endowed was also the essential
history of his own life in those last years. At any rate such is the aspect of
Galton's many-sided nature that I then saw most closely, and it is accordingly
that which I am best fitted to render account of. To me his final crusade for
eugenic principles was the crowning phase of a life whose labours in medicine,
evolution, anthropology, psychology, heredity and statistics directly fitted
him to be the teacher and prophet of the new faith.

I have to express my gratitude to various societies and editors of journals
for permission to reproduce the illustrations that accompanied Erancis
Galton's letters and papers. In particular, to the Royal Institution for
permission to use the figures illustrating Galton's lectures of 1877, to the
Royal Anthropological Institute for permission to use the diagrams of
Galton's memoir of 1885; and to the Editor of Nature for permission to use
Galton's diagrams or other figures from that journal. The permission of the
Royal Society to reproduce illustrations to Galton's memoirs was granted
when my second volume was published. The copyright in Galton's books
belongs to the University of London. The copyright in most of the letters
and photographs belongs to those members of the Galton and Darwin families
who provided me with them, and permission to reproduce them again must
be obtained from those members, as well as from myself (if the second repro-
duction be made from this volume).

While I must again renew my thanks to many who have aided me in this
as in the earlier volumes, I am under deep obligations to my colleagues Pro-
fessor C. J. Sisson and Miss Ethel M. Elderton for assistance in the toil of proof-
reading; if in a few instances I have not followed their obviously better
judgment, I trust they will not despise me for being of a perverse heart. To
Dr Julia Bell I owe the expenditure of too many of her free hours for several
years in the preparation of the ample index to this work ; while to my Wife,

viii Preface

Margaret V. Pearson, I am indebted for the heavy task of aiding in selecting
and of afterwards transcribing the numerous letters and papers, which has
very greatly lightened my own labours. I cannot conclude without a word of
thanks for the care which my printers, the Cambridge University Press, have
devoted to the preparation of this work and the endeavours they have always
made to meet the very varied requirements of its illustration.

KARL PEARSON.
The Galton Laboratory,
University of London.
March 22, 1930.

Yff Ony thyng Amysse be
blame connyng, and nat me:
I desyr ]ie redar to be my frynd,
yff )>er be ony amysse, J>at to amend.

(Mary Mavdleyn, Digby Mystery.)

CONTENTS OF VOLUME III A

CHAP.

XIV. CORRELATION AND THE APPLICATION OF STATISTICS TO
THE PROBLEMS OF HEREDITY

A. Introductory ...........

B. The First Idea of " Regression "

C. Heredity in Stature of Man. Development of the Conception of
Regression ............

D. Attempt to demonstrate the Law of Ancestral Heredity on Eye-Colour
E Law of Ancestral Heredity applied to Basset Hounds ....

F. Representations of the Ancestral Law ......

G. Experiments in Moth-Breeding ........

H. Correlations and their Measurement .......

I. Natural Inheritance ..........

J. Discontinuity in Evolution .........

5. Eugenics as a Religious Faith ........

L Miscellaneous Papers on Evolution, Heredity, etc. ....

Noteworthy Families and Miscellanea .......

The Evolution Committee, and the Proposal to acquire Darwin's House
at Down ............

Appendix to Chapter XIV. " Weights of British Noblemen during the
last Three Generations" .........

XV. PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION .

§ I. History and Controversy .........

§ II. Popularisation of Finger-Printing .......

§ III. Scientific Papers and Books ........

A. The Royal Society Papers .........

B. Finger-Prints, 1893

Decipherment of Blurred Finger- Prints, 1893. Physical Index to

100 Persons, 1894

Finger-Print Directories, 1895 ........

Note to Chapter XV. Finger-Prints as Reminiscences

XVI. EUGENICS AS A CREED AND THE LAST DECADE OF
GALTON'S LIFE

§1-

§2.
§3.
§4.
§ r>.
§6.
§7.
§8-
§9-

Introductory ........

Address to the Demographers, 1891 .

Definition of Eugenics and the Eugenics Fellowship .

The Huxley Lecture, 1901. Allied Matters

Selected Correspondence between Galton and his Biographer,

Work and Correspondence of 1903 ....

Work and Correspondence of 1904 ....

Work and Correspondence of 1905 ....

Events and Correspondence of 1906 ....

1900

1902

PAGE
1-137

1-6
6-11

11-34
34-40

40-44
44-45
45-50
50-57
57-79
79-87
87-93
93-113
113-126

126-135

136-137

138-216

138-154
154-160
161-215
161-174
174-194

194-199

199-215

216

217-436

217-218
218-221
221-226
226-240
240-251
251-258
258-266
266-278
278-292

b-2

Contents of Volume II I A

PAGE

§ 10. Galton's unpublished MS. on Eugenic Certificates .... 292-296

§ 11. Reconstruction of the "Eugenics Record Office" .... 296-304

§ 12. Final Form of Scheme for a Eugenics Laboratory for the University

of London 304-308

§ 13. "Work and Correspondence of 1907 . 308-332

§ 14. Events and Correspondence of 1908 ....... 332-361

(a) On the Literary Style of Scientific Memoirs (pp. 332-339). (b) The
Darwin-Wallace Celebration of the Linnean Society (pp. 340-347).
(c) The Eugenics Education Society (pp. 347-353). (d) The auto-
biography : Memories of my Life (pp. 354-361).

§ 15. Events and Correspondence of 1909 ....

§ 16. Events and Correspondence of 1910 .

§ 17. Francis Galton's Utopia ......

§ 18. Further letters of 1910, chiefly concerning Eugenics

§ 19. The Last Scenes

361-400
400-411
411-425
425-432
432-436

Appendix I. The Codicil to the Will of Sir Francis Galton 437-438

Appendix II. Scheme by Sir Francis Galton for a Eugenics Discussion

Committee, 1905 438

ILLUSTRATIONS TO VOLUME III A

Frontispiece. Francis Galton, aged G6, from the copperplate prepared for Biometrika,
Vol. ii.

Extra Plate. The Greek Girl of the "Just Perceptible Difference" Lecture of 1893,
to face Table of Contents.

Tailpiece. Sir William J. Herschel's Forefinger prints at an interval of 54 years,

the longest known evidence for persistence, to face Appendix n, p. 438

plate to

I. The Genometer, after a suggestion of Francis Galton .

II. Galton's " Ogive Curve " as exhibited by a marshalled series of

Bean Pods ...........

Dr Sorby's painting of a tree from the black pigment of human hair

Dr Sorby's painting of a tree from the red pigment of human hair

Rajyadhar Konai's Contract with Sir W. J. Herschel, made at Hooghly,

1858, and signed with the imprint of his right hand

Effects of various injuries on Finger-Print Patterns

Persistence of minutiae in Finger-Print Patterns at intervals of nine

and twenty-eight years .........

Persistence of minutiae in Finger-Print Patterns at intervals of twenty
six, thirty and thirty-one years .......

The Standard Patterns of Purkenje, with Galton's drawings of their
Cores ............

TIL
IV.
V.

VI.
VII.

VIII.

IX.

XI.
XII.
XIII.
XIV.

XV.
XVI.
XVII.

XVIII.
XIX.

XX.

XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.
XXIV.

XXV.
XXVI.

XXVII.

XXVIII.

XXIX.

XXX.
XXXI.

Examples of the "outlining " of Patterns to assist Classification .
Outlines of Patterns in Arches and Loops .....

Outlines of Patterns in Whorls, and Cores to Loops and Whorls .
Outlines of the ten Digits of eight Persons, taken at random
Transitional Patterns — Arches and Loops .....

Transitional Patterns — Loops and Whorls .....

Persistence of Finger-Prints, Enlarged Patterns ....

Persistence of Finger-Print Patterns with corresponding minutiae like
numbered ...........

Finger-Prints of Like Twins, from the Collection in the Galtoniana
Blurred Finger-Prints, Illustrations of Galton's Treatment (enlarged
2£ times) ...........

Selected corresponding Portions of Blurred Doublets (enlarged 7 times)
Skeleton Charts of Ridge Central Lines of Doublets of Plate XX

Plate XXI overprinted on Plate XX

Classification of Finger-Prints, Types treated by Galton as Arches
Classification of Finger-Prints, Types treated by Galton as Loops .
Classification of Finger-Prints, Types treated by Galton as Whorls
Galton's method of counting Ridges in Loops. Illustration of dabbed
and rolled prints ..........

Illustrations of Galton's Secondary Classificatory Symbols (i,f, c)
Illustrations of Galton's Secondary Classificatory Symbols (y, v, vy)
Galton's Secondary Classificatory Symbols applied to Noteworthy
Peculiarities ..........

Illustration of the use of Galton's Secondary Classificatory Symbols
Francis Galton, the Founder of the Science of Eugenics, from a photo-
graph of 1902, by the late Mr Dew-Smith. (By kind permission of
Mrs Dew-Smith)

face page
30

97
97

146
154

166

179
180
181
181
181
181
181
182

182
191

197
197
197
197
213
213
213

213
213
213

213
213

217

Illustrations to Volume III A

plate to face page

XXXII. Francis Galton, about the age of 80 . . . . . . . 249

XXXIII. Collotype of the " interspaces " on Galton's own Finger- Prints . . 257

XXXIV. Francis Galton in 1904, aged 82 259

XXXV. Two portraits of Charles Darwin : on the right at age 31, from a water-
colour painting by Richmond, formerly in the possession of his daughter,
Mrs Litchfield ; on the left at age 33, with his eldest son William, from

a daguerreotype, in the possession of Lady George Darwin . . 340

XXXVI. Francis Galton, aged 87, on the stoep at Fox Holm, Cobham, with his

biographer ............ 353

XXXVII. A Reverie, caught " when the spirit was not there " .... 354

XXXVIII. Francis Galton, aged 87, on the stoep at Fox Holm, Cobham, with the
faithful Gifi and the Albino puppy Wee Ling ..... 390

XXXIX. Guido Reni's Picture of Apollo and the Hours preceded by Aurora,

from the Casino of the Palazzo Rospigliosi, Rome .... 422

XL. Francis Galton, aged 88, from a sketch made by Frank Carter, twelve

days before Galton's death ......... 432

XLI. Francis Galton, January 17th, 1911, from a photograph taken after

death ............. 433

XLII. The Church at Claverdon, with the iron railings surrounding the vault

where Galton's body lies 435

In the Pocket at the end of this volume :

(a) Supplementary Pedigree of Distinguished Ancestors of Francis Galton
and Charles Darwin

(/3) Galton's Types of Finger-Print Patterns reduced from the framed
enlargements, once in Galton's Anthropometric Laboratory, now in
the Anthropometric Laboratory at University College, London

Bookplate of Tertius Galton.

ERRATA TO VOLUME I

p. 53. Lines 11 and 19-20, for " John Hubert Barclay Galton " read " Hubert John Barclay Galton.

p. 150. Plate LI. The long horizontal object above the mantel-mirror is an oriental pipe not
a lance.

p. 161. On p. 160 we see that Tertius Galton was proposing a visit to the English Lakes, and it
would appear from Emma Galton's diary that this actually took place. It is not clear whether Tertius
Galton's serious illness occurred at Keswick in the English Lakes, or at "Keswick" the home of the
Gurneys near Norwich on the homeward journey. In the letter on p. 162 Galton is speaking of Keswick
in the Lakes, but it is not always easy in the diaries of Emma and Francis to distinguish between visits
to Lakeland and to the Gurneys' home.

p. 168. Line 9. The mysterious " Missourian " of Galton's letter to his Father is very probably
Galton's misspelling for " Mesosaurian." Not only in his boyhood and his college days, but even to the
last decade of his life, Galton's spellings could be erratic. In one of his letters to me he excuses his
spelling by the darkness in which he is writing. It is probable therefore that he judged the spelling of
words by seeing them, and he may only have heard this fossil lizard spoken of, and not seen the name
written.

Pedigree Plate A. Immediate Ancestry and Collaterals of Sir Francis Galton in pocket at end of
Vol. I. Last line but one, seventh column of names, for " F. M. Cormford " read " F. M. Cornford."

M. S. P. and M. V. P.

whose unstinted sympathy and aid
have enabled me to complete my task

Francis Galton, aged 66, from the copperplate prepared for Biometrika, Vol. n.

CHAPTER XIV

CORRELATION AND THE APPLICATION OF STATISTICS TO
THE PROBLEMS OF HEREDITY

"It is full of interest of its own. It familiarises us with the measurement of variability, and
with curious laws of chance that apply to a vast diversity of social subjects. This part of the
inquiry may be said to run along a road on a high level, that affords wide views in unexpected
directions, and from which easy descents may be made to totally different goals to those we have
now to reach. I have a great subject to write upon, but feel keenly my literary incapacity to
make it easily intelligible without sacrificing accuracy and thoroughness."

Natural Inheritance, p. 3.

A. Introductory. Thus wrote Francis Galton in 1889 when the signifi-
cance of correlation and its measurement had impressed themselves upon
him. Up to 1889 men of science had thought only in terms of causation, in
future they were to admit another working category, that of correlation, and
thus open to quantitative analysis wide fields of medical, psychological and
sociological research. Turning to the writings of Turgot and Condorcet, who
felt convinced that mathematics were applicable to social phenomena*, we
realise to-day how little progress in that direction was possible because they
lacked the key — correlation — to the treasure chamber. Condorcet often and
Laplacef occasionally failed because this idea of correlation was not in their
minds. Much of Quetelet's work and of that of the earlier (and many of the
modern) anthropologists is sterile for like reasons.

Galton turning over two different problems in his mind reached the con-
ception of correlation : A is not the sole cause of B, but it contributes to the
production of B; there may be other, many or few, causes at work, some of
which we do not know and may never know. Are we then to exclude from
mathematical analysis all such cases of incomplete causation? Galton's
answer was: "No, we must endeavour to find a quantitative measure of this
degree of partial causation." This measure of partial causation was the germ
of the broad category — that of correlation, which was to replace not only in
the minds of many of us the old category of causation, but deeply to influ-
ence our outlook on the universe. The conception of causation — unlimitedly
profitable to the physicist — began to crumble to pieces. In no case was B

* "Un grand homme [Turgot], dont je regretterai tousjours les lecons, les exeinples, & sur-tout
l'amitie, ^toit persuade que les verites des Sciences morales & politiques, sont susceptibles de la
meme certitude que celles qui forment le systeme des Sciences physiques, & meme que les branches
de ces Sciences qui, comme l'Astronomie, paroissent approcher de la certitude mathematique."
Discours preliminaire, Essai sur I'application de I 'analyse a la Probabilite des Decisions, p. i,
Paris, 1785.

t See for example Laplace's memoir in Memoires de VAcademie des Sciences for 1783, pp. 693-
702, where J entirely overlooks the correlation between the size of the population and the
number of births in evaluating what is really the probable error of the birth-rate.

pgiii 1

2 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

simply and wholly caused by A , nor indeed by C, D, E and F as well ! It
was really possible to go on increasing the number of contributory causes,
until they might involve all the factors of the universe. The physicist was
clearly picking out a few of the more important causes of A, and wisely con-
centrating on those. But no two physical experiments would — even if our
instruments of measurement, men and machines, were perfect — ever lead to
absolutely the same numerical result, because we could not include all the
vast range of minor contributory causes. The physicist's method of describing
phenomena was seen to beonlyfitting whenahigh degree of correlation existed.
In other words he was assuming for his physical needs a purely theoretical
limit — that of perfect correlation. Henceforward the philosophical view of the
universe was to be that of a correlated system of variates, approaching but by
no means reaching perfect correlation, i.e. absolute causality, even in the group
of phenomena termed physical. Biological phenomena in their numerous
phases, economic and social, were seen to be only differentiated from the
physical by the intensity of their correlations. The idea Galton placed before
himself was to represent by a single numerical quantity the degree of
relationship, or of partial causality, between the different variables of our
ever-changing universe. How far he was successful forms the subject-matter
of this chapter.

I have said that Galton came to this fundamental conception from two
aspects. The first problem was that of inheritance. To take an illustration :
A character in the Father does not determine absolutely the like character in
the Son ; it is only one out of many contributory factors. The character is
only a partial expression of the Father's germ-plasm; so it is with the Son's
character — it is not at all a full expression of his germ-plasm. Again, the Son
is not a product only of his Father's germ-plasm, but of his Mother's also, and
those of both parents in their turn are products of innumerable ancestral
stirps leading us back through long eons of evolution. Nor is the somatic or
bodily character of the Son a product only of heredity, it is the integration
of a number of factors acting throughout his prenatal and postnatal growths.
From the physicist's standpoint of causation there was no way at all to attack
this problem, the causes were too indefinite and elusive to be individually
grasped and measured. They could only be dealt with one at a time — the
measure of the resemblance of offspring to parent, a partial causation, led
Galton to the idea of correlation.

The second problem which impressed itself on Galton's mind was that of
correlation in the narrow biological sense. The word itself appears to have
originated with Cuvier who denoted by it an association between two organs
or characters of a family — thus the occurrence of a split hoof with a particular
form of tooth, so that from the discovery of one organ a prediction could be
made as to the nature of others. It has been said that Cuvier 's conception
did not involve causation*. I do not know that any correlationist of to-day
would assert that the knowledge of the length of the femur, which would
enable him to closely predict the length of the humerus, is an assertion of
* See C. Herbst, Uandw'orterbuch der Naturwistseiwchaften, Bd. Ill, S. 621, Jena, 1913.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 3

causation in a sense different from that of Cuvier; he would mei"ely think in
terras of associations with differing grades of intensity. Be this as it may,
Galton's second idea of measuring the degree of relationship arose from the
fact that he had recognised that two characters measured on a human heing
are not independent, they vary with each other. The femur of man has its
characters associated with those of the humerus.

Galton did not realise immediately that his two problems admitted of
the same solution. His first actual attempts at solution of the inheritance
problem were based on the weight of the seeds of mother and daughter
plants. In the first place he used, about 1875, some seed like that of cress (see
Vol. ir, p. 392), and he started by endeavouring to correlate grades or ranks.
This could not be very successful because the regression curve and the
"isograms" (see Vol. II, p. 391) are not linear, but extremely complicated
curves. Later in 1875 (ibid. p. 187) we find him experimenting with
Darwin's assistance on the weight and diameter of sweet-pea seeds, and here
he reached his first "regression line." I reproduce (p. 4) from Galton's data
in a note-book the first "regression line " which I suppose ever to have been
computed. I have recalculated the constants and redrawn the line. It is
for sweet-pea diameters in mother and daughter plants. The correlation
coefficient is - 33, almost exactly 1/3. Two points must here be noticed.
First the parental mean is considerably higher than the offspring mean. If
the offspring mean denotes that of the general population, this would
indicate that Galton's parental population was not a random sample of the
original general population. Secondly the means of the diameters of the
daughter plant peas for each size of mother plant pea, give a series of points of
rather irregular distribution, which conforms as well to a sloping straight line
as to any other form of curve. Here we have the origin of Galton's "regression
straight line." We see that as size of mother pea increases, so does size of
daughter pea, but whether in excess or defect of mean the daughter pea
does not reach the deviation of the mother's diameter from the mean value,
the offspring is less a giant or a dwarf than the mother pea. This is Galton's
phenomenon of regression. In this case the variabilities of mother and
daughter peas were approximately equal, and Galton reached the idea that
the slope of the regression line would measure the intensity of resemblance
between mother and daughter. If there were no slope the diameter of
daughter pea would be the same for all diameters of mother pea. If it
sloped at 45°, i.e. a slope of unity, the daughter pea's diameter would be
exactly that of the mother pea's, supposing their means were the same ; if
they were not, the deviations from their respective means would still be
equal.

It is strange that both Galton and Mendel should have started from peas,
the former from sweet and the latter from edible peas. Galton tells us dis-
tinctly why he chose the former, namely because he would not be troubled
to the same extent by variation in size of peas within the same pod. We
must leave it to the future to judge whether the correlational calculus, which
has sprung from Galton's peas, is or is not likely to be of equal service with

1—2

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Q
U

Diameter or Off spring Seed

( In HuNjmamu or ah Imh ^

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 5

the vast system of factorial genetics which has arisen from Mendel's peas —
and this even in the theory of heredity. We see now what Galton might
have done, he might have provided us with data to check Johansen's later
bean-weight experiments, he might have thrown light on the "pure line."
[ He might possibly have reached the correlation coefficient instead of the re-
1 Agression slope in his first attempt to get a measure of correlation. Whatever
he might have done, he reached the idea of regression before he reached that
of the coefficient of correlation. As long as he was dealing with heredity in
the same sex, the approximate equality of variabilities in the two genera-
tions preserved him from any great error.

Galton was driven to his second problem by Bertillon's system for the
identification of criminals. Bertillon claimed, as I remember Dr Garson did
at a much later date, that the measurements chosen were practically inde-
pendent. Galton needed a criterion to show whether such measurements as
head length, foot length, stature, etc. were or were not associated. He saw that
the problem closely resembled that of heredity, but he was troubled by the
fact that the slope of his regression line depended on the units in which its
two component variables were measured. It was not till more than 13 years*
after his first attack on the subject that Galton realised, namely in 1889 during
a walk in Naworth Park, that the two problems were identical, provided
each character were measured in its own variability as unit (see our Vol. II,
p. 393). With that provision the slope of the regression line becomes what
we now term the coefficient of correlation. It is needful to realise this
history of Galton's. progress : namely that he reached regression and even
the constancy of the array variabilities 12 to 14 years before he formulated
his coefficient of correlation, in order to understand fully the sequence of
his memoirs on this topic.

One further fact it is necessary to bear in mind in order to measure his
achievements. He started like Quetelet from the normal curve as describing
the deviations of a population or of any selected population, e.g. that of an
array of offspring from a parent of given character. \ He did not start with a
general definition of correlation and see whither that would lead him. His
justification was that he was dealing with anthropometric characters or
measurements on living forms whose deviations from type approximately
followed this special law of distribution. Thus he naturally reached a straight
regression line, and the constant variability for all arrays of one character
for a given value of a second f. It was, perhaps, best for the progress of the
correlational calculus that this simple special case should be promulgated
first; it is so easily grasped by the beginner. But it has had the disadvan-
tage that certain branches of science, as psychology for example, have rarely
got further, and, without taking the trouble to apply tests, adopt linear

* In his Natural Inheritance, 1889, p. 79, Galfcon says his sweet-pea data were collected
more than 10 years previously. His lecture at the Royal Institution, Feb. 1877, shows that he
was then already in possession of sweet-pea data, and the first measurements seem to have been
made in 1875.

t What we now term "homoscedasticity."

Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

regression and homoscedasticity where it is quite inappropriate. It is
interesting to note how the history of the spread of knowledge follows with
halting steps the history of its discovery.

Again, if the reader anticipates that Gal ton was a faultless genius, who
solved his problems straightaway without slip or doubtful procedure, he is
bound to be disappointed. Some few creative minds may have done that, or
appear to have done it, because, the building erected, they left no signs of
the scaffolding; but the majority of able men stumble and grope in the
twilight like their smaller brethren, only they have the persistency and
insight which carries them on to the dawn.

B. The First Idea of "Regression." I think these conceptions will be
well illustrated if we consider Galton's first paper dealing with the subject
of regression, namely the lecture entitled : Typical Laws of Heredity, which
he gave on February 9, 1877 at the Royal Institution. It is the next
forward step he took after the memoir of 1875, in which he had propounded
for the first time the continuity of the germ-plasm. See our Vol. II, pp. 184-8.
The paper itself embraces three fundamental sections, which I will take in
logical sequence if not that of the paper itself.

First : an account of the experimental data on sweet-peas. Galton
assumes here that sweet-peas are invariably self-fertilised, a result which
from my own observation I consider only partially true. There is also a
further difficulty here: he does not take the average seed of the mother
plant as representing the maternal character. He takes seeds of equal
weight which may have been the ordinary produce of large-seeded plants,
or the exceptional produce of small-seeded plants, and treats these as
representing the parental character. This very fact would in itself involve
regression in the offspring seeds, and leaves unsettled two important questions :
(i) whether in the average result from all the seeds of a self- fertilising plant,
there would be any regression at all, and (ii) whether there is any difference
in the average seed weights of daughter plants grown from light and heavy
seeds of the mother plant ? Had Galton had these points in mind, he might
have thrown light on controversies of a much later date. Again, does the
size of the mother seed influence the daughter seed only by way of heredity ?
Galton's small seeds led to sickly and often sterile plants, and it is quite
probable that this might affect the weight of their seeds (see our Vol. n,
p. 181). Be this as it may, Galton found from his data* that there was a
linear regression of daughter seed on maternal seed. He does not yet use the
term "regression," but speaks of a "reverting" towards "what may be roughly
and perhaps fairly described as the average ancestral type." But it is difficult
to believe that this reversion was solely due to heredity ; if the original seed
had fully represented the maternal plant and that plant had been indefinitely
self-fertilised, the Law of Ancestral Heredity would suggest no regression at

:*■

* He issued packets of seven sizes of seeds, each containing ten seeds, and nine friends grew
the plants. Two crops failing, he had all the seed offspring of 7x7x10 = 490 carefully weighed
seeds.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 7

all. It is not possible to say whether the observed " reversion " was due to
the weight of a single seed not representing the true maternal character, to
the hypothesis of self-fertilisation not being correct or to other causes.
Theoretically the important point is that Galton reached linear regression
as a first feature of his correlation table. The next point Galton reached was
the homoscedasticity or equal variability of the arrays of daughter seeds
corresponding to a given mother seed*. "I was certainly astonished to find
the family variability of the produce of the little seeds to be equal to that of
the big ones ; but so it was, and I thankfully accept the fact ; for if it had
been otherwise, I cannot imagine, from theoretical considerations, how the
typical problem could be solved" (p. 10).

The second logical stage in Gal ton's analysis is mathematical ; he en-
deavours, assuming that the population is stable and is distributed normally,
to find what relation must exist between the " reversion " coefficient and

* Thus far I have not been able to find Galton's data for the weights of sweet-peas in the
Galtoniana here. It is not easy, however, to find a special topic in the mass of note-books and
undated and unindexed papers. Quite possibly, however, he lent his measurements to somebody,
as he lent many series of observations to myself. It would be interesting to see exactly the
data from which he deduced the two fundamental principles of a normal bivariate distribution,
i.e. the straight-line regression and the equivariability of the arrays. Galton gives the correlation
table of filial and parental seeds in the Appendix, p. 226, of his Natural Inheritance for lengths
not weights. This shows that the mean length and variability of the parent seeds were arbi-
trarily chosen, thero being 70 of each. Further, in the table the offspring seeds are modified to
show 100 iu each array. We do not know therefore the true means or standard deviations
of either parental or offspring populations. This does not, however, affect the determination of
either means or standard deviations of arrays. I find in hundredths of an inch:

Diameter of

Mean Diameter

of Array
of Filial Seeds

Standard Deviation

Parent Seed

of the Array

17-26

1-988

17-07

1-938

16-37

1-896

16-40

2-037

16-13

1-654

16-17

1-594

15-98

1-763

My means do not agree with Galton's, possibly he found his before reducing his whole
numbers to percentages. (It could not be by the distribution of the filial diameters "Under 15,"
as this would tend, I think, to reduce all his means below mine.) He does not give his array
standard deviations nor the quartiles. However, on some such numbers as these Galton reached
his results. The array means are not incompatible with a straight-line relation; the standard
deviations suggest that the smaller parental seeds had offspring seeds of less variability than
those of the larger seeds, rather than equivariability being the rule. This view might be modified
if we knew the actual distribution of the filial seeds "Under 15." Many of these dwarf seeds I
suspect were abortions, as their lumping up at the tail of the arrays really prevents the latter
from being considered as "normal curves." Galton states (loc. cit. supra) that he had obtained
confirmatory results for the foliage and length of pod; this indicates that his experiments must
have been carried on for a second year, as he started only with the parental seed.

8 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

the variability constant of the equivariable arrays in order that the popula-
tion may owing to the laws just stated repeat in the filial the parental
distribution.

Now there are two points to be regarded here. Galton first states that
he is going to suppose no sexual selection at work, and further he next
supposes every female to be reduced to an equivalent adult male standard.
It is true that he does this by the aid of percentiles, but what it really
amounts to is this : If to 2 be the female mean character, o- 2 the standard
deviation and A, the deviation of an individual female from type, to, , cr, and
A, corresponding quantities for the male, then Galton replaces the female
to 2 + A 2 by a male to, + A, , where A, has the same percentile value p for males

as A 2 for females. This really amounts to taking A, = — A 2 ; it appears to me

cr 2

that this reduction of female to male value is more correct than that which

he adopted later in his memoir of 1886 and in Natural Inheritance (see our

p. 15). Having got his midparental value as the mean of the father's and

mother's characters, the last reduced to male value, Galton correctly asserted

that if there be no sexual selection and the original population followed a

normal distribution, the midparental distribution also would be normal with a

standard deviation -p cr, . He next introduces an ingenious artifice ; instead

of supposing the offspring to " revert " he supposes the midparent to revert
and then to have offspring whose type (i.e. mean value) is that of the
original parentage. In other words, if X be the character in a midparentage,
then r'X, where r 1 is the reversion coefficient, will be the same midparentage
after reversion. This really signifies a uniform " squeeze " in the ratio of
r 1 to 1 of the normal curve of midparentages, or the new curve of reverted

midparentages will be a normal curve of standard deviation — = o-, x r'. We

have lastly to distribute the offspring of these midparentages about their
mean values with a constant variability, which we will represent by 2 ; thus
the standard deviation a 1 of the distribution of offspring will be given by

3 = 1^2,/2

o-,V 2 + 2 2 .

But, if this standard deviation of the final normal curve is to repeat the
original population, cr' must equal cr,, or we have

Here / is the " reversion " of the midparent and is equal to -f2r, if r be the
reversion on a single parent*. In other words, if r be the reversion of
offspring on parent then the constant standard deviation of the array of
offspring fox a given parent must be ct,n/i — r 2 , if the population starts with
a normal distribution and when reproduced is to have the same normal

* If the standard deviation of the "reverted" single parent be rv x , then v2ro-, will be the
standard deviation of the reverted midparent, but if this be taken as r'a l clearly r' = *J2 r.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 9

distribution. This is the earliest appearance of the symbol r as a coefficient
of " reversion" ; the reasoning by which the result is obtained is only true, if
parental and offspring generations have the same variability; in that case r
is what we now term the coefficient of correlation, and Galton here deduces
the relationship between the constant array variability and this coefficient.

In the course of his work he introduces the ideas of natural selection and
of differential fertility. This section of the discussion is somewhat difficult to
follow. Galton further supposes selection to take place symmetrically round
the population mean or type. Finally to obtain the above result Galton
supposes the selection and the fertility to be non -differential, or gives them
mere percentage values for all parents alike*.

NECATIVE < 0°

DEVIATION

POSITIVE
DEVIATION

iHlIIIIIIIII

ABC

aJbJ cj

.; i;

■',.

/ / cocrrTof

1 REVERSION

//_OAj<_ OB J
III OA OB

IlIHUIIIIigiiiilliiill!

Fig. 2. Oalton's Quincunx illustrating the nature of Regression.

The third point in this paper of Galton's is the ingenious " Quincunx " by
which he illustrates the phenomenon of reversion and the continual main-
tenance by aid of inheritance of a stable population. Galton at first indicates
how closely certain measured characters are given by a normal distribution
and how such a normal distribution may be produced by a stream of pellets

* A paper in which this matter is more fully dealt with by the present writer will be found
in Biometrika, Vol. vn, pp. 258-275, "On the Effect of a Differential Fertility on Degeneracy:
A New Year's Greeting to Francis Galton, 1910."

p G III 2

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

falling vertically through a forest of horizontal pins. He next, starting with
a normal distribution of variability or,, reduces the variability to r<r 1 by
sloping his discharge tubes towards the type (see Fig. 2). This restriction
of the tubes has the same effect as giving a uniform horizontal "squeeze"
to his original distribution ; he thus reaches his population of " reverted
parents." If he now opens any single one of his tubes he will get a normal
distribution, about the reverted parent character as type, which will have

Fig. 3. Galton's Quincunx illustrating the effect of Natural Selection.

the proper variability a^Vl — r 2 if a suitable choice be made of the extent
of " pin-forest " through which the pellets fall. Since this variability is the
same for all parentages, the extent is constant, and if all the tubes be opened,
all the " reverted " parentages contribute their share to building up again
the population from which we started.

Those who hold the hypothesis of the pure line to be true, apparently
overlook the fact that while the gametic distribution might be stable, they
must appeal to a stringent natural selection, or a differential fertility, to

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 1 1

maintain stability for two successive generations in somatic characters. This
stability Galton achieved by aid of reversion.

In dealing with the problem of Natural Selection, Galton takes only the
case of selection round type and assumes that those selected to live, not
those selected to die, will follow a normal distribution. This limits to some
extent its general applicability, but he illustrates his idea by a second
ingenious Quincunx (see Fig. 3), in which the middle stage is formed by a
vertical normal-curve diaphragm which cuts off from the descending pellets,
uniformly distributed over the horizontal bases of their compartments in the
top stage, the "selected pellets," which again are on the removal of the sliding
floor allowed to run down into the third stage compartments where they
form a normal distribution of much reduced variability.

Speaking of the principles of " reversion " and reduced variability in
the offspring of a given parentage, Galton says :

"The typical laws are those which most nearly express what takes place in nature generally;
they may never be exactly correct in any one case, but at the same time they will always be
approximately true and always serviceable for explanation. We estimate through their means
the effects of the laws of sexual selection, of productiveness and of survival, in aiding that of re-
version in bridling the dispersive effect of family variability. They show us that natural selection
does not act by carving out each new generation according to a definite pattern on a Procrustean
bed, irrespective of waste. They also explain howsmall a contribution is made to future generations
by those who deviate widely from the mean, either in excess or deficiency, and they enable us
to discover the precise sources whence the deficiencies in the produce of exceptional types are
supplied, and their relative contributions. We see by them that the ordinary genealogical course
of a race consists in a constant outgrowth from its centre, a constant dying away at its margins,
and a tendency of the scanty remnants of all exceptional stock to revert to that mediocrity,
whence the majority of their ancestors originally sprang." (loc. cit. p. 17.)

Thus Galton stated his law of reversion originally ; we see that it really
covers the most marked features of bivariate normal correlation, we have
even the now-familiar symbol r. Whether, however, he was at that time
justified in asserting reversion as a typical law of heredity on the basis of
his sweet-pea results may be open to question. Is the weight or diameter of
a single seed a fair representation of a parental somatic character? Was
Galton justified in considering the variability of his offspring constant ? These
are points which have much bearing on later work and on what correlation
the r really signified in the case of Galton's actual experimental data.

C. Heredity in Stature of Man. Development of the Conception of
Regression. That Galton had some doubts himself is, I think, clear from the
fact that for eight years he published nothing further on the subject of
regression, but started by aid of his family records to collect data bearing on
inheritance in man: see Vol. n, pp. 363 et seq. As soon as he had obtained
enough data to deal with the inheritance of stature in man he returned to
the subject, and in 1885 and 1886 published a number of papers dealing with
the topic. The first of these is his Presidential Address to the Section of
Anthropology of the British Association, Aberdeen Meeting, 1885*. He next
published a more detailed paper in the Miscellanea of the Journal of the

* B. A. Transactions, 1885, pp. 1206-1214; Nature, Vol. xxxn, pp. 507-510.

2—2

12 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Anthropological Institute*. He further took the subject as the topic of his
Presidential Address at the Anniversary Meeting of that Institute in
January, 1886f, having meanwhile again discussed it in a lecture at the
Birmingham and Midland Institute entitled: "Chance and its Bearing on
Heredity" J. Finally we have the mathematical basis of Galton's work more
fully provided in a paper on "Family Likeness in Stature" with an
Appendix by J. D. Hamilton Dickson, presented to the Royal Society on
January 1, 1886§. None of these papers is exclusive, each has something
not in the others, but probably those in the Miscellanea of the Journal of
the Anthropological Institute and in the R. S. Proceedings are the more im-
portant for those who have not time to read them all. We have throughout
to remember that Galton was a pioneer, and could not see matters in the
clearer light of to-day when we start from a knowledge of bivariate
distribution with its two means, two variabilities and its coefficient of
correlation; he did not yet clearly recognise the distinction between a
coefficient of regression and a coefficient of correlation. It is difficult for the
reader now-a-days to appreciate the paradox which Galton reached from his
data and finds it needful to discuss at some length, namely : that the coefficient
of regression for the offspring on a midparent is double what it is for the mid-
parent on the offspring ||. A further difficulty is that Galton invariably thought
in terms of grades, quartiles and the "ogive curve," and this I venture to think
is by no means helpful for elucidating correlation, as the reader of the first
ten pages of the Royal Society paper will find. It has always been a puzzle
to me why Galton called in Mr Dickson and placed before him a somewhat
artificial problem in probability the answer to which comes directly ^ from
Galton's own two statements.

* Vol. xv, pp. 246-263. f Vol. xv, pp. 489-499.

| Reported in the Birmingham Daily Post, December 7, 1886.

§ Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. XL, pp. 42-73, 1886.

|| Since the midparental standard deviation is, when the female is reduced to male equivalent,

o-j/s/2 in our previous notation, the two regression coefficients are respectively: — — r and

— — j^ r, that is, r/*J2 and «/2 r, or one twice the other. I think Galton was slightly puzzled

here, because he had not yet fully realised that the two variabilities not being the same, he must
measure each variate in its own unit of variability in order to make both regressions the same.
11 Galton had discovered that the offspring of parents of character deviation x vary about
(rtr 2 /o-,) x with a standard deviation <r, V(l - r 2 ). Hence if y be the deviation of the n offspring
of the n parents of deviation x, and we assume, as Galton, that parental and offspring genera-
tions both follow the normal law, the number of offspring of deviation y will be

N i _i£

But n' = ~7= — e 2 <ri 2 , where N is the total population of parents, thus substituting for ri we
have n jV" 1 /x> 2rxy y 2 \

z =o 7r^ e 2 ( 1 - J,2 )W w *i)

2jrcr 1 <r i! vl — r
as the frequency distribution of offspring and parents, the well-known result, which was not
even written down by Mr Dickson !

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 13

The most noteworthy point, however, is this, that Galton having the
correlation table before him of the statures of 928 offspring and of their mid-
parents proceeded after smoothing the frequencies to determine the contour
lines and found them to be:

(i) a system of concentric and similar ellipses about the common mean of
the filial and midparental statures.

Further:

(ii) the regression straight lines were conjugate diameters to the two axes
of stature.

He also determined from his contours the ratio of the axes of this ellipse
system, and the inclination of the major axis to the horizontal. The ellipse,
which served as type, is given in the accompanying diagram (see Fig. 4,
p. 14), and the observed values on this ellipse and the values computed from
Mr Dickson's Formulae are* :

Galton from Contours From Dickson's Formulae

Regression Slope 1 in 3 6 in 17 '5

Major to Minor Axis 10 to 5-1 4l to ^2 or 10 to 5-35

Inclination of Major Axis 25° 26° 36'

It is needless to say that Galton was delighted with this accordance.
He wrote f as follows with regard to it:

"I may be permitted to say that I never felt such a glow of loyalty and respect towards
the sovereignty and magnificent sway of mathematical analysis as when his [Mr Dickson's]
answer reached me confirming, by purely mathematical reasoning, my various and laborious
statistical conclusions with far more minuteness than I had dared to hope, for the original data
ran somewhat roughly, and I had to smooth them with tender caution }."

We ought on no account to overlook the fact that the theory of linear
regression and the associated homoscedasticity were evolved by Galton from
his sweet-pea experiments, confirmed by his stature measurements, and
resulted practically in the form of the normal surface for two variates with its
elliptic contours, before the mathematical theory of correlated errors was
known to him. \ It is one of the most striking lessons in what may be achieved
by a patient analysis of even crude observations. Yet without being dis-
couraged in our own attempts at similar discoveries, we do well to remember
that only an exceptional mind has the insight to discriminate between the
essential and the non-essential in a mass of statistical data, and to select those
two principles which illuminate the manner in which a population reproduces
itself stably by aid of heredity — and what is more in so doing to pave the
way to the solution of many other problems of a wholly different character.
Fig. 5, p. 16, shows the regression line of offspring on midparent for the case of
stature; it is, I think, the second regression fine ever drawn, and Galton
indicates by the line at 45° exactly how much the offspring fall behind the
stature of their individual midparent. He added to this regression diagram,
a picture of his "Forecaster of Stature" — which might equally well be used to

* Journal of the Anthropological Institute, Vol. xv, p. 263.
t Ibid. p. 255. I Ibid. p. 255.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

►V

S h x

«o\ \

"it

s IA

"w\ \

\* : *\

^sN. M

>•

<*:-

1 \

1 \ 1

1 1

"* *

\ \s i

*-<
t

/C\ ^^\

<m py

\ *i \ '0 ^

v «0 "l

V \

r>.~

\n / ■^

«A A s

t-N \^ C")

•

— ^-* , j—'^i

\p\

. CO

z 6

■*■

«s

V 1

S tfi \ 0| -.

Ul o

Ul P

_l '-<

l-i

OQ^

a S

^J\

< Tl

-J o

\ "*

01 ^sr* v

«5 ^>-^ oo \to

o g

C0_

> \

^^o

Ul H

a -

< *

Co ^^ N

-Ax^v \

< 2

■oO

J^ *

\ ^""v °

A \ *

CO \ <o \

o\ \
^ \ \ CO **

< , 3
oc 1

'3
I

X\\ I-

a<2

tc~

N t*i >

r~* xi ^o \ /?)

*
to -

1 1

1 \ 1 *\

1 1

1-
z
□

■f.9-6

+ +

5 fH fj

O "

3 g

1 ' 1

i 1

1 1 1

1 1

O S3

CO t> to

to to to

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 15

predict the probable value of any third variate from a knowledge of two
others*. The working of the Forecaster is almost obvious on examination of
the diagram, but for the benefit of those who come for the first time to the
subject of regression I give Galton's own words:

"The weights M and F have to be set opposite to the heights of the mother and father on
their respective scales; then the weight sd will show the most probable heights of a son and
daughter on the corresponding scales. In every one of these cases it is the fiducial mark in the
middle of each weight by which the reading is to be made. But, in addition to this, the length of
the weight sd is so arranged that it is an equal chance (an even bet) that the height of each son or
each daughter will lie within the range defined by the upper and lower edges of the weight on
their respective scales. The length of sd is 3 inches = 2/t ; that is, 2 x 1 -50 inch.

"A, B and C are three thin wheels with grooves round their edges. They are screwed together
so as to form a single piece that turns easily on its axis. The weights M and F are attached to
either end of a thread that passes over the movable pulley D. The pulley itself hangs from a
thread which is wrapped two or three times round the grove of B and is then secured to the
wheel. The weight sd hangs from a thread that is wrapped in the same direction two or three
times round the groove of A, and is then secured to the wheel. The diameter of A is to that of
B as 2 to 3. Lastly, a thread wrapped in the opposite direction round the wheel C, which may
have any convenient diameter, is attached to a counterpoise.

"It is obvious that raising M will cause F to fall, and vice versd, without affecting the wheels
A, B, and therefore without affecting sd; that is to say, the parental differences may be varied
indefinitely without affecting the stature of the children, so long as the mid-parental height is
unchanged. But if the mid-parental height is changed, then that of sd will be changed to §- of
the amount.

"The scale of female heights differs from that of the males, each female height being laid
down in the position which would be occupied by its male equivalent. Thus 56 is written in the
position of 60 - 48 inches, which is equal to 56 x 1*08. Similarly, 60 is written in the position of
64-80, which is equal to 60 x 1-08 J."

The last words indicate what is, I think, an important point: Galton
obtains the female from the male stature by multiplying by the constant factor
1'08. This he obtained as the ratio of the male to the female mean value,
and he practically assumes this ratio to be the same for all other statures.

In a certain sense I think this is, at least theoretically, a retrograde step
from his suggestion of 1877. He then took the transmuted female mean to be
the male mean plus the female deviation increased in the ratio of male to
female variability. This appears to be theoretically a better process of trans-
mutation. Practically the two methods will only agree, if the ratio of the
two variabilities is equal to the ratio of the two means, i.e. if the so-called
coefficients of variability of the two sexes are equal. This is approximately
but not absolutely true for a number of human characters.

There are of course several other conditions which must be fulfilled to
make Galton's definition of midparent valid, and some of these he discusses.
In the first place the parents must mate at random with regard to the
character dealt with, i.e. there must be no sexual selection in the form of
assortative mating with regard to stature, tall must not tend to marry tall,

* It would only be needful to adopt scales in accordance with the constants of the bivariate
regression formula.

t In this paper Galton uses the symbol /for the quartile deviate.
j Journ. Anthrop. Institute, Vol. xv, p. 262.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

3
1-
<t
1-
CO

o£

w t>C
Ul

►-
to

<
o
ul
a:
O
u.

1 ( "** ) IK

FATHER

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1

-€T

1 lb.

\ »1

10
u

<
u

MOTHER

M 1 M | N II II II II

Daughter

1 1 1 1 1 1 II 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1

□u

Son

| 1 1 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 | I 1 I 1 |

ts.

>•
(X

*.3f

— E

co
co

cr
o

<
or

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 17

nor short, short. Galton discusses* the absence of assortative mating for
stature and forms the following table, where the medium group embraces
individuals of 67" and up to 70 stature for males or transmuted females:

Husband

Short

Medium

Tall

Totals

Short...
Medium
Tall ...

9
25
12

28
51
20

28
18

104

205

He notes that there are 27 like marriages short with short and tall with
tall, and 26 contrasted marriages^ short with tall, and argues that there is
no assortative mating in stature. In a fuller treatment of the same data
by the present writer the coefficient of resemblance between husband and
wife was found to be "093 + "047 J, which might just be significant. Later
work has shown that there is sensible assortative mating not only in stature
(•280), but in span ( - 199) and cubit ("198)§; in other words big men do tend to
marry big women and small men small women. Galton's data show, however,
so little assortative mating that his results were not sensibly influenced by
disregarding it.

Galton now turns to another point, namely : Does the difference in stature
of parents influence the stature of the offspring? He was clearly conscious
that this was an important point, for on it depends whether his value for the
midparental stature is or is not to be considered correct. As we should now
express it, he was really asking whether the stature in the offspring was
equally correlated with the statures of the two parents, or rather, that is the
question he would have been asking had he transmuted his female deviations
to male deviations by aid of the ratio of the two variabilities and not of the
two means 1 1. If the two correlations be not equal, then Galton's " Forecaster,"
based on his conception of midparent, would give incorrect results. Galton
indicates in a table (Journ. Anihrop. Instit. Vol. xv, p. 250) that the differential
influence of the parents should not be very great, but he does not really

* Joum. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, p. 251.

f Printed in loc. cit. 32 instead of 26.

\ Phil. Trans. Vol. 187 A, p. 270, 1896.

§ Biometrika, Vol. II, p. 373.

|| If r M be the paternal, r 23 the maternal coefficient of correlation and r 12 that of assortative
mating, the bivariate formula shows us that to give equal weight to father and mother we must
have equality of the two expressions

!-»■„■

and

1 — r *

(Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. VIII, p. 240, 1895), and this involves r n = r„ 3 , i.e. the equality of the parental
influences.

p G III

18 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

determine it quantitatively. Actually for his data we have the following
correlations*:

Father Mother

Son -396+ -024 -302 ±-027

Daughter -360 ±-026 -284+ -028

There was thus really quite a well-marked prepotency of the father in
the case of stature. Later results on ampler and better material have
failed to confirm this prepotency f; I think it may well have been due to
amateur measuring of stature in women, when high heels and superincum-
bent chignons were in vogue ; it will be noted that the intensity of heredity
decreases as more female measurements are introduced. Daughters would be
more ready to take off their boots and lower their hair knots, than grave
Victorian matrons. As we have not since succeeded in demonstrating any
sex prepotency in parentage, Galton's assumption that such did not exist
justifies his theory. But this assumption was not justified by his actual data
and affects seriously the values of the constants he reached, which are all too
low in the light of more recent research. I think we should be inclined to
say now that the regression of the offspring deviate J is on the average
nearer to f than to Galton's § of the midparental deviate. Galton, however,
recognised very fully that his numerical values were only first approxima-
tions. He writes:

"With respect to my numerical estimates, I wish emphatically to say that I offer them
only as being serviceably approximate, though they are mutually consistent, and with the
desire that they may be reinvestigated by the help of more abundant and much more accurate
measurements than those I have at command. There are many simple and interesting relations
to which I am still unable to assign numerical values for lack of adequate material, such as
that to which I referred some time back, of the relative influence of the father and the mother
on the stature of their sons and daughters.

"I do not now pursue the numerous branches that spring from the data I have given, as from
a root. I do not speak of the continued domination of one type over others, nor of the persistency
of unimportant characteristics, nor of the inheritance of disease, which is complicated in many
cases by the requisite concurrence of two separate heritages, the one of a susceptible constitution,
the other of the genus of the disease. Still less do I enter upon the subject of fraternal devia-
tion and collateral descent§."

Galton's reasons for making a special study of stature are dealt with at
considerable length and summarised as follows:

" The advantages of stature as a subject in which the simple laws of heredity may be
studied will now be understood. It is a nearly constant value that is frequently measured and
recorded, and its discussion is little entangled with consideration of nurture, of the survival
of the fittest, or of marriage selection. We have only to consider the midparentage and not to

* Phil. Trans. Vol. 187 A, p. 270, 1896.

t See Biomelrika, Vol. II, p. 378, 1902.

| Galton in this paper introduces the term "deviate ": "I shall call any particular deviation
a 'deviate,'" Journ. Anthrop. Inslit. Vol. xv, p. 252. The term was perhaps unnecessary con-
sidering the existence of " deviation," but it has come into general use, and is perhaps more
justifiable in Galton's sense than " variate," which is now so often used, not for a particular
variation, but for the " variable " itself.

§ Journ. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, p. 258.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 19

trouble ourselves about the parents separately. The statistical variations of stature are extremely
regular, so much so that their general conformity with the results of calculations based on the
abstract law of frequency of error is an accepted fact by anthropologists. I have made much
use of the properties of that law in cross-testing my various conclusions and always with
success*."

Galton considers the fact that stature is not a simple element, but a
compound of the accumulated lengths or thicknesses of more than a hundred
parts, to be a distinct advantage and a source of the beautiful regularity of
its frequency distributions f. He does not see that this may tend to screen
some fundamental law which may be obeyed by the simple components.
Thus we note that as a rule the parental correlations decrease as we take
characters based on fewer elements, e.g. the parental correlations for span
are less than those for stature, and those for forearm are less than those for
span. There might be — I on my part do not assert that there is — an alternate
inheritance in the simple components, which is screened in the complex
compound J. To this Galton might well have replied: Why should a single
bone be looked upon as an ultimate element, if it develops from a number
of centres of ossification, and pushing the matter further may we not be
driven to find the simple component ultimately in a cell? The "simple com-
ponents," which obey some equally simple law of inheritance, are still to find
in the bony skeleton of man.

Two further terms defined by Galton may here be considered.

He recognises that the individuals in what we now term an array (a column,
or row) of the correlation table are not in themselves blood kindred, they
are not, for example, all sons of the same parents, or all brothers of the same
individual. Their link is that they are all sons of a set of parents having the
same small range of any character, or again all brothers who have a brother
within the same small range of character. Thus these individuals probably
differ in both ancestry and nurture. Galton proposes to call them "co-kinsmen "
or more definitely according to the array type "co-filials" or " co-fraternals. "
By such terms he only means that their correlated variable (e.g. stature in
parent, brother or collateral) has the same value, or limited range of values.
Galton was thus fully aware that the variability within a family group of
brethren, a fraternity, was not the same as the variability within such an
array or co-fraternity, or co-kinship. Galton's terms have not come into
general use, it is, perhaps, awkward to call individuals co-kinsmen who are
not kinsmen at all. But the failure to distinguish between a fraternity in
the true sense, and a co-fraternity in Galton's sense, has not been unfruitful
of error§. It is, perhaps, best to stick to the words "filial array" or "fraternal

* Journ. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, p. 251. t Ibid. p. 249.

X Those who assert that stature or cephalic index " mendelises," have not explained how
the bones on the dimensions of which they are formed themselves react to inheritance. If
these simpler elements " mendelise," how comes it that the compounds do, and what becomes
of the correlations between these components 1

§ If r be the correlation coefficient of offspring on midparent and R be the multiple correlation
coefficient of offspring on the whole of its ancestry, then, o- being the standard deviation of off-
spring, o- VI - r 2 is the variability of a co-fraternity and <r \/l — B? the variability of a fraternity,
or group of blood brothers.

3—2

20 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

array," the word array suggesting that we are dealing with a wider group
than a single family.

The next idea raised by Galton is very important for later researches.
He goes to the root of his law of regression when he states that the somatic
character of the parents does not fully define the somatic character of the
offspring. The somatic character of the parents is not the full representative
measure of the germ plasm of the stirp. This is represented by a long series
of ancestors, who become so numerous as we go backward, that their mean
value for a generation cannot differ from mediocrity. Regression in Galton's
view is the result of the influence of parental heredity pulling the offspring
so to speak towards the parental value and the mediocrity of the more distant
ancestry pulling towards its own value of the character.

Now we may or we may not know something of the ancestry behind the
first midparent. If we know nothing absolutely then the fact that the first
midparent has a certain character value enables us to predict a certain
probable value for the next midparent and so on. If we did know completely
the ancestry, we might replace the whole ancestry by a single midancestor.
To this midancestor, we may give the name "generant." Again we had better
cite Galton's own words, because although the idea is suggestive he does not
define it in a manner which enables us to determine mathematically its nature.
From what we said above it is clear that we may have a true generant and
a probable generant based on only a partial knowledge of the ancestry*.

Galton's Conception of the Generant.

" The explanation of it [Regression] is as follows : The child inherits partly from his parents,
partly from his ancestry. Speaking generally the further his genealogy goes back, the more
numerous and varied will his ancestry become, until they cease to differ from any equally num-
erous sample taken at haphazard from the race at large. Their mean stature will then be the same
as that of the race ; in other words, it will be mediocre. Or, to put the same fact into another
form, the most probable value of the midancestral deviates in any remote generation is zero.

" For the moment let us confine our attention to the remote ancestry and the midparentages,
and ignore the intermediate generations. The combination of the zero of the ancestry with the
deviate of the midparentage is the combination of nothing with something, and the result
resembles that of pouring a uniform proportion of pure water into a vessel of wine. It dilutes
the wine to a constant fraction of its original alcoholic strength, whatever the strength may
have been.

" The intermediate generations will each in their degree do the same. The midde\ iate in any
one of them will have a value intermediate between that of the midparentage and the zero value
of the ancestry f. Its combination with the midparental deviate will be as if, not pure water,
but a mixture of wine and water in some definite proportion, had been poured into the wine.
The process throughout is one of proportionate dilutions, and therefore the joint effect of all of
them is to weaken the original wine in a constant ratio.

" We have no word to express the form of that ideal and composite progenitor, whom the
offspring of similar midparentages most nearly resemble, and from whose stature their own
respective heights diverge evenly above and below. If he, she or it, is styled the " generant "
of the group, then the law of regression makes it clear that parents are not identical with the
generants of their own offspring."

* Journ. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, pp. 252-3.

t This sentence is not, I think, correct as it stands. A man might easily have four grand-
parents all taller than his parents. Galton probably meant to insert the words " on the
average."

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 21

If U for any character be the deviate of the generant from the mean of
the race, then the individual endowed with such U's for all characters would
represent the stirp of any family. Unfortunately Galton does not give us
any method for determining the U of the generant. I think, however, if
we take the character U of the generant to be that linear function of the
characters of all the ancestry which gives the highest correlation R with the
character in the offspring, it throws Tight on Galton's idea. In this case U is
simply proportional to the multiple regression expression. If we make the
following hypotheses, which have considerable experimental evidence in their
favour, namely :

(a) that the individual correlations of offspring with male and with
female ancestors are equal,

(b) that such correlations with individual ancestors die out in a geometri-
cal ratio, i.e. the correlations of the offspring with individual parents (father
or mother), with individual grandparent (male or female), with individual
great-grandparent, etc. form a series r„ i\a, r,a 2 , etc., where a is less than
unity, then it can be demonstrated that the deviate U will be given by
the formula*

where h lt h 2 , h 3 , etc. are the deviates of the midparental characters in the
successive grades of ancestry and y, /3 are constants, which can be found in
terms of r, and a. Further, the fraternity of which U defines the stirp will
vary round U with variability crJl—R*, where R (the "coefficient of
multiple correlation") is known in terms of r, and a, or of y and /S.

The expression for IT, or the deviate of the generant which defines the
stirp, has been termed the Law of Ancestral Inheritance^. It is not a
biological hypothesis, but the mathematical expression of statistical variates,
which obey, as many measurable characters in man, certain forms of frequency
distribution, these being maintained in successive generations. It can be
applied with special values of y and /8 to many biological hypotheses. We
are, however, not concerned to discuss these matters here, but merely to
point out that in the papers we are now dealing with Galton was feeling his
way upwards towards this Law of Ancestral Inheritance, though I venture
to think by a faulty stairway. The somewhat complicated mathematics of
multiple correlation with its repeated appeals to the geometrical notions of
hyperspace remained a closed chamber to him, necessary as multiple correla-
tion now is for many practical problems of modern statistics. As I have said
there is a true generant, i.e. one in which we insert the true values of the
different ancestral midparental deviates, namely h lt A 2 , h 3 , ... as above, and a
probable generant for which we only know h x and put in probable values

* Biometrika, Vol. vin, pp. 239-243.

t Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lxii, p. 386. For the fuller mathematical treatment see Biometrika,
Vul. vin, pp. 239-240 and Vol. xvn, pp. 129 et seq.

22 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

based on h x for h, 2 , h 3 , ..., etc. Galton deals only with the latter. He writes
as follows * :

" When we say that the midparent contributes two-thirds of his peculiarity of height to
the offspring, it is supposed that nothing is known about the previous ancestor. But though
nothing is known, something is implied, and this must be eliminated before we can learn what
the parental bequest, pure and simple, may amount to. Let the deviate of the midparent be x
(including the sign), then the implied deviate of the midgrandparent will be ^ x, of the mid-
ancestor in the next generation \ x and so on. Hence the sum of the deviates of all the
midgenerations that constitute the heritage of the offspring isa;(l+J + ^ + etc.) = x\ .

Now I think this result erroneous because it assumes that the quantities
y, ya, ya" , ... of the generant above can be found from the simple regression
formula of parent on offspring. This we know to be very far from the fact,
the multiple regression coefficients have no such simple relations to parental
regression. The fallacy lies, I think, in this: we could imply that value of
the grandparental from the parental deviate by means of the simple regression
formula, but to do this is to assert that all the remaining h's, h 3 , h t , etc., are
put zero, i.e. are given every conceivable value, with the mean value zero.
But we are going to imply other than zero values for these h's, hence our
system of implied ancestral values is not consistent and this, I think, is
indicated by the total heritage coming out xf. To get over this difficulty
Galton proceeds "to tax" each contribution to the heritage. He takes as

two extreme cases (a) a uniform taxation of all ancestral contributions of - .

and (b) a taxation geometrical in amount, supposing — of the total only to

be transmitted from one generation to a second. He thus reaches the
following expressions :

/l 1 1 \ 1 3

x(— + —.+ — + etc....)= - x-,

\n 3?i to / n 2

.'111 \ 3

x - + — „ + — , + etc. ...) =x

m 3m 2 9m s "/ 3m — 1'

But x being the midparental character the heritage of the offspring is,

1 A 1 C

Galton says,f x, thus- = -, and — = — - . From this he draws the conclusion
J J n 9 m 11

that both may be taken to be \ approximately. But here the reasoning

seems at fault, for the offspring heritage of \x is based on all the other

midparental deviates h.,, h 3 ,... taking their average or zero values. The

regression coefficient would not be two-thirds, if they took the values

3^i> iA* e tc.

Finally from what Galton has just said it would appear that we might

have two series for determining ancestral contributions, the one in n, i.e. ^,

^, £,..., or the one in m, i.e. $,%,£,.... But this is clearly not what he

* Boy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lxii, p. 61, and compare Journ. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, pp. 260 etseq.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 23

understands, for having determined the midparental contribution to be £ from

either series, he now writes* of the values of - and — :

n m

"These values differ but slightly from J, and their mean is closely J, so that we may fairly
accept that result. Hence the influence, pure and simple, of the midparent may be taken as £,
of the nridgrandparent T , of the midgreatgrandparent |- and so on. That of the individual parent
would be T , of the individual grandparent y 1 ^, of an individual in the next generation F * T and
so on."

Thus Galton reaches his Separate Contribution of each Ancestor to the
Heritage of the Child, a principle which is often spoken of as his Law of

Ancestral Heredity. In reaching it he apparently drops his - series altogether

and follows his — series with its geometrical system of taxation. This is

distinctly more in keeping with the expression for the generant deviate U
above, which runs in a geometrical series. If we assume all the ancestors to

have the same deviation h, we have U= r> h, and, if the offspring value

might in such a uniform breed be also taken as h, it follows that y = 1 — /S.
Hence if we take the first midparents' contribution to be ^, i.e. y = ij, with
Galton, it follows that /3 = <^, and our series is Galton's geometrical series with
his radix value, a half. But I venture to think it was inspiration rather than
correct reasoning which led him to a geometrical series for U.

On the other hand his multiple regression coefficients ^, \, |-, ... suffice to
determine what the correlations between an individual ancestor in any
generation and the offspring ought to be. They take the values for parents *3,

for grandparents ^ x '3, for great-grandparents — x '3 and so on. Galton found

his midparental regression § and took his parental to be \\. This is not so
far from "3, that we could say it confutes Galton's Ancestral Law. But we
find Galton taking the grandparental regression and therefore the correlation
\, the great-grandparental ^y and so on. These values form a series a, a 2 ,
a', ... for the individual ancestral correlations and lead to y= 1, fi = 0, or to
the generant U being solely determined by the parents, the higher ancestry
contributing nothing to the generant J. Hence it follows that Galton's
Ancestral Law is not in keeping with the values he has taken for his
individual ancestral correlations. The reasoning by which he has reached
one or the other is defective. As I have said Galton's guess at a geometrical
relation for the coefficients of £7 was an inspiration, but his idea that a grand-
son is the son of a son and so his regression (and with a stable population
his correlation) must be | x ^ = \ is fallacious. Regression coefficients cannot
be obtained from each other in this manner.

* Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lxii, p. 62.

f This will be equal to the correlation, for the variabilities of both variates are taken to be
the same.

t See Phil. Trans. Vol. 187, A, p. 306, 1896.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton, by means of seeking the slope of the regression line, found the
regression of brother on brother to be § and this accordingly would be the
fraternal correlation ; he then said : a nephew is the son of a brother, therefore
his regression on his uncle = -j x f = f- Again I do not believe that regressions
can be built up in this manner. It appears to be multiplying together
probabilities that are not independent, but correlated; for all a regression
provides is a probable deviation, and we cannot apply independent probabilities
to a correlated triplet. Why may not a brother be considered as the son of a
midparent and so have regression § x § = $ instead of Galton's observed value
|^? Why might we not equally well argue that a nephew is the grandson of
a midparentage, which gave rise to his uncle and thus the nephew-uncle
regression be-jxfx§ = ^- instead of § % Why should cousins* be considered
the offspring of two brothers |x|x| rather than as the grandsons of one
midparentage -jXfxfx^? Even if we are always to take the "shortest way
round," no argument is given in favour of it, and it could only be satisfactorily
demonstrated by actual data.

:iGHTj

ines MEAN STATURE OF
7S ~ CHILDREN Or MID- PARENTS ,
OF VARIOUS HEIGHTS /

70 " from, R.F.F data /K*

w- p r t

MEAN STA TURE OF
BRO THERS OF MEN OF
' VARIOUS HEICHTS

n-'A

from.' Special data

MEAN STATURE 8^!

>jf Pitfi".'t*H'>rt)^

Fig. 6. Galton's Filial and Fraternal Regression Lines.

I do not think Galton's method of deducing the degrees of resemblance
between kinsmen of various degrees of blood relationship from the single
datum of the regression of a filial array on its midparent will pass muster;
it is extraordinarily suggestive — no one had thought before of giving
a quantitative measurement to the various types of kinship. Galton indicated
how it could be done by aid of correlation tables and gave at this time two
such tables t, those for midparent with offspring and for brother with brother.
These are both from his R. F. F. [Records of Family Faculties), but he also
provided another correlation table giving the distribution for a special series
of pairs of brothers. In Fig. 6 will be found his regression lines for offspring
on midparents, and for brother on brother. His method of reduction was,
however, very different from any we should adopt to-day. When he wanted
a mean he determined a median, and he did this by roughly proportioning
(graphically) the total in the cell in which it lies, he worked not with the

* The value J x § x ^ = ^ T is given by Galton : Natural Inheritance, p. 133.

t If we include the earlier one for the seed-weights in mother and daughter plants for the
case of sweet-peas (see our p. 4) we have here the four earliest correlation tables and regression
lines ever published.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 25

standard deviations, but the probable errors, and he determined these from the
quartiles by rough proportioning as before. When he wanted a regression
coefficient he plotted the medians of the arrays and fitted these with a
straight line, presumably by testing with a straight edge. The slope of this
straight line is Galton's regression coefficient. If we assume the standard
deviation of the two marginal columns to be the same, then this regression
coefficient is the coefficient of correlation, but that term was not used by
Galton in the group of memoirs at present under discussion.

It will be remembered that Galton transmuted all his females to their
male equivalent, and then found his regression for offspring on midparent to
be § and therefore on a single parent to be ^ = '3333. Reworking the
whole material ten years later I found the mean of the four possible parental
correlations to be '3355*, in singular accordance with his rougher methods,
which, however, had largely screened the significant inequalities of the
parental correlations in his case.

Turning to Galton's data for brothers I note that he nowhere tells us how
he gets his regression coefficient of f. In the R. S. Proc. paper (he. cit. p. 55)
there is a small graph for the " Special" data for brothers, none for the R. F. F.
data for brothers. The slope of the regression line Galton has run through
the array medians is, as near as I can judge it, 34°, or the regression would
be '6745, which Galton would call §. In the Natural Inheritance, p. 109,
there are small charts for the regression lines of both the R. F. F. and the
"Special" data, the former (which does not go truly through the mean) has
an angle of 24° giving a correlation of "4452 and the latter an angle of about
33°, or a slope of '(5494. Actually forming tables myself on Galton's data I found
for the R. F.F. Regression of Brother on Brother '4547, and for the "Special"
data "5990, not so violently diverse from Galton's results, when we consider
the difference of methods, and personal equation in selecting pairs of brothers
for tabular entry. But there is a point in which I find it needful to differ
from Galton in the value of his material. I believe that the "Special" data
were really heterogeneous ; they contained pairs of brothers measured in an
Essex volunteer regiment, who taken alone gave a regression of no less than
"7175, while the remainder had only a value of "5574. I am inclined to think
therefore that we need to throw out the volunteers, and if we do so the mean of
Galton's two results, \ ("4452 + '5574) = '5013, is very close to the mean value
'50 which has since been found on more satisfactory and ampler data for a
variety of characters in man. I doubt whether it is possible to accept Galton's
original estimate of § for fraternal regression and correlation, and believe that
he may have been led to select the higher value of the two he had obtained
by an idea that fraternal should equal midparental regression.

Anyhow in these numbers we find the first attempt to obtain a numerical
measure of the degree of resemblance in brothers, just as in another part of
the paper he has provided us with the first measure of filial resemblance.
Galton knew quite well that his values were not final, but here, as so often,
he blazed the track for others to build a highway.

* See our p. 18.

p a in .4

26 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

There is another suggestion in the Royal Society paper which has
ultimately been followed up to great profit, namely that the variability
within the family could be ascertained by considering the difference in
the same character of pairs of brothers. Let R be the multiple correlation
coefficient of an individual on all his ancestors or his correlation with
his "generant," then since two brothers have the same ancestry the
variability in a family of brothers is a-Jl—R 2 , where o- is the standard
deviation of brothers. Now if x x and x, be the characters in a pair of
brothers, for example their statures, we have \ (x 1 + a: 2 ) for their mean and
\ (x l — x,y for their standard deviation squared, or so-called variance. If this
be taken for a large number of pairs, then it may be shown that

Mean variance for pairs of brothers = £ o- 2 (1 — r) = J cr 2 (1 — R 2 ),

where r is the simple correlation of brothers*.

These results have really been given as early as 1886 by Galton. He
does not use R, and instead of standard deviations, speaks of quartile values,
i.e. probable errors. He writes b for our *67449 <r </l - R 2 , p for our '67449 cr,
and our r is his regression of brother on brother or his w. Thus in his symbols :

Mean (probable error) 2 of pairs of brothers = \p i (1 — w) = \ 6 2 .

These results are given on pp. 58-59 of the R. S. Proceedings memoir,
and demonstrated by methods which appeal only to the most elementary
conceptions. When we come to actual numerical values, Galton finds a series
of values for b (the probable deviation in a group of brothers) which ranges
from //- 98 to 1 "38 — a result which might be anticipated from the rather
heterogeneous nature of his material. If for the reasons already stated we do
not trust to the "Special" data only, but use also the R. F. F. results, the mean
value (Table, p. 59) found by the various processes for b is 1 //- 179. For p
I find from Galton's table on his p. 69, l //, 684, and thus deduce for R the
value "7140, comparing not badly with the value "7284 obtained recently for
brothers from probably better dataf. Clearly with these values for p and b
that for w, the regression of brother on brother or the correlation of brothers,
is "5096 and not § = '6667 as Galton assumed it, trusting to his "Special"
data; this is a result agreeing far better with later determinations of
fraternal heredity J.

The whole paper is a most remarkable one, not only for the wealth of
new ideas it contains, but for the insight it shows Galton had into many
problems which have only been recently, or are only at present, under

* Biometrika, Vol. xvn, pp. 130-1. t Ibid. p. 138.

% A further point worth recording occurs on p. 58 of the R. S. Proc. memoir. Suppose
samples of size n are taken from a normal distribution. Then the mean square standard deviation
of these samples, /!,, is given in terms of the standard deviation squared, 2 2 , of the sampled

>fi \ ji — 1

population, by /Zj = 2 2 . Galton puts this in probable deviation form as d? = b 2 and

putting n = 4, 5, 6, 7 applies it to find b 2 from mean square probable deviation (in his termino-
logy the quartile) of brothers in families of different sizes. Thus anticipating more recent work
on small samples.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 27

discussion. He perceived for the first time that the problem of multiple
correlation when solved would give the closest prediction possible to the
probable value of the character in an individual from known characters in
the kinsfolk, but he also recognised that long selection could not indefinitely
reduce variability, that 30°/ o reduction in variability was about as much as
could be hoped for (i.e. p to b in his notation).

" The possible problems are obviously very various and complicated, I do not propose to
speak further about them now. It is some consolation to know that in the commoner questions
of hereditary interest, the genealogy is fully known for two generations, and that the average
influence of the preceding ones is small.

"In conclusion it must be borne in mind that I have spoken throughout of heredity in respect
to a quality that blends freely in inheritance. I reserve for a future inquiry (as yet incomplete)
the inheritance of a quality that refuses to blend freely, namely the colour of the eyes. These
may be looked upon as extreme cases, between which all ordinary phenomena of heredity lie*."

These words show that Galton fully recognised that his theory applied
only to continuously varying and blending characters.

The paper in the Anthropological Journal Miscellanea, while less replete
with ideas requiring mathematical interpretation than that in the R. S.
Proceedings, contains two matters which deserve notice. Over and over
again we meet with the statement that more able men are born from undis-
tinguished parents than from parents of marked ability. In the year 1927
it formed the subject of a series of controversial letters in The Times news-
paper, in which neither side seemed to have any statistical ammunition, nor
appeared to be aware that they were dealing with a forty year old paradox,
which Galton had refuted in 1885 :

" Let it not be supposed for a moment that any of these statements invalidate the general
doctrine that the children of a gifted pair are much more likely to be gifted than the children
of a mediocre pair. What they assert is that the ablest child of one gifted pair is not as likely
to be as able as the ablest of all the children of very many mediocre pairs t."

In 1900 J the biographer gave exact numbers for the production of ability
on the assumption that one man in twenty may be treated as "able." It
turned out that in 10,000 matings the 52 pairs of exceptional parents pro-
duced 26 exceptional sons, while the 9948 non-exceptional pairs produced
474 exceptional sons, thus the rate of production of exceptional sons by
exceptional parents was 10 times greater than the rate by non-exceptional
parents, but the latter produced more than 18 times as many exceptional
sons as the former. The result flows merely from the fact that a rate of 10
times the production in the case of exceptional parents is counteracted in
total output, by the fact that there are some 200 times more non-exceptional
than exceptional pairs of parents. It is distressing to note how such
distinguished scientists as Dr Leonard Hill are unable to grasp the interpre-
tation of this simple statistical paradox first provided by Galton in 1885!

The second point is the publication of a diagram illustrating the vari-
ability of a stable population in the parental generation, for the midparentages,
for the generants, and for the filial generation. The diagram (see our p. 28) is

* R. S. Proc. Vol. lxii, pp. 62-63. t Journ. Anthrop. Instxt. Vol. xv, p. 254.

% Phil. Trans. Vol. 195, A, p. 47.

4—2

«0

►-

»-

t- u

s
cs

CO
(A

u
j

1
6-
£

I 5 »

k S Eti

+ + + •

O I i

J ■

K-

•

tr co

00 C*

•j

o
e

3SH3

dSlQ

sasM

3dSl

v /

X
E-

•^

t-*

* ia in *

^F*

/ 1 \

S3vL

WLLJM

aowo

, «

aavH

J-M30

woo

E-

W
DS

^»

CT>

<M !fr

w w

+1 03

•*•

o
o

sax

vhxm

aowo

3 /

\ s

aj,va

0/jviao

MOO

E-
«A

E-

«o

t- 00

CO t*

o
o

■*■>

*•»

S3H0M1 Ml

•$ M <M •>■ O «

i« OJ tA **

Mouvuvsa

+ + + + 1

1 1 1

3tA

t»co
St

.>_..^__

S3H9MI MI

1 I I T I jl ""

(0 C\2 — O CTi CO

1 1 1 1

r- «o ia *

J.HD13H

N I - * N h» <0 |<D

<0 <fl <© vO

m
6

o
E

•

•1

o
re
p-

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 29

not described at length*, and I have ventured to modify it in one or two
directions, which I believe will make it somewhat clearer. The main difficulty
Ibave is to interpret what Galton meant by the column headed "Generants." If
he meant by " Generant " the hypothetical individual that I have represented
by U above, a sort of " midancestor," replacing the whole stirp, then I think
the variability of this midancestor should be given by o-j vl — i?, where <r x is
the standard deviation of the population for the given character. For stature,
using not cr, but the quartile, this would be Galton's b or l" - 179, or the
value which Galton selects for b, i.e. l"'06. In his diagram, we have under
the " Generants " column " Probable deviation " 0""8 ; this number does not
occur, as far as I can see, anywhere else in the paper. One solution I can
suggest is that Galton was thinking of the variability of pairs of his new
population; in this the variability of these paired generants would be b/-j2,
and , 8x\/2 = ri31, almost the mean between the above values of b. Another
explanation may be that Galton had not reached the comprehensive idea of
the single midancestor, which I have defined by the " generant " above, but
that his generant depended solely on the midparent and was to be taken as
an individual with f of the character of the midparentage. In this case the
variability of the generant group would be § of that of the midparental
group, i.e. § (l //- 2) = r/, 8. If this be true the generant would be only a
hypothetical individual who produced offspring varying about his own, and
not about a regressed type. I trust this latter solution may be erroneous,
as I should like Galton to have conceived the idea of a single individual —
not one depending only on the parents — who would represent the whole
stirp or ancestry. At any rate let us preserve in future the good word
" generant " for the hypothetical individual who possesses, in the manner
indicated by the function TJ, all the midancestral characters which are
capable of showing a blending inheritance. Such a generant is a sort of mean
man for the stirp, who for statistical purposes represents the whole ancestry.
If Galton had not this idea, he provided at least the origin from which it
sprung! If his generants are the receded midparents, let us ourselves use
generantsfor the midancestry, who will notof necessity involve regression at all.

Of the Birmingham Lecture on "Chance and its Bearing on Heredity"
little need be said, it only adds to what we have already discussed, emphasis
on the point that in a stable population the whole inheritance of any blending
character depends on the knowledge of three constants: (i) the mean character
in any generation, (ii) the corresponding variability, and (iii) a single here-
ditary correlation.

Galton gave a further account of his researches on regression in stature

* Galton is explaining how the new generation is a reproduction of the old and writes:
" the process comprises two opposite sets of actions, one concentrative and the other dispersive,
and of such a character that they neutralise one another and fall into a state of stable
equilibrium (see Diagram [on our p. 28]). By the first set, a system of scattered elements is
replaced by another system which is less scattered ; by the second set, each of these new
elements becomes a centre whence a third system of elements is dispersed" (loc. cit. p. 256).
This is the only reference to the diagram or its interpretation I have noticed.

30 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

in his Presidential Address to the Anthropological Institute on January 26,
1886*. One or two points from this address may be noted. On pp. 491-3
he describes the working model which he exhibited to indicate how the
probable stature of any man could be ascertained from that of a kinsman in
any degree. Since the regression is constant all we have to do is to make
use of the property of similar triangles. AB is a scale of stature, where M is
the mean stature of the population.
S' is any particular stature, a
point on the horizontal through M,

O— ^

--A

S '

so that OM =10 units, then if
Om = lOr, where r is the correlation
of the particular grade of kinship,
a string from O to S' will cut a
vertical line through m in a point A.b

S, such that the point S gives the Fi 8- 8 -

probable stature of the kinsman of the grade r of correlation. Galton put on
a number of lines to determine probable stature in sons, nephews, grandsons,
etc. He also constructed scales based on the standard deviation (owl— r 2 )
showing the percentile distribution for each grade of kinship. These scales
could be shifted up and down on their respective lines ab, so that the prob-
ability could be measured of any deviation from the probable stature S. As
Galton's numerical values for the regressions were somewhat doubtful, I con-
structed at his suggestion some ten years later a life-size " Geniometer" on
this plan with the revised values we had then determined for the hereditary
correlations. It is reproduced on Plate I. The original figures which are in
brilliant colours t gave Galton and I hope my audience some amusement.

In a presidential address of this kind, it is legitimate to let one's thoughts
run freely, there is no need sternly to demonstrate each step as may be
thought fitting in a Royal Society paper. Accordingly Galton "let himself
go." Some quotations will illustrate for the reader what opinions were
forming in his mind, they are not demonstrated judgments — it is doubtful if
some are demonstrable at all.

(i) On the Normal Distribution or Law of Error (pp. 494-5).

" I know of scarcely anything so apt to impress the imagination as the wonderful form of
cosmic order expressed by the 'law of error.' A savage, if he could understand it, would
worship it as a god. It reigns with severity in complete self-effacement amidst the wildest
confusion. The huger the mob and the greater the anarchy the more perfect is its sway. Let
a large sample of chaotic elements be taken and marshalled in order of their magnitudes, and
then, however wildlyirregularthey appeared, an unexpected and most beautiful form of regularity
proves to have been present all along. Arrange statures side by side in order of their magnitudes,
and the tops of the marshalled row will form a beautifully flowing curve of invariable proportions ;
each man will find, as it were, a pre-ordained niche, just of the right height to fit him, and if
the class-places and statures of any two men in the row are known, the stature that will be found
at every other class-place, except toward the extreme ends, can be predicted with much precision."

* Journ. Anthrop. Instit. Vol. xv, pp. 487-499, 1886.

j* The actual artist, who was then a member of my staff, is now a distinguished man of
science, a grave and learned professor, and might not be too pleased if I gave his name away !

Take the red thread through any value on the scale of stature, say 74", then the average
stature of persons having all the kinsfolk described below of that stature would be obtained
by drawing a vertical line through the mark indicated by the kinsfolk till it meets the red
thread, and carrying through this meeting point a horizontal line back to the scale of stature,
which provides the average desired. For example the average nephew of two uncles, one
paternal and one maternal, each 6 ft. 2 in. would be 6 ft. 06 in., but the average nephew of
four uncles, two on each side, each 6 ft. 2 in. will be 6 ft. 1-8 in.* Again if both parents
and paternal and maternal grandparents were of this stature, the grandsons would have
progressed and be on the average 6 ft. 3"1 in. The statures are recorded for males, the
corresponding female statures may be obtained by subtracting T g w ths from the male statures.
In starting with females the male stature equivalent to that of the female must first be
obtained by adding o- :i rds of its value to the female stature. Thus a woman of 5 ft. 9 in.
counts as a man of 6 ft. 3 in.

The reduction from my life-size diagram to the present small dimensions costs much in
accuracy of reading, but serves to bring out the point that the regression ultimately changes
to a progression.

* The regression coefficient used on the genometer was •9614.

-Parents &nd Paternal and Maternal

Grandfathers

Four Uncle$, tujo on each side
_ Parents and Paternal Grandparent
""Three Grandparents

-Both Parents and tuJO Brothers

— Tujo Paternal and one Maternal Uncle
Both Parents and a Brother

-Both Parents

A Maternal and a Paternal Uncle

- A Maternal and Paternal Grandparent
:Tiuo Brothers

A Parent and a Brother

'Father and Paternal Grandparent's
Father, Paternal Grand and Great- Grandfathers

. Both Paternal Grandparents

Brother or Sister
; Two Cousins, one on either parental side

A Father or a Mother
" Tujo Paternal Uncles

-Great-Grandparents (Husband and Wife)

An Uncle or Aunt
■A Grandnarent

Tu/0 Cousins (Brethren)

_ A Cousin
A Great- Grandparent

-A Great- Great- Grandparent
A Second Cous'm

2
o
u

Q
U

Q
S

=>
J

r.
1

a
k

u
2

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 31

Galton was wont to illustrate the beauty of the "pre-ordained niche" on
a marshalled series of bean pods which he had many years before prepared.
This series is reproduced on Plate II. Unfortunately the tips of some of the
pods have bent back, but the general scheme survives.

(ii) The Phenomenon of Regression, a great Hindrance to the
Establishment of Breeds (pp. 495-6).

" It will be seen from the large values of the ratios of regression how speedily all peculiarities
that are possessed by any single individual to an exceptional extent, and which blend freely
together with those of his or her spouse, tend to disappear. A breed of exceptional animals,
rigorously selected, and carefully isolated from admixture with others of the same race, would
become shattered by even a brief period of opportunity to marry freely. It is only those breeds
that blend imperfectly with others and especially such of these as are at the same time prepotent,
in the sense of being more frequently transmitted than their competitors, that seem to have a
chance of maintaining themselves when marriages are not rigorously controlled — as indeed they
never are, except by professional breeders. It is on these grounds that I hail the appearance
of any new and valuable type as a fortunate and most necessary occurrence in the forward pro-
gress of evolution."

Galton admits that the precise manner in which a new type comes into
existence is unknown, but suggests that a multitude of petty causes may
contribute to reshape the grouping of the germinal elements and so lead to
a new and fairly stable position of equilibrium, which admits of hereditary
transmission. In favour of this view he cites the frequent experience of
"sports," useful, harmful and indifferent and therefore without ideological
intent. These, he considers, have various degrees of heritable stability, and
form fresh centres towards which some at least of the offspring have a
tendency to revert. He considers that such sports, by refusing to blend
freely, may be transmitted almost in their entirety.

"On the other hand, if the peculiarity blends easily, and if it was exceptional in magnitude,
the chance of inheriting it to its full extent would be extremely small...*. I feel the greatest
difficulty in accounting for the establishment of a new breed in a state of freedom by slight
and uncertain selective influences, unless there has been one or more abrupt changes of type,
many of them perhaps very small, but leading firmly step by step, though it may be along a
devious track, to the new form."

* Galton gives in a footnote the percentage of sons who are as tall or taller than their fathers.
I have recalculated this table on somewhat better data than Galton had available {Biometrika,
Vol. ii, p. 381). It now runs as follows:

Father's
Stature

Probable
Stature
of Son

Percentage of
Sons taller
than Father

Father's
Stature

Probable
Stature
of Son

Percentage of
Sons taller
than Father

Father's
Stature

Probable
Stature
of Son

Percentage of
Sons taller
than Father

67"-5
68"-0
69"-0
70"-0
71"-0

68"-56
68"-82
69"-33
69"-85
70"-37

67-4°/
63-7°/
55-6 7°
44-0 7°
39-4 7°

72"-0
73"-0
74"-0
75"-0
76"-0

70"-88
71"-40
71"-91
72"-43
72"-95

31-6 7
24-5 7°
18-4 7:
13-4 •/.

9-5%

77"-0
78"-0
79"-0
80"-0
81"-0

73"-46
73"-98
74"-49
75"-01
75"-52

6-4 7
4-2 7°
2-6 7°
1-6 7°
0-9 7°

The considerable changes from Galton's percentages arise from the facts : (i) that the sons in
our data had a mean stature 1" greater than their father's, (ii) that our regression was -516
against Galton's -333.

32 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Whatever we may think of Gal ton's arguments, it is clear that in 1886
he did not believe in the influence of natural selection as producing new
forms by acting on continuously varying small deviations. This may have
been due to the influence which the idea of perpetual regression * had upon his
mind. Whatever its source, Galton was in 1886 and later a firm believer, as
the above passage indicates, in evolution by mutation. He was a mutationist
before De Vries published his first paper on mutations (1900).

(iii) On the Inheritance of Ability and its Application to the
Upper House of Legislature (pp. 497-9).

Galton inquires how far the results for heredity in stattfre may be applied
to heredity in ability. He holds that considerable differences have to be
taken into account, and he classifies them under three heads :

" Firstly, after making large allowances for the occasional glaring cases of inferiority on the
part of the wife to her eminent husband, I adhere to the view I expressed long since as the
result of much inquiry, historical and otherwise!, that able men select those women for their
wives who are not mediocre women, and still less inferior women, but those who are decidedly
above mediocrity. Therefore, so far as this point is concerned, the average regression in the son
of an able man would be less than one-third."

On better data J than Galton had at his command the regression of son's
stature on father's stature is about "52 instead of - 33, and, allowing for
assertative mating, about *82 on the midparent instead of Galton's - 67.
When we introduce the grandparents the regression is not large. I think
these points will explain Galton's difficulty as to ability without resort to
the theory that extreme ability does not blend, which he suggests in his
second statement:

"Secondly, very gifted men are usually of marked individuality, and consequently of a special
type. Whenever this type is a stable one, it does not blend easily, but is transmitted almost
unchanged, so that specimens of very distinct intellectual heredity frequently occur."

Unfortunately Galton gives no illustrations, and without statistical
evidence it is difficult to interpret his meaning.

" Thirdly, there is the fact that men who leave their mark on the world are very often those
who, being gifted and full of nervous power, are at the same time haunted and driven by a domi-
nant idea, and are therefore within a measurable distance of insanity. This weakness will
probably betray itself occasionally in disadvantageous forms among their descendants. Some of
these will be eccentric, others feeble-minded, others nervous, and some may be downright
lunatics."

The same point has been made frequently since Galton's day, but although
isolated cases can of course be cited, the statement demands statistical
demonstration. We require to know first whether the men "who leave their

* The theory of multiple regression shows us that if an individual mates with his like, he
may regress on exceptional parents, but his offspring will not regress on him, nor further de-
scendants either. A breed may be established if we select only parents and grandparents; the
regression is thus of minor importance compared with the homogamy.

t See Vol. ii, p. 105. J Biometrika, Vol. ii, p. 381.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 33

mark on the world" are really always the able men, and if so, how many
of them are "driven by a dominant idea." Again having defined this class,
do statistics indicate that their offspring more often suffer from some form
of nervous breakdown than the sons of men of lesser ability? Ryk ud med
dine tal, bygmester! Talene pa bordet!

I think Galton did not really believe that ability was inherited in a
manner widely different from stature, for he now proceeds to suggest how
a fitting House of Peers might be based on the knowledge gained by his
inquiry. He supposes that in some new country it is desired to institute an
Upper House of life-peers which shall be largely governed by the hereditary
principle.

"The principle of insuring this being that (say) two-thirds of the members shall be elected
out of a class who possess specified hereditary qualifications, the question is : What reasonable
plan can be suggested of determining what those qualifications should be?

"In framing an answer we have to keep the following principles steadily in view: (1) The
hereditary qualifications derived from a single ancestor should not be transmitted to an indefinite
succession of generations, but should lapse after, say, the grandchildren. (2) All sons and
daughters should be considered as standing on an equal footing as regards the transmission of
hereditary qualifications. (3) It is not only the sons and grandsons of ennobled persons who
should be deemed to have hereditary qualifications, but also their brothers and sisters, and the
children of these. (4) Men who earn distinction of a high but subordinate rank to that of the
nobility, and whose wives had hereditary qualifications, should transmit these qualifications to
their children. I calculate roughly and very doubtfully, because many things have to be considered,
that there would be about twelve times as many persons hereditarily qualified to be candidates
for election as there would be seats to fill. A considerable proportion of the.se would be nephews,
whom I should lie very sorry to omit, as they are twice as near in kinship as grandsons*. One in
twelve seems a reasonably severe election, quite enough to draft off the eccentric and incom-
petent, and not too severe to discourage the ambition of the rest. I have not the slightest doubt
that such a selection out of a class of men who would be so rich in hereditary gifts of ability,
would produce a senate at least as highly gifted by nature as could be derived by ordinary
parliamentary election from the whole of the rest of the nation. They would be reared in family
traditions of high public services. Their ambitions, shaped by the conditions under which here-
ditary qualifications could be secured, would be such as to encourage alliances with the gifted
classes. They would be widely and closely connected with the people, and they would to all
appearance — but who can speak with certainty of the effects of any paper constitution? — form
a vigorous and effective aristocracy." (pp. 498-9.)

Galton does not state how he would start his Upper House ab initio, nor
take into account the possible need of recruiting its stock from outside
ability. His scheme would certainly introduce improved and better planned
marriages among the peers, as they would be anxious to preserve the
peerages within their own families. Here as elsewhere f he points out to our
hereditary peers how little justification there is for their position, while at
the same time he indicates that there is a basis in heredity for a really
effective aristocracy. Such doctrines would scarcely appeal even now to either
Tory or Democrat. Among the many proposals put forward for reforming the
British House of Lords, none has endeavoured like Galton's to place it on a

* I think this is incorrect for reasons stated above (see pp. 22 and 24). The observed corre-
lations between a man and his grandson and a man and his nephew are about equal,
t See our Vol. n, p. 93.

pain 5

34 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

scientific basis by suggesting that the hereditary honour should follow ability
in the stock and not be granted to a preordained individual.

D. Attempt to demonstrate the Law of Ancestral Heredity on Eye-
Colour. In 1886 Galton published in the Proceedings* of the Royal Society
a paper on "Family Likeness in Eye-Colour." The only earlier paper I know
which deals with this topic is that by Alphonse de Candollef. That paper has
no adequate statistical treatment, and suffers from two fundamental errors.
The material was collected not only from Switzerland with its mixed races,
but from Sweden, Germany and France, so that beyond the immediate
parents, there must have been great differences in the eye-colours of the
unrecorded earlier ancestry, and secondly the contributors were especially
requested to leave out offspring of "doubtful" eye-colour, and also those of
definite eye-colour whose parents had doubtful eye-colour. I do not think that
in de Candolle's paper any results of real scientific value are reached. Galton's
method of approaching the problem is entirely different. He starts from his
Law of Ancestral Heredity, and endeavours to apply it to eye-colour, which
he says does not usually blend. Accordingly he proportions the ancestral
contributions not in the character of the individual but among the whole
group of offspring. As Galton believed he had deduced from his mid-
parental regression of f the system i + i + £+--- for contributions to the
individual character in the case of stature, so he now supposes that an indi-
vidual parent's eye-colour will determine on the average that of \ of the
offspring, that of a grandparent -j^ of the offspring, and so on.

"Stature and eye-colour are not only different as qualities, but they are more contrasted in
hereditary behaviour than perhaps any other simple qualities. Speaking broadly parents of dif-
ferent statures transmit a blended heritage to their children, but parents of different eye-colours
transmit an alternative heritage. If one parent is as much taller than the average of his or her
sex as the other parent is shorter, the statures of their children will be distributed in much the
same way as those of parents who were both of medium height. But if one parent has a light
eye-colour and the other a dark eye-colour, the children will be partly light and partly dark, and
not medium eye-coloured like the children of medium eye-coloured parents. The blending of
stature is due to its being the aggregate of the quasi-independent inheritances of many separate
parts, while eye-colour appears to be much less various in its origin. If then it can be shown, as
I shall be able to do, that notwithstanding this two-fold difference between the qualities of
stature and eye-colour, the shares of hereditary contribution from the various ancestors are in
each case alike, we may with some confidence expect that the law by which these hereditary
contributions are governed will be widely, and perhaps universally applicable J."

Galton starts his paper by considering whether there has been a secular
change in eye-colour in the four generations to which his Records of Family
Faculties extended. He started with those who ranked as "children" in the
pedigree as Generation I ; their parents, uncles and aunts were Generation II ;
the grandparents and their collaterals were Generation III, while the great
grandparents and their collaterals were Generation IV. He gives the

* Vol. xl, pp. 402-416. Read May 27, 1886.

t "Her^dite de la couleur des yeux dans l'espece humaine." Archives des Sciences physiques
et naturelles, 3 Rme Periode, T. xn, pp. 97-120, Geneva, 1884.
X Hoy. Soc. Proc. pp. 402-3.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 35

accompanying chart for the percentages of these eye-colours in the various
generations, and concludes that there has been in these four generations

Fig. 9. Percentages of Eye-Colour in Successive Generations.

little secular change in eye-colour. It should, I think, be noted that the
Generations III and IV are likely to be much older than Generations I and II
when their eye-colours were recorded. Galton's data give the following

5-2

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

percentage values on considerable numbers in the groups combined of Light
and Dark Blue, Grey, Blue Green:

Generation

Male

Female

III

Percentages
Probable Errors

58-2
+ 1-92

58-4
±1-22

62-9
+ 1-33

70-4
+ 1-43

58-0
±1-97

58-1
+ 1-23

58-6
+ 1-22

56-2
±1-58

It will be seen that, while there is no significant change in the percentage
of light eyes in the women, there is really such a change in the light eyes
of the men ; the grandparental and great grandparental generations have
more bluish eyes. Were it not for the fact that there is no change in the
women, we might attribute this not to a racial change going on, but to men's
eyes growing lighter with extreme age. I have no statistical data to produce,
but my impression of the marked frequency of very light colour in old men's
eyes is strong. At the same time I know no physiological reason why men's
and not women's eyes should grow lighter with greater age.

On the basis of his diagrams Galton considers that he may disregard "a
current popular belief in the existence of a gradual darkening of the popula-
tion, and can treat the eye-colours of those classes of the English race who
have contributed to the records, as statistically persistent during the period
under discussion" (p. 406).

Galton next states that he considers that there are only two fundamental
types of eye-colour, the light and the dark, but under this supposition the
medium tints are troublesome. Such tints he has classified under "Dark
Grey and Hazel." In these cases the outer portion of the iris is usually of
a dark grey colour, and the inner of a hazel. The proportions of grey and
hazel vary, and the eye is called "dark grey" or "hazel" according to the
colour which happens most to arrest the attention of the observer. Galton's
attempt to deal with these medium eyes, of which there are in the popula-
tion about 12'7 / o , is to me unconvincing; yet the fact that he recognises
their existence is more satisfactory than the Mendel ian treatment which dis-
regards them entirely !

Galton for conciseness terms all these eyes "hazel." He defines a hazel-
eyed family to be one in which there is at least one hazel-eyed child, and he
proceeds to inquire into the constitution and ancestry of such "hazel-eyed"
families or sibships. He obtains the results tabulated on p. 37.

Now it is clear from the table that when there is a hazel-eyed child in a
sibship, the percentage of dark eyes in the sibship is only very slightly
reduced, but the number of light-eyed brothers and sisters is 16% below
that of the general population. Again in the parental generation, there are
12 °/ o fewer light-eyed parents of hazel-eyed parents, and this 12°/ u is
transferred to the hazel-eyed group, the dark-eyed parents remaining at

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 37

Constitution and Ancestry of Hazel- Eyed Sibships.

Generations

Total cases
observed in
168 families

Percentages

Light Eyed

Hazel Eyed

Dark Eyed

I. Siblings

II. Parents

III. Grandparents

948
336
449

45
49
60

32
25
13

23
26

General Population

4490

61-2

12-7

26-1

the general population percentage. The distribution of the grandparents of
a hazel-eyed person is practically the same as that of the general popula-
tion. From these data Galton concludes as follows :

"The total result in passing from Generation III to I, is that the percentage of the light eyes
is diminished from 60 or 61 to 45, therefore by one quarter of its original amount, and that the
percentage of the dark eyes is diminished from 26 or 27 to 23, that is to about [1 by about] one-
eighth of its original amount, the hazel element in either case absorbing the difference. It follows
that the chance of a light-eyed parent having hazel offspring is about twice as great as that of
a dark-eyed parent. Consequently since hazel is twice as likely to be met with in any given
light-eyed family as in a given dark-eyed one, we may look upon two-thirds of the hazel eyes as
being fundamentally light and one-third of them as fundamentally dark. I shall allot them
rateably in that proportion between light and dark and so get rid of them. M. Alphonse de
Candolle has also shown from his data that yeux gris (which I take to be equivalent to my hazel)
are referable to a light ancestry rather than to a dark one, but his data are numerically insuffi-
cient to warrant a precise estimate of the relative frequency of their derivation from each of
these two sources." (pp. 407-8.)

I find it very difficult to follow this reasoning, or to see from the table
above its validity. It would seem to be essential to follow up the particular
ancestry of each hazel-eyed individual, before we can draw the conclusions
that Galton does from the massed numbers of children, parents and grand-
parents. Galton and de Candolle at least admit the difficulty of the hazel
eyes; many Mendelian writers speak only of "brown" and "blue" eyes;
others speak of hazel-eyed persons as heterozygotes*.

Galton having thus disposed of his yeux gris, now turns to the same
multiple regression formula as he has used for stature, namely he makes
the regression coefficient \ for a parent, ^ for a grandparent and so on to
higher ancestry. He also makes use of what is, I believe, an erroneous hypo-
thesis, at any rate one inconsistent with his multiple regression coefficients,

* Sometimes a definition is given of pure blue eyes as being those without anterior pigment.
According to one ardent Mendelian this can always and only be tested with a lens; another
accepted relatives' statements, and came to the same conclusion without a lens. From twelve cases
in which both eyes were carefully examined with a lens and thus found to be without anterior
pigment, the excised eye when sectioned and examined microscopically showed quite clearly
anterior pigment. Hitherto I have failed to come across any eye, however blue, which is without
some anterior pigment when sectioned. At what degree of pigmentation does the recessive
character cease?

38 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

namely, that if an individual has h of a certain character, the most prob-
able value of the character in his parent will be ^h, and in his grand-
parent —^h and his great grandparent — Ji and so on.
o o

Consequently, if we know nothing beyond the one parent of character h,
the expected heritage is

When one grandparent only is known to have h then the corresponding
parent has ^h, and the two great grandparents ^h, the four great great

grandparents — 2 h and so on. Thus the formula is
o

i.e. actually 0"1583&.

If a parent and the corresponding two grandparents be known Galton
says the parent will contribute £ of his character and the two grandparents
and their ancestry ^ as above. But I do not think this is correct, even on
Galton's assumptions. In the previous case we predicted the great grand-
parents and higher ascendants from a knowledge of the grandparents only.
But in this case we have not only these two grandparents, but also the
knowledge of their offspring, the parent, to predict from, and accordingly
Galton's ■g'jj- for the rest of the ancestry is not satisfactory. As he is working
in round numbers, Galton puts ^ ( = '075) as equal to '08.

Three cases are now dealt with : I, both parents only known ; II, four grand-
parents only known; and III, both parents and four grandparents known.
I gives 2 x "30 = "60 of heritage with a residue of "40 undetermined. Galton
distributes this residue in the general population proportions of light to dark
eyes after distributing the hazel eyes § to light and ^ to dark eyes, which
give 70°/ o and 30% of those eyes. Thus the residue "40 is to be given "28
to light and "12 to dark eyes. The corresponding residues for cases II and
III are "36 and "18, which Galton distributes as "25 and "11, "12 and "06*
respectively.

Galton now combines all these results in a table from which with know-
ledge of the ancestry as far as parents and grandparents are concerned he
considers prediction of eye-colour in offspring can be ascertained (p. 39).

Let me illustrate the use of this table. A family of 12 given by Galton
had both parents light-eyed, 3 grandparents light-eyed and 1 hazel-eyed.
If we predict from parents only we should have

12 x (2 x "30 + "28) = 12 x "88 = 10"56 light-eyed.
If we predict from grandparents only we should have

12 x (3 x "16 + 1 x "10 + "25) = 9"96 light-eyed.

* More accurately the latter pair should be - 13 and -05.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems 0/ Heredity 39

And if from all our information t

12 x (2 x -25 + 3 x -08 + 1 x '05 + '12) = 10-92 light-eyed. /

Thus the best prediction gives 11 out of 12 children light-eyed. Actually
all 12 were light-eyed. Take again another family 2 parents hazel, 2 grand-
parents light, 1 hazel and 1 dark. Total family, 7 children. The prediction
is 7 (2 x -16-1- 2 x -08 + 1 x "05 + -12) = 4"55 light-eyed, the observed number
was 4. Of course Galton only claims to give the average family, and some
of the results he gives from his Table of 78 individual families are not
good. But his Table III in which he deals with 16 groups of different
ancestries is, considering what appears to me the doubtful character of his
assumptions, really surprising. Out of 827, 629 were observed to be light-
eyed. Predicted from parents only 623 were light-eyed, and from parents
and grandparents 614. As a rule, however, III gives a better result than I;
for example, out of 183 children, all of whose parents and grandparents were
light-eyed (none hazel), 174 were observed to be light-eyed; here III pre-
dicts 172, and I only 161.

Prediction Table for Eye Colour in Offspring.

Both Parents
I

Four Grandparents
II

Both Parents and

Four Grandparents

III

Light

Dark

Light

Dark

Light

Dark

Light-eyed Parent
Hazel-eyed Parent
Dark -eyed Parent

0-30
0-20

0-10
0-30

—

0-25
0-16

009
0-25

Light-eyed Grandparent
Hazel-eyed Grandparent
Dark-eyed Parent

—

016
0-10

006
0-16

0-08
0-05

0-03
0-08

Residue to be rateably assigned

0-28

0-12

0-25

0-11

0-12

0-06

It is certainly remarkable that the predictions should be even as accurate
as they are — and they are indeed not perfect — considering the contradictory
assumptions on which they are based*. Perhaps in the first glow of finding
such an amount of accordance Galton was justified in writing:

"A mere glance at Tables III and IV will show how surprisingly accurate the predictions

are, and therefore how true the basis of the calculations must be My returns are insufficiently

numerous and too subject to uncertainty of observation to make it worth while to submit them

* In particular Galton's assumption that the correlations of the offspring with the individual
parent, grandparent, great grandparent, etc., form the series r, r 3 , r 3 , etc., is incompatible with
his multiple regression coefficients \, ^, ^ T , etc. Any such series causes all those coefficients ex-
cept the first or parental coefficient to vanish, and reduces the ancestral multiple regression to
a simple biparental inheritance. Thus the parental characters determine completely those of
the offspring, as in the well-known case of the Mendelian theory of gametic characters.

40 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

to a more rigorous analysis, but the broad conclusion to which the present results irresistibly
lead, is that the same peculiar hereditary relation that was shown to subsist between a man
and each of his ancestors in respect of the quality of stature, also subsists in respect to that of
eye-colour." (pp. 415-6.)

The essential fact to be remembered here is that Galton supposes the
ancestral contributions which blend in the case of the stature of the indi-
vidual, will be found as alternative eye-colours in the same proportions as for
stature in the total group of descendants. "For example, if an ancestor
contributes 1/pth of his stature deviation to his descendant in the final
generation, he will contribute his eye-colour to 1/pth of his descendants in
the same generation.

It would be of great interest to rework Galton's proportions with the
actual correlations found from his data, and with the corresponding and con-
sistent multiple regression coefficients, and ascertain whether accordance
was not sensibly improved. His parental correlation J is too small for his
data, and his regression coefficients want considerable modification.

E. Law of Ancestral Heredity applied to Basset Hounds. Galton
having applied his Law of Ancestral Heredity to Eye-Colour in Man sought
for additional material to illustrate it. He found this eleven years later in
Sir Everett Millais' large pedigree stock of Basset Hounds. This material
reached him at the very time he was himself planning an extensive experi-
ment with fast breeding small mammals*. One can but regret that that
experiment was never undertaken. The Bassets are dwarf bloodhounds, and
there are only two varieties of colour, they are either white with blotches
from red to yellow technically termed "lemon and white," or they have in
addition to this "lemon and white" black markings; in which case they are
termed "tricolour." Galton had thus only two types to deal with, which he
terms "tricolour" (T)and "non-tricolour" (N). A full report of his statistical
reduction of Millais' data is given in a paper read before the Royal Society,
June 3, 1897-f.

Galton's material was contained in The Basset Hound Club Rules and
Studbooh, compiled by Everett Millais, 1874-1896, but with this valuable
addition, that Sir Everett Millais had added the registered colours of nearly
1000 of the hounds (this copy is now in the Galton Laboratory). In this
record are 817 hounds, the colour of whose parents are given, and 567 hounds
in which the colours of the two parents and the four grandparents are known,
and lastly in 188 cases in addition the colour of all the eight great grand-
parents.

Galton starts with the same idea as in the paper last dealt with, namely
that each parent contributes £,each grandparent -^ and so on, of the heritage
taken as a whole to be unity. Here as in the case of eye-colour, the heritage is

* An extensive series on moth-breeding had been undertaken but had unfortunately failed
to give any satisfactory results, partly owing to the diminishing fertility of successive broods,
and partly to the disturbing effects of food differences and change of environment in differentyears.

t See Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. i,xi, pp. 401-413. An abstract appeared in Nature, July 8, 1897,
Vol. lv, p. 235.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 41

not taken to be that of an individual, but as represented by percentages of
the total offspring, the coat colours being exclusive, i.e. there is no attempt to
measure the degree of melanism. Galton gives some reasons for his law being
a probable one :

"It should be noted that nothing in this statistical law contradicts the generally accepted
view that the chief, if not the sole, line of descent runs from germ to germ and not from person
to person. The person may be accepted on the whole as a fair representative of the germ, and,
being so, the statistical laws which apply to the persons would apply to the germs also, although
with less precision in individual cases. Now this law is strictly consonant with the observed
binary subdivisions of the germ cells, and the concomitant extrusion and loss of one-half of the
several contributions from each of the two parents to the germ cell of the offspring. The apparent
artificiality of the law ceases on those grounds to afford cause for doubt; its close agreement
with physiological phenomena ought to give a prejudice in favour of its truth rather than the
contrary. Again, a wide though limited range of observation assures us that the occupier of each
ancestral place may contribute something of his own personal peculiarity, apart from all others,
to the heritage of the offspring. Therefore there is such a thing as an average contribution
appropriate to each ancestral place, which admits of statistical valuation, however minute it
may be. It is also well known that the more remote stages of ancestry contribute considerably
less than the nearer ones. Further it is reasonable to believe that the contributions of parents
to children are in the same proportion as those of the grandparents to the parents, of the great
grandparents to the grandparents, and so on; in short, that their total amount is to be expressed
by the sum of the terms in an infinite geometrical series diminishing to zero. Lastly, it is an
essential condition that the total amount should be equal to 1, in order to account for the

whole of the heritage. All these conditions are fulfilled by the series of jr + ^~ + ^ + etc., and

by no other *. These and the foregoing considerations were referred to when saying that the law
might be inferred with considerable assurance a priori; consequently, being found true in the
particular case about to be stated, there is good reason to accept the law in a general sense."
(loc. cit. p. 403.)

Modem research shows that the "binary subdivisions of the germ cells,
and the concomitant extrusion and loss of one-half of the several contributions
from each of the two parents to the germ cell of the offspring " may have other
interpretation than that put upon it by Galton. ^Objections may also be
raised to Galton's proportioning of the "heritage" among the offspring, and
to his allowance for ancestors whose characters are not known directly />But
the criticisms of the "ancestral law," made chiefly by Mendelians, have failed
to attack these weaknesses. They have been generally based on citing
individual matingsf, as if these had any application to a statistical law

* This seems incorrect : the conditions would appear to be equally well satisfied by

(l-a)(l+a + a 2 + a 3 +...),

which series leaves a constant a to be determined by observation of one kind or another. By

putting a = £, Galton excluded his ancestral law from describing Mendelian gametic inheritance,

which corresponds to a = or the parents' gametic constitutions alone determining the offspring.

t Occasionally hybridisations are cited. Galton in a letter to Nature, October 21, 1897, writes:

"Permit me to take this opportunity of removing a possible misapprehension concerning the scope of my
theory. That theory is intended to apply only to the offspring of parents who, being of the tame variety, differ
in having a greater or less amount of such characteristics as any individual of that variety may normally possess.
It does not relate to the offspring of parents of different varieties; in short it has nothing to do with hybridism,
for in that case the offspring of two diverse parents do not necessarily assume an intermediate form."

Whether the limit to offspring assuming "an intermediate form" is needful is another
question, and might raise a discussion as to whether the law could be applied to alternate

pqiii 6

42 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

describing what happens on the average in the case of a race or community
mating at random. What Galton's critics have not seen is that the degree
of accordance between his predictions and observed facts, if not perfect, is
yet so considerable, in the cases of both eye-colour in Man and coat-colour
in Basset Hounds, that it is not possible simply to put it for all characters
on one side as of no importance. No entirely erroneous hypothesis could,
I think, lead to such accordance as Galton shows in his Tables V and VI
of this memoir !

I have already pointed out when dealing with Galton's views on eye-colour,
that, because r is the regression coefficient of child on parent*, it does not
follow that r 2 will be that of child on grandparent or of grandparent on child.
Galton drops this manner of allowing for the unstated characters of the
higher ascendants when he comes to the coat-colour of Bassets. He argues
as follows: Out of 1060 parents of 530 offspring with tricolour coats 836
were tricolour (T) and 224 were lemon and white (iV), i.e. 79 °/ o and 21 c / j
he accordingly says that the chance that a tricolour offspring has a tri-
colour parent is "79. He concludes that if a dog has a tricolour parent, but
nothing is known of the grandparents, these will be '79 °/ o tricolour, and the
parents of these grandparents will be ( - 79) 2 °/ o tricolour and so on. I am
inclined to doubt the accuracy of this method of correction for the past
ancestry of the tricolour for two reasons: (i) if both parent and grandparent
were tricolour, then it seems to me there would be a greater probability of
the great grandparent being tricolour than 79, for we know that not merely
one, but two generations of the offspring of these ancestors have been tri-
colour f; (ii) further, in each ascending generation besides the "79 °/ o tricolour
of a tricolour animal there will be '21 °/ o non-tricolour, but these non-tricolour
dogs will have also a percentage of tricolour ancestry, namely 56 °/ o according
to Galton's Table III, and I cannot see that he has allowed for the non-
tricolour ancestors' contribution of additional ancestral tricolours in his
method of reckoning his tricolour "coefficients" of tricolour grandparents.
Noting that Galton calls A, the ancestry of the sth generation and a the
offspring, we may cite his words from p. 406 :

"Suppose all the four grandparents, A it to be tricolour, then only - 79 of A 3 will be tricolour
also, (0'79) s of A it and so on. These several orders of ancestry will respectively contribute an
average of tricolour to each a of the amounts of (0 - 5) 3 x 0-79, (0"5) 4 x (0-79) 2 , etc. Consequently
the sum of their tricolour contributions is

(0-5) 8 x (0-79) {1 + (0-5) x (0-79) + (0-5) 2 x (0-79) 2 + etc.}

which equals - 1632. The average tricolour contributions from each of the four tricolour grand-
parents must be reckoned as the quarter of this, namely, 0"0408."

characters in either eye-colour or coat-colour; but Galton's disclaimer, made with regard to
Professor Henslow's criticisms of the law (see Gardeners' Chronicle, September 25, 1897) based
on plant hybridisations, has been overlooked by those who more recently have cited hybridisa-
tions as disproving the law.

• r = 0'3 according to Galton.

f Thus from Galton's Table I we find that if parents and grandparents were all tricolour
the percentage was 89, and not 79, tricolour offspring. Galton treats really correlated relation-
ships as independent probabilities.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 43

Now I think this does not involve all the tricolour ancestry of the four
tricolour grandparents, for 0"21 of the great grandparents are non-tricolour,
and there will be (0-21) x (0*56) x (0-5)'x(079)x(0-5) 2 of thegreatgreat grand-
parents tricolour. At each stage a non-tricolour branch will split off, showing
in the next ascending generation some tricolour. It appears to me that
Galton has overlooked the sum of all these ancestral tricolour contributions
in estimating the tricolour in a . They may be considerably less than those
retained, but I do not think they can be disregarded without justification.

"By a similar process," Galton writes, "the average tricolour contribution from the ancestry
of each non-tricolour grandparent is found to be - 0243." (p. 406.)

It would seem that this is obtained from :

(0-5) 3 x (0-56) {1 + (0-5) x (0-56) + (0-5) 2 x (0"56) 2 + etc.} = "0972,
for one-fourth of this is 0'0243.

But the above expression is not, I think, correct, for after the great grand-
parental 0'56 of tricolour we must surely use not 0'56 but 079 to pass from
tricolour to tricoloured ancestry. Thus the result should be

(0-5) :, x(0-56){l + (0-5) x (079) + (0-5) 2 x(079) 2 + etc.}= -1157,

of which the fourth part is "0289.

\Iere as before the non-tricoloured ancestors of earlier generations who
would themselves have tricoloured parents, etc., are neglected!^

Taking Galton's illustration (p. 406) of both parents tricolour, three
grandparents tricolour, and one lemon and white, Galton's factor of "8342 is
only changed to - 8388 by the above correction, but this gives 100 tricolour
hounds out of a total of 119 offspring in this category, while the observed
tricolours were 101, a remarkably close accordance.

I illustrate the sort of accordance obtained in the following examples :

Both Parents Tricolour

Number of Tricolour Grandparents

Totals

Tricolour Offspring :
Observed
Calculated

106 (119)
108

101 (119)
100

24 (28)
21

8(11)
8

239 (277)
237

Both Parents and three
Grandparents Tricolour

Number of Tricolour Great Grandparents

Totals

Tricolour Offspring :
Observed
Calculated

17 (18)
16

19 (21)
18

14 (16)
13

6(6)
5

56 (61)
52

The numbers in brackets denote total offspring.

6—2

44 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Two cases give rather poor results, those for 1 parent and 3 grandparents
tricolour, no great grandparents or higher ancestry known (92 calculated
for 79 observed in 158) and 1 parent, 3 grandparents and 5 great grand-
parents tricolour with no higher ancestry known (18 calculated for 8 observed
out of 3 1 ). In the latter case especially it is the observations which seem to
me questionable, because for one parent tricolour and the other lemon and
white, whatever be the more remote ancestry we get 139 tricolour to 122
non -tricolour, while with 3 grandparents and 5 great grandparents tricolour,
the observations only give us 8 tricolour to 23 non-tricolour or a drop from
50 °/ to 26 °/ o in tricolour, with an increase of tricolour ancestry. If we can
trust the classification, then no simple Mendelian hypothesis will provide
a formula to fit the data, because neither tricolour x tricolour nor non-
tricolour x non-tricolour breeds true. I have said, if we can trust the classi-
fication, because as Galton points out there is a strange prepotency of sire
over dam*, the ratio of sire colour to dam colour in offspring being of the
order of 6 to 5. A more important fact bearing on the classificatory accuracy
arises from an investigation by an entirely different method from Gal ton's f,
where it appeared that the resemblance of the offspring to the sire was far
less than to the dam. This suggested that the parentage was more certain
in the case of the dam than in that of the sire, a difficulty not unlikely to
arise from the carelessness of kennel attendants.

In the opinion of the present biographer the Law of Ancestral Heredity
has been shown by Galton to be at least approximate in two very different
cases, and this justifies further attempts to deal with it, either in Galton's
or a more generalised form, on more satisfactory material and with possibly
more accurate methods of computing the corrections for the unknown
characters of the higher ancestors.

F. Representations of the Ancestral Law. Several graphical representa-
tions of Galton's form of the Ancestral Law have been provided. Perhaps
the best is that devised by A. J. Meston of Pittsburgh, which was modified
by Galton himself in a communication to Nature, January 27, 1898.

The diagram (p. 45) is of the following nature.

It is based on a square of unit edge; 2 and 3 represent the parents; 4, 5,
6 and 7 the grandparents; 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 the eight great grand-
parents, and so on. All even numbers represent males and uneven numbers
females. 2n + 1 is the female mate of the male 2n. The father and mother
of n are always 2n and 2ra + 1 respectively. Every ancestor in whatever line
has now got a definite number, and every number denotes a definite ancestor.
For example:

(i) What is the proper number to represent a child's mother's mother's

* In the Roy. Soc. Proc. paper, p. 404, Galton says the dam is prepotent. But on this page
and in Table II, p. 410, sire and dam should be interchanged. This slip is acknowledged by
Galton himself in a letter to Nature, October 21, 1897, on the Hereditary Colour in Horses, to
which we shall refer later. It does not affect his work as he has made no use of this prepotency
in his calculations.

t Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lxvi, p. 158. January, 1900.

% See The Horseman, December 28, 1897, Chicago.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 45

father's father's mother's father's father's father's mother? The child's mother
is 3, her mother 2x3 + 1=7, her father 2x7 = 14, his father 28, 28's
mother = 2 x 28 + 1 = 57, 57's father is 114, 114's father is 228, 228's father
is 456 and lastly 456's mother is 913, which is the number signifying the
required ancestor.

Fig. 10.

(ii) What ancestor does 253 represent? 253 is odd and therefore the
mother of <j(253 — 1) = 126, who being even is the father of 63, who being odd
is the mother of 31 who is the mother of 15 who is the mother of 7, who is
mother of 3 the child's mother. Accordingly 253 is the child's mother's
mother's mother's mother's mother's father's mother.

This numerical nomenclature is not due to Meston, but to Galton himself,
appearing in his paper of 15 years' earlier date on "Arithmetic Notation of
Kinship*."

We may, to use Galton's notations, say that :

mm f f m f f f m = %\Z, and 253 = mmmmmfm.

The ancestral lines of 913 and 253 separate off at the parents of the
child's maternal grandmother.

G. Experiments in Moth- Breeding. Before we turn to a number of
papers and projects directly arising from the " Law of Ancestral Heredity,"
it is desirable to say a few words on the abortive moth-breeding experiments
(see our p. 49). At first sight the idea of breeding moths seems exceedingly
hopeful. They breed rapidly and apparently could be fairly successfully
reared and bred in captivity. Accordingly Galton in January, 1887, six
months after the reading of his paper on Human Eye Colour, issued for

* Nature, September 6, 1883.

46 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

private circulation a circular entitled Pedigree Moths. He had already
enlisted the assistance of an able entomologist, Mr F. Merrifield, of Brighton,
who had suggested working with the Purple Thorn Moth (Selenia illustraria).
The circular consisted of two parts, one by Galton stating the purpose of the
experiments, and an Appendix by Merrifield asking his fellow entomologists
for advice and help. After referring to the number of pupae he needed,
Merrifield asks his colleagues for information as to the number of eggs, best
means of mating and laying of fertile eggs, preservation of moths, cages,
possible feeding, stupefying, etc., feeding of larvae, and preserving pupae. It
will be seen that the experiments were not rashly entered upon by mere
lay workers. Most careful inquiries were made and the plan of operations
well thought out with no undue haste. I think it needful to emphasise this
as I know of two later laborious experiments in moth-breeding which also
failed to attain any satisfactory results, and of which we might possibly say
that Galton's experience was not turned to profit by the undertakers. Too
often such experience is overlooked, or the investigator trusts to a belief
in his own greater skill, and the use of a different species*.

Galton in his section of the circular, after referring to his work on
regression in stature and to the Law of Ancestral Heredity as exhibited in
eye-colour, states that he thinks it desirable to obtain data providing more
than the three to four generations he has been able to deal with in these
cases. He considers that moths would form suitable material, and that the
time needful would be shortened by taking a species which bred twice a year.
He proposed to measure the size of wing for six generations, and in order to
measure the effect of selection to breed from large male and female, from
small male and female, and from mediocre male and female. Thus he would
establish three lines, and from the largest he would again pick the very
large male and female, and from the smallest the very small male and female,
and from the mediocre line the mediocre were again to be chosen; these
latter were to act as a control series whereby to standardise the large and the
small lines. After six generations Galton proposed to reverse the process, and
return by selection to his original wild moth. The whole experiment would
have taken at least six years. In his circular Galton makes two statements.
^One is that his Law of Regression leads to his Ancestral Law ; this I believe
to be incorrect. There is a relation between the ancestral correlations and a
Law of Ancestral Heredity, but the numerical values given by Galton for his
regression and his ancestral contributions are incompatible with each other
(see p. 39 above)^ In the second place Galton makes the following statement :

" It is, however, highly probable from other considerations that though this simple formula
may be closely true for the parents and nearly true for the grandparents, it may become sensibly
and increasingly different for remoter progenitors. It is this fact that I want to investigate,
because all theory concerning the nature of stability of type, and of much else, must be based on
the facts of Regression, which such experiments as those proposed can alone, so far as I see, be
likely to declare in a trustworthy way."

* It is possible that moths held in captivity for generations, like the silk-worrn moth,
would show less erratic results than wild moths reared under what must after all be very
artificial conditions.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 47

Now what is Galton's difficulty when he thus wishes to modify the con-
tributions of the earlier progenitors ?

I think his difficulty can be elucidated from passages in his other
writings. In the first place, on February 2, 1887, Gallon and Merrifield read
papers to the Entomological Society. These are respectively entitled :

Pedigree Moth-breeding, as a means of verifying certain important
Constants in the General Theory of Heredity, and

Practical Suggestions and Enquiries as to the Method of Breeding
Selenia illustraria for the purpose of obtaining Data for Mr Galton,
and were published in the Transactions*.

These papers consist of an enlargement of the proposals in the Circular
of January and a fuller account of the methods to be adopted in obtaining,
feeding, breeding, and measuring the moths. Between January and February
apparently the measurement of length of wing had been definitely fixed upon.
Galton in his paper says that the laws of simple heredity as he has pro-
pounded them involve only five constants.

" These admit of being separately determined, and they are at the same time connected by
an equation that serves to verify their observed values. The equation depends on the fact
alluded to, that successive generations of the same population yield identical biological statis-
tics, although each family or brood is full of variations, and although the ' median ' of each
characteristic in each brood is on the average always more mediocre than the corresponding
characteristic in the mean of the two parents. The first of these events, 'fraternal variability,'
increases the variability of the population as a whole, and the latter event, which I call
' Regression,' decreases it ; the two can be shown to counterbalance each other and give rise
to a position of stable equilibrium. The five constants are (1), the Median of the race; (2), the
Quartile of the race; (3), the Quartile of the broods of the same parents, i.e. brothers and sisters;
(4), the Quartile of the broods of a large number of like parents, mixed together in a single
group; (5), the coefficient of Regression." (p. 28.)

Before we go further let us endeavour to interpret this important passage
in terms of more modern notation and more modern conceptions of multiple
correlation. Corresponding to (1) we have the mean of the race M ; to (2),
the standa rd deviation of the race <x; to (3), the variability of the family, i.e.
07 vl — R\ where R is the multiple correlation coefficient of an individual on
all his ance stry an d 07 is the standard deviation of the totality of offspring ;
to (4), o-/Vl-r, where r is the correlation coefficient between parent and
offspring; and to (5), o- f r/cr p , where o- p is the standard deviation of the
parental generation in its totality. Now Galton, I think, throughout
supposes (after reducing female to male values) that <T f = o- p = cr, or he sup-
poses his parental variability to be the same as that of his general popula-
tion and again equal to that of the total offspring population. Further he
supposes M to be the same for every generation, and this is the most
stringent limitation of all, for it hinders the possibility of a continuous (or
discontinuous) change of type. We can illustrate this from a statement in
a second paper of Galton's, that on the Coat Colour of Basset Hounds (see
our p. 40 and p. 402 of the memoir itself). Therein he writes as follows:

" The law may be applied either to total values or to deviations, as will be gathered from
the following equation. Let M be the mean value from which all deviations are reckoned, and

* Trans. Entomological Soc. London, 1887, Part 1, pp. 19-34.

48 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

let A> A> etc. be the means of all the deviations, including their signs, of the ancestors in the
1st, 2nd, etc. degrees respectively; then

£ (M + A) + 1 {M+ A) + etc. = M + (» A + £ A + etc.)."

This is sufficient evidence that Galton had not at the time under con-
sideration reached the full meaning of multiple regression. The Ancestral
Law is nothing but the principle of multiple regression applied to ancestral
inheritance, but in this case the deviations must all be measured not from
a general mean, but from the mean of the corresponding generation. The
Law of Ancestral Heredity is therefore independent of the change of type,
if such is taking place ; it can tell us nothing of the laws ruling that change
of type, which is something wholly independent of it. Galton's statements
that the law may be applied either to total values or deviations is only true
for a population stable through the whole ancestry, whereas the application
to deviations (with the proper ancestral coefficients, i.e. the multiple regres-
sion coefficients) is generally true, and if Galton had recognised this, it
would have saved him from doubts as to the compatibility of his law with
evolutionary changes.

That Galton recognised the difference between the Quartile of the single
brood and the Quartile of the clubbed broods of like parents shows that he
fully appreciated the difference between R and r. I do not think, however,
that he recognised that his Ancestral Law, i.e. the. values he had chosen for
his coefficients, actually enforced a definite relation between R and r. But he
fully realised the relation between the regression coefficient and r, his "index
of correlation*." We can now continue our citation from the Entomological
Society paper, which brings out Galton's difficulty :

" The laws in which these constants play a part give calculated results that prove to be
closely true to observation in the ordinary cases of simple heredity, where there has been no
long-continued selection, but it does not at all follow that they will hold true for the descendants
of a long succession of widely divergent parents. It is this that I want to test. The point
towards which Regression tends cannot, as the history of Evolution shows, be really fixed. Then
the vexed question arises whether it varies slowly or by abrupt changes, coincident with changes
of organic equilibrium which may be transmitted hereditarily; in other words, with small or
large changes of type. Moreover the values of the Quartile in (3) and (4) cannot be strictly
constant and are probably connected in part with the value of the Median and require a modi-
fied treatment by using the geometrical law of error instead of the arithmetical one (Proc. Royal
Soc. 1879). Again the diminution of fertility and of vitality that accompany wide divergence
from racial mediocrity have yet to be measured, by comparing the A [selected large size] and Z
[selected small size] broods with the M [mediocre size] broods. It was assumed not to vary in
the approximate theory of which I spoke." (p. 28.)

< These words bring out the difficulty which arose in Galton's mind from
treating regression as taking place towards a fixed racial value, instead of

t supposing it to arise from measuring deviations from the means of their
groups.^In this way a rather mysterious entity "the racial centre of regresO
sion " was created, which was given biological significance, when it really s
was only a factor in the purely statistical description of mass phenomena.
Once recognise that in each generation the deviation is measured from the

* He speaks of his five constants being connected by " an equation."

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 49

mean of its generation and we find no incompatibility of the Ancestral Law
with any change of type. What we obviously must do is to study the
change of type or of successive means ; regression is a wholly independent
matter, and "the racial centre of regression " something which has no essen-
tial existence, biologically or statistically.

The next point that Galton makes is that the variabilities 07VI— ii! 2
and (T f Jl—r- cannot be quite constant; it is not clear whether he only
means by this that 07 and therefore cr, the population variability, changes
with the course of evolution. This is very possible, though there is small
likelihood of its being discoverable in breeding only six generations of moths,
if kept under the same environment. Selection might equally well change
type and variability; but if the distributions of frequency were normal, the
type and variability would be uncorrelated, and the selection of one would not
necessarily affect the other. Hence I do not see why Galton says the change
in the Quartiles is probably connected with the value of the Median ; least
of all do I grasp why he should refer at this point to Macalister's curve for
the geometric mean. Whatever application that curve may have to variation
in sensations, this is the only occasion on which I have seen it suggested
that it has any claim to be used for bodily measurements. It might be as
justifiably used for physical measurements on man as for those on moths, but
I can hardly imagine profit coming from such an application.

The last point made by Galton, namely that the fertility and vitality of
stocks widely divergent from the mediocre are likely to be affected, is a very
important one and is probably the reason why it is not possible to carry size
selection far, at any rate by rapid strides. This has been demonstrated not
only on the moth material at present under discussion, but by more recent
endeavours to modify small mammals by selecting for size.

The reader who is interested in this matter would do well to refer at
least to Merrifield's first report* on the moth-breeding experiments. He will
then quickly understand why they failed to satisfy Galton's thirst for data !
The spring and autumnal broods were really dimorphous, the males appeared
to be larger in one and the females in the other; the wing lengths were not
the same in the two. Thus the fact of two broods a year would certainly
not expedite matters. Further, the fertility of the largest and the smallest
Mas reduced below that of the mediocre, and when Merrifield took steps to
obtain by forcing under higher temperatures more frequent broods, not only
did he increase the size of his moths' wings, but the "giant" line and the
"dwarf" line became sterile and he had to start again from the mediocre.
In fact artificial means had to be used to get the moths from the pupae near
enough in time to breed with one another. Further, changes in environment
or food had to be made to hasten the larvae to the pupal stage because food
supplies were getting low. And all these changes appear to have been
associated with variations in size so that finally the irregularities were too
widespread for any statistical treatment of the data, or as Galton himself

* Trans. Entomological Soc. London (Dec. 7, 1887), 1888, pp. 123-136.
pgiii 7

50 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

expressed it ten years later : " No statistical results of any consistence or
value could be obtained from them*." Thus ended what had at first sight
appeared to be a hopeful series of experiments, experiments upon which
much thought and labour had been expended.

H. Correlations and their Measurement. As I have already pointed out
the conception that the regression coefficient for inheritance could be applied
to a measure of the relationship of associated variates, provided each was
measured in terms of its own scale of variability, first occurred to Galton
while he was taking a walk in the grounds of Naworth Castle in the year 1888
(see p. 393 of Vol. n). On December 5, 1888, Galton sent to the Royal
Society a paper read fifteen days later and entitled: "Co-relations and
their Measurement, chiefly from Anthropometric Dataf ." The twentieth of
December is therefore the birthday of the conception of correlation in
biometric data as apart from the idea of regression in heredity which Galton
had reached some years earlier, without perceiving at once its capacity for wide
generalisation in the treatment of associated variates in all living forms.

Like so much of Galton's work the present paper reaches results of
singular importance by very simple methods; his methods are indeed so
simple that we might almost believe they must lead to a fallacy had not
Galton deduced thereby the correct answer. It is the old experience that
a rude instrument in the hand of a master craftsman will achieve more than
the finest tool wielded by the uninspired journeyman.

The first three paragraphs of this memoir define Galton's method of con-
sidering correlation, and indicate that in 1888 even the spelling of the word
had not been fixed J :

"'Co-relation or correlation of structure' is a phrase much used in biology, and not least in
that branch of it which refers to heredity, and the idea is even more frequently present than
the phrase ; but T am not aware of any previous attempt to define it clearly, to trace its mode
of action in detail, or to show how to measure its degree.

" Two variable organs are said to be co-related when the variation of the one is accompanied
on the average by more or less variation of the other, and in the same direction. Thus the
length of the arm is said to be co-related with that of the leg, because a person with a long arm
has usually a long leg, and conversely. If the co-relation be close then a person with a very long
arm would usually have a very long leg ; if it be moderately close then the length of his leg
would only be long, not very long ; and if there were no co-relation at all then the length of
his leg would on the average be mediocre. It is easy to see that co-relation must be the consequence
of the variations of the two organs being partly due to common causes. If they were wholly
due to common causes, the co-relation would be perfect, as is approximately the case with the
symmetrically disposed parts of the body. If they were in no respect due to common causes,
the co-relation would be nil. Between these two extremes are an endless number of intermediate
cases, and it will be shown how the closeness of co-relation in any particular case admits of being
expressed by a simple number.

"To avoid the possibility of misconception it is well to point out that the subject in hand
has nothing whatever to do with the average proportions between the various limbs in different

* Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lxi, p. 402.
\ Ibid. Vol. xlv, pp. 135-145.

X Five years later in 1893 when the volume containing the letter C of the Oxford English
Dictionary was issued, the Galtonian or biometric sense of " correlation " was not given.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 51

races*, which have been often discussed from early times up to the present day, both by artists
and by anthropologists. The fact that the average ratio between the stature and the cubit is as
100 to 37 1 or thereabouts does not give the slightest information about the nearness witli which
they vary together. It would be an altogether erroneous inference to suppose their average
proportion to be maintained so that where the cubit was, say, one-twentieth longer than the
average cubit, the stature might be expected to be one-twentieth greater than the average
stature, and conversely. Such a supposition is easily shown to be contradicted both by fact
and theory." (loc. cil. pp. 135-6.)

Let us now describe Galton's procedure. In the first place Galton does
not use means, he uses throughout medians, both for his marginal totals and
his arrays. Further he does not use standard deviations, he makes use of
the quartile measurements. Thus if Q lf M and Q 3 be the measurements at
first, second and third quartile divisions, he takes M as his median and
'. CJ.i — Qi) as his measure of variation. Thus his results, unlike our modern
treatment, depend essentially on assuming that all his data follow a normal
(or "curve of errors") distribution J. If M c be the median of any character c
and b M c the median of an array of this character for a given value b of a second
character c', then Galton plots:

J£.-M. tQ b-M,

In other words he reduces the deviation of an array median from the popu-
lation median to its unit of variation obtained from the quartiles, and plots
this to the deviation of the second character from its median reduced like-
wise to its own unit of variation. Then he plots:

„Ms-M„, a-M„

where a is a value of the first character and a M & the median of the corre-
sponding array of the second character, and thus gets a second series of points.
He takes six or seven values of a and of b, plots two sets of six or seven
points and notes that the first and second series of points are nearly on
one and the same straight line§. He draws this straight line as closely as
he can to the points and through the median, and reads off its slope. This
slope is Galton's measure of co-relation. If we take the mean deviation of c'
for a given value of c, Galton calls c the " Subject" and c' the "Relative," but
perhaps it would be best to call the latter the "Co-relative." Galton's data
consisted of about 350 males of 21 years and upwards, of whom the majority
were young students, measured in his Laboratory in 1888. He deals with

* [The variation in the ratio of stature to cubit does, however, provide a means of determining
the correlation. K.P.]

t [Rather 100 to 27 or thereabouts on Galton's numbers, i.e. 67 - 20" for stature and 18 - 05"
for cubit. K.P.]

\ In the table given on p. 52 for the correlation of Stature and Left Cubit it is very difficult
to see any approximation to normality in the distribution of stature.

§ In order to get the same straight line, if c be the subject and c the co-relative, and the
" subject " axis horizontal, then it is needful when c is subject and c co-relative to plot c
along the same axis as was used in the first case for c. In other words the character axes must
be interchanged.

7—2

Life and Letters of Francis GaUon

a
G

six characters: Head Length, Head Breadth, Stature, Length of Left
Middle Finger, Left Cubit and Height of Right Knee. But he only provides
as illustration one table such as we now term a correlation table, and one
diagram illusti'ating how he found what we now term the correlation co-
efficient. The table and diagram dealing with the co-relation of stature and
cubit are given below. Readings were made to one-tenth of an inch.

Correlation Table for Stature and Cubit.

Length of Left Cubit in inches, 348 adult Males.

Under

16-45—

16-95—

17-45—

17-95—

18-45—

18-95—

19-45

16-45

16-95

17-45

17-95

18-45

18-95

19-45

and above

Above 7&4S

69-45— 70-45

—

68-45—69-45

—

67-45—68-45

—

66'45 — 67 '45

—

6o-45—66-45

—

64-45—65-45

—

68-45—64-45

—

Below 68-45

—

Totals

102

* Printed as 48, 48, and 34 respectively in the Roy. Soc. Proceedings.

Diagram illustrating the Graphical Process of finding the Slope of the
Regression Line, i.e. the Correlation Coefficient of to-day's terminology.

Fig. 11.

Galton says he constructed tables and diagrams like the above. " It will
be understood that the Q value is a universal unit applicable to the most
varied measurements, such as breathing capacity, strength, memory, keenness
of eyesight, and enables them to be compared together on equal terms not-
withstanding their intrinsic diversity. It does not only refer to measures of

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 53

length, though partly for the sake of compactness, it is only those of length that
will be here given as examples" (loc. cit. p. 137). Galton already saw clearly
that his new method enabled comparison to be made on equal terms between
variates with such intrinsic diversity as acuity of vision and head breadth*.
I have endeavoured to check Galton's work. I expect he found his
medians and quartiles by plotting an "ogive curve" (see our p. 31 and
Plate II) and smoothing it. The process of checking is rendered difficult by
the following statements on p. 138:

" It is unnecessary to extend the limits of Table II [that of stature and cubit reproduced
above] as it includes every line and column in my MS. table that contains not less than twenty
entries. None of the entries lying within the flanking lines and columns of Table II were used."

The first statement seems to suggest that the whole table has not been
printed, the second leaves one in doubt as to how to find the medians of the
arrays, or indeed of the marginal totals, if none of the entries in the flanking
lines and columns had been used. Unfortunately I have not succeeded in dis-
covering the original work and manuscript tables for this memoir among
Galton's papersf . Putting aside the possibility of re-examining Galton's own
work by more modern methods, we can, I think, indicate how closely his semi-
graphic median, quartile and regression slope methods accord with those
obtained from much longer series by more accurate processes. First let us
consider the correlation coefficients :

Character Pair

Correlation Coefficient

As found by Galton
from 350 Male Adults

As found by Macdonell
from 3000 Criminals

Stature and Cubit
Stature and Head Length
Stature and Middle Finger
Cubit and Middle Finger
Head Length and Head Breadth
Stature and Height of Knee ...
Cubit and Height of Knee

0-80 {0-8290}

0-35

0-70

0-85

0-45

0-90 {0-8665}

0-80 {0-8028}

0.7999
0-3399
0-6608
■ 0-8464
0-4016

The values in the first column of this table were the first organic corre-
lations ever published, and on that account are of great historical interest.

* It is not without interest to note that more than a quarter of a century later, Major
Leonard Darwin could assert that the influences of environment and heredity could not be com-
pared, because there was no common unit of measurement applicable to them both ! He
appeared still ignorant of Galton's use of Q. See Eugenics Review, Vol. v, p. 152.

f My colleague, Miss E. M. Elderton, has taken out the first 348 entries for male adults 21
years and upwards from Galton's Laboratory records, and the resulting values from her tables,
computed by modern methods, are given in brackets in the above and the following tables.
Our table for stature and cubit differs somewhat from Galton's but with a probable error of
•01 1 3 the correlation is hardly significantly different from Galton's value. Both Knee Height and
Cubit are measured in the Anthropometric Laboratory at University College, but the former is
measured to the lowest point of the patella with the subject standing at rest, while Galton
measured to the top of the knee with the subject sitting. Galton deducted the measured heel, we
measure with boots off. Our correlation for male students of Knee Height and Cubit is only 0-66.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Macdonell's values, obtained by a far more refined and accurate method, indicate
— especially when we remember that they are for a very different popu-
lation — how successfully Galton solved his problem. Doubtless he was some-
what aided by the fact that anthropometric physical measurements are far
more nearly normal than many other variates. Had his distributions been
more skew, his median estimates would not have given as accurately the
correlation coefficients. We can now compare the mean or median values
and the standard deviations as found from the quartiles with later results :

Character

Means

Standard Deviations

Galton

(Adults

21 and

upwards)

Macdonell
(Criminals)

Schuster
(Oxford Students)

Galton
(Adults
21, and

upwards)

Macdonell
(Criminals)

Schuster
(Oxford Studei

Stature (cm.)
Cubit (cm.) ...
Height of Knee (cm.)
Middle Finger (mm.)
Head Length (mm.) ...
Head Breadth (mm.)
Cephalic Index

170-69*

45-70

52-00

115-32

193-55

152-40

78-74

166-46
45-06

115-24
191-66
150-04

78-28

176-50 {170-25}

— {45-85}

— {52-15}

196-05
152-84

78-02

6-58
2-11
3-01
5-63
7-11
6-82

6-45
1-96

5-48
6-05
5-01

6-61 {6-80}

- {2'0l

- {2-62}

6-23
4-92
2-92

Considering the difference of social class in the three series, Galton's
results can hardly have exception taken to them, except in the case of the
variabilities of Head Length and Head Breadth. These are excessive, but
as we have not the original tables from which the quartiles were determined,
it is not possible to investigate wherein they are anomalous f.

The degree of accordance reached by Galton's process may be illustrated
by his tables for Stature and Knee Height :

Mean of corresponding

Stature

Knee Heights

Height of Knee

Statures

Observed

Calculated

Observed

Calculated

70-0

21-7 (30)

21-7

222

70-5 (23)

70-6

69-0

21-1 (50)

21-3

21-7

69-8 (32)

69-6

68-0

20-7 (38)

20-9

21-2

68-7 (50)

68-6

20-5 (61)

20-5

20-7

67-3 (68)

67-7

66-0

20-2 (49)

201

20-2

66-2 (74)

66-7

65-0

19-7 (36)

19-7

65-5 (41)

65-7

—

19-2

64-3 (26)

64-7

The figures in brackets give the numbers of individuals upon whom the
observed medians of the arrays were determined. It will be observed that
the accordance between observation and theory is again very good.

* For a. general hospital population: Stature = 170-59 (Biometrika, Vol. iv, p. 126).
f Galton says "The head length is the maximum length measured from the notch between
and just below the eyebrows " (p. 137). Is this the glabella?

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 55

Table V on Galton's p. 143 is noteworthy. In Column 3 we have the co-
efficients of correlation tabled under the now familiar symbol r. In Column 4 we
have the values of v 1 — r", to enable the Quartile of the arrays to be found. In
Column 5 we have, placed one under the other, the two regression coefficients,
and in Column 6 in the same manner the Quartiles of the arrays (i.e.
•67449 cr x J 1 — i 9 and -G7449 a- y J\ — r 2 ) *. Throughout, without referring
directly to the matter, Galton assumes linear regression and homoscedasticity,
i.e. he is thinking in terms of the bivariate normal surface. Next he draws
attention to the relation of his present work to his former work on heredity.

On the fifth line of p. 144, he has the words: " from — to - x — - = 1

to 0'44, which is practically the same." This should read " from — to

11 .... „ .

- x — - = 1 to 0"47, which is identically the same," as it should be since it

expresses the coefficient of correlation found from the second regression
line. Galton emphasises the importance of the reduction in the variability
of the array, as measured by v 1 — r 2 , and points out how this affects the
efficiency of Bertillon's system of identification by anthropometric measure-
ments. Bertillon had asserted that his measurements were independent
variates. A reference to Plate LII of our second volume will show that
Galton had chosen several of Bertillon's " independent " measurements and
determined their actual correlation.

Galton next outlines a method by which the influence of n variates on
another might be determined. He suggests that after transmuting the
variates we should sum them, when the probable error of the sum would " be
Jn, if the variates were perfectly independent, and n if they were rigidly
and perfectly related. The observed value would be almost always some-
where intermediate between these extremes, and would give the information
that is wanted" (p. 145).

This would not, I believe, be a feasible method of approaching multiple
correlation; it neglects the possibility of negative correlations, and does not
provide for the influence on one variate of all the remainder. It is an
attempt to obtain a sort of average value of the interlinkage of a system of
n variates f. I do not think that at this time Galton had realised the
existence and importance of negative correlation.

* A large proportion of values in the 5th and 6th columns have rather serious numerical
errors, corrected by Galton on a copy of the paper in my possession. He also states thereon
that he wishes to change the symbol r to p, presumably because he was thinking of it as the
" correlation coefficient," not as the regression coefficient, when units are reduced to respective
variabilities. The regression coefficient without reduction he had termed »-in his memoir on stature.

t Let x lt a; 2 , ...x„, ...x n be the n variates, and <r lt <r a , ...«r„...«r H their standard deviations,

.<•, , .<\, ,...x s ,...x n their means. Then if x = £>(%* — *»)/o" s , we have :

<r x 2 = M + 25'(»v)

= n, if all the correlations »■„• are zero,
= re + 2 J n (re - 1) = re 2 , if all the correlations are plus one.
Hence <j x = Jn and n in the two cases respectively, as Galton says. But the actual value of <r x

56 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

Galton sums up his results as follows*. Let x be the deviation of the
subject, and y i , y a , y 3 , etc. the corresponding deviations of the correlative,
all deviations being reduced to their proper unit of variability, and also let
the mean of the y deviations for the given x be y x , then we find :

(1) That y x = rx for all values of as; (2) that r is the same, whichever of
the two variables is taken for the subject; (3) that r is always less than 1 ;
(4) that r measures the closeness of correlation.

It will be seen at once that we have here the first fundamental statement
as to the correlation coefficient and its properties. Probably Galton did not
recognise that r = does not signify independence of the two variat.es, only
the independence of means of arrays. In addition to this, complete independ-
ence involves the arrays being similar and similarly placed curves. It was
not till normal distributions were seen to be non-universal that the distinction
between the vanishing of r and the absolute independence of variates was
fully recognised. For the same reason the idea of non-linear regression did
not cross Galton's mind. He got as far as an acceptance of the normal
frequency distribution permitted. Only when we look at what has happened
since 1888, do we realise the importance of that short paper on "Co-relations" !
Thousands of correlation coefficients are now calculated annually, the
memoirs and text-books on psychology abound in them ; they form, it may
be in a generalised manner, the basis of investigations in medical statistics,
in sociology and anthropology. Shortly, Galton's very modest paper of ten
pages from which a revolution in our scientific ideas has spread is in its
permanent influence, perhaps, the most important of his writings. Formerly
the quantitative scientist could only think in terms of causation, now he can

would not be proportional to the sum of the r m ' even if thoy were all positive. Perhaps a better
measure of the same type would be to use <r x 2 , where

X = S(x„ - *„)-/o-» 2 and x = »j

hence : tr x a = mean (\ - x) 2

S (a, - *,) 4 /<r, 4 + 2S' (x, - Jc s f (av - **Y/<rf <r/

-2nS{x 6 -x s yi<r? + iA

= 3« + 26" (1 + 2rJ) - 2ri 2 + ?t 2

= <2n + \S'(r\),

if the variates follow normal distributions, and thus cr x " lies between 2»t and 2m 1 . This at any
rate would present no difficulty arising from the existence of negative correlations. We see, how-
ever, from this result that possibly the best measure, u, of the total correlativity in a system
would be simply to take

n{n-\y

for in this case u will always lie between and 1, the former value corresponding to no associa-
tion in the variates of the system, and the latter to perfect correlation of all of them.

* Galton has interchanged his x and y variates. The paper shows here as elsewhere signs of
haste in preparation.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 57

think also in terms of correlation. This has not only enormously widened
the field to which quantitative and therefore mathematical methods can be
applied, but it has at the same time modified our philosophy of science and
even of life itself. The words which I have cited at the beginning of this
chapter show that Galton, if he expressed himself modestly, still realised the
importance of his work. The root idea at the bottom of correlation must not
be treated as merely rebuilding on a securer mathematical basis statistical
science. It is a much greater innovation which touches in its philosophical
aspects the epistemology of all the sciences.

I have already referred (Vol. u, pp. 380-386) to Galton's attempt to
introduce the conception of correlation* to anthropologists in 1889. It was
a hopeless task ! Most physical anthropologists in this country lack a
thorough academic training, and statistical methods will only penetrate here
after they have been adopted in Germany and France as they are being
adopted in Russia, Scandinavia and America. English intelligence is dis-
tributed according to a very skew curve, with an extremely low modal
value; we have produced great men, who have propounded novel ideas, but
our mediocrity fails to grasp them or is too inert to turn them to profit.
Years later these ideas come back to England, burnished and luring, through
foreign channels, and mediocrity knows nothing of their ancestry !

In 1889 Galton read at the British Association (Newcastle-upon-Tyne)
a note entitled : " Feasible Experiments on the Possibility of transmitting
Acquired Habits by means of Inheritance"; it is published in the B. A.
Report, p. 620, also in Nature, Vol. XL, p. 610, October, 1889. Galton
considers that creatures reared from eggs would be most satisfactory and
suggests fish, fowls and moths. He considers that fish may be taught to
adopt habits not conformable to their nature (Mobius' experiment with pike
and minnows). Fowls have an instinctive dread of certain insects, but might
be taught to eat mimetic and harmless insects. Larvae are fastidious in
their diet, but can be induced to take food which they naturally avoid, and
which is found perfectly wholesome. Would acquired habits of this kind be
in any case transmitted to their offspring ?

I. Natural Inheritance. The ideas on heredity and correlation which
had been working in Galton's mind during the decade of the 'eighties found
final expression in his book entitled Natural Inheritance, published in 1889
when Galton was 67 years of age. It may be said that this publication created
Galton's school; it induced Weldon, Edgeworth and the present biographer
to study correlation and in doing so to see its immense importance for many
fields of inquiry. It is idle to overlook the haste with which it was prepared
and the many slips and positive errors to be found in its pages, but no one who
studied it on its appearance and had a receptive and sufficiently trained mathe-
matical mind could deny its great suggestiveness, or be other than grateful for
all the new ideas and possible problems which it provided. The methods of

* Spelled thus in the Presidential Address of Jan. 2, 1889, and, I think, ever afterwards.
pgiii 8

58 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Natural Inheritance may be antiquated now, but in the history of science
it will be ever memorable as marking a new epoch, and planting the seed
from which sprang a new calculus, as powerful as any branch of the old
analysis, and valuable in just as many fields of scientific research.

In its application to inheritance the work suffers from the same misinter-
pretation of "regression" that I have several times referred to, namely making
the regression of offspring of given parentage a great biological law, when
it really arises from the clubbing together of all offspring of given parentage
without regard to their earlier ancestry. Given selected parentage and grand-
parentage alone, then with our present numerical values of the multiple
correlation constants, it seems highly probable that the progeny of selected
offspring would progress rather than regress on their parents and grand-
parents. In other words, given a line in which by chance or artificial selection
there has been marked ancestry for two or three generations, and which is
then isolated or inbred, there is reason to believe it would progress even
beyond its ancestry rather than regress. Statistical investigations of heredity
since 1889 seem to indicate a progressive evolution in selected lines, rather
than a general regression to a population mean*. That would only arise from
the far too frequent mating with mediocrity or worse than mediocrity. If
Galton's misinterpretation of regression runs through Natural Inheritance,
and makes him appeal to "sports" for evolutionary changes; if the reader
is puzzled to know why Galton should study "variations proper," which
according to him have no permanent value for evolution ; still the book is a
great book, for it applies a wholly new calculus — if one still in its infancy —
to an important biological problem.

I think, however, that Galton fully grasped how much more important
was his method than its special application. He writes that his conclusions

"depend on ideas that must first be well comprehended, which are now novel to the large
majority of readers and unfamiliar to all. But those who care to brace themselves to a sustained
effort, need not feel much regret that the road to be travelled over is indirect, and does not
admit of being mapped beforehand in a way that they can clearly understand. It is full of
interest of its own. It familiarises us with the measurement of variability, and with curious laws
of chance that apply to a vast diversity of social subjects. This part of the inquiry may be said
to run along a road on a high level, that affords wide views in unexpected directions, and from
which easy descents may be made to totally different goals to those we have now to reach. I
have a great subject to write upon, but feel keenly my literary incapacity to make it easily in-
telligible without sacrificing accuracy and thoroughness." (Chapter I, pp. 2-3.)

Galton in his Introductory Chapter states that there are three problems
with which he will be principally concerned. The first problem is to deter-
mine how a population can, under the laws of heredity, keep stable from
generation to generation. The second problem regards the average share
contributed to the character in the offspring by each ancestor severally.
The third problem is to measure numerically the nearness of kinship in

* There has always been this element of truth in Johansen's theory of "pure lines," that
selected lines do not regress if they are isolated or inbred. The doubtful dogma of that theory
is that exceptional members of a "pure line" are only "fluctuating variations," and so no further
selection is of any value within a "pure line."

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 59

various degrees (pp. 1-2). Such are the three fundamentally novel problems
which Galton set himself in Natural Inheritance; we shall endeavour to
show the extent to which he has solved them, or at least has suggested
methods of solving them, in the following discussion of that work.

Chapters II and III are general in character, expressing Galton's own
views on heredity, and erring, if at all, in rather too much appeal to analogy.
In the first of these chapters Galton states his opinion as to "natural" and
" acquired " characters, indicating that he considers the inheritance of the
latter extremely doubtful ; he emphasises the importance of closely criticising
the evidence offered in each case to prove the transmission of acquired
faculties, citing especially the possibilities of intra-uterine influence*. He
refers to the difficulty of combining male and female measures, and states
that:

"Fortunately we are able to evade it altogether by using an artifice at the outset, else, looking
back as I now can, from, the stage which the reader will reach when he finishes this book, I hardly
know how we should have succeeded in making a fair start. The artifice is never to deal with
female measures as they are observed, but always to employ their male equivalents in place of
them. I transmute all the observations of females before taking them in hand, and thenceforward
am able to deal with them on equal terms with the observed male values." (p. 6.)

Galton for stature multiplied every female stature by 1"08 to reach its
male equivalent, or added about one inch to every foot of female stature. He
does not tell us how he demonstrated that equivalence, whether from the
ratio of the mean values in men and women, or more adequately by finding
it held (approximately) for all grades f. The true method is to reduce each
deviation from the mean by dividing by its standard deviation, or other
measure of variability, and it was an inspiration on Galton's part that led
him to recognise that at any rate for the case of stature, the ratio of vari-
abilities in male and female was close to the ratio of their mean values. See
our p. 15 above.

On p. 7 Galton deals with what he terms Particulate Inheritance. He
recognises that an individual may possess characters, which are known
to have existed in an ancestor, but were not in the immediate parents.
From this idea of latent characteristics Galton reaches the conception of
inheritance in the individual as a "mosaic" of ancestral factors, and illustrates
his views by two analogies, that of a builder's yard, with fragments of old
buildings ready to be used again (p. 8), and the vegetations on two islands
which spread to adjacent islets (pp. 10-12). I think he would have done
better to have retained his earlier conception of the "stirp" (see our Vol. II,

* The complexity of this latter source must be borne in mind, if we can accept Galton's state-
ments on pp. 15-16, that not a drop of blood passes from mother to child, and yet that a mother's
system maybe "drenched with alcohol and the unborn infant alcoholised" during all its intra-
uterine existence.

f Probably in this latter way ; see his p. 42, where he says we are to transmute female to
male measures by comparing their respective "schemes," and devising a formula which will
change one to the other. A "scheme," supposed normal, depends on two constants, the mean
and the variability. Galton does not point this out, or state the inference which follows from
his use of the factor 1 -08.

8—2

60 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

p. 185), that is of the continuity of the germ-plasm. It is only in a figurative
sense that we can look upon the inheritance of the individual as a mosaic, and
speak of the contribution of an ancestor to the result. The individual is the
product of the germ-plasms that go to his production, not of the individual
ancestors. The study of the characters of the individual ancestors is only
ancillary to a study of the possibilities of those germ-plasms. The correlation
of a somatic character in a great grandparent, say, and great grandchild is
not in any sense a real measure of what the former contributes to the
latter, nor is the corresponding multiple regression coefficient such a measure.
We are testing what on the average we can predict of the somatic characters
of the offspring from a knowledge of what the germ-plasms of the " stirp "
have produced in the past. In other words the term " contribution of an
ancestor" should be interpreted as, or be replaced by, "contribution of the
ancestor to the prediction formula." It is in no sense a physical contribution
to the go^m-plasms on which the somatic characters of the offspring depend.
I do not think that anyone acquainted with the theory of multiple correlation
would interpret the Law of Ancestral Heredity in any other sense ; but
Galton's use of the terms " particulate inheritance," " mosaic," " heritage
from distant progenitors," must be admitted to be easily capable of mis-
interpretation.

Galton then deals with the " heritages that blend and those that are
mutually exclusive," citing as an illustration of the former, skin-colour in
crosses between white and negro, and of the latter eye-colour. He does not
here, any more than in his fundamental paper on eye-colour (see our p. 34),
explain for what reason he assumes the distribution of eye-colour in the
array of offspring due to a definite ancestry will be in the same proportions
as in the case of a blended character in an individual offspring. Galton con-
cludes that :

"There are probably no heritages that perfectly blend, or that absolutely exclude one another,
but all heritages have a tendency in one or the other direction, and the tendency is often a very
strong one — A peculiar interest attaches itself to mutually exclusive heritages, owing to the
aid they must afford to the establishment of incipient races." (pp. 13-14.)

So far, however, as the struggle for existence and evolution are concerned,
this last sentence must mean that a mosaic of the characters of two distinct
races is for some environmental reasons more fitting than either pure race,
and what is more, that the characters in the new mixed race will be stable
and not segregate out again.

In the concluding paragraph we read :

"The incalculable number of petty accidents that concur to produce variability among
brothers, makes it impossible to predict the exact qualities of any individual from hereditary
data. But we may predict average results with great certainty, as will be seen further on, and
we can also obtain precise information concerning the penumbra of uncertainty that attaches
itself to single predictions. It would be premature to speak further of this at present; what
has been said is euougli to give a clue to the chief motive of this chapter. Its intention has been
to show the large part that is always played by chance in the course of hereditary transmission,
and to establish the importance of an intelligent use of the laws of chance and of the statistical
methods that are based upon them, in expressing the conditions under which heredity acts."
(pp. 16-17.)

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 61

Galton in his Chapter III deals with the theory of Organic Stability,
illustrating it hy the model of a polygonal slab, which has positions of stable
equilibrium with various degrees of stability, i.e. which may require large or
only small displacements to pass from one position of equilibrium to a second.
He considers that his model (see Fig. 12) shows how the following conditions

may co-exist: (l) Variability within narrow limits without prejudice to the
purity of the breed (i); (2) Partly stable sub-types (ii); (3) Tendency, when
much disturbed, to revert from a sub-type to an earlier form; (4) Occasional
sports which may give rise to new types (iii) (pp. 27-30). Again the whole
argument is one of analogy, and the reader may be pardoned a little vexation
when he finds such important topics as the Stability of Sports and Infertility
of Mixed Types only discussed (pp. 30-32) by reference to the analogy of
hansom cabs and the impossibility of their useful blend with four-wheelers*!
The fact, I think, is that Galton's own ideas at this time were obscured
by his belief that the ancestors actually did contribute to the heritage ; he
regarded the incipient structure of the new being to be the result of a clash of
elements contributed from many ancestral sources, and the resulting building
up out of more or less opposing elements of a particulate individual inherit-
ance as the result of chancef . A further source of difficulty to Galton in his
intei-pretation of hereditary phenomena lay in his mistake as to the nature
of regression. This forced on him the conception of positions of stable equili-
brium, each with its own centre of regression, and led him to the view that
evolution must generally proceed by sports, and not by minute steps. It is
true that on p. 32 he draws a distinction between the two views that the steps
may be small and that they must be small, but as he has elsewhere applied his
view of regression to indicate that small steps cannot be the source of evolu-
tion, the distinction is not really much of a concession (see our pp. 31-2).
The following words of Galton deserve, however, to be quoted not only

* I find my copy of the Natural Inheritance, read and annotated forty years ago, defaced by
many marginal notes expressing anger at Galton's analogies in this Chapter. But these notes
were written before I had read and grasped the value of much of the later work in the book.

t Of course the Mendelian appeals to the same doctrine of chance to explain the variation
in the members of an individual brood or litter, but he does so on the basis of homogeneous
germ cells having a heterogeneous factor formula. I am inclined to believe that the germ cells of
the same individual are not always and absolutely homogeneous, at any rate in the higher
organisms, and that the clash of elements to be determined by chance need not lie in the
factors of the formulae of the gametes, but in the fertilising germ cells themselves.

62 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

because they express his own strong convictions, but also because they may
serve as a warning that we must appeal with caution to the continuity of
the palaeontological record :

"An apparent ground for the common belief [that evolution proceeds by minute steps only*]
is founded on the fact that whenever search is made for intermediate forms between widely
divergent varieties, whether they be of plants or of animals, of weapons or utensils, of customs,
religion or language, or of any other product of evolution, a long and orderly series can usually
be made out, each member of which differs in an almost imperceptible degree from adjacent
specimens. But it does not at all follow because these intermediate forms have been found to
exist, that they are the very stages that were passed through in the course of evolution. Counter
evidence exists in abundance, not only of the appearance of considerable sports, but of their
remarkable stability in hereditary transmission. Many of the specimens of intermediate forms
may have been unstable varieties, whose descendants had reverted; they might be looked upon
as tentative and faltering steps taken along parallel courses of evolution and afterwards retraced.
Affiliation from each generation to the next requires to be proved before any apparent line of
descent can be accepted as the true one. The history of inventions fully illustrates this view.
It is a most common experience that what an inventor knew to be original, and believed to be
new, had been invented independently by others many times before, but had never become
established. Even when it has new features, the inventor usually finds on consulting lists of
patents, that other inventions closely border on his own. Yet we know that inventors often
proceed by strides, their ideas originating in some sudden happy thought suggested by a chance
occurrence, though their crude ideas may have to be laboriously worked out afterwards. If,
however, all the varieties of any machine that had ever been invented, were collected and
arranged in a museum in the apparent order of their evolution, each would differ so little from
its neighbour as to suggest the fallacious inference that the successive inventors of that machine
had progressed by means of a very large number of hardly discernible steps." (pp. 32-3.)

In concluding this chapter Galton apologises for largely using metaphor
and analogy, on the ground that he wished to avoid any "entanglements
with theory," as no complete theory of inheritance had yet been propounded
that met with general acceptance (p. 34). This seems to me to show that
Galton looked upon his statistical analysis of inheritance not as a theory of
heredity, but as a description of hereditary facts, which it undoubtedly is.

Chapter IV deals with Galton's "ogive curve" (see our pp. 30-31) by
which he represents a frequency distribution by aid of grades or percentiles.
Galton had discussed this manner of representation in numerous earlier papers,
and we may refer to Plate II for a graphic representation of his curve. The
only novel point in Chapter IV is the suggestion, not very fully worked out,
that the scheme of grades or percentiles might be applied to " inexact
measures," i.e. to our present so-called " broad categories," and that these
may be measures of a great variety of characters including relative professional
success. He cites on this latter point Sir James Paget's analysis of the
successes of 1000 of his pupils at St Bartholomew's Hospital. Sir James
made five classes: (a) Distinguished, (b) Considerable, (c) Moderate, (d) Very
limited success, and in the fifth class (e) he put Failures. Galton made the
numbers in each 28, 80, 616, 151, and 125 respectively. Among the fore-
most were the three professors of anatomy in Cambridge, Edinburgh and

* It is a strange but widely spread notion that those who believe in continuous variation of
a non-fluctuating character, must ipso facto suppose evolution to proceed by "minute steps."
Given a race with mean cephalic index of 75 and a range in index from 65 to 85, there is
nothing to prevent by isolation the establishment of a brachycephalic race of cephalic index 82 —
a spring as great as from Englishman to Jew — without transition through all the small inter-
mediate steps from 75 to 82.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 63

Oxford, and the three last were two men who committed suicide under
circumstances of great disgrace and Palmer, the Rugeley murderer, who was
hanged. There is possibly little knowledge to be obtained from the result
for a single medical school, but comparative statistics for several would be of
considerable value.

Chapter V deals with Normal Variability, and Galton shows how the
distribution depends only on the two constants, the median and the quartile,
and further that if two individuals whose grades are known be actually
measured, then the median and quartile, and so the whole distribution of varia-
tion, can be discovered (p. 62, footnote, and cf. our Vol. n, p. 385). The origin
of the normal distribution is illustrated mechanically by aid of the " quincunx "
(see our pp. 9 and 10). Nor is Galton able to avoid becoming poetically
enthusiastic in a paragraph headed The Charms of Statistics, for he writes :

"It is difficult to understand why statisticians commonly limit their inquiries to averages
and do not revel in more comprehensive views. Their souls seem as dull to the charm of variety
as that of the native of one of our flat English counties, whose retrospect of Switzerland was
that, if its mountains could be thrown into its lakes, two nuisances would be got rid of at once.
An average is but a solitary fact, whereas if a single other fact be added to it, an entire Normal
Scheme, which nearly corresponds to the observed one, starts potentially into existence.

"Some people hate the very name of statistics, but I find them full of beauty and interest.
Whenever they are not brutalised, but delicately handled by the higher methods, and are warily
interpreted, their power of dealing with complicated phenomena is extraordinaiy. They are the
only tools by which an opening can be cut through the formidable thicket of difficulties that
bars the path of those who pursue the Science of Man." (pp. 62-63.)

Galton at the end of his Chapter V gives the two fundamental proposi-
tions on which his normal surface for the distribution of characters in two
relatives depends. He envisages it in the following manner.

"(1) Bullets are fired by a man who aims at the centre of a target, which we will call its
M, and we will suppose the marks that the bullets make to be painted red, for the sake of dis-
tinction. The system of lateral deviations of these red marks from the centre M will be approxi-
mately Normal, whose Q [Probable Error] we will call c. [This is the distribution of the first
relative.] Then another man takes aim, not at the centre of the target, but at one or other of
the red marks, selecting these at random. We will suppose his shots to be painted green. The
lateral distance of any green shot from the red mark at which it was aimed will have a Probable
Error, that we will call b. Now if the lateral distance of a particular green mark from M is
given [a], what is the most probable distance from M of the red mark at which it was aimed?

It is - — T a*.
c 2 + b 2

"(2) What is the Probable Error of this determination? In other words, if estimates have

been made for a great many distances founded upon the formula in (1), they would be correct

on the average, though erroneous in particular cases. The errors thus made would form a normal

be
system whose Q [Probable Error] it is desired to determine. Its value is r a — - g f."

(pp. 69-70.)

* Unfortunately Galton has the value . / — ^, which is very liable to confuse the reader.

t In more modern notation, this may be looked upon as the variability of the array of the
second relative = c 2 ( 1 — r 2 ) ; therefore r = Jc"/(c- + b 2 ). Hence the regression of first relative

c 2

on second relative = rcMc* + b 2 x a = „ ,„ x a. Again the variance of the difference in character

c + b 2

between the two relatives = c 2 + (c 2 + b 2 ) — 2c\/c 2 + b 2 r = b", or b has for physical meaning the
probable error of the distribution of the difference in character between the two relatives.

64 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

It was by the help of these propositions that Galton discussed the action of
inheritance in stable populations. Assuming normal distribution of characters,
as he did, then the above relations really involve the fundamental properties
of bivariate regression, stated with a truly amazing minimum of algebra.

In Chapter VI Galton describes his data. After referring to the moth-
breeding experiments then in progress, and to his much earlier experiments
on the characters of sweet-peas, he passes to his Records of Family Faculties
obtained by the offer of £500 in prizes. He obtained the records of 150
families, 70 by male and 80 by female recorders. The records contained data
as to Stature, Eye-Colour, Temper, the Artistic Faculty, and some forms of
Disease. As a measure of the amount of material thus obtained, we find 205
couples of parents and 930 adult children of both sexes. A further set of
Special Data was obtained by circulars requesting measurements of the
stature of pairs of brothers. The constants for this material differ consider-
ably from those for the Family Records. I think Galton thought the former
material more reliable, but in working through his data in 1895* I came
to the conclusion that the Special Data, owing to the heterogeneity of their
origin, were scarcely to be fully trusted.

The chapter on Data concludes with some account of Galton's work on
the weight of sweet-pea seeds. He states that :

"The results were most satisfactory. They gave me two data, which were all that I wanted
in order to understand, in its simplest form, the way in which one generation of a people is
descended from a previous one; and thus I got at the heart of the problem at once." (p. 82.)

Galton had thus first learnt of the nature of regression in 1875 from his
sweet-pea experiments. He gives in Appendix C, pp. 225-6, of the Natural
Inheritance, the first correlation table for inheritance, that of the diameters
of parental and filial plants. The regression is about ^. I have drawn the
regression line (see our p. 4). Galton also states that he had made con-
firmatory measurements on foliage and length of pod, but he does not enter
into details.

Chapter VII contains the Discussion of the Data of Stature. This
chapter covers the same ground as the papers dealt with in our pp. 11-20,
but there is some amplification and some attempt to simplify the mathematical
reasoningf. The table on p. 133 is, as I have indicated on our pp. 23-4,
very doubtful as far as the numerical values are concerned. In particular
Galton terms the mean regressio n w, an d then says that the probable devia-
tion of the regressed array is p V 1 — w 2 , where p is the probable deviation of

* See Phil. Trans. Vol. 187, A, pp. 283-4.

t Certain corrections should be made. On p. 127, formula (2), there should be no radical

c 2
before c 2 /(£> 2 + <?). This is a relic of an error on p. 70, where - — — a should be read for

C T

r c }

„J -- — — , see p. 224. The numerical value for b deduced from (2) is correct. On p. 128, the

numerical value for b should be -96 not -98, and this value, - 96, should be inserted in the table
on p. 129 instead of the 110 given under the (3) heading. The mean is then 1*03 instead of
1-06.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 65

the population. This is not generally correct; Gal ton is confusing the regres-
sion coefficient with the correlation coefficient. As long as both relatives have
equal variability, which we may suppose to be the case with father and son
or uncle and nephew, the two coefficients are numerically equal ; but when
the two variates have not equal variability, this formula is of course incorrect.
In the first entry in the table we have the regre ssion of sons on midparent
given as §, and Galton calculates from pj\—uf the probable deviation of
the array of sons to be 1 '27. The variability of midparents is, however, not
equal to that of sons, but is in the ratio of 1 to v2; accordingly r = w/s/2
must be used here instead of w, and the probable deviation of the array of
sons is 1"50 and not 1*27.

Further the equality of the regressions of sons on midparents and of
brothers on brothers is made by Galton to be f in both cases. I think this
value is too low in the case of midparents and too high in the case of brothers,
the regressions being much more nearly in the ratio of 1*0 to 0"5 than in a
ratio of equality. Other regressions entered in this table are very doubtful.
We have to look upon the numerical values given as suggestions of the
relative degrees of resemblance of various kinsmen, rather than conclusive
values founded on observation of adequate numbers (see our pp. 23-4).
The main result of Galton's work was to indicate the mechanism by which
a population could remain stable notwithstanding variation and inheritance.
It was a great direct achievement, and in the indirect light it cast on the
general idea of correlation of still greater importance.

Chapter VIII contains the Discussion of the Data of Eye- Colour. This
corresponds to the Royal Society paper, which I have already analysed on
pp. 34-40 above. The same criticisms must be considered as still valid, and
need not be repeated here.

Chapter IX deals with The Artistic Faculty. I do not think the contents
of this chapter had been previously discussed by Galton. The data were
deduced from the answers in Records of Family Faculties to the questions :
" Favourite Pursuits and Interests ? " and " Artistic Aptitudes ? "

The object of this chapter is not to give a reply to the simple
question, whether or no the Artistic Faculty tends to be inherited. A man
must be very crotchety or very ignorant, who nowadays seriously doubts
the inheritance either of this or of any other faculty*. The question is
whether or no its inheritance follows a similar law to that which has been
shown to govern Stature and Eye-Colour, and which has been worked out
with some completeness in the foregoing chapters (p. 155). The conclusions

* It may be interesting with regard to these words to cite a few sentences from an obituary
notice of Francis Galton which appeared in Nature, February 2, 1911 (Vol. lxxxv, p. 441).
The writer says :

"Only once do I remember on a public occasion a slight severity in his usually gentle tone. A medical man
of distinction [Dr Charles Mercier], speaking obviously without any knowledge of the literature of the subject,
had asserted that the supposition that the children of parents with certain mental and moral peculiarities would
reproduce these features, arose from a totally false conception of what the laws of heredity are. The mental and
moral aptitudes were for the speaker outside the purview of hereditary investigation. Galton's reply was very
simple : Much of what his critic had said 'might have been appropriately urged forty years ago, before accurate
measurement of the statistical effects of heredity had been commenced, but it was quite obsolete now.' "

P G III 9

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

reached by Galton in this chapter are, I think, on the whole correct, but his
handling of " broad categories " by means of percentages, in particular when
no probable errors of the percentages are provided, is not to the modern
statistician very conclusive. I think it would be labour well spent, should
the opportunity arise, to work through his data afresh. Meanwhile we may
arrange rather differently his tabulations and consider what flows from them.
He tells us that he found it difficult to separate music from drawing, and
finally classed both into a single group, the " artistic." Thinking also that
parents were likely to overestimate the artistic capacity of young children,
he excluded all but adults. Thus in the parental table the data chiefly refer
to members of the second and third generations.

The first table I have deduced from Galton's data is that for Husband and
Wife. It contains 894 couples and gives a percentage of 28 for males and of
32 for females with artistic temperament. The probable error of the difference
4 of these percentages is 1*46, or the difference is about 27 times its prob-
able error, it may therefore be just significant. Galton concludes that :

" Part of this female superiority is doubtless to be ascribed to the large share that music
and drawing occupy in the education of women, and to the greater leisure that most girls have,
or take, for amusing themselves. If the artistic gifts of men and women are naturally the same,
as the experience of schools where music and drawing are taught apparently shows it to be, the
small difference observed in favour of women in adult life would be a measure of the smallness
of the effect of education compared with that of natural talent." (p. 156.)

I should not have thought the experience of art schools was in favour of
the equality of artistic gifts in the two sexes. Galton's data really tell us
nothing as to the grade of artistic faculty in the two sexes, as for this we
require grouping in at least three categories. But my impression is that a
larger proportion of the prizes and studentships for creative work still goes
to the men, even in those schools where the women are in a majority.

Assortative Mating in Artistic Faculty.

Husband

Artistic

Non-Artistic

Totals

Artistic
Non-Artistic

107 {80}
143 {170}

179 {206}
465)438}

286
608

Totals

250

644

894

Assuming the artistic faculty to be a continuous normal variate, we find
from the above table the coefficient of correlation between Husband and
Wife to be no less than *2418 ± "0376. This value for the mating of like with
like for a mental temperament is singularly in accord with the intensity of
assortative mating for physical characters *. It denotes a resemblance between

* Stature, -2804 + -0189; Span, -1989 ± -0204; Forearm, -1977 ± -0205. Health as measured
by Duration of Life: Wensleydale and Wharfedale, -2200 ± 0244; Oxfordshire, -2500+ -0211;
Society of Friends, -1999 ± -0212. See Biometrika, Vol. II, pp. 373 and 487.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 67

Husband and Wife as great as that between cousins. I have placed in brackets
after the observed numbers those that would arise in each category if the
mating were purely random. It will be seen at once that the tendency for
like to marry like is increased at the expense of the unlike marriages. I fail
to understand how Galton interpreted his percentages ; naturally if like
marries like above the random allotment, there must be a reduction in the
marriages of unlike individuals, the random 42 °/ o of the latter being in fact
reduced to 36 7 . Thus he writes :

"There is I think trustworthy evidence of the existence of some slight disinclination to marry
within the same caste, for signs of it appear in each of the three sets of families with which the
Table deals. The total result is that there are only 36 per cent, of such marriages observed,
whereas if there had been no disinclination but perfect indifference, the number would have
been raised to 42. The difference is small and the figures are few, but for the above reasons it
is not likely to be fallacious. I believe the facts to be, that highly artistic people keep pretty
much to themselves, but that the very much larger body of moderately artistic people do not.
A man of highly artistic temperament must look upon those who are deficient in it, as barbarians;
he would continually crave for a sympathy and response that such persons are incapable of giving.
On the other hand, every quiet unmusical man must shrink a little from the idea of wedding
himself to a grand piano in constant action, with its vocal and peculiar social accompaniments;
but he might anticipate great pleasure in having a wife of a moderately artistic temperament
who would give colour and variety to his prosaic life. On the other hand a sensitive and imagina-
tive wife would be conscious of needing the aid of a husband who had enough plain common
sense to restrain her too enthusiastic and frequently foolish projects*." (pp. 157-8.)

I have cited this passage, because, although it endeavours to explain a
"slight disinclination to marry within the same caste," which Galton's data
rightly interpreted show no evidence for, it yet throws light on some of his
personal views of life. I can well picture what torture to him it would have
been to be wedded to "a grand piano in constant action." While always
exhibiting the best of old-fashioned courtesy to women, he had, when I first
knew him, little belief in their intellectual strength; just as he held, that
while women gifted with great physical strength existed, it was well for the
repose of the other sex that they were rare (see our Vol. II, pp. 374-376). I
think that later in life, when he came more in touch with academically trained
women, and saw what work they could do on his own lines, his views suffered
considerable modification. Again I am not content to pass without protest
the rather sweeping statement that sensitive and imaginative persons,
whether men or women, are apt to require restraining from "too enthusiastic
and frequently foolish projects"; it denies that such persons often combine
their sensitiveness and imagination with a rational power of control. It does
not seem to me that the three factors, reason, sensitiveness and imagination,
are incompatible, but that the success of truly great minds lies in the just
combination of the three.

* Galton has written in pencil against this passage in his personal copy of National In-
heritance, that it must be corrected, and I have also found some printed lists of Errata, in which
the passage is stated to be incorrect. But none of the half-dozen copies I have examined of the
work contains this Errata slip, and thus it is desirable to draw the attention of possible readers
to a misinterpretation, which would certainly have been corrected in a second edition.

9—2

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

But let us return to less exciting questions. Galton does not, it is sad to
record, classify his data in four fundamental parental tables, and till the
material is reworked we must be content with the following arrangement.

Midparent and Child, Artistic Faculty.

Both Parents
Artistic

Only one
Artistic

Neither
Artistic

Totals

Artistic
Non-Artistic

95
53

201
319

173

666

469
1038

Totals

148

520

839

1507

Unfortunately there is no distinction of sex in the offspring. Working
out the correlation of this table in three different ways* I find the mean
correlation coefficient to be '4405 with a probable error of the order of "024.
There appears little doubt accordingly of the resemblance of offspring in
artistic faculty to their parents, but the problem which Galton was investi-
gating was not the existence of this resemblance, but whether its intensity
might be taken as practically identical with those he had found for eye-
colour and stature. The reader for whom the following remarks may be too
technical is recommended to pass to the conclusions at the end of this para-
graph. Galton assumes (i) equal inheritance from both parents, we will
represent this by the correlation coefficient r ; (ii) he does not correct by
reducing female to male measure, we will suppose this done ; (iii) he neglects
the assortative mating, we will represent this by the correlation coefficient e,
in the present case this being equal to "2418. The following results can be
easily demonstrated :

(a)

Variability of Midparent

v r

+ e

2 '

Variability of Offspring
(b) Correlation of Offspring and Midparent =

_rv/2

= •4405,

+ e

1+6

v/2x-4405

J\ +>

or substituting the value of e :

Regression on Midparent = , 559 = fx0 - 84,

Parental Correlation, r= '3471 =£ x T04.

Now Galton deduced for regression of offspring on midparent for both
stature and eye-colour the value f , and for parental correlation £. For the

* Treating the degrees of artistic faculty in the midparents as 1, 0-5, and 0, a biserial corre-
lation coefficient after correction for class index gives 4523+ -0138. The two possible divisions
giving fourfold tables provide -4655 + -0240 and -4039 + -0298. The three results are thus in
reasonable accord.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 69

artistic faculty the former value is therefore 16°/ m defect and for the latter
value 4 °/ o in excess. Galton, using what he admits to be a very crude
method of percentages, shows that a regression of § would give him :

Percentage of Artistic Offspring.

Both Parents
Artistic

One Parent
Artistic

Neither
Artistic

Theory
Observation

407.

36 7.

38-5 7

39 7. °

177

217.

Observation differs by 10°/ o m the first case and 23*5 % m the last case
from theory. Galton says that the first values are "in very happy agreement,"
that the second "agree excellently well" and that the third give "a very
fair accordance," and concludes :

"that the same law of Regression, and all that depends upon it, which governs the inheritance
both of Stature and Eye-colour, applies equally to the Artistic Faculty." (pp. 161-2.)

But if the best value we can find from Galton's data for the Regression
differs 16°/ from the value he assumes*, it is clear that we cannot assert
that the accordance of percentages between theory and observation given
in the above table justifies us in assuming on the present material that the
Regression is the same for Artistic Faculty and Stature. Nevertheless
while it may be impossible to accept on the basis of Francis Galton's data
in Natural Inheritance that agreement between the constants for the
inheritance of Stature and Artistic Faculty — that is between physical
and psychical characters — which he thought he had found, we have yet to
bear in mind two points: First that since 1889 more refined tools and
better and more ample data have distinctly tended to confirm the equality
of inheritance of mind and body ; and secondly that Galton was foremost
in the endeavour to obtain statistically a quantitative measure for the
strength of resemblance in psychical characters.

Before we pass to the subject of Disease, it seems fitting here to note
that Galton dealt with a second psychical characteristic, that of Temper.
He refers to this on p. 85, where he deals with Marriage Selection, and also
in Appendix D, pp. 226-238, which is a reprint with slight revision of a
paper which first appeared in the Fortnightly Review, July, 1887f, under
the title of " Good and Bad Temper in English Families." Galton found
Temper in his Family Records described under 15 "Good" epithets and
'46 " Bad " epithets, and he divided these into five classes, the first two
corresponding to his "Good," and the remainder to his "Bad." These were

* If the midparental regression had been deduced from a correlation coefficient found in the
ordinary way, its probable error would have been -0096; the difference of - 667 and '559 is -108,
more than 10 times that probable error. I think we must conclude that '559 cannot be treated
as

I-

t Vol. xlii, N.S. pp. 21-30.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

(i) Mild, (ii) Docile, (iii) Fretful, (iv) Violent, and (v) Masterful. I liave
already discussed this classification in Vol. n, p. 271. I would only add that
if we follow Galton's classification of Good and Bad Temper, we find a slight
negative correlation between Husband and Wife. If it be considered signi-
ficant, the mild temper of one mate may be due to the experience that
control is needful or at least advisable in the environment of a violent
consort. On the other hand the fourfold table for siblings, i.e. offspring of
the same parents, is:

Temper in Siblings.

1st Sibling

02
T3

Good Temper

Bad Temper

Totals

Good Temper
Bad Temper

330 {264}
255 {321}

255 {321}
454 {388}

585
709

Totals

585

709

1294

The numbers in curled brackets give the frequencies which would occur in
each category on the basis of independent chance. It will be seen that
observation shows a heaping up in the like categories at the expense of the
unlike categories. The correlation coefficient is "3167 for this fourfold table;
there is thus a considerable degree of resemblance between the temper of
siblings, but I believe this measure would be considerably increased if sullen
and fiery tempers were not included in one group.

Chapter X deals with the subject of Disease. This is a most interesting
and suggestive chapter, but the data were too sparse to provide definite con-
clusions of any kind.

Galton states (p. 165) first (by again appealing to an analogy!) his
Preliminary Problem. We know, he tells us, the ages at death and the
causes of death of the population as a whole. We know the proportions at
each age of those who die of diseases A, B, C, etc. He would assume —
which I think is somewhat doubtful — that the proportions of persons dying
of these diseases at various ages in two successive generations are the same.
If now we limit ourselves to persons dying at a certain age of disease A,
how, if at all, does this affect the distribution of deaths from the diseases
A, B, C, etc., in the offspring generation ?

The problem is an exceedingly difficult, if an extraordinarily important
one, for it requires an immense mass of data. In the first place the pro-
portional death distribution is a function of social class, and of occupation ;
it is as we have seen a function of age ; it influences fertility ; and in more
than one way is affected by sex*. Anyone who has seriously faced the
problem, and seen the number of groups into which the various affecting
factors compel him to sort the material, will recognise how hopelessly

* The male in many cases, as by foreign travel or by military or naval service, runs greater
risks than the female.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 71

inadequate must be the schedule-series which can be collected by any single
investigator however energetic. Galton's deduced schedule extracted from
his data was a good one, but I should like to see added two columns, one for
occupations and one for domiciles, under which latter heading I understand
such descriptions as "rural," "urban," "India," "Nigeria," etc., stating years
of life in each domicile. I reproduce one of Galton's working schedules, in

Sample of one of Galton's Schedules for Heredity of Disease

Mother's Maiden Name Mary Claremont

Initials

Kin

Principal Illnesses and Ailments

Cause of Death

Age at Death

J.G.

Father

Bad rheum, fever ; agonising
headaches ; diarrhoea J bron-
chitis ; pleurisy-

Heart Disease

E.G.
W.G.

F.L.
C.G.

Brother
Brother

Sister
Sister

Rheum. ; gout

Good health except gout ;

paralysis later
Rheum, fever ; rheum, gout
Delicate (inoculated and died)

Apoplexy
Apoplexy

Apoplexy
Smallpox

56
83

M.G.

Mother

Tendency to lung disease ;
biliousness ; frequent heart
attacks

Heart Disease and
Dropsy

A.C.

W.C.

E.C.

F.R.

R.N.

L.C.

Brother

Sister

Good health
Led a wild life
Always delicate
Smallpox three times
Bilious ; weak health
?

Accident

Premature Old Age

Consumption

General Failure

Cancer

Fever

46
62
19
85
50
21

M.G.
E.G.
G.L.

F.S.

R.F.

L.G.

Offspring
Brother
Brother

Sister

Sister
Sister

Sister

Inflam. lungs ; rheum, fever
Debility; heart disease; colds
Bad headaches ; coughs ; weak

spine ; hysteria ; apoplexy
Bad colds ; inflam. lungs ;

hysteria
Infantile paralysis ; colds ;

nervous depression
Inflam. brain, also lungs ;

neuralgia ; nervous fever

Heart Disease

Consumption

Paralysis

17
40
50

Living

Space left for remarks

Suggested additions, columns for occupation and environment. Also transfer the word
" Living " from " Age at Death " to " Cause of Death " column, and if living state age at time
of record.

72 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

which he has changed the real names. It is of interest as showing a case
in which inoculation was followed by smallpox and death, and a second case
in which one person had smallpox three times, both being phenomena of
which the possibility raised heated controversy in the 18th century.

Now if we remember that we can hardly form less than 15 principal
disease groups nor fewer than 10 age groups, and that we have two parents,
it will be seen that we require to divide our material to start with into 300
categories. It would be of little service, if we are to reach really definite con-
clusions, unless we had 50 to 100 parents in each of these groups, that is to
say, records of 15,000 to 30,000 of the first generation, and it might be hoped
five times as many in the second generation, a total say of 100,000 to 200,000
recorded deaths, and we must assume these cases to be in a fairly uniform social
class and with a fairly like environment. Probably it would be best to work
with one social class, and weed out cases having very differentiated environ-
ments. Galton had 160 usable family records, with an average of 75 individuals,
so that he might hope to reach 12,000 records of disease and perhaps G000 of
deaths. Actually he had only about 2000 causes of death recorded, which
might correspond to some 300 groups of two parents and five children. On
the average this would give for each special age group and each special
disease group about two parents of the same sex, mustering ten children of
two sexes and all ages, from which to determine whether and to what extent
a parent dying at a given age of a specific disease influences the offspring
dying of that or other specific diseases at given ages*. The problem is one
of probabilities and we shall not have data enough to answer it. Suppose
a man to die of cancer between 65 and 75; then we may further be supposed
to know the chance that a man of 35 to 45 will die of cancer, but how are
we to determine, supposing the latter man is son of the former, whether the
relationship in disease is one of chance or heredity ? We can only do it,
if we have enough pairs of fathers and sons like the above to calculate
from the observed frequency the probability of sons dying round the given
age of cancer, and to determine if it differs significantly from the prob-
ability of deaths in general from cancer of men between the ages of 35
to 45, whether they have or have not a cancerous parent. I have enlarged
on these points, because the measurement of heredity in disease is a funda-
mental problem of eugenics, but its complexity in the general form is rarely
recognised ; the labour and great cost of such investigations are in most
cases prohibitive. Galton spent £500 in getting his Family Records, but
although inheritance of disease was to be an essential part of it, he obtained
practically nothing of value. Thus he writes in this connection :

" I had hoped even to the last moment, that my collection of Family Records would have con-
tributed in some small degree towards answering this question, but after many attempts I find
them too fragmentary for the purpose. It was a necessary condition of success to have the complete
life-histories of many Fraternitieswho were born some seventyor more years ago, that is during the
earlier part of this century, as well as those of their parents and all their uncles and aunts. My

* It is most important to bear this age factor in mind, as the relative proportions of the
diseases of which an individual may die vary in life from age to age.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 73

records contain excellent material of a later date, that will be valuable in future years, but
they must bide their time ; they are insufficient for the period in question. By attempting to
work with incomplete life-histories the risk of serious error is incurred." (pp. 166-7.)

And farther on Galton sees what is the kernel of the matter :

"Data for Hereditary Diseases. The knowledge of the officers of Insurance Companies as to
the average value of unsound lives is by the confession of many of them far from being as exact
as is desirable *

"Considering the enormous money value concerned, it would seem well worth the while of
the higher class of those offices to combine in order to obtain a collection of completed cases for

at least two generations, or better still for three They would have no perceptible effect on

the future insurances of descendants of the families, even if these were identified, and they
would lay the basis of a very much better knowledge of hereditary disease than we now possess,
serving as a step for fresh departures. A main point is that the cases should not be picked
and chosen to support any theory, but taken as they come to hand. There must be a vast
amount of good material in existence at the command of the medical officers of Insurance
Companies*. If it were combined and made freely accessible, it would give material for many
years' work to competent statisticians, and would be certain, judging from all experience of
a like kind, to lead to unexpected results." (pp. 185-6.)

Still from his " fragments " Galton drew certain suggestive conclusions.
He tested the trustworthy character of his data by determining whether
deaths due to cancer, consumption, drink and suicide appeared less frequently
on his records than in ordinary tables of mortality and found that they did
not. He concluded that his correspondents had entered with interest into
what was asked for, and had freely trusted him with their family histories.
Galton throws out a curious suggestion : Namely suppose that one parent has
a disease A and the other a disease B ; if the child inherits a tendency to
both diseases, how far are they mutually exclusive, how far do they blend or
how far does the blend change them into a third form of disease ? I think,
for example, there is evidence to show that such hereditary diseases as phthisis
and rheumatism are largely antagonistic. What effect on offspring results
from the marriage of mates from rheumatic and tuberculous stocks?

Galton considers that there was evidence in his records of two obvious here-
ditary tendencies in stocks, the one to disease and the other to the absence of

* It is worth noting that Mr W. P. Elderton (now Actuary and Manager of the Equitable
Life Assurance Society) fifteen years later, speaking at a meeting of the Sociological Society where
Galton had read a paper on Eugenics, made the following statement with regard to heredity
of disease: "An important item in the study of heredity is the heredity of disease, and I think
life assurance offices might be able to give useful statistics. When a person whose life is assured
dies, a certificate of death is given to the office and is put away with the papers that were filled
up when the assurance was taken out. These original papers state the causes of death of
parents, brothers and sisters and their ages at death, or their ages if they were alive when the
assurance was effected. These particulars give information for the study of heredity in relation
to disease, and from the same source light might be thrown on a question of great importance
— the correlation between specific disease and fertility. One point in conclusion. Dr Hutchinson
spoke of the greater importance of environment, but in that he would hardly get actuaries to
agree with him. Their observation, judged by life offices, experience and practice, would seem
to show that environment operates merely as a modifying factor after heredity has done its
work." Sociological Papers, 1904, Macmillan & Co., 1905, p. 62.

Fifteen years passed after Galton threw out the suggestion that material might be available
in assurance offices, before an actuary told us it did actually exist. Twenty-five further years
have rolled by and still nothing has been done !

P G III 10

74 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

disease. This seems to be confirmed by a strong inheritance of general physical
health independent of any special disease, which has been established since
Galton's inquiry. He purposely adopts in order to cover many popular expres-
sions the term "consumption." But beside actual consumption he graded in
three additional classes (for which he gives the rather vague descriptions
used), the context of the record also being considered*. These are (i) Highly
suspicious, (ii) Suspicious and (iii) Somewhat suspicious. He reckoned at the
rate of 4 of (i) to three actually consumptive, 4 of (ii) to two actually consump-
tive and 4 of (iii) to one such. Dividing a total of consumptives thus formed by
the total offspring he formed a ratio, which multiplied by 100 he termed the
" consumptivity " of the fraternity. For example, in a fraternity of which one
member was actually consumptive, two suspicious and four somewhat sus-
picious, Galton would reckon three consumptive members, and the taint, or
consumptivity, would be 43 °/ o . To his surprise he found on making frequency
distributions of consumptivity in fraternities, whether for one brother or one
parent consumptive, that low and high degrees of consumptivity were both
maxima, and moderate degrees gave a minimum or "anti-mode." Thus Galton,
as far as I am aware, reached the first U-shaped distribution of frequency. He
himself, notwithstanding his great belief in the normal curve, says it is not
possible to torture the figures so as to make them yield the single-humped
normal curve :

" They make a distinctly double-humped curve whose outline is no more like the normal
curve than the back of a Bactrian camel is to that of an Arabian camel. Consumptive taints
reckoned in this way are certainly not ' normally ' distributed. They depend mainly on one or
other of two groups of causes, one of which tends to cause complete immunity and the^ other to
cause severe disease, and these two groups do not blend freely together. Consumption tends to
be transmitted strongly or not at all, and in this respect it resembles the baleful influence
ascribed to cousin marriages, which appears to be very small when statistically discussed, but
of whose occasional severity most persons have observed examples." (pp. 175-6.)

Galton shows on pp. 177 and 179 by aid of very slender data, namely
1 4 fraternities with a "high " degree of consumption, which signified about 50 °/ c
deaths from lung trouble, and nine fraternities severely affected as to the heart,
that the parentages in the two cases were of a very different character. In
the latter case there was practically no distinction between the diseases from
which the father and mother died; in the former no more deaths than those
of two fathers could be associated with lung trouble, while some nine mothers
out of fourteen were consumptive. This led Galton to take the view that
consumption, while partly due to the inheritance of a tuberculous diathesis,
which may be transmitted equally by either parent, is also transmitted by
infection, and that in this respect the mother is by her closer contact far
more a source of infection than the father. Is this differential influence of
parents for tuberculosis confirmed by later investigations? I have taken the
unpublished results for some 400 phthisical patients in King Edward VII's
Sanatorium, and classified their parents into definitely phthisical and
"suspicious," where owing to mention of their ailments there was suspicion

* See his pp. 172-3. Something of the same kind is still undertaken by tuberculosis officers
in grading the families of the admittedly tuberculous.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 75

of lung trouble. In 413 cases where information as to the father was
given, he was definitely phthisical in 7 '02 / o arid there were suspicions
of phthisis in 17*19 °/ o . In 420 cases of mother the corresponding numbers
were 6 - 90 °/ o and 13-81%. Thus Galton's view of the greater influence
of the mother, whether by infection or by heredity, is not confirmed on
large numbers*. Notwithstanding Galton's suggestion as to the funda-
mental part played by infecting mothers he proceeds on pp. 181-185 to
discuss consumption on the basis of heredity. Although we may not feel this
justifiable, his method is so suggestive and generally applicable that it must
be discussed here. He starts by assuming that the distribution of resistance
or immunity in the population may be supposed to have a normal distribu-
tion of mean M and — to use modern notation- — a standard deviation a. Now
according to Galton's data 16 °/ o of the deaths of his general population were
from consumption, hence M— - 9945cr is the level of immunity at which con-
sumption begins its ravages, and the mean immunity of those who die from
consumption is M— r5207o\ But, if we accept Galton's figures for stature,
the parental regression (and correlation) is |, or the marriage in which only
one parent is consumptive gives rise to a "co-fraternity" (modern "array")
of mean M — ^ x r5207o- = J/— -5069cr, with a variability or standard devia-
tion of 2 = owl — ^ = a x - 9428. Accordingly the centre of this array is at a
distance - 4876cr from the limit to immunity and the ratio of this to the
standard deviation of the array = '5172. The table of the Probability Integral
shows that this is only very slightly over 30 °/ o . Galton, disregarding the
fact that by choosing his regression, he has ipso facto chosen the variability
of his array, tries values for it which he thinks reasonable and which give
him 31 °/ o , 29 °/ and 27 °/ c of consumptives in the offspring of a consumptive
parent. These are not far from the value 30 °/ o we have obtained. Galton
by his different methods obtained 26 °/ o and 28 °/ o of consumptive offspring
of a consumptive parent, but this is only a minimum limit, as it does not
appear that he confined himself to families all the members of which were
already dead, or had passed practically through the age zone of really
lethal tuberculosis. Of course the method supposes that within reasonable
limits the degree of immunity of each individual remains constant, and that,
within reasonable limits again, this degree of immunity is not affected by
the size of the dose.

The importance of the method is greater than that of its application,
which is rendered doubtful by the use of the special values, not confirmed,
for stature, and by the fact that Galton had already attributed much of the
result to infection. What, however, the method indicates is, that if we know
the frequency of a particular type of disease in the community and its

* One curious result does seem to flow from my data. If we divide our patients into male
and female, then of the 423 parents of the female subjects 8-75% were definitely phthisical and
18-207 o were suspected; but of the 410 parents of male subjects only 5-127„ were definitely
phthisical and 12-68 °/ o suspected of phthisis. This suggests either that the parentage was more
influential in the case of the female, or that women knew more or were less reserved than the
men about the diseases of their parents.

10—2

76 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

frequency in the case of the offspring of a parent suffering from this disease,
then by a series of approximations we can readily obtain the value of the
correlation between offspring and parent, or the intensity of heredity in the
case of that disease. Galton himself states :

"Too much stress must not be laid on this coincidence*, because many important points had
to be slurred over, as already explained. Still, the primd facie result is successful, and enables
us to say that so far as this evidence goes, the statistical method we have employed in treating
consumptivity seems correct, and that the law of heredity found to govern all the different
faculties as yet examined, appears to govern that of consumptivity also, although the constants
of the formula differ slightly." (p. 185.)

The penultimate chapter of Natural Inheritance is termed Latent
Elements. The main point to which Galton appeals here is that the parents
contributing on the average a definite amount to the heritage of a child,
according to Galton each £, the residue of the stock of either parent can on
the average only contribute a definite amount, i.e. ^ on this view, to the child,
or only £ of the characters of the ancestry can lie latent in the parent, and be
contributed to the child. Galton argues that "either pai-ent must contribute
on the average only one quarter of the Latent Elements, the remainder of them
dropping out and their breed becoming absolutely extinguished" (p. 188).
He illustrates this by the selection of 13 out of a pack of 52 cards; any card
may be chosen but actually 39 are rejected, yet if a great many sets of
13 are chosen, i.e. a great many individuals be taken, every card in the
original pack will ultimately appear. " No given pair can possibly transmit
the whole of their ancestral qualities ; on the other hand there is probably no
description of ancestor whose qualities have not been in some cases trans-
mitted to a descendant" (p. 189). The throwing out of half the latent (as
well as half the patent) elements at each crossing is really part of Galton's
idea of all inheritance being particulate, a mosaic of ancestral characters.
Even his idea of a blend is not a summation of continuous contributions, but
a summation so to speak of quanta from individual ancestors.

In his next paragraph Galton deals with a Pure Breed, and again his error
as to regression appears to come to the surface. He discovered regression
simply as a statistical result, i.e. because he took parents of given characters,
whose earlier ancestry might be anything whatever, he naturally found the
offspring nearer than the parents to mediocrity. But unfortunately this idea
of regression fixing itself in his mind became for him a biological fact, and
he considered that he had discovered in stability of types, i.e. in groups each
with their own focus or centre of regression, the source of evolution, or change
from one type to a second. He now tells us that in the case of pure breed in
which there has been long selection, the influence of a large quantity of
mediocre ancestry would disappear, and so would the tendency to regression,
except in so far as it is "connected with the stability of different types"
(p. 189). In other words we have now two sources of regression, while
Galton's original deduction of regression was purely statistical and depended

* That of the above percentages.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 77

on the presence of the ancestral mediocrity. He does not state what experi-
mental evidence there is for this other type of regression, and my impression
is that it arose in his mind from a belief that regression was always in action
and so evolution impossible by mere selection of continuous variations.

Under the same heading of Pure Breed Galton also considers the vari-
ation within a sibship or group of brethren. If, as he defines a pure breed, it
be merely a line in which the ancestors have been given the same selection
value for a large number of generations, then on Galton's theory of normal
distribution of variates, the theory of multiple regression shows us that the
variability will be the same within the sibship, whether the ancestry have
been selected or not. Galton, to whom that theory was not familiar, deduces
by a rough approximative method that the ratio of variability in the pure
breed is to that in the mixed breed as - 98 to TOO; but actually on his
hypothesis they are equal ; the variability of the sibship is independent of
whether the characteristics of the progenitors are alike or unlike. Of course
the reader must understand that by pure breed and mixed breed Galton is
only referring to sibships which have their progenitors alike and their pro-
genitors unlike in character respectively. All these progenitors are supposed
of the same race, and he was not dealing with cross-breds, or mixture of
races, in his "mixed" breeds.

In the final paragraph of this chapter Galton gives the results of his
experience. He considers that for practical prediction you need to know not
only the obvious somatic characters of the two parents, but the latent
characters of their germ-plasms. These latter he considers can be respec-
tively determined with a fair degree of approximation from the paternal and
maternal uncles and aunts, if they exist in considerable numbers. Also what
may be ascertainable of grandparents and their sibships will be of value.
But he considers that if he were to start collecting family records again, he
would limit himself to families having at least six adult children, and with as
many members in both paternal and maternal sibships. There is much that
is true in this view, yet at the same time, where a stirp occasionally throws
a noteworthy individual, it may be doubted whether a sample of 12 in the
first generation and six in the second is large enough to bring out all the
latent possibilities which may be of importance. The desire of the Eugenist
must always be for as complete a family pedigree as possible. It would not
be feasible on a sample of 18 to say whether a single occurrence showed
insanity to be a latent character of the stock or not.

Galton's final chapter contains a brief summary of the work, of which
our present section is a more complete one. Only two points may be referred
to. On p. 196 he writes:

" There are no means of deducing the measure of fraternal variability [i.e. variability in the
sibship from the same pair of parents] solely from that of the co-fraternal [i.e. the array of
individuals who all have one parent of the same character value]. They differ by an element of
which the value is thus far unknown."

We need no longer admit this ignorance. If R be the multiple correlation
of an individual on all his ancestry, or on his "generant," then <r J\—R? is

78 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

the variability of the sibship or fraternity proceeding from that generant,
where a is the standard deviation or variability of the general population.
If r be the correlation of brothers in the ordinary sense, then owl— r 2 is
the variability of an array or co-fraternity of brothers. The connecting link
missed by Galton is : R 2 = r*.
The second topic is :

" the fundamental distinction that may exist between two couples whose personal faculties
are naturally alike. If one of the couples consist of two gifted members of a poor stock, and
the other of two ordinary members of a gifted stock, the difference between them will betray
itself in their offspring. The children of the former will tend to regress ; those of the latter will
not. The value of a good stock to the well-being of future generations is therefore obvious, and
it is well to recall attention to an early sign by which we may be assured that a new and gifted
variety possesses the necessary stability to easily originate a new stock. It is the refusal to
blend freely with other forms. Some among the members of the same fraternity might possess
the characteristics in question with much completeness, and the remainder hardly or not at all."
(pp. 197-8.)

It will be perceived from this paragraph that Galton does not hold the
absence of regression in the " gifted " stock to be due to less mediocrity in
the ancestry, but to the creation of a " new " stock by some trick of falling
into a fresh position of stability, which enables the stock, at any rate in
some of its members, to breed true. That is, he appeals to mutations for the
source of " gifted " stocks.

Whether this be true or not, Galton I think reached his views owing to
a misinterpretation of the statistical phenomena of regression. It was a
misfortune that he really did not get beyond the idea of regression in two
variates, because to be clear as to the true relation between his "mid-
parental heredity " and his " Law of Ancestral Hei'edity " a knowledge of
multiple regression is essential. But it was the greatest good fortune that
he got as far as he did; he blazed the track, which many have followed
since, and if he left unsolved or half-solved problems, his disciples ought to
be grateful that the master has provided the problem as well as the tool,
rather than be stern critics of his pioneer workf. Natural Inheritance is a
great book even if it has its obvious blemishes.

The work concludes with the reproduction of tables from the memoirs
on percentiles, on stature and on eye-colour, etc. Also with a series of Ap-
pendices. A gives particulars of Galton's own works and memoirs. B reprints
Hamilton Dickson's paper (see our p. 12). C describes the experiments on
sweet-peas, never fully dealt with. D reprints the Fortnightly Review paper
on Temper (see our pp. 69-70 and Vol. n, p. 271). E reproduces Galton's
paper on the Geometric Mean (see Vol. II, pp. 227-8). F reprints Galton
and Watson on the Probable Extinction of Families (see Vol. u, pp. 341-343).
G deals with the orderly arrangement of hereditary data, in particular with

* See Biometrika, Vol. xvir, p. 131.

t We have in a case in the Oalloniana of the Galton Laboratory the first map of Damara-
land. Is it of less value because it is not an Ordnance map of what was once German
South- West Africa 1

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 79

the case of recording disease. Much of this the reader who wishes to go
farther than our pages will find more easily here than in the original papers.
Certain numerical misprints in the tables require that they should be care-
fully examined before use.

J. Discontinuity in Evolution. In 1894 appeared William Bateson's
Materials for the Study of Variation, treated with especial regard to Dis-
continuity in the Origin of Species. \One ofothe strange misconceptions with
regard to Galton's views and to his work lies in the fact jthat- h e ha s been ovei T
andr-over again considered as the propounder of the view that evolutionJias_
takfinj)lace hy iJie_selection of slight or- continuous vajiatians^ _ As~amatter
of fact Galton had for some years before t.hfl_aj>pgg.ra.r)cft of Pnit^sonVliook—
been preaching emph^aticany^Jlie^dpctnne of djscontinuity-i&r evolution. S
Indeed his opinions on th e manne r_oXj3 y7nuEioTr ~date back to 1872 : see our
Vol. II, pp. 84, 170-174 and 190. They are more clearly "expressecTnTtKe
preface to the 1892 reprint of Hereditary Genius. There we read :

"Another topic would have been treated more at length if this book were rewritten —
namely the distinction between variations and sports. It would even require a remodelling of
much of the existing matter. The views I have been brought to entertain since it was written, are
amplifications of those which are already put forward in pp. 354-5*, but insufficiently pushed
there to their logical conclusion. They are that the word variation is used indiscriminately
to express two fundamentally distinct conceptions: sports and variations properly so called.
It has been shown in Natural Inheritance that the distribution of faculties in a population
cannot possibly remain constant if on the average the children resemble their parents. If they •
do so the giants (in any mental or physical particular) would become more gigantic and the
dwarfs more dwarfish, in each successive generation. The counteracting tendency is what I
called 'regression.' The filial centre is not the same as the parental centre but it is nearer to
mediocrity ; it regresses towards the racial centre. In other words the filial centre (or the
fraternal if we change the point of view) is always nearer, on the average, to the racial centre
than the parental centre was. There must be an average ' regression ' in passing from the
parental to the filial centre." (pp. xvii-xviii.)

The flaw in Galton's argument is again one that we have had several times
to notice, namely that he is overlooking the fact that he has clubbed together
parents of all possible types of ancestry, and the " regression" of his sons is
solely due to the large number of such parents who have sprung from an
ancestry mediocre or below mediocrity. The amount of filial regression depends
entirely on the amount of this mediocrity, and there will be no regression
if two or three generations above the parents are of like deviation from
mediocrity. Thus although it may still be a matter for experiment and dis-
cussion, whether evolution proceeds by variations proper or by sports, whether
it be continuous or advance by jerks, the reason which made Galton the pioneer
in advocating discontinuous evolution was a misinterpretation of his own
discovery of " regression." -f

* These pages deal with Galton's idea of the stability of types : see our p. 61 and Vol. II, p. 1 1 3.
It is quite reasonable to suppose that by successive selection of extreme variations proper we
might reach a position of unstable equilibrium of the parts of an organism. But there does not
exist experimental evidence at present to indicate that such instability would lead to a sport
breeding truly rather than to non-viable forms of the organism. See our pp. 93-4.

80 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

This is expressed so definitely in the following paragraph that I must
cite it :

" It is impossible briefly to give a full idea, in this place, either of the necessity or the proof
of regression; they have been thoroughly discussed in the work in question*. Suffice it to say,
that the result gives precision to the idea of a typical centre from which individual variations
occur in accordance with the law of frequency, often to a small amount, more rarely to a larger
one, very rarely indeed to one that is much larger, and practically never to one that is
larger still J. The filial centre falls back further towards mediocrity in a constant proportion to
the distance to which the parental centre has deviated from it whether the direction of the
deviation be in excess or in deficiency. All true variations are (as I maintain) of this kind, and
it is in consequence impossible that the natural qualities of a race may be permanently changed
through the action of selection upon mere variations. The selection of the most serviceable
variations cannot even produce any great degree of artificial and temporary improvement,
because an equilibrium between deviation and regression will soon be reached, whereby the
best of the offspring will cease to be better than their own sires and dams." (p. xviii.)

The flaw in the argument here is that Galton uses " filial centre " in two
senses. In the first sense it refers to all the offspring of pairs of parents of
the same character values, whatever their parental ancestries may be. ^Hence
there must always be regression^ In the second sense it is used of the
offspring of an individual pair of parents, and interpreted to mean that the
offspring of a given individual stock always regresses to the population mean,
more and more in each generation. This is not true, the stock may with
assortative mating even progress. The misfortune arose from Galton not
having reached the formulae for multiple regression. Had he done so, he
would have seen the contradiction between his "Law of Ancestral Heredity"
and his interpretation of " Regression." Whether continuous or discontinuous
evolution, or partly one and partly the other, expresses the truth, it is quite
certain that Galton in 1892 supported evolution by mutations owing to an
error of interpretation. His views on the subject undoubtedly contributed
to directing attention to discontinuous evolution. He writes :

" The case is quite different in respect to what are technically known as ' sports.' In this
a new character suddenly makes its appearance in a particular individual, causing him to differ
distinctly from his parents and from others of his race. Such new characters are also found
to be transmitted to descendants. Here there has been a change of typical centre, a new point
of departure has somehow come into existence, towards which regression has henceforth to be
measured and consequently a real step forward has been made in the course of evolution. When
natural selection favours a particular sport, it works effectively towards the formation of a new
species, but the favour that it simultaneously shows to mere variations seems to be thrown away,
so far as that end is concerned. There may be entanglement between a sport and a variation
which leads to a hybrid and unstable result, well exemplified in the imperfect character of the
fusion of different human races. Here numerous pure specimens of their several ancestral types
are apt to crop out, notwithstanding the intermixture by marriage that had been going on for
many previous generations." (pp. xviii-xix.)

Unfortunately the only method of settling points of such fundamental
importance — that of critical experiment — was not adopted %. Some biologists

* [Natural Inheritance, 1889. See our pp. 57 and 65.]
•f [This sentence is lacking in Galton's usual precision of statement.]

I Galton here first indicates what for years he believed to be the right experimental method
for solving problems in heredity; his scheme, however, failed because he endeavoured to work

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 81

poured scorn on statistical methods even while they rejoiced in being ignorant
of the mathematical processes, which would alone have enabled them to
understand and criticise them effectively.- Other biologists contented them-
selves with asserting that material collected by " non-biologists " could not
possibly be of biological value. Many rash statements were made which would
hardly now be maintained by the most ardent mutationist or Mendelian*.
The controversy over Galton's method of dealing with heredity became a
logomachy, or as some would say a tauromachy, and contributed little of
permanent value to science. It was idle because the fundamental questions
as to whether " variations proper " could serve as a basis for selection, and
whether and to what extent sports bred true, were not investigated by
agreed critical experiments. No one who has tried or even thought over
such experimental work — bound to be of a secular nature — will be in the
least likely to minimise the difficulty of devising and carrying through a
crucial experiment. Nevertheless that was and remains the sole satisfactory
method of settling a scientific dispute as to natural phenomena. The opinion
that no real conclusion could be reached, except by direct experiment, was
the actual reason why Galton's lieutenants ultimately retired from the
controversy concerning the application of his methods to the measurement of
heredity. Galton himself for another decade endeavoured to provide means
for secular experimentation. What was the outcome of his attempts we shall
see later on.

Again when Galton came to study finger prints, he was struck by the
scarcity of transitional types ; further his evidence indicated that there was
little if any correlation between type and any bodily or mental characteristics,
or that the types were peculiar to any human races.

" It would be absurd therefore to assert that in the struggle for existence, a person with,
say, a loop on his right middle finger has a better chance of survival, or a better chance of early
marriage, than one with an arch. Consequently genera and species are here seen to be formed
without the slightest aid from either Natural or Sexual Selection, and these finger patterns are
apparently the only peculiarity in which Panmixia, or the effect of promiscuous marriages,
admits of being studied on a large scale. The result of Panmixia in finger markings corroborates
the arguments I have used in Natural Inheritance and elsewhere, to show that 'organic stability'
is the primary factor by which the distinctions between genera are maintained ; consequently
the progress of evolution is not a smooth and uniform progression, but one that proceeds by
jerks, through successive ' sports ' (as they are called), some of them implying considerable
organic changes; and each in its turn being favoured by Natural Selection.

"The same word 'variation' has been indiscriminately applied to two very different con-
ceptions, which ought to be clearly distinguished ; the one is that of ' sports ' just alluded to,

by a committee of incompatihles. I shall return to his attempts later, but their first foreshadow-
ing appears in the 1892 preface to Hereditary Genius:

" It has occurred to others as well as myself, as to Mr Wallace and to Professor Romanes, that the time
may have arrived when an institute for experiments on heredity might be established with advantage. A farm
and garden of a very fewacres, with varied exposure, and well supplied with water, placed under the chargeof intelli-
gent caretakers, supervised by a biologist, would afford the necessary basis for a great variety of research upon in-
expensive animals and plants. The difficulty lies in the smallness of the number of competent persons who are
actually engaged in hereditary inquiry, who could be depended upon to use it properly." (p. xix.)

* For example, that two-factor dominant and recessive Mendelian hypotheses would account
for the heredity of coat-colour or eye-colour. Or that albinotic eyes were those without any
granular pigment, and individuals possessing them would breed true.

POIII- 11

82 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

which are changes in the position of organic stability, and may through the aid of Natural
Selection, become fresh steps in the onward course of evolution ; the other is that of the
variations proper, which are merely strained conditions of a stable form of organisation, and
not in any way an overthrow of them. Sports do not blend freely together ; variations proper
do so. Natural Selection acts upon variations proper, just as it does upon sports, by preserving
the best to become parents, and eliminating the worst, but its action upon mere variations can,
as I conceive, be of no permanent value to evolution, because there is a constant tendency to
' regress ' towards the parental type. The amount and results of this tendency have been fully
established in Natural Inheritance. It is there shown, that after a certain departure from the
central typical form has been reached in any race, a further departure becomes impossible
without the aid of these sports. In the successive generations of such a population, the average
tendency of filial regression towards the racial centre must at length counterbalance the effects
of filial dispersion ; consequently the best of the produce cannot advance beyond the level
already attained by the parents, the rest falling short of it in various degrees*."

The views of Galton here summarised show that the view he took in the
Natural Inheritance of 1889 f, that evolution was largely carried out by
" sports " or in jerks, i.e. was chiefly discontinuous, was not the outcome of
reading Bateson's work, although in that work he found support for his
ideas. It will be seen at once also that he had divided, years before later
controversies, " variations " into " sports " — now termed " mutations " — and
"variations proper," which Galton held (and had indeed demonstrated) were
inherited, but believed could not be of permanent value, because of what he
termed the " constant tendency to regress." The fact that they are inherited
distinguishes Galton's " variations proper," and very definitely distinguishes
them, from the "fluctuating variations" of Mendelian writers, which are
asserted by them to be non-inheritable. How far the theory of discontinuous
variation — with all its contradiction in many cases of the palaeontological
record J — was really forced on the attention of biologists by Galton's writings
it is not possible to say. We do know that both De Vries and Bateson were
at one time enthusiastic students of Galton's works. However this may be,
what is now clear is that there is no "unexpected law of universal regression"
as Galton supposed, it is merely a misinterpretation of his own data and the
constants based upon them.

It is important to examine this point, not only with regard to Galton's
views on Discontinuity in Evolution, but also owing to the many biological
misinterpretations of the statistical conception of regression. Galton found
that the average value of the stature of sons of fathers having an excess h
in stature above the population mean had only an excess of ^h above that
same mean. Practically all his conclusions are based on this single fact and
the statement that the array of such sons varies about this regressed mean
with a variation about 6 °/ c less than the variation of the general population.
The reduction of variation is so small, that it is possible practically to select
sons of the same character deviation as their parents possessed. In order to

* Finger Prints, 1892, pp. 19-21.

t See Chapter in, " Organic Stability," and compare our pp. 60-62 above.

| " The distinctive feature of palaeontological evidence is that it covers the entire pedigree of
variations, the rise of useful structures not only from their minute, apparently useless, condition,
but from the period before they occur." Henry F. Osborn, 1889.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 83

illustrate what Galton overlooked let us take his Ancestral Law coefficients
as if they represented the absolute truth and investigate what would be the
mean stature of sons if their parents and grandparents were by natural or
artificial selection raised to a deviation^Qibove the population value.
The mean of the sons would now be

the offspring have accordingly regressed \h from the parental deviation.
Now suppose selection to cease, and owing to isolation or other cause the
offspring to interbreed ; then their offspring will have the average value

In other words there is no further regression, or what these offspring lose
in the regression of their parents is compensated by the exceptionality of their
</r<(ndparents.y Applying the formula once more we have for the offspring
average

i(lh + %h) + x \(%h + ih + %h + %h) + ^{h + h + h + h + h + h + h + h)

+ ^g (h + h + h + h+to sixteen times)

or the exceptional great grandparents make up for the loss of the regressed
parents and the exceptional great great grandparents for the loss of the
regressed grandparents; and so on. In other words there is no "unexpected
law of universal regression. " yEjegressipn in Gal ton's sense arises solely irom
the fact that by clubbing into a single array the offspring of all fathers of a
given character deviation he has given them not only mothers whose average
stature will be mediocre, but also a mediocre ancestry. But if there be
isolation and inbreeding w T hat Galton treated as a regression is a permanently
progressed value for the offspring. Indeed if we continue to select, not with
increased deviation, but with the same deviation (h), there is, so far from a
regression, a continuous progression towards the selection value. For example
if we select for

1 generation 2 generations 3 generations 4 generations 5 generations

we progress: ^h, §§A, §§&, ||^, f^/i, ,

and then inbreeding due to isolation or other cause after any one of these f

generations maintains the group at the progressed value. __ ^

Shortly there is no law of " universal regression," and we canyjgdurce U^
from Galton's own theory that his "variations proper," if selected and inbred,
would establish a breed with a " new centre of regression." It is of course
more than probable that our new centre of regression, i.e. the type of our
new breed, may be unsuited to survive, that is to say in Galton's sense
may be unstable. One cannot alter one character in an organism without
modifying all the correlated characters, and some of those altered are likely
to have survival value. But Galton's own data and Galton's own theory

11—2

84 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

rightly interpreted lead to no "universal regression," still less to an argument
that "variations proper" cannot be the subject of selection and the formation
of new breeds.

This does not prove that "variations proper" have been the basis of
evolution, but it removes Gal ton's chief reason for belief in evolution by
discontinuity, that is by sports or mutations. The law of "universal regres-
sion " — over which Galton undoubtedly stumbled — is only true when we
neglect ancestry beyond the parents and suppose mating at random, but
these are not the conditions which exist when intense selection is taking place
and the selected interbreed.

Having prefaced Galton's views on Discontinuity with some criticism,
which I think is needful, of his theory of regression, we may turn to his
paper on "Discontinuity in Evolution," which was published in Mind, Vol. in,
N.S. pp. 362-372, July, 1894. Galton begins by saying that students of the
laws of variation need not be disheartened by the impossibility of learning
what is the cause of variation. Galton, who, as we have seen, believed in
individuality in the numerous germ cells of an organism, and that germ cells
were subject to selection, found no difficulty in attributing variation to the
effect of interacting germinal elements*. He considered that the actual cause
of any particular variation might be put on one side by those who study the
degree and character of variation generally.

We are next provided with a definition of race based upon the idea of a
typical centre of regression. As I understand him A and B are two different
races, if the offspring of the members of A and the offspring of the members
of B regress to two different centres of regression. But how can we practically
demonstrate this ? If we take the offspring of a pair of individuals of race A,
the degree in which they differ from their parental mean will depend upon
the long line of ancestry of those parents (to adopt Galton's own views); if
the parents were relatively small in stature, say, for their ancestry, the
offspring average may exceed the parental stature; if they were relatively
tall, the offspring average may fall short of the parental. If we choose such
a large number of parents of given statures, that we may assume the
ancestors of the parents have for average value that of the general popula-
tion, then the offspring average will regress to the population mean, and
should we know the regression coefficient accurately, this will provide the
population mean or " typical centre of regression." Similarly we might
determine the typical centre of the race B, and ascertain whether the two
centres were or were not significantly different. But I cannot see that this
is any more than inquiring whether the populations A and B have different

. * I must confess to feeling it extremely difficult to accept the view that the population of
germ cells belonging to an individual organism are like atoms, identical in character, and
have a germinal capacity defined by absolutely the same formula. Such a population of germ
cells is, if parasitical, still an organic population, and one continually in a state of reproduction
and change. No other organic population that we know of is without variation among its
members, and I find it extraordinarily hard to believe that it is a matter of complete indiffer-
ence which individual spermatogonium of an organism is the ultimate source for fertilisation
of an individual ovum of a second organism.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 85

means, and we might proceed at once to do this without introducing at all
the ideas of inheritance and regression. Galton's definition might be of
service if we could determine from the regression of the offspring of a single
pair of parents, or a few pairs, the typical centre, but this is no more feasible
than to determine from a few individuals the population mean ; the very-
backbone of Galton's conception of parental regression is that the ancestors
of the parents cover all the possible pairs in the community, or are on the
average mediocre.

Having defined his races A and B to be those having different centres of
regression, which if the races are stable simply connotes different population
means, Galton concludes that if A and B are stable then intermediate types
are less stable. I think this is only a theory, not necessarily a demonstrable
fact. It may be that races A and B have not diverged from a common
ancestral race C by continuous variation, but there is nothing in Galton's
theory of regression to prevent A and B arising from C or even A from B
by continuous variation. The idea of "stability" as a source of organic
evolution is one that Galton was very fond of; when a race has been largely
selected, it topples over, so to speak, into a new form of organic equilibrium
with a new centre of regression. In this way Galton would account for
"sports" and the prepotency and permanency of certain sports, and he con-
siders that most breeds have arisen from sports. He then refers to various
kinds of sports as in peacocks, peaches, and the appearance of remarkable
intellectual gifts in man. Under the latter category he cites Sebastian Bach.
" Can anybody believe that the modern appearance in a family of a great
musician is other than a sport?" (p. 368). He also refers to Inaudi the
mental arithmetician, who started as an illiterate Piedmontese boy. In the
latter case, however, the Inaudi stock may well have possessed similar, if
less intense powers which were never called into activity, while in the former
case we now possess the pedigree of the Bach family, and their remarkable
musical power is certified for five or six generations. All variation is dis-
continuous when examined in small groups such as families, and the extreme
deviations in such small groups may be easily interpreted as sports. Newton
again may well have been a sport, but till we know more than we do at
present of his mother's ancestry, it is hardly wise to hold that he was such.
Nor again if some of these men are to be considered "sports," can we
dogmatically assert that they might, like the "japanned" or black-shouldered
peacocks, have produced offspring regressing to a new typical centre.

" The phrase organic stability must not as yet be taken to connote more than it actually
denotes. Thus far it has been merely used to express the well-substantiated fact that a race
does sometimes abruptly produce individuals who have a distinctly different typical centre, in
the sense in which those words were defined. The inference or connotation is that no varia-
tion can establis+i itself unless it be of the character of a sport, that is, by a leap from one
position of organic stability to another, or as we may phrase it, through ' transilient ' variation.
If there be no such leap the variation is, so to speak, a mere bend or divergence from the
parent form, towards which the offspring in the next generation will tend to regress ; it may
therefore be called a ' divergent ' variation. Thus the unqualified word variation comprises .
and confuses what I maintain to be two fundamentally different processes, that of transilience
and that of divergence, and its use destroys the possibility of reasoning correctly in not a few

86 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

important matters. The interval leapt over in a transilience may be at least as large as it has
been in any hitherto observed instance, and it may be smaller in any less degree. Still whether
it has been large or small, a leap has taken place into a new position of stability. I am unable
to conceive the possibility of evolutionary progress except by transilience, for if they were
merely divergences, each subsequent generation would tend to regress backwards towards the
typical centre, and the advance that had been made would be temporary and could not be
maintained." (p. 368.)

We see that Galton only differed from the mutationists by supposing that
their not-inherited "fluctuating variations" were really inherited, although
they were of no permanent account, being rendered nugatory by his principle
of regression. In view of the inheritance he had found for grades of stature,
he could hardly hold otherwise than to suppose them inherited, but he coupled
this inheritance with a misinterpretation as I have shown of his own statistical
theory of regression, which left him practically in the ranks of the muta-
tionists — a strangely inconsistent position for one who has been looked upon
as the founder of the Biometric School ! A. little farther on Galton writes:

"These briefly are the views that I have put forward in various publications during recent
years, but all along I seemed to have spoken to empty air. I never heard nor have I read any
criticism of them, and I believed they had passed unheeded and that my opinion was in a
minority of one. It was, therefore, with the utmost pleasure that I read Mr Bateson's work
bearing the happy phrase in its title of 'discontinuous variation/ and rich with many original
remarks and not a few trenchant expressions. ...It does not seem to me by any means so certain
as is commonly supposed by the scientific men of the present time, that our evolution from a
brute ancestry was through a series of severally imperceptible advances. Neither does it seem
by any means certain that humanity must linger for an extremely long time at or about its
present unsatisfactory level. As a matter of fact, the Greek race of the classical times has
surpassed in natural faculty all other races before or since*, and some future race may be at
least the equal of the Greek, while it is reasonable to hope that when the power of heredity and
the importance of preserving valuable 'transiliences' shall have been generally recognised, effec-
tive efforts will be made to preserve them." (pp. 369 and 372.)

What direction those "effective efforts" should take Galton does not
indicate. He tells us that human sports of considerable magnitude in both
the moral and intellectual fields assuredly occur. But when we face the
question of increasing the number of their offspring we soon recognise that
endowment of parenthood will achieve little in the case of a rare mutation ;
we find ourselves led into the thorny field of speculating on the eugenic as
distinguished from the social value of monogamy and on the possible utility
of endogamy in the perpetuation of human sports. The elimination of animal
passions still strong in man would have to be carried much farther than it
has yet been, before the tribal customs as to marriage and family life could
be safely called into question even in the case of individuals of surpassing
intellectual or moral eminence, were it feasible, indeed, to determine such
individuals with anything like unanimity. The difficulty of the problem
should not discourage all consideration of it, for it is clearly fundamental if
we are consciously to use heredity to elevate mankind ; on the other hand
the very difficulty of the problem forbids hasty solutions being adopted and
proclaimed as essentials of the eugenic programme"}* .

* [See, however, my remarks, Vol. II, pp. 107-109.]

t See on this point, The Times (December 31st) report of a discussion under the auspices of
the Eugenics Society at the Educational Congress on December 30, 1927.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 87

Galton's interest in Discontinuous Evolution was further manifested in
the same year by a circular which will be found in the Transactions of the
Entomological Society of London, 1895 (April 3rd). It consists of three
questions addressed to breeders and others, not only entomologists but to
those who pursue any branch of natural history. The questions are for
information on the following topics :

"(i) Instances of such strongly-marked peculiarities, whether in form, in colour, or in habit,
as have occasionally appeared in a single or in a few individuals among a brood; but no record
is wanted of monstrosities, or of such other characteristics as are clearly inconsistent with
health and vigour.

"(ii) Instances in which any one of the above peculiarities has appeared in the broods of
different parents. [In replying to this question, it will be hardly worth while to record the
sudden appearance of either albinism or melanism, as both are well known to be of frequent
occurrence.]

"(iii) Instances in which any of these peculiarly characterised individuals have transmitted
their peculiarities, hereditarily, to one or more generations. Especial mention should be made
whether the peculiarity was in any case transmitted in all its original intensity, and numerical
data would be particularly acceptable that showed the frequency of transmission: (a) in an
undiluted form, (/;) in one that was more or less diluted, and (c) of its non-transmiss-ion in any
perceptible degree."

The context attached to the questions shows that Galton was still
troubled by the question of regression: " Regressiveness and stability are
contrasted conditions and neither of them can be fully understood apart
from the other." As I have endeavoured to indicate regression is merely a
statistical result, which holds for a population, not for an individual, when
we table the former with a knowledge of only a limited number of the
kinsfolk of individuals and assume the mean of each generation to remain
the same*. The biological problem is to determine how this mean changes
and is quite independent of the statistical idea of regression. As I have
indicated above (p. 83) the offspring of selected ancestry on Galton's own
theory do not regress to the population mean, and in this respect the only
contrast that could be drawn between the offspring of a "sport" and of such
selected ancestry is the question of the extent to which a sport breeds true
without having even a limited amount of selected ancestry. This is really
the point which Galton's third question would tend to answer f.

K. Eugenics as a Religious Faith. I have already pointed out that a very
fundamental characteristic of Galton's mind was his desire that our pro-
gressive knowledge of natural law should at once be turned to practical service
in attempts to elevate the race of man. He could not think of the doctrine of

* This assumption is made by Galton, but it is not in the least needful to the statistical theory
of regression, which measures each generation from its own mean.

f I am not certain whether it was in reply to this circular that Galton received information
about a singular family of lunatic cats. He described the family in a letter to The Spectator
(April 11, 1896), entitled: Three Generations of Lunatic Cats. The sires of the kittens were
unknown, but may be assumed to have been normal. Nevertheless the lunacy, which may be
considered as a sport, was transmitted by the mother to all her offspring and grandchildren
with undiluted strength. The only doubt that can be raised is whether the sire of "Phyllis," who
was brought from Ewart Park, Northumberland, might possibly have been a wild cat. It is a
pity the family could not have been preserved for the study of hereditary lunacy.

88 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

evolution merely as a contribution to academic biology; for him the type of
"sport" of greatest interest and value was that embracing the human moral
or intellectual "sports," and he desired at once to know how we might per-
petuate for the service of mankind such supermen as might appear. Evolution
according to him was providing for the survival of the physically and mentally
more vigorous members of the race, and he desired to see this achieved with
greater rapidity and less pain to the individual. In 1894 a book entitled Social
Evolution, written by Benjamin Kidd, was published, and created for a time
some stir as dealing with the relation of supernatural, or at least ultra-rational
religion to the social evolution of man. It was not written from the scientific
standpoint and contained little of permanent value. It led Galton, however,
to publish a rather remarkable article on " The Part of Religion in Human
Evolution*." Kidd's thesis may be briefly summarised as follows : Intra-group
struggle for existence is the sine qud non of social progress; this beneficent
working of the struggle for existence is so painful to existing men that they
would not, if they were rationalists, pay the price for it; to check the anti-
social and anti-evolutionary force of reason religion has been evolved to
provide an ultra-rational sanction for moral conduct.

Galton starts his paper by suggesting that superstitions in barbaric
times, such illusions as totems, tutelar deities, and we may add tribal and
national gods, gave cohesive force and compactness to a group and tended
to render it successful against other groups, which on rational grounds had
begun to question such illusions. Galton recognises the important part
religion may play in determining national stability. Even after men of
education have realised the irrationality of a national creed, it may be
unwise precipitately to destroy it.

"The social system of every nation, including its religion, whatever that may be, has ad-
justed itself into a position of stability which is dangerous to disturb. Deep sentiments and
prejudices, habits and customs, all more or less entwined with the established religion of each
nation, are elements of primary importance to its social fabric. It is true that vast changes
become obvious in the social system of every progressive people, whenever its habits and customs
at one period are compared with those of another long after, but, as a rule, the changes are
piecemeal- Each change is primarily confined to a single part, the remainder adapting itself to
the new condition with a comparatively small shift of the position of the centre. Commonsense
teaches how much can be thus done with safety at any given time. Great and sudden changes
in religion are hardly to be attempted except when the stability of the existing system is
tottering and on the point of falling." (p. 758.)

Whatever views we may take about religion, whether we regard it as a
supernatural revelation or not, we can agree that one of its chief functions is
to curb selfishness in the individual, to inculcate altruism, and by restraining
human passions to help the stabilisation of society. With this end in view
religion from the earliest times has been the guardian of tribal custom in
regard to marriage, birth and death. It has therefore concerned itself with
matters which from our present knowledge of the laws of natural selection
and heredity we recognise as bearing on human evolution. It is impossible —

* The National Review, August 1894, pp. 755-765,

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 89

and this the Church is now beginning to recognise — to place the scientific
doctrine of evolution and the moral conduct of man as inspired by religious
belief in separate idea-tight compartments. Slowly, but nevertheless surely,
this aspect of religion is taking possession of the minds of the more thoughtful
clergy. It has long been seen by many men of science that it formed the
most hopeful field for co-operation between the old supernaturalism and the
new scientific knowledge. It is from this conception that Galton, as an
agnostic, starts to bring religion into touch as a living force with our belief
in human evolution.

Galton cites three definitions of religion. (^4) that of John Stuart Mill:
The essence of Religion is the direction of the emotions and desires towards
an ideal object, recognised as rightly paramount over all selfish objects of
desire. (B) that of Kant: Religion consists in our recognising all our duties
as Divine commands. And (C) that of Gruppe: A belief in a State or Being
which, properly speaking, lies outside the sphere of human striving or attain-
ment, but which can be brought into this sphere in a particular way, namely
by sacrifices, ceremonies, prayers, penances and self-denial.

Gruppe's definition is historical, indicating religion only by its past out-
ward and nigh outworn forms. Kant's definition of religion as a recognition
of supernatural sanction for all duties is too narrow in its sanction and too
wide in its duties*; it demands also a continuous revelation as duties con-
tinuously change with human progress. It was not unnatural therefore
that Galton selected Mill's definition of religion. He points out that any
guiding idea that takes passionate possession of the mind of a person or a
people is an adequate adversary to purely selfish considerations, and that
such would be religious in Mill's sense but not in that of Kant or Gruppe.

"Many of the ordinary emotions which influence conduct admit of being excited to so high
a pitch that the merely self-regarding feelings do not attempt to withstand them, but yield
themselves unresistingly to be sacrificed to the furtherance of a cause. That the emotions can be
so excited, whether in a party or in a nation, easily and often irrationally, is one of the common
teachings of history." (p. 757.)

No supernatural command or sentiment is needful. Religious enthusiasms
in the sense of Kant or Gruppe may give great help, but they are not
indispensable.

"The ambitions, loves, jealousies, and hates of nations, families, and persons, seem fully
strong enough to force men who are under their influence, to disregard what is commonly under-
stood by the phrase selfish desires." (p. 758.)

Galton, under a conviction of its truth, then makes the following affirma-
tion :

"The direction of the emotions and desires towards the furtherance of human evolution,
recognized as rightly paramount over all objects of selfish desire, justly merits the name of a
religion." (p. 758.)

* To lender unto Caesar what is Caesar's may be the dictate of a great religious teacher, but
is scarcely a religious duty— even if Caesar be not a foreign war-lord!

l'GIII 12

90 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

Thus, I think, he sympathises with the Victorian scientific criticism of
religion as defined by Kant and Gruppe, but he desires to see a religion in
Mill's sense built up to replace the formal religions. He holds that :

"the destructive task is a necessary though painful preliminary, because until obstructions are
thoroughly cleared away, and the view is quite open, the character and exigencies of the vacant
space cannot be rightly understood, nor can a judgment be formed as to how far and in what way
rebuilding is needful. It is also pardonable enough that the work of destruction should be over
zealously indulged in by some who have long chafed under what they consider to be the irra-
tionality of one or other of the many conflicting creeds.

"All earnest inquirers recognize the awful mysteries that surround human life, but they are
angered by theosophies that attempt to solve part of the problems by means of hypotheses that
are improbable in themselves, while they introduce gratuitous complications. For instance if we
strip from Milton's fable and from the dramatis personae of Paradise Lost all the glamour thrown
over them by his superb diction, a grotesquely absurd framework remains behind. His high
undertaking to justify the ways of God to man becomes ludicrously inadequate. The same spirit
under another guise that moved our ancestors in the days of the Reformation to shatter the
authority of Rome, is abroad again but is now directed against the dogmas of the time. The
spirit is that of a determination to face and view the grand and terrible problem of life in the
clear light of day, and not through artificial mediums that partly hide, partly colour and partly
refract it." (pp. 758-9.)

Galton, while desiring a reformation of religion in the sense of Erasmus,
was perfectly conscious that the bulk of our people, who may be weary of
the old superstitions, are in such a backward state that they will be more
ready to accept new superstitions* than to seek a rational basis for a national
religion. Granted the discredit of the long accepted ultra-rational faith,
granted that a nation "be suffering in a still more acute form than our
own from poverty, toil, and an unduly large contingent of the weakly, the
inefficient, and the born-criminal classes, and that the existing social
arrangements are acknowledged to be failures," what will follow? Galton
held that socialistic experiments on various scales and in various ways will
be largely tried and will be admitted to be ineffective owing to the moral
and intellectual incompetence of the average citizen^.

"There would then be a widely-felt sense of despair; there would be ominous signs of
approaching anarchy and of ruin impending over the nation, while a bitter cry would arise for
light and leading. A state of things like this is by no means impossible in the near future, even
here in England, and therefore, it deserves some consideration as being something more than a
merely academic question. In the imagined event, preachers of all sorts of nostrums would
abound, mostly fanatics who could see only one side of a question, and on that account they
would be all the more earnest in their opinions and persuasive to the multitude." (p. 759.)

Thus Galton uses the probable ineffectiveness of socialistic experiments
as an argument in favour of the acceptance of eugenics as a social and at

* Salvationism, Spiritualism, Theosophy, Christian Science, to say nothing of the resurrection
of the urge, dating from the Neolithic period, to the sacrifice of the people's deity or its totem,
and a communal feast on the remains.

t I do not remember any other reference of Galton's to Socialism. The present passage indi-
cates that it was not in its ideas antipathetic to him, but that he conceived it would fail owing
to the moral and mental feebleness of the average citizen. The present experiments in Russia
and China will serve to test his opinions in the eyes of sympathetic onlookers. Their failure
would convince men according to Galton that racial progress in the eugenic direction must
precede or accompany social reconstruction.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 91

the same time a religious programme for the nation. He puts into the mouth
of a supposed agnostic and "somewhat fanatic" preacher opinions which were
undoubtedly his own — even though he states that, with much sympathy for
them, he would not commit himself to them without serious reservations the
statement of which "would merely distract the argument*." It would indeed
be a loss, if Galton's views thus boldly expressed should perish in an
ephemeral review article. He himself has added in a list of his papers in my
possession a note to the effect that this article suggests Eugenics — although
that name is not mentioned — as a religion in accordance with our modern
views on human evolution. We note here the beginning of Galton's last
period in which he devoted his activities to eugenic propaganda. I cite the
following characteristic passages :

"The mystery is unfathomed as to whence the life of each man came, whether it pre-existed
in anj' form or not. The mystery is equally great as to what will become of his life after the
death of the body ; whether it will be perpetuated in a detached form as some creeds say,
whether it will be absorbed into an unlimited sea of existence, as other creeds assert, or whether
it will cease entirely. As regards this life, there are also mysteries. Every act may or may not
have been determined by previous conditions, but man has the sense of being free and respon-
sible: he is accustomed to do and to be done by as if he were so, therefore we may provisionally
believe that he is free and should act on that supposition. There is a further mystery as regards
the cosmic conditions under which we live, for no assurance can as yet be obtained of any
supernatural guidance, the facts alleged in evidence of its existence being more than counter-
balanced by those that point the other way. We cannot, in consequence, tell with certainty
whether human life is subject to an autocracy, or whether, at least for practical purposes, it
exists as an isolated republic; but the latter appears at present to be the more probable, and
should, therefore, guide our conduct. Each man's destiny during his life may then be viewed
with propriety as depending entirely on his own physiological peculiarities and on his sur-
roundings. He has. consequently, to conduct himself as a member of a free executive committee
during his brief life, guiding his actions by whatever he can learn of the tendencies of the
cosmos, in order to co-operate intelligently with what he cannot in the long-run resist. The
sense of responsibility that is imposed by this view would sober, brace, and strengthen the
character, just as that of dependence on an autocratic power effeminates and enfeebles it

"On the foregoing basis our agnostic might say : 'Let us consider what is peculiarly profitable
and proper for man to attempt. One of the most prominent conditions to which life has been
hitherto subject, is the newly discovered law of the survival of the fittest, whose blind action
results in the progressive production of more and more vigorous animals. Any action that causes
the breed or nature of man to become more vigorous than it was in former generations is
therefore accordant with the process of the cosmos, or, if we cling to teleological ideas, we should
say with its purpose.

" It has now become a serious necessity to better the breed of the human race. The average
citizen is too base for the every day work of modern civilization. Civilized man has become
possessed of vaster powers than in old times for good or ill, but has made no corresponding
advance in wits and goodness to enable him to direct his conduct rightly. It would not require
much to raise the natural qualities of the nation high enough to render some few Utopian
schemes feasible that are necessarily failures now. Conceive, for the sake of argument, the nation
to be divided in the imagination into three equal groups L, At, J¥, in order of their natural civic
capacities. At present the production of the forthcoming generation is chiefly effected by L and
M, the lowest and the middle; if it were hereafter effected by M and N, the middle and the

* What these reservations may be we do not know, they probably related to evolutionary,
as opposed to revolutionary change. The opinions of the "supposed agnostic" are so akin to those
which Galton has himself expressed in other passages, but never more briefly or forcibly, that
we may well be certain they are really his own.

12— i

92 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

highest, a distinct gain would be achieved in the lifetime of many of those who initiated the
reform, for it is probable that the inefficient multitude of weaklings in brain, character, and
physique would be sensibly diminished in thirty years.

"Our agnostic preacher might go on to say that this terrible question of over-population
and of the birth of children who will necessarily (in a statistical sense) grow into feeble and
worse than useless citizens must be summarily stopped, cost what it may. The nation is starved
and crowded out of the conditions needed for healthy life by the pressure of a huge contingent
of born weaklings and criminals. Wo of the living generation are dispensers of the natural gifts
of our successors, and we should rise to the level of our high opportunities. The course of nature
is exceedingly wasteful in every way. It is careless of germs, tens of thousands of pollen grains
perishing of which none have had the chance of effecting fertilization, by being transported to
the proper spot at the proper moment, by the blind agency of an insect ferreting among the
flowers for food. It is equally careless of the microbes whose part in the animal world is ana-
logous to the pollen of the flowers; they are produced in myriads, though only one is needed
for fertilization. It is no exaggeration to say that the number of them which is produced each
year by an average male of any of the larger animals, would suffice to fertilize a million of
females, if every one of them were utilized. The course of nature is also indifferent and ruthless
towards our own lives, but reason can teach us to effect with pity, intelligence, and speed many
objects that nature would otherwise effect remorselessly, unintelligently and tediously. By its
action, suffering may be minimized and waste diminished. Wherever intelligence chooses to inter-
vene, the struggle for existence ceases, that struggle being by no means so absolute a necessity
in evolution as Mr Kidd assumes it to be. ...Horses are bred in the number and of the stamp
required, within the limits of excellence that experience has taught to be possible. A general
high level of the qualities that make a good horse has been attained without any aid from
natural selection, artificial selection having superseded it.

"Before, however, as even a fanatic must allow, any form of artificial selection could be ap-
plied to the human race, other than such moderate, yet not ineffective, reforms as might produce
the results mentioned a little way back, much is needed. Accurate knowledge has to be obtained
on numerous details connected with productiveness, of which we are now curiously ignorant
and careless to study, while national customs would have to be profoundly modified. The fanatic
might, however, fairly urge that in considering what is feasible, and what not, the three following
canons ought to be freely accepted :

" 1. The customs of every nation are liable to change to an extent that is barely credible
to those who do not bear history in mind ; therefore the existing customs of any nation may be
lightly regarded while discussing future possibilities.

"2. No custom can be considered seriously repugnant to human feelings that has ever pre-
vailed extensively in a contented nation, whether barbarous or civilized.

"3. Any custom established by a powerful authority soon becomes looked upon as a duty,
and, before long, as an axiom of conduct which is rarely questioned.

"Fortified by these three canons, an anthropologist who is necessarily familiar with the cus-
toms of many nations will find abundant elbow-room for his wildest speculations. There is hardly
any proposition, however monstrous it may seem to us now, that is thereby precluded from
consideration

"It is quite credible that a nation whose old religious notions and social practices, whatever
they were, have avowedly failed, who have been aroused to the knowledge that man possesses
vast and hitherto unused powers over the very nature of unborn generations, who have learnt to
realize the dilatoriness, ruthlessness, and pain that accompany the evolution of man, when it is
left as now to cosmic influences, and who have satisfied themselves that the present low state
of their race might be materially improved by concerted national action, should seize with
irresistible ardour upon the idea of utilizing their power.

"That is to say, the nation might devote its best energies to the self-imposed duty of carrying
out, in its manifold details, the following general programme: (1) Of steadily raising the natural
level of successive generations, morally, physically, and intellectually, by every reasonable means
that could be suggested; (2) of keeping its numbers within appropriate limits; (3) of developing
the health and vigour of the people. In short, to make every individual efficient, both through
nature and by nurture.

"A passionate aspiration to improve the heritable powers of man to their utmost, seems to
have all the requirements needed for the furtherance of human evolution, and to suffice as the

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 93

basis of a national religion, in the sense of that word as defined by J. S. Mill, for, though it be
without any ultra-rational sanction, it would serve to 'direct the emotions and desires of a
nation towards an ideal object, recognized as rightly paramount over all selfish objects of
desire.'" (pp. 761-3.)

I trust this long citation will not have wearied the reader; for his
biographer it contains some of the most important lines Galton ever wrote.
There is no reason to be afraid of plain words. Man has learnt how to breed
plants and most inferior forms of life that are of service to him. He has yet
to learn how to breed himself When he has studied heredity and environ-
ment in their influences on man, the application of the laws thus found to the
progressive evolution of the race will become the religion of each nation. Such
is the goal of Galtonian teaching, the conversion of the Darwinian doctrine
of evolution into a religious precept, a practical philosophy of life. Is this
more than saying that it must be the goal of every true patriot* ?

L. Miscellaneous Papers on Evolution, Heredity, etc. We may now
turn to a series of short papers by Galton, chiefly published in Nature,
and dealing with hereditary and evolutionary topics from 1897 onwards.

The first paper we note is entitled: "Rate of Racial Change that accom-
panies Different Degrees of Severity in Selection," and will be found in
Nature, April 29, 18.97 (Vol. lv, p. 605). This is an important paper,
because it deals with the effect of continued selection in modifying a variate
continuously distributed in a population. Galton starts with his two-thirds
regression of the offspring on the midparent for stature and the reduction of
the variability of the offspring of such midparents in the ratio of T5 to 17
inches. He then continues to select both parents at the 99th, 95th, 90th,
80th and 70th grades for 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and an infinite number of generations
in order to determine the progression there would be in stature by such
continuous selection. Galton, unfortunately ignorant of the formulae of
multiple regression, makes three erroneous assumptions, namely: (i) that the
regression between each generation is the same, namely §, notwithstanding
the earlier ancestry being as we advance more and more selected; (ii) that
the variability of the array of selected ancestry remains for the later genera-
tions the same as for the first selected generation ; this is of course incorrect,
the variability steadily diminishing towards a finite limit; (iii) that if the
selected race be now left to itself, it will regress indefinitely to the old
general population mean :

" It must be borne in mind, that there is no stability in a breed improved under the supposed
conditions ; but that as soon as selection ceases it will regress to the level of the rest of the
population through stages in which the deviation, at starting, sinks successively to w, w t ...w n of
its value f. It may, however, happen that a stable form will arise during the process of high

* Some may question whether we have more here than in Comte's Religion of Humanity.
I think so, because it is freed of the ceremonialism which Comte and Gruppe demanded as
a factor of religion, and it is essentially based on the acquirement of knowledge in a field of
science, which had little if any existence in Comte's day.

t w is Galton's regression coefficient in the case of selected midparent, with no selected
previous ancestry.

94 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

breeding, that shall aflbrd a secondary focus of regression, and become the dominant one, if the
ancestral qualities that interfere with it be eliminated by sustained isolation and selection.
Then a new variety would, as I conceive, arise ; but into this disputable topic there is no need
to enter now." [See, however, my footnote, p. 79.]

We now know that on the theory of multiple regression, this indefinite
regression has no existence; there is a slight regression in the first genera-
tion of breeding from the selected stock, but it ceases with this generation.
We have again in the cited passage evidence that Galton was obliged to
appeal to "sports" to account for evolutionary progress, because he had mis-
interpreted the theory of regression. If iv be the regression of the offspring
of the first generation of selected midparentage, the regression of the
offspring of parents of the first generation, who have also selected midgrand-
parents, is not to be taken w again. Thus the formulae, the numerical table
and the conclusions drawn from it in this paper are I think in error. But
the idea at the back of it that the more intense the selection, the more rapid
is the relative progress, is true ; as also the idea that there may in each case
be a limiting value. Probably no such continued selection is really feasible;
too many characters in the organism are highly correlated, so that if it were
possible to carry under conditions of viability an individual character to a
height much above the population mean, some one or other of the correlated
characters would be almost certain to be incompatible with the continued
efficiency of the organism in relation to its environment or its functions*.

I have not recalculated Galton's table, because with the data at present
available, I am inclined to believe that selection for two or three generations
and then inbreeding would be followed, at any rate in some characters, by
a progression rather than a regression. In other words the strength of
inheritance is such that with a very brief period of selection followed by
isolation a continuous differentiation will proceed — so far as it is not checked
by a counter natural selection. This suggests that we may have to seek in
heredity itself for the basis of progressive evolution ; a variation maintained
for a couple of generations, followed by an isolation of the offspring, will
continue to progress. If this be true we surmount the difficulty of why
variations to which the environment is not hostile, or indeed may be
favourable when they are sufficiently developed, can reach the stage of
development at which they become important as a new factor of efficiency
in the individual. We see that it is not natural selection, but the mere
force of heredity, which leads in isolated groups to the genesis of variations
of sufficient importance to have survival value to the individual. We may
term this theory of the genesis of remunerative variations the "Heredity
Theory of Progressive Evolution." It seems at first sight in flat contradic-
tion to Galton's views on continuous regression when selection ceases,
unless the selection has led to the creation of a sport. Yet it really flows

* Nor is this confined only to the functions of the individual, but may concern the functions
of other members of its race. Thus breeders of bull-dogs have gone on continuously selecting
the size of the head until the mortality of puppies and bitches at littering has become so serious
as to threaten even the survival of the breed.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 95

from a more complete view of multiple regression, and the more accurate
values we now have for the heredity constants.

The second paper to be referred to was published in The Gardeners'
Chronicle for May 15, 1897, and is entitled "Retrograde Selection." In
this Galton asks from horticulturists advice as to the cultivation of a
plant or plants existing in an original stock R and a stable variety V.
For example V might be a dwarf variety. Galton proposes to endeavour by
selection to pass back from V to R. If the plants in progress of selection be
X, then Galton proposes to pass towards R by selecting the plants above
the quartile of X on the R side of the character. He describes very fully
how the experiments could be made in an orderly fashion and the needs as
to soil and methods of growth; he refers to his paper of April (see our p. 93)
for a measure of the rate at which changes might be supposed to take place.
No doubt much might be learnt from such experiments — if only, that "retro-
grade selection" is impossible. I am not certain that Galton had not this in
mind, for if in his view stable varieties could only originate in sports, we
could not select back to the original stock, unless selection itself conduces to
sporting. I do not think the paper led to any actual experiments on Gal ton's
part, although the Editor of the Chronicle wrote strongly in favour of such
experiments in a leader in the following week, and there were some sugges-
tions on May 29, 1897*.

In Nature, November 4, 1897 (Vol. lvii, p. 16), Galton gave a brief
account of E. T. Brewster's paper on "A Measure of Variability and the
Relation of Individual Variation to Specific Differences f ." Brewster is really
comparing what we now term Interracial with Intraracial Variability,
measuring his variability by what is practically the coefficient of variation
V. His thesis is that if for any two interracial characters A and B,
V A is >V B , then for the corresponding intraracial characters in the "allied
races" v a will be > v b . There does not seem any obvious theoretical reason
for this, but Galton holds that Brewster "has provisionally established
his thesis that whenever any special character varies much in individuals of
the same race, it is probable that it will be found to vary much in 'allied
races' and conversely."

The next paper to be considered is entitled: "Hereditary Colour in
Horses," and appeared in Nature, October 21, 1897 (Vol. lvi, pp. 598-9).
Galton tabulated his data from material collected and published by " Tron
Kirk" in the Chicago journal, the Horseman (Christmas Number, 1896). In
the fundamental table which Galton gives there are 3025 matings of bay sires,
but as "Tron Kirk" informs us that 3100 foals were born to no more than
46 different bay sires J, or an average of 67 foals to the sire, it is clear that

* The interpretation put by the practical gardeners was that Galton wanted to go back from
an improved form to a poor original. But I do not think this by any means the chief purport
of his paper; he wanted if possible to go back from a specialised variety to the form, not necessarily
inferior, from which it had been obtained.

f Proceedings, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, May, 1897.

% It is not said that the matings of bay sires cover these 3100 foals, but presumably they
do. The difference in numbers may be due to the omission of grey foals or to twinning.

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

there will be a great bias in the returns owing to the limited number of
gametic constitutions in the sires. The following table gives the results as

Table of Colour Inheritance in Horses.

No. of
Observations

Colour
of Dam

Colour
of Sire

Percentages of Colour iu Offspring

Chestnut

Bay

Brown

Black

A (i)

(")
(iii)
(iv)

1900

Chestnut
Bay
Brown
Black

100
10

6
52

3
5

407
366

Chestnut
Bay

Bay

Chestnut

33
30

61
63

4
3

2
4

52
69

Chestnut
Brown

Brown
Chestnut

86
65

2
9

72
57

Chestnut
Black

Black

Chestnut

6
30

76
40

3
30

221
450

Bay
Brown

Brown
Bay

1
6

79
66

156
268

Bay
Black

Black
Bay

60
53

30
16

7
24

55
6

Brown
Black

Black
Brown

—

22
16

38
50

40
33

Percentages taken only to whole numbers.

published by Galton. In the first line of the series of rows, A (i), we see
that for 68 cases of chestnut mated with chestnut all the offspring were
chestnut. Galton does not comment on this, but it was the source of con-
siderable later controversy. A certain number of matings of chestnut with
chestnut taken from Wetherby's Thoroughbred Studbook gave the same result
as the first row of Galton's matings ; but a longer series, wherein it was pointed
out that the Studbook did contain some instances of chestnut mated with
chestnut not producing chestnut, was rejected on the ground that these
instances must be due to error of record, a most circular process of reasoning.
It is clear from B where we are dealing with a fairly adequate number
of crossings both ways that (i) there is not a predominance of sire or dam
for chestnut with bay matings, and (ii) bay may contain a factor of chest-
nut. If we work out from B the number of bays with a factor for
chestnut we find them to be 3T5 °/ o , while 68 '5 °/ o lack that factor. Applying
these percentages to the 1900 bay and bay matings in A (ii) we should

f.CS*r6r /i p.

Reproduction in close colour facsimile of Dr Sorby's painting of a tree with the pigment from
black human hair. [Colouring matter largely from melanin pigment granules ?]

•toj

,V»v

»»*

J*L.

*' - ^ t -

Reproduction in close colour facsimile of Dr Sorby's painting of a tree with the pigment from
dark red human hair. [Colouring matter largely from the diffused pigment of the fibrillae ?]

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 97

anticipate 9 , 9°/ chestnut and 90'1 °/ o non-chestnut foals, a result almost
exactly that observed.

If we judged by A (iii), A (iv), and G, we should conclude that black and
brown had no factor for chestnut. In that case chestnut and bay crossed
with black and brown would produce no chestnut foals. This is flatly con-
tradicted by C, D, E and F, which indicate that browns and blacks can
contain a factor for chestnut. The only explanation is, perhaps, a rather
forced one, namely that the matings in A (iii), A (iv) and G were few in
number and possibly made from a very few sires of brown and black colour
without factors for chestnut, while C, D, E and F, providing far more
numerous matings, contained blacks and browns with such factors. C, D, E
and F, indeed, tend to confirm this, for when the sire is black or brown
there are far fewer chestnuts produced than when the dam is black or
brown; in the latter case the larger number of dams used would give a
greater chance of their carrying factors for chestnut.

Galton himself by averaging up the likenesses in coat- colour of foal to
dam and to sire concluded that as some 32"83 °/ o of foals followed the colour
of their dam and 3175 °/ that of their sire, there was no prepotency, but
such an averaging method misses the possibility of discovering a prepotency
due to the presence or absence of "factors." The equality of male and female
hereditary influence is borne out by the long series B, but hardly by the other
and shorter series such as C and D*. Galton was very fully aware of what
he terms the "rudeness" of the data. He had been troubled with much the
same problems in considering hair colour ; but he had then obtained an
analysis of the pigments in human hair from Professor Sorby and the latter
investigator had shown the existence of two distinct pigments, one red and
one black. Sorby painted two trees in these two pigments extracted from
human hair, pictures which used to hang in Galton's dressing room and are
now in the Galton Laboratory. More recent microscopic investigation seems to
show that the same two pigments occur in the hair of horses and dogs, but that
the red pigment is diffused in the hair, i.e. "the whole ground substance of
the fibrillae is impregnated with it." On the other hand the black or melanine
pigment occurs in the form of pigment granules"}". On examination of a
number of specimens of horse hair in samples from ribs and mane of chestnut
horses, ranging from the golden chestnut of the Trakehnen stud to the
black chestnut, the diffused red pigment was found in all, but the pigment
granules varied from scarcely any in the golden and light chestnuts to close
packing in the dark and black chestnuts. This corresponds very closely to
the range of granular pigmentation found in passing from light red to dark
auburn hair in man. Such results suggest that it is very desirable to study
microscopically the distribution of the two pigments in the hair of horses'

* For example in 124 matings of chestnut dam by brown or black sire there were only
6 chestnut foals, but in 126 matings of chestnut sire with black or brown dam there were
46 chestnut foals.

t Pearson, Nettleship and Usher: Monograph on Albinism, Part II, pp. 319-345, Cambridge
University Press.

pgiii 13

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

coats, and to remember that granular pigmentation varies enormously within
the range of coat-colours described as chestnut by hackney breeders. Galton
assumes that full red pigmentation counts for 1 '0 and takes chestnut to be
0*8 ; bay, 07; brown, - 4; and black, O'l. Then by using the results of the
several lines in A, he concludes that each chestnut parent contributes
40 units to the offspring, each bay 337 units, each brown 25 - 3, and each
black 10 "4. He is now able to deal with the crosses in B, C, D, E, F and G.
He finds that there should be in the offspring of the matings :

units of red
units of red

Theoretically ...
While observations give

74
70

65
64

50
60

59
61

41
54

36
35

But is this really conclusive ? It is possible that there are almost the same
amounts of diffused pigment in the different coats and that the visible
colours arise from the relative amounts of granular pigmentation. Had
Galton put the amount of red pigment = - 8 for all coat-colours, he would
have got his theoretical and observational numbers in perfect agreement.
But I do not think this would justify the assumption that the amount of
red pigment is the same for all coats. I think then that we cannot assume
his far rougher agreement is any proof of the numbers he has selected, or
indeed of his theory of average parental contributions*. After the experience
we now have had in the coat-colour of mammals, I feel fairly convinced that
it is necessary to supplement the macroscopic classification by microscopic
examination, for the categories formed in the former manner contain a great
range of both diffuse and granular pigmentation.

Prepotency in Trotting Horses. Still another paper of the same year
occurs in Nature, July 14," 1898 (Vol. lviii, pp. 246-7). It is entitled " The
Distribution of Prepotency," and deals with data for American Trotting
Horses. Galton was much occupied at this time with the idea of the pre-
potency of individuals. He believed that some favoured individuals had a
power of impressing their exceptional characters on their offspring, and that
this prepotency was of the nature of a " sport." The American Trotting
Horse data provided, he considered, a method of testing this belief. Wallace's
Year Books give lists (i) of the sires of offspring any one of which has
succeeded in trotting one mile in 2 minutes and 30 seconds or less, or who
has "paced" (ambled) the same distance in 2 minutes and 25 seconds or
less ; (ii) of the dams of two such offspring, or else of one such offspring and
one such grandchild. Galton selected from these lists of sires and dams those
foaled before 1870 and therefore who would be at least 25 years of age in
the Year Book for 1896, which he was using. He considered that this would
give at least 20 years of breeding age to the parents and 5 years of attempted

* I took the relative proportions of red to be r u r 2 , r 3 , r t , and determined their values to fit
li, G, D, E, F, G by least squares instead of guessing their values; the ratio of the r's was
1-00 : 1 04 : 1-14 : 1-06, almost a ratio of equality !

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 99

record making at least to the foals. In this way Galton obtained 716 sires
and 494 dams who had produced offspring satisfying the above conditions,
and he classified them by the number of times they had produced such marked
foals. Reduced to percentages of sires and dams the following table resulted :

Percentage numbers of Standard Performers produced
by a single Sire or Dam.

6—10

11—20

21—30

31—40

41—50

51 and over

Sire
Dam

46
50

17
35

7
3

3
1

Galton explains the difference between sire and dam by remarking that
while the sire produces some 30 foals annually, the dam produces only one,
and therefore the chance of a large number of standard performers is much
less for her. He even allows that some of the exceptionally noteworthy per-
formances of the sires (Blue Bull, 60 ; Strathmore, 71 ; George Wilkes, 83 ;
Happy Medium, 92; and Electioneer, 154 standard performers) may be due
in part to the best mares being sent to famous sires. But he concludes
that the extraordinary "tail" of high-class offspring of the sires must be due
to some prepotency in some of the sires which enables them to impress their
character on their offspring, and he remarks :

" My conclusion is that high prepotency does not arise through normal variation, but must
rank as a highly heritable sport, or aberrant variation ; in other words its causes must partly be
of a different order, or else of a highly different intensity, to those concerned in producing the
normal variations of the race. In a sport the position of maximum stability seems to be slightly
changed. I have frequently insisted that these sports or " aberrances " (if I may coin the word*)
are probably notable factors in the evolution of races. Certainty the successive improvements
of breeds of domestic animals generally, as in those of horses in particular, usually make fresh
starts from decided sports or aberrances, and are by no means always developed slowly through
the accumulation of minute and favourable variations during a long succession of generations."

Here, I think, Galton has forgotten two things :

(i) The average difference between the first and second individuals in a
group of 100 tabled to any character is no less than "36 of the variability of
the group, and in a random sample may be still higher, but this is no
adequate reason for treating the first individual (or the last) as a sport
because he is not, like mediocre individuals, practically continuous with his
neighbours.

(ii) That the number of distinguished offspring any individual gives rise to
must be considered in relation to his total output. Galton merely says that
a sire produces " some 30 foals annually." I do not think this is adequate.

Many years ago I saw a good deal of the working of a large thoroughbred
stud ; the stud contained a number of stallions, some famous for their racing

* The word is quite good English, if Joseph Glanvill and Sir Thomas Browne are authorities.

13—2

100 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

achievements or for those of their progeny, others less famous. The service
lists of the former were always full up with external and home mares ; this
could not be said of the latter. I think it would be safe to say that the
former stallions served annually at least double the number of mares the
latter did. I hold therefore that to really demonstrate even a relative
superiority in producing standard performers Galton ought to have taken
the number of standard performers per total foals produced and this for
both sire and dam. Owing to one cause or another one mare may fail more
frequently than another to produce her annual foal. Out of four viable foals
she might produce three standard performers. Galton's method would make
her a less exceptional mare than one that produced four standard performers
out of ten foals. Thus his conclusions may be correct, but they cannot be
said to be proven until we know the relation of exceptional to total offspring.
The distribution of standard performers to sires looks like a "./"-shaped
frequency curve, and I do not understand why it is not as justifiable as
a ./-shaped curve for cricket scores, nor do I believe that anything is
deducible from the deviation of its tail from normality*.

Foundation of '" Biometrika." In October 1900 the present biographer sent
in a paper to the Royal Society ; that paper was printed in the Philosophical
Transactions and was published in November of the folloiving year. Mean-
while William Bateson, who had read the paper as one of the referees, wrote
a sharp criticism of it, which the then Secretary of the Royal Society printed
and issued in slip to the Fellows, before the latter had any opportunity of
studying the criticised paper itselff. Michael Foster, notwithstanding the
remonstrances of the biometricians, failed to see any objection to a referee
criticising a paper before its publication, and as a result of his attitude, it was
determined early in 1901 to found a Journal for the publication of biometric
papers. Weldon and the biographer were to be Acting Editors with Galton
as Consulting Editor. It is all past history now, and with twenty volumes
issued of Biometrika, one can afford to smile, when one thinks of Bateson
and Michael Foster as unwitting parents of what they would have considered
an unviable hybrid! Biometrika appeared in October 1901, and Galton
contributed an introductory notice entitled "Biometry" (Vol. I, pp. 7-10).
A good deal of that paper would now be unintelligible without the light

* There is a long review in the same number of Nature (Vol. lviii, pp. 2-11-2) by Galton
of Alexander Sutherland's The Origin and Growth of the Moral Instinct. Galton praises
the book highly, as extremely original and extending and confirming the masterly sketch by
Darwin in Chapters iv and v of his Descent of Man of the evolution of the moral instinct.
Galton does not, however, contribute any special views of his own, except the remark that "it
would be very interesting to trace and describe the origin and purport of superstitious fears in
human nature and their bearing on moral instinct." Galton, it must be remembered, was always
appreciative and generous in reviewing ; there is, even allowing for this, much information
collected in Sutherland's book, which should give it a permanent place in the evolutionist's
library.

f Shortly afterwards a resolution of the Council was conveyed to me, requesting that in
future papers mathematics should be kept apart from biological applications. /3ios was an
admissible topic, fxirpov also, but their combination was anathema, and that at a time when statis-
tical theory had to be worked out step by step as the biological applications demanded.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 101

that the above historical facts throw upon it. Galton's tale of Sir Joseph
Banks and the young geologists was the parable which he provided in order
that he who runs might read.

" Now that nearly a century has slipped past since the event, there can be no harm in
digging up and bringing to light a buried but amusing historical fact."

Then follows the inner story of the foundation of the Geological Society.
" But," continues Galton,

" it is not in the least my intention to insinuate that Biometry might be served by any modern
authority in so rough a fashion, but I offer the anecdote as forcible evidence that a new science
cannot depend on a welcome from the followers of old ones, and to confirm the former con-
clusion that it is advisable to establish a special Journal for Biometry."

Speaking of those early difficulties of Biometry, Galton writes :

" The new methods occupy an altogether higher plane than that in which ordinary statistics
and simple averages move and have their being. Unfortunately the ideas of which they treat,
and still more the technical phrases employed in them, are as yet unfamiliar. The arithmetic
they require is laborious, and the mathematical investigations on which the arithmetic rests
are difficult reading even for experts ; moreover they are voluminous in amount and still grow-
ing in bulk. Consequently this new departure in science makes its appearance under conditions
that are unfavourable to its speedy recognition, and those who labour in it must abide for some
time in patience before they can receive much sympathy from the outside world. It is astonish-
ing to witness how long a time may elapse before new ideas are correctly established in the
popular mind, however simple they may be in themselves. The slowness with which Darwin's
fundamental idea of natural selection became assimilated by scientists generally is a striking
example of the density of human wits. Now that it has grown to be a familiar phrase, it seems
impossible that difficulty should ever have been felt in taking in its meaning. But it was far
otherwise, for misunderstandings and misrepresentations among writers of all classes abounded
during many years and even at the present day occasional survivals of the early stage of non-
comprehension make an unexpected appearance. It is therefore important that the workers in
this new field who are scattered widely though many countries, should close their ranks for the
sake of mutual encouragement and support. They want an up-to-date knowledge of what has
been done and is doing in it. . . .

" This Journal, it is hoped, will justify its existence by supplying these requirements either
directly or indirectly. I hope moreover that some means may be found, through its efforts, of
forming a manuscript library of original data. Experience has shown the advantage of
occasionally rediscussing statistical conclusions, by starting from the same documents as their
author. I have begun to think that no one ought to publish biometric results without lodging
a well arranged and well bound manuscript copy of all his data, in some place, where it should
be accessible under reasonable restrictions, to those who desire to verify his work. But this by
the way*.

" There remains another urgent reason of a very practical kind for the establishment of this
Journal, namely that no periodical exists in which space could be allowed for the many biometric
memoirs that call for publication. Biometry has indeed many points in common with Mathe-
matics, Anthropology, Botany and Economic Statistics, but it falls only partially into each of
these. An editor of any special journal may well shrink from the idea of displacing matter
which he knows would interest his readers, in order to make room for communications that
could only interest or be even understood by a very few of them." (pp. 7-8.)

Thus Galton in his eightieth year heartened his young lieutenants for
their task, and his words have been through some 28 years a guide to the

* It is noteworthy that Galton's suggestion of a store of data (which has been provided in
the archives of the Galton Laboratory for all papers worked out there) has recently been
revived by Professor Julian Huxley, and suggestions made for storing measurements in the
British Museum (Natural History).

102 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

surviving editor of Biometrika, never in the first place to expect recognition
too quickly, and always if possible to give opportunities for publication to
the younger men, whose work and enthusiasm might elsewhere meet with
a cool reception.

Gifted Sons of Gifted Fathers. On November 28, 1901 (Nature, Vol. lxv,
p. 79) Galton published a paper entitled : " On the Probability that the Son
of a very highly-gifted Father will be no less gifted."

" Here we meet again with the specious objection which is likely to be adduced, as it has
already been urged with wearisome iteration, namely, that the sons of those intellectual giants
whom history records, have rarely equalled or surpassed their fathers*. In reply I will confine
myself to a single consideration and, ignoring what Lombroso and his school might urge in
explanation, will now show what would be expected if these great men were as fertile and as
healthy as the rest of mankind.

" The objectors fail to appreciate the magnitude of the drop in the scale of intelligence, from
the position occupied by the highly exceptional father down to the level of his genetic focus (as
I have called it), that is the point from which his offspring deviate, some upwards, some down-
wards. They do not seem to understand that only those sons whoso upward deviation exceeds the
downward drop can attain to or surpass the paternal level of intelligence, and how rare these
wide deviations must be."

Galton points out that besides the exceptional quality of the father there
are three other factors influencing the position of the offspring's genetic focus :
(i) the quality of the mother, (ii) the quality of the father's ancestry and
(iii) that of the maternal ancestry. The problem is — if we do not discuss it
from an individual case — what weight to give to these three additional factors.
Now it is a well-recognised fact that while exceptional parents produce
exceptional sons at a much higher rate than non-exceptional parents do, the
pairs of the latter are so much more numerous than those of the former that
it is far more probable that an exceptional man is the son of non-exceptional
than of exceptional parents. Hence when we are dealing with average results
(ii) and (iii) will not be highly contributory. On the other hand many ex-
ceptional men have wives much above the average, and we ought to reckon
something for the influence of the mother. Let us take her influence to be
measured by an exceptionality one-fifth that of her husband and suppose him
to be one man in a thousand f. If we have somewhat over-estimated the
average exceptionality of the wife, as one woman in two hundred, we have done
so purposely partly to account for possibly neglected paternal and maternal
ancestry, and partly to give the son a better chance of reaching to his father's
exceptionality. On these assumptions we may treat the problem on rather
more modern lines than Galton has done. The "genetic centre" or mean of
the array of offspring of our exceptional man and his wife will be at a
distance 2*086 x <r, where cr is the standard deviation or variability of
the population for the given character. This supposes the parental corre-
lations to be equal and of intensity '46, and the coefficient of assortative
mating to be '25, both reasonable average values. The average son of our

* See what has already been said regarding this point on our p. 27 above.
t Assuming that the coefficient of assortative mating to be - 25 then the average wife of an
exceptional husband (1 in 1000) would only be 1 in 40.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 103

exceptional parents is only one man in fifty-four. We have now to determine
what is the variability of this array of sons about the mean and how many sons
in that array will equal or exceed the father in exceptionality. The variability
of such sons is '8133cr, and the deviation from the filial mean of the father
is (3-100-2-086) 0-= l-014o-, or the deviation is 1'014/'8133 = 1'25 nearly in
terms of the sons' variability. From which we ascertain that only 1 1 times
in 100 occasions would the son equal or exceed his father's exceptionality, i.e.
one in nine sons. Granting an average of three sons to each father we have
to examine the cases of three exceptional fathers before we come across a son
equal to his father in ability.

But Galton was considering a much higher degree of exceptional ability ;
he suggests seven or eight times the quartile for his excess above mediocrity.
Let us take one man in 100,000, and suppose a nearer approach in the mother
to Galton's view, say she was one woman in fifty, then the deviations of the
parents would be 4'27<x and 2'05cr respectively. The genetic centre would be
2'32cr, and the deviation of the filial mean from the father in terms of filial
variability would be (4'27 -2'32)/'8133 = 2'40 nearly, or 8 sons out of 1000
would reach or exceed their fathers' level or 1 son in 125, or allowing three
sons to a father only 1 son would arise in the case of 40 fathers of distinction
who would be at least his father's equal.

In a population of 10,000,000 adult men there would be 100 of this ex-
ceptional ability each producing able sons at the rate of '025 apiece. The
remaining 9,999,900 produce 97'5 or nearly at the rate of 1 per 1000, or '001
apiece. That is to say 39 exceptional men are produced by non-exceptional
fathers to one produced by exceptional fathers, but the latter produce
exceptional sons at 25 times the rate of the former. This is the paradox
which Galton tried in vain to make people understand. It has quite recently
been again confusing the minds of Professors Raymond Pearl and Leonard
Hill, who cannot grasp how great ability is inherited, because the majority
of distinguished men have not distinguished fathers.

Pedigrees. Few of those who have had the task of making pedigree charts
have not been worried by the unmanageable size to which they are apt to grow,
but still more by the difficulty of indexing in a connecting form the material
on which pedigrees are ultimately to be based. Galton in a paper entitled
"Pedigrees," published in Nature, April 23, 1903 (Vol. lxvii, pp. 586-7),
suggests a method of what may be termed an "index pedigree" — or as he
himself termed it a "pedigree based on fraternal units." This consists in
giving a numbered page to each family group. The family group consists of:
(i) Father and (ii) Mother with reference to their family group numbers;
(iii) their offspring, with any facts the purpose of the pedigree is to illustrate
stated about them; thus the main information is to be found on the page,
where an individual is one of the offspring, i.e. under his family group number ;
(iv) the. wife or husband of each child with their family group numbers; and
(v) the family group number which gives the offspring of each marriage in
the first family group. The birthdays of the parents in every family group are

104

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

given, in each case for the purpose of distinguishing couples with the same
names. The following is a slightly modified reproduction of Galton's illustra-
tion. The whole "index pedigree" will of course have an index, the main
family group of any individual and the family group founded by him being
recorded. For example we look up Frank Gore in this index and find against
his name 205, 340. The latter entry will give his birthday and confirm that

Family Group*.

John Gore
Amy Myers

29 October 1822
4 May 1826

31 d
43 c

101

Fred. Gore
George Gore
Ellen Gore
Susan Gore
Steph. Gore
Fanny Gore

101a
1016
101c
101 ^

101 e
101/

Characterisation

Mary Drew
Jane Boyle
John Piers
Unmarried
Unmarried
Harry Pitt

144 a
136 e
105 6

163/

205
211

207

223

George Drew
Eliz. Patten

27 March 1827
9 May 1830

51d
62 a

144

Harry Drew
Mary Drew

144 a

144 6
144 6

Rose Spry

1. Fred. Gore

2. George Lewis

123e
101a
165 c

315

205
340

Fred Gore
Mary Drew

26 November 1858
4 October 1862

'lOla
144 6

205

Frank Gore
Amy Gore
Anne Gore
Alex. Gore
Rose Gore

205 a
205 6
205 c
205 d
205 e

Anne Fox
James More
Unmarried
Eva Sully
Stephen Bell

218a
265 c

241 d
270 6

340
344

370
315

* Slightly modified from Galton's form. Letters to individual numbers need only be
attached when there are no names.

he is the man we are seeking. It will give us information as to all his children
and by reference to the number in the last column on the right we can find
out the characteristics of his grandchildren and so on to lower descendants.
By reference to the other number 205, we find the full particulars of all his
brothers and sisters, and can trace by the numbers 344, 370, 315 all his
nephews and nieces, and then upwards to their ancestors or downwards to
their descendants. The family numbers 101 and 144 lead us to the particulars
of his father and mother, and to those of all his paternal and maternal uncles
and aunts respectively. 101 and 144 also give us the family group numbers
of his paternal grandparents. The numbers 211, 207 and 223 will enable us
to find all his paternal, while 315 will give us his maternal cousins. 340 will
lead us to his half-brothers and sisters.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 105

It is fairly clear that if the General Registry were indexed in this way, or
even special registries like those of the Society of Friends, pedigree making
would be easy work. The Family Group system becomes somewhat more
cumbersome in the case of rapidly breeding mammals, for example, dogs. In
this case it is needful to replace the family group by the dam, sire and single
litter, even if the mating be repeated, as the material becomes too unwieldy.
For very small mammals — guinea-pigs, rats or mice — where names are not
given, it is the index number of the individual which needs careful thought,
especially if it is desired to provide in that index number some indication of
the generation to which an individual belongs. A small letter may be given
to each individual in the litter attached to the family group index number,
and F s may be added to denote the sth generation from foundation stock, but
it is difficult if, say, an F 2 sire has been mated with an F 3 dam to indicate
this relation briefly. The difficulty is greater when such a mating is some
distance back in the ancestry. If such matings have occurred in considerable
numbers the use of generation marks in the index number of animals becomes
a doubtful blessing, and we may well fall back on Galton's Family Group
numbers plus a small letter.

Nomenclature of Kinship. Galton, still thinking over various methods
of expressing kinship, turned from the numerical expression of it to seek a
brief nomenclature, and published in Nature, January 28, 1904 (Vol. lxix,
pp. 294-5) a paper entitled: "Nomenclature and Tables of Kinship." In this
he endeavours to give a self-explanatory, brief and euphonious name to each
grade of kinship, which he had in earlier papers provided with an appropriate
literal or numerical symbol (see our Vol. n, pp. 354-5, and the present volume,
pp. 44-5). He does it in the form of a schedule, here reproduced (see
p. 106), for recording in all his known relatives some character X known to
exist in A.B. This schedule is practically what he used in the same year to
obtain the distribution of successes in the kinsfolk of Fellows of the Royal
Society, a topic to which we shall return shortly. The schedule is republished
here because it may form a starting point for those desirous of making
similar inquiries. One of the most important points in it is the insistence
(by the presence of a separate column) on the importance of enumerating
the total number of relations of each class. Even up to the present year I
have seen disease schedules drafted in which the question is asked : How
many brothers (sisters, cousins, uncles, aunts, etc.) have been subject to the
disease? without the slightest consciousness that such information is idle
unless accompanied by the statement of the total number of relatives,
affected and not affected, in each class.

There is only one way and that a rather incomplete one in which such
imperfect data can be somewhat inadequately utilised. That is by ascertain-
ing the average number of relatives of each class in the population at large.
Galton often pressed the present writer for data on this point, but there arose
considerable difficulties in the way of obtaining them, perhaps the chief of which
were the secular changes in the size of families and the infant death-rate*.

* There are also difficulties with regard to the " weighting " of the large families both in the
collecting of the data, and in the actual use of them when obtained.

pqiii 14

106 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Distribtition of the Peculiarity X in the Family of A.B.

fa = Father, or father's, according to its place; similarly, me = Mother; bro = Brother; si = Sistei
so (or sow where more euphonious) = Son. The links in the chain of kinship are to be read as leadir
outwards from A.B. Thus, me da signifies "A.B.'s mother's daughter is." fa bro son means "A.B,
father's brother's son is."

Ordinary names

for generalised

kinships

Titles

showing

the precise

chain of

kinships

Adults alone

Titles

Adults alone

Names in
full of

Total

No. of

sons and

daughters

Initials of

those whose

.Y deserves

record

showing

the precise

chain of

kinships

Total

No. of

sons and

daughters

Initials of

those whose

X deserves

record

those whose
initials

appear in the

preceding

column

Grandfather
Grandmother

fa fa
fa me

1
1

me fa
me me

. 1
1

Uncles
Aunts

fa bro
fa si

me bro
me si

Father
Mother

father
mother

1
1

—

— •

Brothers . . .

Sisters

brother
sister

—

Half-brothers
Half-sisters

fa son
fa da

me son
me da

Nephews ...
Nieces

bro son
bro da

si son

si da

First cousins
Male

fa bro son

fa si son

•

me bro son
me si son

First cousins
Female

fa bro da

fa si da

me bro da
me si da

Maiden name of the wife

Year of
marriage

Number who
survived infancy

Initials of
those whose X
deserves record

Sons

Daughters

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 107

Number of Kinsfolk. This question of the "Average Number of Kinsfolk
in each Degree" was raised by a paper with this title published in Nature,
September 29, 1904 (Vol. lxx, p. 529). Galton tells us that the simplest
conditions for a general theory are those which suppose (i) the population to
be stable, i.e. its numbers statistically constant in successive generations;
(ii) that the generations do not overlap; (iii) that they are completed by
passing wholly into history ; and lastly (iv) that any individual is taken into
account at whatever age he or she may have died. Galton further supposes
that the numbers of the two sexes may be taken as roughly equal. Thus he
considers it only needful to work out the results for a single sex. Suppose
the average number of females born to a woman who is a mother to be d,
then he says that on the average only one of her female children will be
fertile of female children, or the chance that any one of these females will be
fertile of females is l/d. Any mother has d female and d male children and
therefore any one of these children will have d — \ brothers and d — ^ sisters
on the average. Galton uses a dash to denote a female relative who is fertile
of females. Thus the number of sisters (si) is d — %, but the number of fertile
sisters (si') is only (d — \)/d, and each of these produces d daughters (da).
Accordingly the number of sisters' daughters (sororal nieces) of a woman
will be (a — \)fdxd = d — \. In this way the following table is reached:

Specific Kinships

Average Number in each

Ancestry :

me' (mother) ...

me' me' (mother's mother) ...

me' me me (mother's mother's mother)

lx 1
lxlxl

i
i

Collaterals :

si (sisters)

me si (maternal aunts)

me me' si (maternal grandmother's sisters)

si' da (sisters' daughters)

me' si' da (mother's sisters' daughters)

si' da da (sisters' daughters' daughters) ...

d-l

1 x(d-l)
lxlx(d-i)
{d-DJdxd
1 x(d-\)jdxd
(d-%)jdx\xd

d-h
d-l
d-\
d-l
d-\

Descendants :

da (daughters)

da' da (daughters' daughters)

da' da' da (daughters' daughters' daughters)

( d *d) x ( dx d) xd

Further explanatory letters were published by Galton, October 27, 1904,
November 10, 1904, and January 12, 1905. These note one or two misprints
and also reply to an objection raised by Professor G. H. Bryan. The reader
will find an interesting paradox to solve, if he asks why his wife's sisters'
daughters are on the average slightly less numerous than those of his own
wife!

Kinsfolk of Fellows of the Royal Society. The main purpose of several
of the notes by Galton discussed above becomes clear when we read the

14—2

108

Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

paper he communicated to Nature on August 11, 1904 (Vol. lxx, pp. 354-6)
entitled : " Distribution of Successes and of Natural Ability among the Kins-
folk of Fellows of the Royal Society." Galton received more than 200 replies to
a circular with a blank schedule (see our pp. 105-6) which he had sent to
the Fellows. In this paper he deals with the 110 which arrived up to a certain
date, and contained one or more noteworthy kinsfolk of the Fellow. Galton
introduces a slightly arbitrary system of marking, namely 3, 2, 1 or marks to
measure more or less noteworthiness, but gives lists of what sort of positions
and honours he paid attention to. All Fellows of the Royal Society were
given the highest or starred class with 3 marks. In many cases the judgment
as to noteworthiness depended on the opinion of the F.R.S. who filled in the
schedule, more especially when it concerned the women of his family. Those
who will take the trouble to examine the book later published by Galton
and Schuster (see our pp. 113-121) will see how differently various Fellows
rated "noteworthiness" in their own families; some consider success as
merchant or solicitor, or even the becoming an advocate, as a noteworthy
achievement, while others would probably never for a moment suppose such
occurrences in their family as more than the ordinary routine of middle-class
professional life. Galton for obvious reasons does not provide the marks he
allotted to such noteworthiness, and he probably marked it low, but the fact
that he gave the highest number of marks to every Fellow of the Royal
Society makes his present biographer somewhat sceptical as to the value
of his system in grading ability; at the one end you may have a born
scientific genius who revolutionises men's ways of thinking of nature, at the
other the professional scientist, not known outside his own country, scarcely
beyond his own university, and in no way more able than the normal man
in any profession who makes a living by his calling. Admittedly Galton's
task was a very difficult one and probably his method may have been, if rough,
sufficiently accurate to demonstrate the results he considers to flow from it.
Let us consider some of these results :

In the first place he gives a Table, we may notice, for the successes of
male kin of Fellows of the Royal Society through A (Male) and B (Female)
lines. In this Table the columns headed "Index of Success" are the total

Successes of Kinsmen of Fellows of the Royal Society.

A. Through Male Lines

B. Through Female Lines

Kinship

Index of Success

Kinship

Index of Success

fafa bro
fa bro son
fafa
fa bro

26
45
67
66

me me bro
me si son
me fa
me bro

5
31
58
64

Total

204

Total

158

Correlation and, Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 109

marks for " noteworthiness " obtained by the total corresponding grade of kins-
men of the 110 Royal Society Fellows. It is important that the reader should
bear this in mind as it is not an index in the usual sense of a ratio or percentage.
On this Galton comments:

"A popular notion that ability is mainly transmitted through female lines is more than
contradicted by these figures."

A first impression might be that this result is due to overlooking ability in
the women, but Galton had on his schedule a list referring only to women*.
Even if the Fellows did overlook the capacity of their mothers (which is not
usual with sons of ability) this does not account for their overlooking the
achievements of their mothers' relatives. I think the explanation is to be
sought in other directions. We find that our 110 Fellows had 57 fathers of
distinction, but only 16 mothers. The fathers are credited with 136 marks
or 2 "4 marks apiece and the mothers with 24 or 1"5 marks apiece. It is clear
that more than half the fathers of the Fellows were "noteworthy" in a fairly
high degree and not more than 16 of these noteworthy fathers, possibly none
of them, married a woman of special ability. That is to say they handicapped
their sons by not marrying women of marked ancestral distinction. Had
they chosen wives with equal ancestral distinction to that of their own line
these 57 fathers would probably have had a still larger number of noteworthy
sons. I particularly emphasise the word ancestral because an examination of
the above table shows that our 57 fathers did not simply marry mediocrity.
The me bro group is sensibly equal to the fa bro group in noteworthiness,
and the me fa group (i.e. that corresponding to the fathers-in-law of the
fathers) is not so far behind the fa fa group. In other words it would appear
that our fathers of distinction were thrown by circumstance or inclination
into the society of women (from whom they chose their wives) who were the
sisters or daughters of men of distinction, but that in making their choice
they paid no attention to their wives' earlier ancestry. The point is a somewhat
subtle one and wants testing on more ample data, but it seems to me the real
explanation of the results in Galton's table. We cannot conclude from it
that ability in men is mainly transmitted through the male line. If the above
interpretation be correct then the eugenist must ever bear in mind that it
is not enough from the standpoint of offspring to marry a woman of ability,
he marries so to speak also her stock f.

The next point Galton makes is that the families of the Fellows must be
fertile, because the number of brothers, whether of selves or of fathers, comes
out 2 - 43. This would correspond, since d — ^ = 2"43, to 2d= 5'86 or practically
nearly 6 members in the family. But although this is a measure of the
observed fertility in the 110 Fellows, I think a word of warning is needful.

* Suggested categories : Social leader, Great force of character, Reputed very clever, Artistic
(in any way) to an exceptional degree, Successful worker in educational, civic and philanthropic
matters, Brilliant prize winner at school or college, etc.

f This is of course only repeating the biological fact, that the genetic potentialities of an
individual are only very partially determined by his or her somatic characters, and the only way
to obtain a wider appreciation of them (in the case of man where experimental breeding is im-
possible) is to examine the whole stirp as fully as possible.

1 10 Life and Letters of Francis Gait on

Fifty-seven fathers of these Fellows were themselves distinguished men. Now
let us start from distinguished fathers; we have seen (see our pp. 102-3)
that they are likely to have a higher percentage than mediocre fathers of dis-
tinguished sons, but the probability of a distinguished son occurring to a
distinguished father depends on the number of his male offspring. Hence if
we start by selecting distinguished men, we are likely to find that their fathers
had families above the average, especially if those fathers were themselves
distinguished. I do not think therefore that we can reach a measure of the
fertility of distinguished men from the number of their brothers, nor indeed
from the number of their fathers' brothers, if a large number (upwards of 50 °/ o )
of those fathers were themselves distinguished. We require the number of
children of the Fellows themselves, and this has not been provided.

The next point raised by Galton is of very considerable interest, namely
the relative intensity of heredity in the direct line and in the collaterals of
this line. I am a little puzzled to follow Galton here. In the direct line of male
ancestors there is only one representative in each generation, and there is no
necessity to divide by 1 1 the total marks obtained by each grade of ancestry
if we are dealing only with relative measures of noteworthiness. In the one
case of fa fa and me fa, the grandparents, Galton does divide by two. Yet
when he comes to the collateral kinsmen, he puts down the total marks gained
by brothers, and these number not 110 but 110 x 2 "43 brothers, and there-
fore it is not legitimate to compare the total marks obtained by brothers with
those obtained by "selves" or fathers. In the same way Galton does divide by
two the sum of the total marks obtained by paternal and maternal uncles,
but forgets that uncles are more numerous than fathers or selves! I have
therefore ventured to recompute Galton's Table III, adding to it one or two
additional items, but giving in each case the average number of marks
obtained by a kinsman of the given grade instead of Galton's total marks of
the class. The following will illustrate the method by which my average has
been obtained. There are four kinds of male cousins: (i) fa bro son; their
average number is 1 x{(d — \)/d\ x d, for there is only one father; his average
number of brothers = a — ^, and ijd (see our p. 107) is the probability that a
brother will have sons and d is the number of his sons. Accordingly (on Galton's
theory) d — \ is the number of male cousins that a man will have of the class
fa bro son; (ii) fa si son will also provide d — \ male cousins; (hi) me bro son
and (iv) me si son will give the same number, or the average number of total
male cousins is 4 (d — ^). Galton gives 2"43 as the average number of brothers
in the self generation and the father generation. Hence d — ^ = 2*43 and
d = 2"93, and therefore on Galton's theory 972 is the average number of male
cousins or 19*44 the average number of cousins of both sexes combined *. Now
the following are the total marks obtained by the cousins of 110 men, i.e.
2 138 '4 cousins : fa bro son, 45 ; fa si son, 25 ; me bro son, 46 ; and me si son,
31; total marks, 147. Average marks of a cousin: "07.

* This seems to me rather a low average number of cousins for the individual, but I think
it is the number which results from supposing the population stable; probably no population
ought to be considered as such.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 111

Proceeding in this manner we obtain the table below. I am inclined to
think the average marks for Sons and Nephews too low, as it is possible
that many of them would not have had time to reach full noteworthiness.
As I have noted there is something defective in the earlier generations through
the female line, and I have contented myself with using fa fa bros and
fa fa fa as representatives of their grade. Galton does not even give fa me fa
so that we cannot tell whether they got zero marks or he omitted to classify
them. It is quite probable that many men know more of their father's
paternal than of his maternal grandfather, a result of the old habit of tracing
descent only through the male line.

Average Noteivorthiness of Kinsmen in Direct and Collateral Lines
of 110 Fellows of the Royal Society.

Generation

Kinship

Numbers

Total

Marks

Average
Marks

Kinship

Numbers

Total
Marks

Average
Marks

I
II

III
IV

Self

faf a \

me fa)

fa fa fa

110
110

220
110

330
136

125
11

3-00
1-24

0-57
0-10

Brothers
fa bros \
me bros)

fa fa bros
*

267-3
534-6

267-3

170

130

0-64
0-24

0-10

Additional

Sons

322-3

015

Nephews 1
= bro sons + si sons)
Cousins

5346
2138-4

48
147

0-09
0-07

* No entries have been made by Galton for the father's great uncles.

From this revised table Galton's main conclusion flows as definitely as,
perhaps more definitely than, from his own Table. The ancestor in the direct line
is far more noteworthy than the average collateral in the same grade. To be
in the direct line from distinguished ancestry amounts to much, but to be
merely the collateral of a great man means very little. Examining the numbers
in the first three lines of the table we see that the collaterals of a man of
distinction have on the average only £ of the noteworthiness of his direct
ancestor in each generation. As Galton puts it elsewhere, to be the cousin of
a man of ability means little if the kinsman gets only the cousin's average
share; it might mean a good deal if the character did not blend and the
kinsman ran the chance, if a small one, of getting the whole of his cousin's
exceptionality.

Galton next discusses the "Relation of Success to Natural Ability."
He proceeds by stating that success is due to the combined effect of Natural
Gifts and Circumstances. His method is to record success in terms of 1, 0,
and — 1 marks to each division of a third of the frequency distribution for
ability J and he marks each grade of circumstance ("healthy rearing, family

t The mean values of the thirds, 1 -09, 0, and — 1 -09, would be more legitimate.

112 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

and social influences, education, money, leisure, and surroundings that en-
courage work or idleness") in the same way. Galton then assumes that if
S be the measure of success, A of ability and C of circumstance,*

and he then points out that the regression of success on ability will be just
one half, if ability and circumstance be uncorrelated. But I see absolutely
no reason for assuming the above form of relation between Success, Ability
and Circumstancef .

Galton considers the intensity of the relationship of Ability to Environment
at some length. He suggests that "a bright attractive boy receives more
favour, and thereby has more opportunities of getting on in life, than a dull
and unpleasing one, but these advantages are not without drawbacks;
attractiveness leads to social distractions, such as have ruined many promising
careers." Then he cites Henry Taylor's couplet:

"Me, God's mercy spared from social snares with ease,
Saved by the gracious gift, ineptitude to please."

But I fear that no generalities, only numerical observations, can lead us
to a true appreciation of the value of r AC . Researches since Galton's day
show how small is the correlation of Ability and Environment. Galton
suspected this and wrote that he believed home influences were much less
potent than might be supposed. Galton states that the result of his inquiry
was "to prove the existence of a small number of more or less isolated
hereditary centres, round which a large part of the total ability of the
nation is clustered, with a closeness that rapidly diminishes as the distance
of kinship from its centre increases."

He further held that these exceptionally gifted families were an asset to
the nation. "It must suffice for the present to mention the existence of at
least nine gifted families connected with Fellows of the Royal Society, two
or three of whom are exceptionally gifted." He concludes (as he has done
elsewhere: see Vol. u, pp. 120-2) that it would be both feasible and advan-
tageous to make a register of gifted families. Such a register Galton started
for other fields of noteworthiness than the scientific, and fragments of this
boldly outlined scheme still lie in the archives of the Galton Laboratory.

I have given considerable space to this paper of Galton, partly because
it forms the basis of the later book on Fellows of the Royal Society, but

* The regression of success on ability would be J (a- A + <*c r Ac)l' T A-i where u A and <r a are the
variabilities and r AC the correlation of ability and circumstance. Clearly the regression of
success on both ability and circumstance = |, if r AC = 0.

t Preserving the type of symbols used in the last footnote the better form of relationship
would be _

S-S = r 8A -r sc r A0 A -1 + r 8C - r SA r AC C-C

<*S 1- ^AO ^A 1 — I^AC °"C

where a bar denotes a mean value. Short of determining from actual observation the "three
correlations r SA , r sc , and r A0 , I do not see that we can profitably guess at values (such as i)
for the multiple regression coefficients.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 113

chiefly because, although I doubt the accuracy of some of the processes
adopted, it is highly suggestive for kindred researches, and appears to have
attracted little of the attention it deserved at the time of its publication in
Nature.

Closely associated with the material on which the above memoir was based
is a letter Galton published in The Times, November 17, 1904, with regard
to the character and ancestry of Lord Northbrook, who had died on the
1 5th of the same month. Galton was in a position to comment on the character
of Lord Northbrook, for he had served on a council* with him for two years
and noted his "rare combination of thoroughness and quickness," which
were reported family characteristics of the Barings. Galton was also well
acquainted with the family history of the Barings for Lord Northbrook
as a Fellow of the Royal Society had replied to Galton's schedule very
amply and sympathetically. A full pedigree of the Barings as a noteworthy
family would be well worth working up. Like many families of distinction
in Great Britain, the Barings in the direct male line show foreign blood.

Noteworthy Families.

We now turn to the work which embraces the data on which the pre-
ceding two communications were based. The material was collected by
schedules issued by Galton which were filled in by about half the Fellows
and returned to him. From these Mr Edgar Schuster f selected the families
in which there were at least three noteworthy kinsmen, and formed lists of
their achievements on Galton's model. He thus compiled the brief biographical
notices of sixty-six noteworthy families which fill about two-thirds of the
volume. The book is entitled :

Noteworthy Families (Modern Science). An Index to Kinships in Near
Degrees between Persons whose Achievements are honourable and have been
publicly recorded. By Francis Galton, D.C.L., F.R.S., Hon. D.Sc. (Camb.)
and Edgar Schuster, Galton Research Fellow in National Eugenics. Vol. I
of the Publications of the Eugenics Record Office of the University of
London. John Murray : London.

The intention was to collect similar material in other fields and publish
corresponding volumes for Literature, Art, Politics, etc. Some of this material
was actually collected J.

If we consider briefly the material compiled by Schuster one is bound to
confess that it is disappointing. As only about half the Fellows replied, and
the families of only 63 are discussed, it is clear that we cannot look upon
the results as representative of the Royal Society, much less of British

* Probably that of the Royal Geographical Society of which Lord Northbrook was at one
time President.

t Mr Schuster had, in October 1904, been elected to the first Research Fellowship in
National Eugenics founded by Francis Galton in connection with the University of London :
see Chapter XVI below.

X "This volume is the first instalment of a work that admits of wide extension." Galton's
Preface, p. ix.

P G III 15

114 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Science. We cannot assume that the bulk of those who did not reply
omitted to do so because their families presented no noteworthy members.
We thus obtain no wholly trustworthy general picture of the frequency with
which noteworthy men of science arise from noteworthy or commonplace
families. Further in the 63 families dealt with as noteworthy we feel the
definition is too arbitrary, several scarcely reach real distinction, and for
those that do and are well worthy of record a trained genealogist could have
given a truer picture and more interesting account of the family (with a
pedigree chart !) from fairly accessible sources. We have indeed no certainty
that our sample is a "random" one. Galton in hisPreface of xhii pages, which
forms the more valuable part of the book, admits that the facts given are
"avowedly bald and imperfect," but considers that they lead to certain im-
portant conclusions, for example he considers they show "that a considerable
proportion of the noteworthy members in a population spring from com-
paratively few families" (p. ix). This is very likely true, but it is difficult
to accept it on evidence which does not indicate how many noteworthy
persons there are in the population or how many we are to expect in a
family, and deals only with what is probably not a truly random sample of
even the men of science in the population, i.e. 63 out of a total which in
1914 was fixed at 1729 for the British Empire*.

Galton notes several important points, which may be of value as cautions
to future circularisers. I cite some of them :

"The questions were not unreasonably numerous, nor were they inquisitorial; nevertheless,
it proved that not one-half of those addressed cared to answer them. It was, of course, desirable
to know a great deal more than could have been asked for or published with propriety, such as
the proneness of particular families to grave constitutional disease. Indeed the secret history of
a family is quite as important in its eugenic aspect as its public history; but one cannot expect
persons to freely unlock their dark closets and drag forth family skeletons into the light of day."
(pp. ix-x.)

Galton accordingly only asked for information on points which " could be
stated openly without the smallest offence to any of the persons concerned."
One matter astonished Galton; he found it extraordinarily difficult to
obtain even for near kin the number of kinsfolk of each person in each
specific degree of kinship. Sometimes the omission was no doubt due to
oversight or inertia, but Galton was surprised to find in how many cases
the number of near kin was avowedly unknown.

"Emigration, foreign service, feuds between near connections, differences of social position,
faintness of family interest, each produced their several effects, with the result as I have reason
to believe, that hardly one-half of the persons addressed were able, without first making inquiries
of others, to reckon the number of their uncles, adult nephews, and first cousins. The isolation
of some few from even their nearest relatives was occasionally so complete that the number of
their brothers was unknown." (pp. x-xi.)

Galton (p. xiii) states that he uses the epithet "noteworthy" to corre-
spond in all branches of effort to that which would rank with an F.R.S. among
scientific men. He considers that the term covers all those who appear in
the Dictionary of National Biograj)hy, and about half those who appear in

* Who's W/to in Science, 1914.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 115

Who's Who. No attempt, he tells us, is made in Noteworthy Families to
deal with the transmission of ability of the highest order. Galton here
repeats what he has suggested elsewhere, namely that genius is akin to
insanity: "the highest order of mind results from a fortunate mixture of
incongruous constituents, and not such as naturally harmonise. Those con-
stituents are negatively correlated, and therefore the compound is unstable
in heredity" (p. xv). I do feel it impossible to accept this view; it is quite
easy to cite the names of men, to whom the world accords the title of genius,
who have had a strain of madness. But one is apt to exaggerate their number
and possibly their greatness. Galton states that "the highest imaginative
power is dangerously near lunacy." He tells us that he once heard Bonamy
Price narrating how as a young man he had asked Wordsworth what was
the exact meaning of the lines in the famous Ode to Immortality* :

"Not for these I raise
The song of thanks and praise;
But for those obstinate questionings
Of sense and outward things,
Fallings from us, vanishings ;
Blank misgivings of a Creature
Moving about in worlds not realised," etc.

Wordsworth had replied that he had had not unfrequently to exert strength,
as by shaking a gatepost, to gain assurance that the world around him was
a reality. Galton concludes that at such times the mind of Wordsworth
could not have been wholly sane; indeed he goes further and considers that
such conduct suggests temporary insanity. Yet it seems to me that to
every contemplative man, or at least to every contemplative child, such
slipping away from their momentary environment, even in a crowded gather-
ing, will not be unfamiliar, and that they can remember instances when they
have experienced a distinct effort to recall themselves to their space and time
relations; even if they do not need to shake a gatepost, they may require
to shake themselves. It is very curious that Galton, who was so essentially
a psychologist and attributes much to the subconscious mindf, should have
been unfamiliar with the states in which the mind seems switched off from
external reality, although conscious that it is still continuing. It is, I think,
unreasonable on this ground to associate Wordsworth with insanity. I cannot

* This is not Wordsworth's title, which is: Ode, Intimations of Immortality from Recollections
of Early Childhood — a title which suggests when the "obstinate questionings" arose, and with
them the remedy.

t Galton indeed held genius to be something akin to inspiration, and supposed that the
powers of unconscious work possessed by the brain are abnormally developed in those who
exhibit it. "The heredity of these powers has not, I believe, been as yet especially studied. It
is strange that more attention has not been given until recently to unconscious brainwork,
because it is by far the most potent factor in mental operations. Few people, when in rapid
conversation, have the slightest idea of the particular form which a sentence will assume into
which they have hurriedly plunged, yet through the guidance of unconscious cerebration it de-
velops itself grammatically and harmoniously. I write on good authority in asserting that the
best speaking and writing is that which seems to flow automatically shaped out of a full mind."
(See pp. xvii-xviii of the work under discussion.) Lagrange when listening to music or at social
gatherings would sink into deep reveries and lose all consciousness of his environment.

15—2

116

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

help regretting that the greater authority of Galton was thrown into the
scale which was already weighted with Lombroso and Ellis.

In the following chapter Galton discusses the proportion of noteworthies
to the generality, but his final conclusion that "the proportion of one note-
worthy person to one hundred of the generality who were equally well
circumstanced as himself does not seem to be an over-estimate " requires
perhaps more evidence than is provided.

Chapter V deals with "note worthiness as a measure of ability," and
discusses on the lines of his paper in Nature (see our pp. 1 08 et seq.) the inter-
relation of Success, Ability and Environment. I have already commented on
Galton's treatment of this topic. It seems to me that his discussion is based
solely on classification and nothing can be predicted of the correlation
between these three factors until their relative frequencies in the several
classes have been determined by observation.

Chapter VI deals with Galton's convenient nomenclature for kinship
(see our p. 106). In Chapter VII we have the vital question investigated
of the number of kinsfolk to be expected in each degree. I say this is vital,
for without it we cannot possibly obtain any measure of the strength of
heredity. Galton does not here adopt the method of his paper described on
our p. 107, where he worked with a stable population, but he makes his
returns for each class of kinship on the basis of the F.R.S.'s returns, the
schedule containing an inquiry as to the number of kinsfolk in each degree,
who survived childhood. Hence Galton's previous results do not strictly
apply as they were based on all children born, as well as on a theoretically
stable population. His Table V (p. xxx) gives only the data for 100
Fellows. I looked at the schedules and found a rather larger number
available as schedules appear to have come in later after his Table V was
completed. But as the averages were not essentially altered, I will reproduce
Galton's numbers, citing them in a different form. The problem wants
answering on far more extensive material, but I do not know where else to
find even a rough approximation to the average number of relatives a man
may expect.

Average Number of Kinsfolk in each Degree.

Class

Kin <?

Average
Number

Kin ,

Average
Number

Size of Family

Brothers and Sisters
Uncles and Aunts

Totals

First Cousins

Totals

bro

fa bro
me bro
Uncles
fa bro son
fa si son
me bro son
me si son
cj Cousins

2-06
2-28
2-19
4-47
2-65
1-84
2-36
2-37
9-22

fa si
me si
Aunts
fa bro da
fa si da
me bro da
me si da
$ Cousins

2-07
2-07
2-38
4-45
3-02
2-08
2-66
2-46
10-22

5-13
5-35
5-57

Total
First
Cousins
19-44

Clearly the number of nephews and nieces is also contained in the table.
A man may expect on the average 4*49 nephews and 5*10 nieces, while a

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems oj Heredity 117

woman would have on the average 473 nephews and 5'12 nieces. The later
generation seems to give a slightly smaller family than the earlier genera-
tion. Since the families include only those who have reached adult age, and
the infant death-rate was certainly greater in the older generation, the decrease
in size of family is probably larger than appears. The calculations show that
an individual has on the average about one fertile relative in each specific
type of kinship. Galton now says that he proposes to make "the reasonable
and approximate assumption" that "the number of fertile individuals is not
grossly different to that of those who live long enough to have an opportunity

of distinguishing themselves" "Thus if a group of 100 men had between

them 20 noteworthy paternal uncles it will be assumed that the total
number of their paternal uncles who reached mature age was about 100,
making the intensity of success as 20 to 100 or as 1 to 5. This method of
roughly evading the serious difficulty arising from ignorance of the true
values in the individual cases is quite legitimate, and close enough for
present purposes" (p. xxxiii).

The argument is not easy to follow. Galton, for example, has (p. xxx)
shown that the number of paternal uncles who survived childhood in the case
of 100 F.RS.'s is 228, and he now says we must consider this as only 100,
and so we see the above number reduced to less than one half. But I think
he is contrasting those who survived childhood with those who lived long
enough to have an opportunity of distinguishing themselves. He considers
that only one individual in each grade of kinship can on the average be
fertile in a stable community, and such an individual would probably live to
an age at which he would have had an opportunity of distinguishing himself.
But it is difficult to see why those who have an opportunity of distinguishing
themselves are limited to the fertile. The unmarried uncle may equally with
the married have a chance of distinguishing himself. Assuming that "survived
childhood" meant to the Royal Society Fellows the surviving 15 years of age
— and Galton refers to competitive success at school — and that by 40 years
any man has had an opportunity of distinguishing himself, then only some
£ of those alive at 15 are dead before 40. Thus our 228 paternal uncles
would scarcely be reduced to 182 if they had died at the rate of the total
average community. Probably their lives were considerably better than the
average, and it would be safe to suppose nearly 200 lived to forty years. This
is 100 °/ more than Galton proposes to take. I should therefore be prepared
to double Galton's number of candidates for distinction in each collateral
grade of kinship* (but this will not affect his conclusions, if we are discussing
only relative, not absolute degrees of noteworthiness) and to suppose the same
number of relatives in each grade, which is approximately true (see our p. 107).

In Chapter VIII Galton limits his inquiry to males. He says that:

"Women have sometimes been accredited in these returns by a member of their own family
circle, as being gifted with powers at least equal to those of their distinguished brothers, but
definite facts in corroboration of such estimates were rarely supplied." (p. xxxiv.)

* This does not apply to the direct line, in which the number who lived to bear offspring is
known exactly. Of course any direct ancestor may have died without reaching the age when he
could obtain noteworthiness, but Galton does not consider the effect of this.

118

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

It may be difficult to get adequate appreciation of women's noteworthi-
ness, but it is still more difficult to measure heredity in ability, unless we
have some direct measure of whether ability can be transmitted through the
mother with strength equal to that of transmission through the father. We
know whether the father was or was not noteworthy, but if we have no
measure of the ability of the mother, we cannot determine whether an able
maternal stock transmits its ability equally through an able and through a
mediocre woman member. Further Galton does not discuss the sons of
Fellows as many might not have reached maturity ; 467 persons were
addressed, 207 of these sent serviceable replies, of which only G5 are treated
in Schuster's list of noteworthy families of F.R.S.'s (pp. 1-79). Galton's
data are numerically based on the 207 cases. He states that the real crux
of the problem lies in what the remaining 260 were like. Abstention might
be due to dislike of publicity, to inertia, or to pure ignorance; such causes
would hardly affect the randomness of the sample, but if the 260 did not
reply because they had no noteworthy kinsfolk this would influence the
sample, and badly influence it. The two extremes are that (a) we suppose
the 260 to share the richness of the 207 in noteworthy kinsfolk, (b) we con-
sider that the 260 had no noteworthy kinsfolk. Galton says he cannot guess
which of these hypotheses is the more remote from the truth, but considers
that actuality cannot be very far removed from their mean value. I cannot
find, however, that this is what Galton has really used. For example the
F.R.S.'s had 81 noteworthy fathers. The percentage of noteworthy fathers
on the first hypothesis is 81 x %$$ = 39 - 13 and on the second hypothesis is
81 x 4^$ = 17 "34; thus the mean of the two is 28 "24. Galton, however, does
not take the mean of the two hypotheses, but of the numbers 207 and 467,
and gets 337; then he finds M ^ u> - = 24-04, and this is the percentage he
actually uses. Taking 1 man in 100 as noteworthy — a somewhat arbitrary
assumption — he states (p. xl) that F.R.S.'s have 24 times as many note-
worthy fathers as the generality of men. Before we pass to Galton's final
table we may cite one or two points he makes which are of distinct
interest and importance for similar investigations. In Chapter IX he gives
the result of marking individual degrees of noteworthiness ; he made three
categories and gave to them in degree of noteworthiness marks 3, 2, 1. He
then reduced the total of marks for each degree of kinship (657) to the
total number of cases of noteworthiness (329). As a first appreciation the
two results differed very little ; thus (p. xxxvii) :

Comparison of Results with and without Marks in 65 Families.

First
Degree

Second
Degree

Third
Degree

First
Cousins

Total

Number of marks assigned
Marks reduced by factor $f£
Number of Cases of Noteworthiness

225
113
110

208
104
112

102

51
46

122

61
61

657
329
329

The reason for this approximate concordance lies in the distribution of
triple, double and single marks being much the same in the different

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 119

kinship groups. Galton concluded that marking for different degrees of
noteworthiness would be a waste of energy in such a rough inquiry as that
he was undertaking. But I think it would have been of great interest had
Galton divided his material in another way, i.e. classified his F.Ii.S.'s into
the three categories of noteworthiness, and tested whether their kinsmen
had the same or different totals of marks. In other words he would have
answered the question of whether ability leading to noteworthiness is
inherited in quality as well as quantity.

The next point is very important. Most men know beside their own
name that of their mother, i.e. her maiden name. Hence both the numbers
and achievements of the uncles and aunts in both paternal and maternal
lives are known and there is no difference of a sensible kind in Galton's
totals. This holds also for the achievements of the grandparental generation.
But when we come to the great grandparents and great uncles, there have
been further changes of name in fa me fa, me me fa, fa me bro and me me
bro, and Galton attributes the ridiculously low number of cases of note-
worthiness compared with those for fa fa fa and fa fa bro with a loss of
record owing to change of name. This probably has a good deal to do with
it, but it does not account for the successes of me fa fa and me fa bro, who
of course bear the mother's maiden name, being only half those of fa fa fa
and fa fa bro, who bear the father's name. I am inclined to think that the
factor of assortative mating to which I have referred on p. 1 09 is at least a
contributory cause.

I now reproduce Galton's final table of results, to which I have added
percentages*:

Numbers and Percentages of Noteworthy Kinsmen recorded
in 207 Returns of F.R.S.'s.

Kinship

Numbers
Recorded

Percentages

Kinship

Numbers
Recorded

Percentages

bro

81
104

28-24
32-26

—

fa fa
me fa
fa bro
me hro

40
42
45
52

13-94
14-64
15-69
18-13

fa fa fa
fa me fa
me fa fa
me me fa

2
5
1

3-83
0-70
1-74
0-35

fa bro son
me bro son
fa si son
me si son

30
19
28
22

10-46
6-62
9-76
7-67

fa fa bro
fa me hro
me fa bro
me me hro

4-18
0-70
2-09
0-70

Total Cousins

Male Cousins,

each type

99
24-75

34-51
8-63

* Obtained from Galton's assumption that we may take the mean of the extreme cases, i.e.,
we multiply by - (— + —J = -3486. I prefer this to his actual method.

120 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

From this table we see how degree of noteworthiness diminishes as we
pass from the near relatives of the noteworthy to more distant kinsmen. If
we accept Galton's two hypotheses : (i) that only one relative in each class
can on the average be considered as having lived and been mature enough
to have had the opportunity of reaching noteworthiness (see our p. 116) and
(ii) that one person in a hundred of the generality is noteworthy, then the
above percentages express the numbers of times the F.R.S.'s have more note-
worthy kinsmen than the generality of men*. It will be seen that the
kinsmen with surnames different from those of the F.R.S.'s fathers and
mothers have even a lesser percentage of distinction than the generality
of men ! Allowing that this may be to some extent due to ignorance of the
names, and so of the achievements of these relatives, are we justified in
holding that the percentage of noteworthiness in the generality is as high
as 1 Y ? Galton himself says :

"The reader may work out results for himself on other hypotheses as to the percentage of
noteworthiness among the generality. A considerably larger proportion would be noteworthy
in the higher classes of society, but a far smaller one in the lower; it is to the bulk, say three-
quarters of them, that the 1 per cent, estimate applies, the extreme variations from it tending
to balance one another.

"The figures on which the above calculations depend may each or all of them be changed to
any reasonable amount, without shaking the truth of the great fact upon which Eugenics is
based, that able fathers produce able children in a much larger proportion than the generality."

(p. xli.)

Finally Galton refers to the fact that while there was a general high level
of ability in the families of F.R.S.'s, some parents were in no way remarkable,
so that the "Fellow" was simply a "sport," in respect of his taste and
ability. "It is," he remarks, "to be remembered that 'sports' are trans-
missible by heredity, and have been, through careful selection, the origin of
most of the valuable varieties of domesticated plants and animals. Sports
have been conspicuous in the human race, especially in some individuals of
the highest eminence in music, painting and in art generally, but this is not
the place to enter further into so large a subject." Galton cited Bateson,
De Vries and his own earlier writings (see our pp. 79 et seq.) for the treatment
of this topic.

I find it very difficult to accept the view that a Fellow of the Royal
Society, whose parents or even the whole of whose known kindred fail to
be remarkable, or rather to have been recorded as remarkable, is a sport. In
the first place when a pedigree like that of the musician Bach is fully
worked out, he is seen to be very far from a sport; he is only the ablest
member of a very able musical stirp. And in the next place, if we take a
family every member of which for indefinite generations has been mediocre
for any given character, we find the variability of an array of offspring is
some 70 °/ o of the variability of the population at large, which contains among
its members the specially able. Hence although the specially able will not

* We might divide these numbers by two, if we assume that in collateral kinship, there will
be two on the average who will reach an age when to be noteworthy is possible.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 121

arise as frequently from the mediocre stirp as from the able stirp, they will
occur albeit in smaller numbers. I see no reason for terming such occurrences
"sports" (see our pp. 78-9, 102-3 above).

Galton's Preface was written when he was 84 years of age ; it was
written at a time when he was feeling keenly that he could no longer under-
take the lengthy accumulation of data and their reduction. Nevertheless
it is remarkable in its discovery of new problems to be solved and in the
suggestions of how they may be solved. The rest of the book is somewhat
ephemeral in character, and its judgments of noteworthiness open to
criticism, but I think Galton's contribution deserves to be preserved, and
I have therefore abstracted it at length here.

Miscellanea. Closely allied to the endeavour Galton made to obtain a
register of noteworthy scientific families was a schedule he prepared entitled :
"Register of Able Families," with a view to collecting material on a broader
basis than that of the Royal Society. The object of the inquiry was "to
collect information concerning a large number of exceptionally able families
in all ranks of society." Ability and exceptionality are therein defined as
follows :

"Ability refers to the powers of mind or body, to character, and to every quality which
makes a person valuable to his country or to the society in which he lives. It is shown by an
artisan who becomes a foreman or an employer, by a clerk who rises to a position of trust, by a
private soldier who gains a commission, by a student who wins scholarships and university
honours, by those who educate themselves in the absence of other opportunities of instruction,
and by all who have fairly achieved honourable distinctions."

Exceptionality, we are told, refers to the middle classes :

"The same amount of ability that is exceptional among them would be very much more
exceptional among the lower classes, but not very uncommon in the most distinguished circles of
society. The interpretation of the word in each particular case is left to the judgment of the
correspondent."

Then comes a characteristically Galtonian paragraph :

"The merit of a family as a whole falls under three distinct heads: (1) Its number, large
families being more valuable than small ones when the individuals are of equal merit. (2) The
average merit of the individuals. (3) The absence of serious drawbacks in respect to character
or physique. Civilised man being at present the worst bred of all animals, it is extremely rare to
find families who are unstained by any moral or physical blemish*. Correspondents should, there-
fore, not err on the side of diffidence in proposing names; it will be the business of the office to
examine the returns that ai - e received and to select the best."

This circular was issued, but probably not in large quantities. What
returns Galton obtained I do not know. At any rate no filled-in copies were
among the papers that reached the Laboratory named after him. He may
have destroyed what he received as worthless, or recognised before its issue
that the circular must fail of its object. Exceptional ability is the last to
recognise itself under that name, and if you ask mediocrity to register ability
you will find that even if it can recognise its existence, it cannot appreciate
its degrees, and will almost certainly underestimate its national importance.

* Italics the biographer's,
para 16

122 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton, as I have often informed the reader, was ever young, ever believed
that his fellow mortals had the same enthusiasm for the acquisition of
knowledge that he himself had, and was always trustful that they would act
as dispassionately in assessing their fellow mortals as he himself acted. Thus
he launched his schedules and seemed never discouraged even when they
brought little or no harvest !

In the January number of the Monthly Review for 1903 Sir Edward Fry
published a paper entitled: "The Age of the Inhabited World." In this
paper he endeavoured to show that Natural Selection is incapable of doing
much that has been accredited to its agency, especially citing the case of
mimetic insects. He wrote :

" ...useful deception will not take place until the protected form is nearly approached. Thus
during the whole interval occupied in passing from the normal form of group A to near the
normal form of group B, natural selection will have been entirely inoperative.... Either birds
are deceived by a small amount of imitation or they are not. If they are, natural selection can-
not have produced perfect imitation; if they are not so deceived, then group A has passed over
from its original form to something close upon the form B without any guidance from this
principle."

Galton criticised this statement in Nature, February 12, 1903 (Vol. lxvii,
p. 343) in a letter entitled: "Sir Edward Fry and Natural Selection." He
writes :

"I deny this sharp dilemma and assert the existence of many intermediate stages. Two
objects that are somewhat alike will be occasionally mistaken for one another when the condi-
tions under which they are viewed are unfavourable to distinction. The light may be faint,
only a glimpse of them may have been obtained, the surroundings may confuse their outlines*.
While these conditions remain unchanged, the frequency of mistake serves as a delicate
measure of even the faintest similarity. .., If one edible group A has individual peculiarities
within the limits of variation, that give it a resemblance, however slight, to one of the noxious
group B, it will occasionally be mistaken by a bird for a B and allowed to live unharmed. The
similarity may be due to a characteristic attitude, to a blotch of colour, to a preference for
resting on a part of the foliage to which its own form bears some likeness, or to other causes.
In any case, it may well prove to be the salvation of 1, 2 or more per cent, of those who would
otherwise have been seen and eaten. If so the thin edge of natural selection will have found an
entrance, and its well-known effects must follow."

It will be noted that Galton says "within the limits of variation." That
point is so often overlooked that I must again emphasise it. Few biologists
have ever measured the blotch or spot on a butterfly's wing in the case of
400 or 500 members of the same species. They think in terms of a type
specimen and suppose the type of one species has to be gradually shifted
by small stages to the type of another. But the absolute range of variation
may possibly be 25 °/ e °f the type value f. Stringent selection for one or two
generations may easily raise the type 10 °/ o or 15 °/ o . Such selection is not
the same thing as proceeding by minute stages.

* I think Galton is here thinking of his own experimental work on degrees of resemblance
and the use of blurrers: see our Vol. n, pp. 329-333.

t The mean length of thigh bone in the type Englishman is say 447 mm., but the range of
English thigh bones runs from 381 to 513, a range practically covering the type of all existing
races. If existence for man depended on the length of his thigh bone there is nothing to prevent
severe selection — say the destruction of all individuals with thigh bones over 400 mm. — lowering
the English thigh bone to the value, 411 mm., of the Fuegian even in a couple of generations.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 123

Sir Edward Fry replied in Nature, March 5, 1903 (Vol. lxvii, p. 414),
and falls at once into the fallacy of supposing that because variation in
group A is continuous, it can only approach group B by converting minute
points of likeness in the midst of unlikeness into such a preponderance of
likeness as to produce deception. He holds, as so many others have held, that
the theory of the accumulation of minute variations fails to account for the
facts of mimetism. The error lies in supposing that because the organ varies
"continuously," therefore evolution by natural selection involves a gradual
accumulation of minute variations in a given direction. Let us suppose the
edible group A to enter a new environment, where the protected group B
exists, and that a small percentage of A differing widely from type has
a sufficient resemblance to B to escape destruction at any rate to some
smaller degree than its brethren. The bulk of A will be rapidly destroyed,
but the widely divergent section will be, as it were, isolated by the
destruction of their fellows, they will inbreed, and the tendency will be,
according to the heredity theory of progressive evolution (see our p. 58),
for the protecting character to continually increase in intensity, until in a
larger and larger percentage it succeeds in deceiving its foes. Sir Edward
Fry's appeal to the interspace that separates "the first minute change that
deceives no one to the point of first deception," in which interspace he holds
natural selection cannot operate, is clear evidence to my mind that he did
not know how wide is the range of variation in nearly all organs of all
organisms. Natural selection is not forced to choose an individual differing
by a minute amount from the type. To hold this view is to think only
in terms of the type, and not in terms of the whole population.

Some further communications very typical of Galton may be noted here.

He was far too human not to appreciate what the mass of men found of
interest, and among other gatherings, he enjoyed great race meetings.
Speaking of the Derby he writes in his Memories (p. 179) :

" For my own part, I especially enjoy the start of the horses, for their coats shine so brightly
in the sunshine, the jockeys are so sharp and ready, and the delays due to false starts give
opportunities of seeing them well. I don't care much for its conclusion ; but I used often after
seeing the start to run to the top of the rising ground between the starting point and the stand,
and sometimes got a good opera-glass view of much of the finish."

That Galton frequently went to the Derby is clear, and two instances
deserve notice as characteristic of the man. On one of these occasions he
persuaded Herbert Spencer and an Oxford clerical don to accompany him.
We can imagine how Galton would enjoy this incongruous party who, how-
ever, he tells us, enjoyed each other's society. "All went off quite well,
except that Spencer would not be roused to enthusiasm by the races. He
said that the crowd of men on the grass looked disagreeable, like flies on a
plate ; also that the whole event was just what he had imagined the Derby
to be."

Nevertheless Spencer was sufficiently fascinated to join Galton's Derby
party again. We have unfortunately not the don's impressions of the
philosopher, the statistician or the races ! On another occasion Galton found

16—2

124 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

it too hot to run to the hill, and facing the distant stand he watched the
massed faces on the grand stand before the race and just as the horses ap-
proached the winning post. The result of his observations was communicated
to Nature*, and runs thus:

The Average Flush of Excitement.

" I witnessed a curious instance of this on a large scale, which others may look out for on
similar occasions. It was at Epsom, on the Derby Day last week. I had taken my position not far from
the starting-point, on the further side of the course, and facing the stands, which were about
half a mile off, and showed a broad area of white faces. In the idle moments preceding the
start I happened to scrutinise the general effect of this sheet of faces, both with the naked eye
and through the opera-glass, thinking what a capital idea it afforded of the average tint of the
complexion of the British upper classes. Then the start took place ; the magnificent group of
horses thundered past in their fresh vigour and were soon out of sight, and there was nothing
particular for me to see or do until they reappeared in the distance in front of the stands. So
I again looked at the distant sheet of faces, and to my surprise found it was changed in
appearance, being uniformly suffused with a strong pink tint, just as though a sun-set glow had
fallen upon it. The faces being closely packed together and distant, each of them formed a mere
point in the general effect. Consequently that effect was an averaged one, and owing to the
consistency of all average results, it was distributed with remarkable uniformity. It faded
away steadily but slowly after the race was finished. F. G."

There is a notion still very current that gouty constitutions should avoid
stoneless fruits, in particular strawberries. Galton's creed was that: "General
Impressions are never to be trusted. Unfortunately when they are of long
standing they become fixed rules of life, and assume a prescriptive right not
to be questioned." What about gout and that noble fruit the strawberry %
Galton (as well as his biographer) had come across instances, wherein belief
dominating desire, enforced asceticism, and so deprived the believer of much
harmless pleasure, by dogmatically asserting harmful consequences. Judge
of Galton's joy while reading the biography of Linnaeus, at discovering that
the great naturalist, when the doctors failed to cure his gout, had got quit
of his disease by large doses of strawberries ! Galton wrote in 1899 a letter to
Nature^ on Linnaeus' strawberry cure for gout. One can see the twinkle in
his eye as he looked from his writing table towards Harley Street.

"The season of strawberries is at hand, but doctors are full of fads, and for the most part
forbid them to the gouty. Let me put heart into those unfortunate persons to withstand
a cruel medical tyranny by quoting the experience of the great Linnaeus. ...Why should gouty
persons drink nasty waters at stuffy foreign spas, when strawberry gardens abound in
England?"

A further characteristic letter appeared in Nature, December 20, 1906
(Vol. lxxv, p. 173) regarding the "Cutting a Round Cake on Scientific
Principles." The problem to be solved was clearly a personal one for
Sir Francis and his niece, who averaged a small cake every three days.
" Given a round tea-cake of some 5 inches across and two persons of moderate
appetite to eat it, in what way should it be cut so as to leave a minimum
of exposed surface to become dry?" The accompanying diagram shows

* June 5, 1879 (Vol. xx, p. 121).

t June 8 (Vol. lx, p. 125). See D. H. Stoever, Life of Sir Charles Linnceus, 1794 (Eng.
Trans.), p. 416.

Correlation and, Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 125

Sir Francis' solution. Broken lines show intended cuts ; ordinary straight
lines the cuts that have been made. The segments are kept together by an
elastic band.

Fig. 13.

Always assuming, which I feel some doubt about, that both consumers
of this cake ate their daily allotment of the circular rind, the method leaves
an unconscionable amount of dry rind (some fth) for the third day's con-
sumption ! I rather suspect that the cook would have been instructed by the
lady of the house to bake in rectangular tins in future.

Another amusing contribution: "Number of Strokes of the Brush in a
Picture," was made to Nature, June 29, 1905 (Vol. lxxii, p. 198). Galton
as I have already noted* sat in 1882 for his portrait (not a very successful
one) to Graef. The source of the failure is, perhaps, revealed, for Galton
finding it tedious to sit doing nothing counted the painter's slow methodical
strokes per minute and then averaged them up. As he knew only too well
the number of hours spent in the sittings, he obtained the total he desired
to ascertain, some 20,000 strokes to the portrait. About 22 years later he
was painted by Charles Furse f , whose method was totally different from that
of Graef. He looked hard at Galton while mixing his colours, then he made
dabs so fast that Galton found difficulty in keeping up his count. The
difference of the two artists' work will be recognised, if the reader compares
the Graef picture (Vol. n, Plate XI) with the Furse picture (Frontispiece to
Vol. i). It may, however, destroy his pleasure in both, if he thinks of the
two artists both having caught the aspect of Galton when silently counting!
However to Galton's great surprise Furse's dabs came out about 20,000 to
Graef's 20,000 strokes! Only we must remember that Furse did not fully
complete his portrait. For comparative purposes Galton computed the
number of stitches in an ordinary knitted pair of socks and found 102 stitches
in the widest part to each row and 100 rows to 7 inches, whence he computed
that the leg parts of a pair of socks would contain over 20,000 separate
movements, or rather more than required for a portrait. Galton concludes :

" Graef had a humorous phrase for the very last stage of his portrait, which was ' painting
the buttons.' Thus, he said, ' in five days' time I shall come to the buttons.' Four days passed,
and the hours and minutes of the last day, when he suddenly and joyfully exclaimed, ' I am
come to the buttons.' I watched at first with amused surprise, followed by an admiration not
far from awe. He poised his brush for a moment, made three rapid twists with it, and three

• Vol. ii, p. 99 and Plate XI.

t Furse died October 16, 1904, of phthisis. His unfinished portrait of Galton must have been
one of his last works.

126 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

well painted buttons were thereby created. The rule of three seemed to show that if so much
could be done with three strokes what an enormous amount of skilled work must go to the
painting of a portrait which required 20,000 of them. At the same time, it made me wonder
whether painters had mastered the art of getting the maximum result from their labour. I make
this remark as a confessed Philistine. Anyhow I hope that future sitters will beguile their
tedium in the same way that I did, and tell the results*."

Committee for the Measurement of Plants and Animals. It is impossible
to pass over in Galton's Life the last decade of the nineteenth century without
some reference to this Committee; it took up too much of Galton's energies
and consumed too much of his valuable time to remain without some notice
in his biography. But the time has hardly yet arrived, when it is possible to
write fully about it, and cite at length the voluminous letters and other
documents which indicate the parts played by various individuals in first
hindering and then entirely perverting the original purposes of the Com-
mittee.

The Committee was appointed at Galton's suggestion by the Royal Society
Council on January 18, 1894, and consisted of Francis Galton (Chairman),
Francis Darwin and Professors Macalister, Meldola, Poulton and Weldon
(Secretary), with the very definite purpose of "conducting Statistical Inquiries
into the Measurable Characteristics of Plants and Animals." The first report
was made in 1896, and consisted of a detailed account of Weldon's measure-
ments on Carcinus mosnas, and also his "Remarks on Variation in Animals
and Plants f." In the latter paper Weldon emphasised his own view that
while "sports" in certain exceptional cases may contribute to evolution,
ordinary "continuous" variations were a more probable source of change and
further stated, what is almost self-evident, that "the questions raised by the
Darwinian hypothesis are purely statistical, and the statistical method is the
only one at present obvious by which that hypothesis can be experimentally
checked." In asserting this he was only saying that heredity and selection
in Nature are mass phenomena and must be treated as such. To those who
have read the earlier pages of this chapter, it will be clear that Weldon's
view as to the relatively small importance for evolution of "sports" was
opposed to Galton's, but this divergence of opinion by no means caused
friction between the Chairman and the Secretary of the Committee. It did,
however, call forth reams of criticism and numerous letters of protest from
William Bateson to the Chairman. The only addition to the Committee in
1896 was, however, that of the present biographer. That Weldon's paper
admitted of criticism not only from the biological, but from the statistical
side must be allowed, but the fatal mistake was the old one, the evil of
attempting to work through a Committee. Had Weldon's paper been published

* Would the result be that many subjects would have the strained look of those practising
mental arithmetic? The late Mr Hope Pinker told me that he was once modelling a bust of Jowett.
The Master remained stolidly silent ; Pinker found his task hopeless, and told Jowett that he
must throw up his commission, unless the Master consented to talk. " I will try to be good,
I will try," replied Jowett, and the portrait was completed. It is not always the artist's fault,
if sittings end in a failure.

f See Roy. Soc. Proc. Vol. lvii, pp. 360-382.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 127

as his independent contribution, it could have been criticised in the usual
way ; he could have defended it, and its merits as well as the difficulties of
its subject would have been amply recognised. As it was the reason given for
the criticisms (which came from more than one quarter) was that of saving
the Committee from making serious blunders*. The Chairman became the
centre to which attack and rejoinder were directed, and in despair he wrote
to Weldon on November 17, 1896 :

" Herewith is another paper from Bateson, and I enclose with this his accompanying letter
to myself. We must talk over what is the fairest course to adopt when we meet (as we probably
shall) before the meeting of the R. Soc. on Thursday.

" You see that he offers to print his four letters for circulation among members of the Com-
mittee. My greatest difficulty in thinking what should be done arises from the lengthiness of
these papers. I wish the issue could be stated in much more condensed language.

" It would in man} 7 ways be helpful, if Bateson were made a member of our Committee, but
I know you feel that in other ways it might not be advisablef. The other members besides
yourself hardly do enough."

In 1897 the Committee was enlarged by the addition of zoologists and
breeders, some of whom had small desire to assist quantitative methods of re-
search — Sir E. Clarke, F. D. Godman, W. Heape, E. Ray Lankester, E. J. Lowe,
M. T. Masters, O. Salvin, W. T. Thiselton-Dyer and W. Bateson. It was further
rechristened "Evolution (Plants and Animals) Committee of the Royal
Society." For several years there was no dominant personality, who could
effectively guide this very mixed assembly. Personally I ceased to attend its
meetings, resigning in 1900, and was followed in that year by Weldon and
later by Galton. Mr Godman then became Chairman and the Reports of the
Committee were devoted entirely to the publications of Bateson and his school.
The capture of the Committee was skilful and entirely successful J. I think
the feeling of the young biometricians towards Galton's enlarged Committee
was more or less expressed by the letter to Galton I now quote, the date is
February 12, 1897 :

" I wanted to write a few words to you about yesterday's meeting, but have hardly had,
nor indeed hardly now have time to do so. I felt sadly out of place in such a gathering of
biologists, and little capable of expressing opinions, which would only have hurt their feelings

* A paraphrase of some of these criticisms will indicate the spirit in which they were written.
Vast labour, it was said, had been put into the work and its author no doubt thought himself
justified in the conclusions put forward. Perhaps the Committee had thought too little of the
responsibility it undertook in publishing such work. The author must know that many would
accept his conclusions though few would be able to follow the paper or judge the matter for
themselves. Nevertheless the critic found the evidence so inadequate and superficial that he
could not understand how responsible people could entertain the question of accepting it. He
very truly regretted the countenance given to such a production, etc. etc. Poor Galton ! There
are some people, whose unfortunate temperaments compel them to believe that as a matter of
conscience they are born to be their brothers' keepers.

\ Bateson had absolutely no sympathy with the statistical treatment of biological problems,
the very work for which the Committee had been appointed.

I Perhaps the small understanding shown by the ruling spirits of the Royal Society of
what had taken place, was evidenced in 1906, when inquiries were made as to whether the
Society would accept the Weldon Memorial Medal and Premium, and the President wrote
suggesting that the Evolution Committee would be an appropriate selecting body !

128 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

and not have been productive of real good. I always succeed in creating hostility without
getting others to see my views ; infelicity of expression is I expect to blame. To you I mean
to speak them out, even at the risk of vexing you.

" All the problems laid down by you in your printed paper seem to me capable of solution,
and nearly all of them in one way only, by statistical methods and calculations of a more or less
delicate mathematical kind. The older school of biologists cannot be expected to appreciate
these methods, e.g. Ray Lankester, Thiselton-Dyer, etc. A younger generation is only just
beginning its training in them.

" I believe that your problems could be answered by direct and well devised experiments at
a ' farm ' or institute under the supervision of some two or three men who appreciate the new
methods. I think you were entirely right in the idea of a committee to carry out such experi-
ments. But I venture to think that the Committee you have got together is entirely unsuited
to direct such experiments. It is far too large, contains far too many of the old biological type,
and is far too unconscious of the fact that the solutions to these problems are in the first place
statistical, and in the second place statistical, and only in the third place biological. It was
the character of the Committee as now constituted which led me to support Michael Foster's
motion that the Committee should not experiment, but assist experiment, and further to object
to his words ' under the Committee.' Fancy the attempt to make real experiments on varia-
tion, correlation, or coefficients of heredity 'under a Committee' of which, I shrewdly suspect,
only the Chairman and Secretary know the significance of these terms !

" Hence to sum up, your method seems to me a right one — a Committee to undertake
experiments of a definite statistical character*. But your actual Committee is quite a wrong
one. It might be a good Committee to press the public with subscription lists ; but it is,
I believe, a hopeless one to devise experiments which will solve in the only effective way these
problems."

Meanwhile besides the criticisms already referred to, there were factors,
other than the hope of peace, inducing Galton to enlarge his Committee
and widen its programme. As early as February 3, 1891, Alfred Russel
Wallace had written to Galton urging that the time was ripe for an experi-
mental farm or institute to undertake researches which might decide disputed
points in organic evolution.

Copy of Letter from Alfred Russel Wallace to Francis Galton^.

Parkstone, Dorset. February 3, 1891.

My dear Mr Galton, Don't you think the time has come for some combined and systematic
effort to carry out experiments for the purpose of deciding the two great fundamental but dis-
puted points in organic evolution, —

(1) Whether individually acquired external characters are inherited, and thus form an
important factor in the evolution of species, — or whether as you &■ Weismann argue, and
as many of us now believe, they are not so, & we are thus left to depend almost wholly
on variation & natural selection.

(2) What is the amount and character of the sterility that arises when closely allied but
permanently distinct species are crossed, and then "hybrid" offspring bred together.
Whether the amount of infertility differs between the hybrids of species that have pre-
sumably arisen in the same area, & those which seem to have arisen in very distinct or
distant areas — as oceanic or other islands.

* The Royal Society had on Dec. 11, 1896, decided to retain the old name of the Committee,
which contained the word "measurement." It was not till the following year, that with
enlarged numbers and a wider programme, the Council acceded to Galton's request that the
Committee be called "The Evolution (Plants and Animals) Committee."

t I have to thank Alfred Russel Wallace's son, Mr W. G. Wallace, for kindly permitting me
to publish the following letters of his father.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 129

Both these questions can be settled by experiments systematically carried on for ten or
twenty years. The question is how is it to be done. Talking over the matter with Mr Theo. D. A.
Cockerell, a very acute &, thoughtful young naturalist, we came to the conclusion that a Com-
mittee of the British Association would probably be the best mode of carrying out the experiments,
by the aid of a B. Ass", grant & a Royal Society grant, aided perhaps by subscriptions from
wealthy naturalists. It seems to me that one paid observer giving his whole time to the work
could carry out a number of distinct series of experiments at the same time, — and if the Zool.
Soc. would allow somo of the experiments to be made with their animals in their gardens much
expense would be saved. To be really good however the hybridity experiments (and the others
too) would have to be carried out with large numbers of animals, and thus some sort of small
experimental farm would be required. Surely some wealthy landlord may be found to give a
small tenantless farm for such a purpose. Then, using small animals such as Lepus and Mus
among mammalia, some gallinaceous birds and ducks, and also insects, a good deal could be
done even on a largo scale, at a small cost. On the same farm a corresponding set of plant-
experiments could be carried out; and an intelligent well educated gardener or bailiff, with a
couple of men, or even one, under him, could superintend the whole operations under the written
directions and constant supervision of the Committee.

Would you move for such a Committee at the next B. Ass". Meeting 1 ? You are the man to
do it both as the original starter of the theory of non-inheritance of acquired variations, the
only experimenter on pangenesis, & the man who has done most in experiment and resulting
theory on allied subjects.

We thought first of a separate Society, but I doubt if a new society could be established &
supported, whereas a Committee either of the B. Ass", or of the Royal Society could do the work
quite as effectively & would probably receive as much support from persons interested in these
problems. It seems to me a sad thing that years should pass away & nothing of this kind be
systematically done. I feel sure you would meet with general support if you would propose the
enquiry. Believe me, Yours very faithfully, Alfred R. Wallace.

Francis Galton, F.R.S.

P.S. It would of course be better still if a fund could be raised sufficient to establish an
Institute for experimental Enquiry into the fundamental Data of Biology. This is surely of far
higher importance than the anatomical, embryological, & other work for which the Plymouth
Biological Station was founded. A. R. W.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Feb. 5/91.

My dear Mr Wallace, The views you express so clearly & forcibly, agree with those
I have often considered — ranging between a modest cottage with hutches <fe a bit of ground, up
to an Heredity Institute. There was also a half move in this direction made last spring by Ray
Lankester, Romanes <fe others. The difficulties I fear and which I hope you can remove, are as
follows. Let us suppose that funds have been collected, a small farm procured and a sensible
manager installed in it and that operations are ready to begin. Also I would suppose that the
cost of conducting experiments would be met by those who devised them, who themselves had
obtained a grant for the purpose from the R. Soc, Brit. Assoc, or otherwise.

Now (1)1 doubt if it would be easy to devise a sufficiency of experiments to occupy the
establishment of a sort that wd. generally be recognised as crucial. In the two groups of de-
siderata you mention, no one that I know of, has yet suggested an experiment, much less several
experiments, that those who believe in and those who don't believe in the hereditary transmission
of acquired characters would accept as fair. If a few such could be devised all my fears as to
the utility of the establishment would vanish. If it could settle this one question pains and cost
would be amply repaid.

(2) Similarly as regards the sterility question though in a much less degree. The uncertain
and often large effects of confinement on fecundity would be a serious disturbing cause.

It then seems to be the first desideratum before making any move that a fairly long list of
definite problems, that such an establishment might be set to work upon, ought to be drawn up.
Would you put your views as to these on paper %

The number of experimenters is sadly small.

pgiii 17

130 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

(3) Another difficulty is that the experiments are not likely to be so carefully tended &
guarded in an establishment as they would be by oneself or by personal friends. I have had some
very marked evidence of this in my own experience, which I don't like to put on paper for fear
of causing annoyance.

If the difficulties I have mentioned can be shown to be small, all the rest would be plain
sailing. The farm would bear a similar relation to Heredity both plant and animal that the Kew
Observatory does to experimenters in Physical Science.

It might grow into a repository of stud books and all about domestic animal breeding, and
pay its way well in this department. Also it might become a repository of family genealogies
& facts about human heredity, and also pay its way here; the people love to have their genea-
logies put on record, photos of family portraits preserved, &c. & would pay for the trouble it
might cost to keep them.

But the first thing is the experimental farm — in connection with Kew or Chiswick — the
Zool. Society & Marine biological laboratories. It could be started moderately under the same
roof, so to speak, as one of these, so as to avoid many expenses of a separate establishment,
while an independent home was being prepared for it to be entered into if it succeeded.

I have much that would be helpful to say, if you can remove these initial difficulties of
prospect. Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

Pray give our united kind remembrances to Mrs Wallace, &, accept them yourself.

Copy of Letter from Alfred R. Wallace to Francis Galton.

Parkstone, Dorset. Feby. 7th, 1891.

My dear Mr Galton, On receipt of your interesting letter I sat down & jotted the enclosed
notes of the kind of experiments that it seems to me would test the theory of heredity or non-
heredity of individually-acquired characters. Also a few as to fertility or sterility of hybrids,
& as to the real nature of some of the supposed instincts of the higher animals. I do not myself
see much difficulty in carrying out any of these, but then I am not an experimenter as you are.
Still, I shall be glad to know exactly where the difficulty or insufficiency lies. If these, or any
modifications of them, would be valuable & to the point, it seems to me that the mere keeping
the plants and animals in health & properly isolated would fully occupy the keeper or keepers
of the farm, — while the actual experiments — the deciding on the separation without selection
of the various lots to experiment with, — which should be crossed <fc when, and other such
matters, would recur only at considerable intervals & could be supervised by the members of
the Committee, or some of them, by means of, say, a weekly inspection.

I have limited my notes to three points in which I feel most interest, but of course experi-
ments in variation such as Mr Merrifield is carrying on for you, could be added to any extent
if there were any danger of the keepers having too little to do !

All the experiments I suggest would require considerable numbers of individuals to be kept
healthy and to be largely increased by breeding, — and they would all have to be continued
during several years depending on the duration of life of the various species experimented
with.

My wife and I are in pretty good health & beg to be kindly remembered to Mrs Galton.
As everybody seems to come to Bournemouth we shall hope some day to have a call from you.

Yours very faithfully, Alfred R. Wallace.
F. Galton, Esq., F.R.S.

This letter was accompanied by a detailed list of possible experiments.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Feb. 12/91.

My dear Mr Wallace, I have thought much & repeatedly over your letter & have talked
with Herbert Spencer & with Thiselton-Dyer, but cannot yet see my way. I hate destructive
criticism, — for it is so easy to raise objections, — & want to offer constructive criticism & to help
progress but have every point in view <fc in all the details I see serious difficulty without any
considerable gain.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 131

As an example of many others of the suggested experiments, take the first, viz. that of plants
in windy & in still localities. Suppose (1) there was a difference in the seedlings from them, then
the advocates of non-inheritance of acquired faculties would protest against its applicability
saying that there had been selection, the lofty plants & the wide spreading ones would have
been preferentially blown down and the weakly ones would have been killed by the rigour of
conditions, therefore there had been selection in favour of the small &, hardy. Now suppose
(2) that there was no difference, — then the same people would say " I told you so." The expt
would be for them a case of " heads you lose, tails I win."

Next, to produce any notable effect the expt must, as agreed by all, be protracted for many
generations.

Lastly, nature affords an abundance of excellent examples, far superior to artificial ones.
Thus take an (elevated) region swept with winds but with hollows in it which are sheltered
and all of which is forest clad. The trees in the sheltered hollows will have been from time
immemorial finer than those of the same kinds of the exposed places; collect the seeds and plant
them under like conditions elsewhere.

During a (Swiss) tour a man might collect an abundance of such seeds of contrasted origin
of many species of trees. Even a morning's walk would afford more data than a century of
artificial experiment.

So again the seeds of plants originally of English stock but reared for some generations in
various parts of the world might be collected and planted side by side.
[The last is Thiselton-Dyer's proposal.]

The only certain employment in the plant department of your proposed farm is to make
experiments such as these, or rather to verify in a regular methodical way much that is known
already, including expts on the opposite side such as graft-hybridism.

Dyer says that no experimental work is likely to succeed at such places as Kew in the
ordinary course of work, where careful oversight is required. The men have much other work
to do. It would require a man to be specially devoted to its oversight.
The animal experiments seem to be enormously costly.

The case you mention of hybrids it sterility would require many hundreds of animals at the
lowest of the computations you give data for. Where the effects of disuse are concerned the
animals should be, as a rule, underfed as regards their appetites and only eat just enough to
keep them in health ; then as there is a deficiency of material for growth, economy of structure
would be effective. This would be very difficult to ensure. Some of the most interesting experi-
ments are those of the Brown-Sequard type, but these must be put out of court in the present
mood of the public & of the law.

Is not the bird nesting experiment continually the unconscious subject of experiment in those
fowls who have been hatched from eggs in incubators 1

Did you happen to see some remarks I made at Newcastle British Assoc/n, which are printed
in the last Journal but one 1

I suggested expts on those creatures which are reared from eggs apart from parents.
Chickens in incubators, fish, & insects. The incubator industry is large in France & so is the
silk- worm. But the naturalists present seemed not inclined to dwell on those views*.
Could anything be made of the following :

A farm for the verification of easy experiments, within easy reach of London.
Cordial relations between it and

(1) The Zoo., the Horticult., Kew, & Royal Agricult. Society.

(2) Private persons of various ranks who would agree to help in expts.
Library of reference on heredity got mostly by begging.

Log-book of daily work preserved (1 in duplicate).

Publication of results in some one of the existing Scientific periodicals.

Superintendent (qualifications & Salary to be considered).

All under a c/ttee (? of the Royal Society).

In all this I am keeping the Kew Observatory in view as a somewhat analogous institution.

But before, anything could be done, even before asking for its serious consideration, a few
carefully and/w% worked out proposals of experiment ought I think to be drawn up. I mean
just as much as would have been done if the proposer handed them in to the Gov/t Grant or
other committee, for a grant of money. Very sincerely yours, Fkancis Galton.

* See our p. 57 above.

17—2

132 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Copy of Letter from Alfred R. Wallace to Francis Galton.

Parkstone, Dorset. Feby. \?>th, 1891.

My dear Mr Galton, It will be I am afraid impossible to discuss the difficulties of experi-
ment you urge by correspondence, and I will therefore confine myself to a short reply to the
objections you have actually made, which seems to me very easily done.

Plants in windy and still air.

You say, "it might be said" there had been selection. But this is very easily obviated, & is
the very point on which experiment is superior to observation of nature. In an ordinary open
garden or field plants properly cultivated are not killed or prevented from flowering & seeding
by wind. They grow healthily under it, and I feel sure that not one in a hundred plants would
so suffer. The contrast wd. be produced not by the violence of the wind in the one case but by
its absence in the other set, they having grown in a glass-covered (or glass-sided) garden. If a
common perennial plant was grown — a mallow or a wallflower — for example — a set of 50 or
100 plants might be grown on for 3 or 4 years so as fully to establish whatever change could
be produced in the individuals by the diverse conditions. Then at the end of that time take the
whole of the seed produced by each lot, — take two samples, of say the 100 smallest or lightest or
better perhaps 100 of the average of each, and cultivate them side by side under identical con-
ditions. It would not matter to me, or I think to you, what anybody said, but if there were —
(a) a decided & measurable difference in the two lots of plants from which the seeds were taken,
and — (b) there was no measurable or decided difference between the plants grown from these
seeds under identical conditions, this would be one definite fact against inheritance*, — while if
there was a difference of the same nature & fairly comparable in amount it would be a decided
fact in favour of inheritance. No doubt it might be urged that the effect would be minute but
cumulative, & that might be admitted, <fe the experiment continued under exactly the same con-
ditions for say ten generations. If then no differential effect were produced in the offspring the
evidence would be strong against inheritance. Of course the fairest way would be for the advo-
cates of inheritance to formulate the experiments they would admit to have weight, and the
opponents of inheritance to do the same.

Then you say "nature affords an abundance of excellent examples, far superior to artificial
ones." This I altogether demur to. In nature we always & inevitably have selection of various
kinds, due to soil, aspect, winds, enemies, overcrowding, &c. <fec. &c. & we cannot possibly separate
the effects of these from any possible inherited effects due to diversity of conditions. But this
is what we can & do do in cultivation. — We save plants from overcrowding ife therefore from
the struggle with other plants, we can give all the same soil & aspect, protect all alike from
enemies, give both the same selection or the same absence of selection of seeds. In nature you
cannot possibly tell whether any peculiarity in individuals is due to conditions or to genetic
variation, while if you take those cases where the difference is clearly in adaptation to conditions —
as the dwarfer plants at higher altitudes — you have the probability, almost certainty, of a con-
siderable amount of nat. selectn. By experiment you are able to avoid all these uncertainties
&. determine the effects of certain definite modifications of environment on individuals, — & then
ascertain whether the modifications thus produced are inherited.

In nature too, you have the uncertainty introduced by double parentage; each parent in all
cross-fertilised plants, may have had different characters & have grown under different conditions.
In experiment you eliminate this cause of uncertainty.

Of course the experiments with animals would involve expense, but with the smaller animals
not very much, — & I understood you to say that this would not be an obstacle.

If you or any one else will point out the difficulties or uncertainties in the other experiments
I suggested I will be glad to answer them, as I think I have done in the one case you have
referred to.

It is only in this way that we can arrive at a satisfactory mode of procedure, & I regret that
I cannot have the advantage of discussing the question with yourself & others who are well
acquainted with the subject and with the special difficulties of experimentation.

Believe me, yours very truly, Alfred R. Wallace.
* [i.e. of acquired characters.]

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 133

PS. Pray do not trouble to reply to this unless you think anything further from me may
be of any use. A. 11. W.

Of course I have referred to the one experiment of zvind ifc no wind as an example, not by
any means considering it one of the best experiments. A. R. W.

It will be seen that Wallace had a due appreciation of the necessity for
"large numbers"; he recognised that the true method of approaching these
problems was statistical. If the time was ripe for such experimental work
forty years ago, what must we consider it now %

Apparently it was not till 1895 that Galton having got his Committee
on the Measurement of Plants and Animals recurred to Wallace's idea of an
experimental farm, which Wallace in 1896 termed a "Biological Farm." But
a new possibility had arisen, that of acquiring the Darwin house at Down as
a station for experimental evolution. Everything was favourable to such
a desirable project. The Darwin family were prepared to part with the house
for a national purpose on terms which meant a very large contribution
from themselves. Galton named a large sum which an anonymous donor
was willing to contribute towards the work of experimentation. There can be
little doubt that had the scheme been pushed with energy, Down might thirty
years ago have been obtained for a purpose urgently necessary and thoroughly
in keeping with the spirit of Charles Darwin's work. But a bold scheme
only appeals to the bolder minds, and these seemed to be entirely wanting
among the men to whom Galton wrote with the hope of engaging their support
for the proposed Biological Farm*, as it was termed in the circular issued by
Galton on November 30, 1896. I reprint that document here:

y Royal Society. It was to procure a place where

investigators could have experiments carried on

The Committee appointed by the Royal at their own cost, subject, of course, to the per-

Society, for the Measurement of Plants and mission of the Committee of Management, the

Animals, proposes to hold an informal meeting cost being, in most cases, defrayed out of grants

at the Royal Society, on Friday, December 4th, in aid to the investigators, made by the Royal

at 4 p.m., which they hope you will favour with Society or by the British Association,

your presence. It is likely that a farm-house with 20 acres

The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the of suitably varied land, and some running water,
propriety of asking aid from the Council of the would amply suffice, so long as the experiments
Royal Society in establishing and maintaining were chiefly confined to small animals. The
a Biological Farm, to supply materials (mostly farm would be in the charge of a resident care-
zoological) appropriate to the investigations on taker under the direct authority of a scientific
which the Committee is occupied, and for under- superior, who might hold the office of Secretary
taking experiments in breeding during many to the Committee of Management. It would be
successive generations for the use of those who his duty to see that their instructions were duly
study the causes and conditions of Evolution. carried out.

The general idea that such a Farm would Independently of the farm, and perhaps

fulfil, somewhat resembles that which was pre- preliminary to the attempt to raise money for

sent to the founders of the physical Institute its maintenance, the suggested Committee could

known as the "Kew Observatory," which has accomplish a very important service in a similar

been for many years under a Committee of direction, for the performance of which it is

Management appointed by the Council of the believed that funds would be immediately

* Meldola, who was throughout warmly in favour of such an institution, actually termed it a
"Biometric Station" in December, 1896.

134 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

available. That is, they might communicate of the Secretary need not at first be large, since

with persons, many of high social position, the duties of the office would not then be so

who are breeders on a large scale in their own onerous as to prevent his holding other ap-

grounds, thereby initiating a widely spread pointments.

system of co-operation in carrying out experi- The meeting will be asked to consider this
ments desired by the Committee. It is not to scheme, amending and altering it as desirable,
be expected that the several results would be to discuss its cost, and the ways of meeting
equally trustworthy with those made under that cost. If, after this, the prevalent feeling
specially trained management as in the pro- should be in favour of further proceedings,
posed farm. On the other hand, whenever it the meeting might appoint an Executive Corn-
was found that similar experiments made simul- mittee, not consisting exclusively of Fellows
taneously at many different places led to the of the Royal Society, to examine the subject
same results, those results would eminently de- closely in its various details, to consider the
serve confidence. The incidental advantage of precise experiments that might be first under-
interesting influential persons in the work of taken, and to report to an adjourned meeting.
the Committee would be great.

The cost of the complete scheme does not FRANCIS GALTON

seem likely to be very formidable. It would be (Chairman of the Committee of the Royal Society

chiefly made up of the rental of the farm, the far the Measurement of Plants and Animals).
erection of enclosures, hutches, etc., the small

initial cost of the animals, their feed, and the 42 > Rutland Gate, S.W.

wagesof the caretaker and assistants. The salary . November 30th, 1896.

The response was most heartrending. Even such warm friends of Galton
as Sir J. D. Hooker and Herbert Spencer were not helpful. The former
thought that experiments on plants could be undertaken at Kew, and no
new station was needful; the latter thought the course suggested impolitic,
the proposed purchase of the Darwin house was no doubt appropriate as
a matter of sentiment, but most inappropriate as a matter of business. He
would be disinclined to cooperate if any such imprudent step were taken*.
Great matters must spring from small germs, which would only justify them-
selves by their success. Real encouragement came only from Adam Sedgwick,
from Meldola, and from Weldon ("Surely £4000 can be raised somehow!").
The Darwin brothers it is needless to say wrote most generously and helpfully,
but the scheme fell dead even among the biologists who thought it worth while
to come to the meeting with the view of discussing it. There was among
them no broad conception of what a station for experimental evolution might
achieve for their science, and there was not the slightest chance of enthusiasm
and energy being put into the project so that it might be carried to a successful
issue. The money for the acquisition of Down was still to be found, but there
was the sum of £2000 assured by the anonymous donor f, and one distinguished
biologist, thinking a bird in the hand was worth two in the bush, asked, if
they had not come to allot that sum for their experimental work, what had
they come for? I never left a meeting with a greater feeling of despair, and
this was shared by Weldon, and to a lesser extent by Galton, who was
consoled to some extent by Francis Darwin's writing that, however much
he regretted the Down project could not be worked, he was not going to

* Asa matter of fact Spencer had not been consulted, but had heard of the matter indirectly
through Adam Sedgwick, and had then written to Galton to know what it was all about!

t "There is assurance that a sum of £2000 would be available to start the undertaking, if
a thoroughly satisfactory programme could be agreed to."

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 135

consider that scheme as finally dead. Now after thirty years it looks as
if Down would be retained as a national possession. One may hope that it
will be put to as good and fitting a purpose as Galton proposed for it. He
has left a lengthy paper dealing with the work he considered the Biological
Farm should undertake; it is based on the suggestions he received from many
quarters, modified by his own ideas. It is a scheme for "Further accurate
observations on Variation, Heredity, Hybridism, and other phenomena that
would elucidate the Evolution of Plants and Animals." The matter is arranged
under 16 headings, and it is sad to consider that, although more than thirty
years have passed since the scheme was drafted, but little has been done
to solve the problems therein suggested. It is impossible to print the full
manuscript here, but some idea of what it deals with may be judged from
its table of Contents :

"A. Preparatory. (!) Procedure (especially emphasising the need for continuity in observa-
tion and for secular experiments). (2) Cooperation (Institutions and Individuals). (3) Breeds
suitable for Experiments (necessity for stores of pure stocks of small animals). (4) Place for
Station (Down, and existing establishments). B. Heredity as affected by and related to : (5) Close
interbreeding, Panmixia, Prepotency. (6) Hybridism. (7) Telegony. (8) Acquired modifications
in parent. (9) Mental influence on Mother ("Jacobise" in a variety of ways). (10) Instinct
(nest building by birds, who have never seen the nest of their species ; directive instinct in dogs,
taken to unknown place and watched from a distance by a stranger). (11) Variations, "Sports"
and their intensity of inheritance. (12) Natural and Physiological Selection. (13) Partheno-
genesis. (14) Fertility (many problems stated). (15) Sex and its causes. (16) Gestation."

The bundle of papers in which this and other schemes and letters from
innumerable correspondents are included is labelled by Galton: "Old Papers
concerning the Evolution Committee of the R. Soc. of probably no present
value. Might be useful if a Darwinian Institute were ever founded." "Of
probably no present value"- — what a criticism of the biologists of 1890-1900!

Here, as in Experimental Psychology, Galton was ahead of his age, and
few have recognised how much even by raising these questions, he stimulated
that movement for experimental biology, which the present generation of
biologists believes was unthought of by their Victorian predecessors. Thus
came to an end Galton's plan for an experimental station for evolution; it
was another illustration of the futility of working through ill-assorted
committees. I say came to an end, but hardly in Galton's mind. It must
I think have been in 1903, when in, the summer vacation the biometricians
were employed on their summer tasks at Peppard and Galton was of the
company, that the matter again arose. One evening he asked his two
lieutenants to prepare a draft scheme for a biological farm, to state its size,
staff, equipment, its probable cost and annual expenditure for maintenance
and experimentation. Weldon and I talked the matter over, and felt that
although Galton was well-to-do, he was not so wealthy, that to run a biological
farm might not deprive him of some of the easements necessary to his age.
We therefore determined to estimate the cost of the farm on the scale of
maximum effectiveness. It was a pious fraud, but the suggestion of a biological
farm was never again referred to, and Galton's thoughts of increasing human
knowledge soon turned to less expensive projects.

136

Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

Appendix to Chapter XIV*.

"The Weights of British Noblemen during the last Three Generations,"
Nature, January 17, 1884 (Vol. xxix, pp. 266-268).

This rather amusing paper is not included in any list of Galton's
memoirs known to me, nor were any offprints of it to be found in the
Galtoniana. It seems to have been forgotten by Galton himself and would
have certainly been overlooked by me had I not stumbled across it in
reading Komanes' review of Galton's Record of Family Faculties and Life
History Album in the same number of the Journal. Galton — whom the
Goddess of Chance certainly favoured — became acquainted with the fact
that an old established firm of wine and coffee merchants had been since
about 1750 in the habit of weighing their customers, and that upwards of
20,000 persons, many of whom were famous in English history of the
eighteenth century, had for their use or amusement sought the firm's huge

GALTON'S SMOOTHED CURVES FOR AGE -WEIGHT OF BRITISH

NOBLEMEN IN THREE SUCCESSIVE GENERATIONS.
190

180 -

c©0

£ 170

160

beam scales. Galton confined his attention almost entirely to noblemen as a
well-rounded class, whose ages were easily ascertainable, and to their data
in respect only of two characteristics, namely the degree of fluctuation in
weight as exhibited by the age- weight curves of individual noblemen, and
the difference in the average age-weight curves of noblemen born in the
three periods 1740-1769, 1770-1799, 1800-1829. He found that the average
annual fluctuation in the earlier group was about 7 lbs. and that in the
latest group it was only 5 lbs. He concluded that this pointed to an

* Some notice of the following paper should have appeared in Section H of Chapter xm
(Vol. n), but its existence was then unknown to me.

Correlation and Application of Statistics to Problems of Heredity 137

irregularity in the mode of life that was greater two or three generations
back than now. Further he found that the "prime" for weight was also
earlier in age for the older generations, being hardly discoverable at all in
those born in the first third of the nineteenth century or in the professional
classes of the 'eighties. His three smoothed curves reproduced on p. 136,
with the table of mean weights at each central age, indicate that noblemen
of the generation which flourished about the beginning of last century
attained their meridian and declined much earlier than those of the genera-
tion sixty years their juniors, or indeed than the mid- Victorian professional
classes, where the culminating point was difficult to ascertain.

Galton's data were somewhat scanty as the following table will indicate,
but his general conclusions appear to be justified :

Actual Mean Weights in pounds at Various Ages.

Class

Years of Age

Born 1740-1769
Born 1770-1799
Born 1800-1829

166(13)

168 (24)
165 (35)

176(18)
171 (23)
165 (44)

184 (24)
172 (24)
171 (43)

181 (21)
184 (26)
175 (37)

181 (18)
178 (26)
181 (22)

180 (12)
178 (15)
188 (7)

Mid- Victorian
Professional Class

161

167

173

174

"There can be no doubt," he writes, "that the dissolute life led by the upper classes about
the beginning of this century, which is so graphically described by Mr Trevelyan in his Life
of Fox, has left its mark on their age-weight traces. It would be most interesting to collate
these violent fluctuations with events in their medical histories; but, failing such information,
we can only speculate on them, much as Elaine did on the dints in the shield of Launcelot,
and on looking at some huge notch in the trace [for the individual], may hazard the guess,
'Ah, what a stroke of gout was there!' "

Although no great importance can be attached to Galton's results for this
particular class of subject, yet the problems his paper suggpsts might be
profitably studied on more ample material now extant. I am therefore glad
to have brought to light once more this long forgotten paper.

PGIII

CHAPTER XV

PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION

"It became gradually clear that three facts had to be established before it would be possible
to advocate the use of finger-prints for criminal or other investigations. First it must be proved,
not assumed, that the pattern of a finger-print is constant throughout life. Secondly that the
variety of patterns is really very great. Thirdly that they admit of being so classified, or
'lex iconised,' that when a set of them is submitted to an expert, it would be possible for him
to tell, by reference to a suitable dictionary, or its equivalent, whether a similar set had been
already registered. These things I did, but they required much labour." Galton: Memories of
my Life, p. 254.,

Fore

Fbre

LEFT

RIGHT

Fig. 15.

§ I. History and Controversy.

The writer must confess to having felt not a little puzzled when he had to
determine in what order to present Galton's work on Personal Identification.
It is not only that his work was scattered over very numerous publications,
but that in order to make it effective Galton had to step into the public
arena; and this had its usual consequences, namely controversy and misrepre-
sentation, factors which had hitherto played but a small part in Galton's
career. On the whole it is strange how little controversy intruded on Galton's
long and quiet years of study; this was in part due to the peace-loving mind
of the man, but there were also other causes at work. In the first place
he was labouring most of his life in an entirely untilled field, and there
could be no friction therefore with other pioneers. In the next place his
fellow scientists were slow to realise that the new logical tools he was

Personal Identification and Description 139

forging would ultimately be applied in their own fields of work, and when
that application came, whether in anthropology, psychology, biology, sociology
or medicine, there would be sure to be friction, and resulting controversy —
heated and bitter. That experience was left to his lieutenants and their
disciples.

In the matter of finger-print identification, however, Galton was not only
sharpening a new tool, but urging on all and sundry its application to
practical problems. The tool was soon seen to be so efficient that it had
to be adopted, but its very efficiency raised jealousy and controversy, as to
whom the merit of its introduction must be attributed. I shall endeavour
in this chapter not only to put before my readers the history of the adoption
of finger-print identification in this country, but the means Galton took to
popularise the idea, and finally provide a resume of his scientific contribu-
tions to the subject which form the foundation on which all later work in
this field has been based.

Investigations with regard to finger-prints occupied much of Galton's
time during the years from 1887 to 1895. I say advisedly from 1887,
because soon after the opening of his second Anthropometric Laboratory,
he began the collection of those thousands of finger-prints, on the study
of which so many of his conclusions depended*. It may be safely said
that no one had in the early 'nineties so vast a collection of finger-prints as
Francis Galton, a collection covering not only our own English race, but also
Welsh, Hindoos, Jews, Negroes, and special groups such as idiots, criminals,
etc. That collection started by Galton has continued to grow to the present
day, although now it is chiefly, but not entirely, confined to hereditary
data. I have already indicated how Galton in the 'eighties was occupied with
the problem of portraiture and personal identity (see Vol. II, Chapter xn),
and it was from the standpoints (a) of ethnology, (b) of heredity, that he
first approached the problem of the papillary ridges on the fingers. It is
well known now that finger-prints may be classified into certain types,
which Galton called "genera," and that variations appear to cluster round
these typical forms. It would have been a great achievement to show that
in certain human races only one "genus" occurs, or indeed that the "genera"
occur in very different proportions. Galton failed in racial collections of
fairly considerable numbers to detect any marked differentiation of this
kind. I am not prepared to assert that with larger collections and more
modern statistical methods some differentiation might not still be found ; it
is hard to believe that from the very origin of Homo these genera have

* This collection in large indexed cabinets exists in the Galtoniana, and I should be very
grateful to any one whose tinger-prints were taken thirty to forty years ago, if they would call
in at the Galton Laboratory, University College, W.C.I, and allow their lingers to be reprinted.
Galton in delivering his Presidential Address to the Anthropological Institute, January 22,
1889, refers to his lecture of 1888 as "of last spring " and mentions that he is taking the two
thumb prints and describes the technique he has adopted. His work therefore began certainly
in 1888 and I suspect experimentally in 1887 before his lecture of May, 1888. The earliest
dated tinger-prints that I can find in this laboratory are from March, 1888.

18—2

140 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

been scattered almost indiscriminately among the ten fingers ; yet Galton
failed to solve any anthropological problem by the aid of finger-prints*.

In the matter of heredity he was more successful, he produced evidence
adequate enough to demonstrate that finger-prints were hereditary, but
neither he nor any one since has produced a satisfactory account of the
manner in which they are inherited.

In later years t Galton formed a considerable collection of family prints
of the two forefingers only. These were tabled and reduced in 1920 by
Miss Ethel M. Elderton, who demonstrated the general inheritance of the ridge
patterns, but noted that two finger-prints were far from adequate to deter-
mine the intensity of heredity, as although a parental peculiarity of pattern
might pass to the same finger in the child, or with less probability to the
homologous finger, it might also pass to any one of the remaining eight
fingers ; this, if it happens to any individual finger with still less probability,
may occur with equal or even greater probability when we take into account
the total eight of them. While the existence of ten fingers in man is a
distinct advantage in the matter of personal identification — or if we like a
distinct misfortune to the criminal — it is also something of a misfortune to
the geneticist. At any rate Galton's work left much to be done in deter-
mining the organic correlations between prints of the different fingers in
the same individual { and the bearing of these organic correlations on the
problem of heredity in the ridges. Thus it came about that while Galton
did much pioneer work in the collection and co-ordination of material his chief
contribution to the subject was in the matter of identification. He was the
first to publish matter, largely due to Sir William Herschel, fully establishing
the persistence of finger-print patterns ; he was the first to show the nature of
their variety and to classify them, and lastly he was the first to prove that it
was possible to index them and rapidly to find, from a given set of prints,
whether their owner was already in the index. All these problems were
fundamental and must be definitely solved, if finger-prints were to be used for
police purposes. None of this spade work had been achieved or at any rate
published before Galton took up the subject. Before his day we have mere
suggestions of the possible usefulness of these prints. Within ten years from
his first study of the subject by the aid of his papers dealing with the prints
from a scientific standpoint, by repeated letters to the press, by action through
the British Association and by definite demonstrations in his Laboratory to
the Commission appointed by Mr Asquith to consider the question of criminal
identification in England, Galton had got not only bertillonage accepted in

* More recent researches, for example, those of Kubo (1918) and Collins (1915), seem to
indicate that the Oriental races have a larger percentage of whorls and fewer ulnar loops than
the European races. But the results are doubtful because there is a large personal equation in
the matter of classification. I think we must conclude with Stockis {Revue Anthropologiqne,
Annee 1922, p. 92) that the results reached (thirty years after Galton) are still not adequate
to admit of our asserting the existence of well-defined ethnic differences in finger-prints.

t See Biomelrika, Vol. n, p. 365, 1903. Collection made in the years 1903 to 1905.

\ A beginning was made in the study of the organic correlation of finger-prints by
Dr H. Waite, Biometrika, Vol. x, p. 421 el seq.

Personal Identification and Description 141

England, but, what in the sequel has proved more important, the use of
finger-prints. The fact that such prints are now practically adopted in
the Criminal Investigation Departments of all civilised countries, is striking
testimony to Galton's work and to his energy. Attempts have been made
to belittle his achievement in this matter. Galton's claim is not based on
his being the first to suggest this use of finger-prints, or on being the first
actually to apply them. It lies in the fact that general police adoption of
finger-prints resulted from his activities. It is easy to make suggestions, it
wants an additional mental quality to get them carried out by administrative
bodies, always and often justly conservative in character*.

In Galton's lecture at the Royal Institution in 1888 on "Personal Identi-
fication f," he gave an account (pp. 3-5) of Bertillon's method — bertillonage
as it came to be called — the basis of which lies in recording the anthropometric
measurements of criminals. Galton believed in the serviceableness of this
method, but he held also that its efficiency had been overrated, because its
inventor much underestimated the high correlations, which Galton surmised,
and which were later demonstrated to exist between the various measurements
taken. He then made his first public reference, as far as I am aware, to
those "most beautiful and characteristic of all superficial marks" the

"small furrows, with the intervening ridges and their pores, that are disposed in a singularly
complex yet regular order on the under surfaces of the hands and the feet. I do not now
speak of the large wrinkles in which chiromantists delight, and which may be compared to the
creases in an old coat, or to the deep folds in the hide of a rhinoceros, but of those fine lines of
which the buttered fingers of children are apt to stamp impressions on the margins of the books
they handle, that leave little to be desired on the score of distinctness."

Galton then refers to the work of Purkenje in 1823, Kollmann 1883,

Sir William Herschel andDr Faulds, etc., much in the same terms as in his

Finger Prints of 1892{. In this lecture Galton submitted on the problem

of permanence :

"a most interesting piece of evidence, which thus far is unique, through the kindness of Sir
Win. Herschel. It consists of the imprints of the first two fingers of his own hand made in 1860
and in 1888 respectively, that is, at periods separated by an interval of twenty-eight years."
<pp. 12-13.)

Galton analyses the minutiae (see our p. 178) in an adequate, but less
thorough manner than he did later by the aid of sevenfold photographic
enlargements and the tracing in of the ridges. It is clear that Galton was
actively interested in finger-printing, and his remarks on p. 15 show that
he had been experimenting in many ways on the most advantageous and

* An executive department has not only to consider the cost of installing an innovation,
and afterwards of its maintenance, but likewise whether the resulting advantages will
compensate for the additional expenditure.

f See our Vol. n, p. 306; also the Journal Royal Institution, May 25, 1888, or Nature,
June 28, 1888.

J He does not refer to the paper by Nehemiah Grew in the Phil. Trans, of 1684 (Vol. xiv,
pp. 566-67). That paper has a very good, i.e. well engraved, illustration of the ridges on the
palm of the hand and on the fingers. A rather curious representation of the pores on the ridges —
not referred to in the text — appears also to belong to Grew's paper. Grew emphasises that the
pores are on the ridges, not in the furrows, and speaks of them as little fountains for the dis-
charge of sweat. There is no statement as to permanence or as to personal identification.

142

Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

cleanliest method of taking the impressions. In his Finger Prints of 1892
Galton says that

"My attention was first drawn to the ridges in 1888, when preparing a lecture on Personal
Identification for the Royal Institution, which had for its principal object an account of the
anthropometric method of Bertillon, then newly introduced into the prison administration of
France. Wishing to treat of the subject generally, and having a vague knowledge of the value
sometimes assigned to finger marks, I made inquiries, and was surprised to find, both how
much had been done, and how much there remained to do, before establishing their theoretical
value and practical utility." (p. 2.)

Fig. 16. Finger Prints of Sir William J. Herschel at an interval of 28 years. From Galton's Finger
Prints, Plate 15, Right Forefinger. Second method of marking minutiae.

I do not think that it can be asserted that Galton failed to recognise
what work had been previously published, except in the case of Nehemiah
Grew*, and from him he would indeed have learnt very little, had he known
of him. That the pores were on the ridges, not in the furrows, Galton
probably found out from his own observation f.

* Alix's paper of 1868 (see our p. 143 ftn. t) and Klaatsch's of 1888 are referred to on
p. 60 of the Finger Prints, but more stress possibly might have been laid on the former.

■\ In the Memories, pp. 257-8, is an amusing account of Herbert Spencer's view on the
relation of ridges to pores:

" I may mention a characteristic anecdote of Herbert Spencer in connection with this. He asked me to
show him my Laboratory and to take his prints, which I did. Then I spoke of the failure to discover the origin
of these patterns, and how the fingers of unborn children had been dissected to ascertain their earliest stages,
and so forth. Spencer remarked that this was beginning in the wrong way; that I ought to consider the
purposes the ridges had to fulfil, and to work backwards. Here he said, it was obvious that the delicate mouths
of the sudorific glands required the protection given to them by the ridges on either side of them and therefrom
he elaborated a consistent and ingenious hypothesis at great length. I replied that his arguments were
beautiful and deserved to be true, but it happened that the mouths of the ducts did not run in the valleys
between the crests, but along the crests of the ridges themselves. He burst into a good-humoured and up-
roarious laugh and told me the famous story which I had heard from each of the other two who were
present at the occurrence. Huxley was one of them. Spencer, during a pause in conversation at dinner at the
Athenaeum said, 'You would little think it, but I once wrote a tragedy.' Huxley answered promptly, 'I know
the catastrophe.' Spencer declared it was impossible, for he had never spoken about it before then. Huxley
insisted. Spencer asked what it was. Huxley replied: 'A beautiful theory, killed by a nasty, ugly little fact'."

Personal Identification and Description 143

I think, however, Galton had forgotten the date at which his attention
was first drawn to finger-prints. He appears to have been collecting data
before his lecture in 1888. But as early as 1880 Dr Faulds wrote a letter
(February 16th) from Japan to Charles Darwin mentioning that the topic
might have interest for him. The letter suggested that there were racial
differences in finger-prints and enclosed two prints of palms of hands and of
the five fingers. Darwin, strangely for him, rather overlooked the possible
importance of the topic ; he was clearly busy and worried*. He forwarded
the letter to Galton mentioning that it might have interest for anthropo-
logists, and suggesting it had better be dealt with by the Anthropological
Institute. Galton actually did present the letter to that Institute, and its
officials appear to have then pigeon-holed it. Faulds' and Darwin's letters
were unearthed many years later (April, 1894), after Galton had published
his books, and returned by A. E. Peek to Galton. These letters I found in
the Galtoniana.

Before this discovery I had no knowledge that Dr Faulds had written to
Darwin in 1880, but it is clear that Galton sent the letter as suggested by
Darwin to the Anthropological Institute. It cannot be said that any injustice
was thus done either by Darwin or Galton. No busy scientist is bound to pay
attention to the innumerable suggestions that may be made to him. Further,
twenty years earlier, 1858, Sir William Herschel was using finger-prints for
practical executive purposes in India, and lastly what is more to the point
Dr Faulds sent much the same communication slightly later to Nature where
it was printed on October 28, 1880 1, i.e. in the year of his letter to Darwin,
and called forth a response from Sir William Herschel stating what he had
himself achieved J. Galton refers to both letters not only in his Royal
Institution lecture of 1888, but also in his Finger Prints. Before Galton
issued his epoch-making papers of 1891, and his three books 1892 to 1895,
no really substantial work had been published on finger-prints, since
Purkenje's. A comparison of Galton's results with the two letters in Nature
of 1880 will suffice to indicate how idle it is to attempt to belittle his claims.

* Darwin was failing in health in 1880 and correspondence with strangers had become
a burden to him. See Life and Letters, Vol. in, p. 355 et seq.

f Vol. xxii, p. 605. It should be noticed that Dr Faulds states that he commenced his study
of the "skin furrows of the hand" in the previous year, but he yet speaks of "the for-ever-un-
changeable finger furrows of important criminals," and again in his letter to Darwin he states
that photographs may grow unlike the original, but never the rugae. In other words he begs
the question of permanence. At the same time he shows that he has ideas of the wide possible
usefulness of the finger-print. He says that he had been studying the papillary ridges in
monkeys, but appears to have overlooked the elaborate comparisons of these ridges among all
kinds of primates including man in the paper by Alix: "Recherches sur la disposition des lignes
papillaires de la main et du pied," Annates des sciences naturelles (Zoologie), T. vm, pp. 295-362,
T. ix, pp. 5-42 and corrections T. x, p. 374. The portion in T. ix contains excellent engravings
of the hands and feet ridges of primates. Alix enlarges on the great variety of the finger-prints
in man, and figures "double vortex," "loop" (Amande), "racket," "spiral," "spiral within circle"
and simple "circle." In other words he was reaching and figuring a classification to enable him
to compare man with other primates.

J Nature, Nov. 25, 1880, Vol. xxm, p. 76. Herschel recorded a twenty-two years' use of
finger-prints and gives some evidence of their permanence.

144 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

A serious mis-statement more or less frequently made was that Bertillon
who ultimately adopted the finger-print system of identification had initiated
it. This pained Galton extremely, because he actually introduced Bertillon to
the method, but the latter at the time feared practical difficulties such as the
want of education in his employees. Bertillon's letter of June 15, 1891, in
a reply to a letter of Galton's suggesting that he should try the system, has
luckily been preserved. The essential paragraph runs as follows :

" Je vous remercie de votre nouvel envoi relativement aux impressions digitales. Je suis fort
dispose a ajouter votre precede au signalement anthropometrique surtout pour les enfants.
Mais je redoute quelques difficult^ pratiques pour le nettoyage des doigts apres l'impression
faite, etc. Puis mes agents si peu instruits mettront-ils le zele necessaire pour apprendre votre
mdthode? Je crois que vous traversez souvent Paris, pourriez-vous, a votre prochain voyage,
me consacrer une matinee au Depot, pour un essayage sur la vile multitude?"

The words "votre proc^de" and "votre mdthode" clearly indicate that
Bei'tillon was fully aware of the originator of this process of criminal inves-
tigation. Notwithstanding, even as late as 1896, in the English translation
of Bertillon's Instructions signaletiques, the date of the introduction of the
prints of the thumb and three fingers of the right hand into the French
schedule for the criminal is given as 1884, instead of 1894, and "conveys the
idea that the use of finger-prints in Paris is much older than it really is, and
previous instead of subsequent, to its use in England*." The 1893 edition of
Bertillon's Identification Antliropometrique, Instructions signaletiques has
no reference to finger-prints. It is still over-confident as to the infallibility
of bertillonage f. Galton claimed neither finality nor infallibility for his
methods ; as to finger-print identification he found it a suggestion and he
left it an art.

In 1905 M. Bertillon wrote in reply to a question of Dr Faulds:

"Les impressions digitales a Paris sont adjointes au signalement anthropometrique depuis
l'annee 1894. J'ajoute que nous nous en trouvons fort bien. Quoique nous n'ayons jamais fait
d'identification erronee antierement nous sommes encore mieux garantis, si possible, en ce qui
regarde l'avenir." {Guide to Finger-Print Identification, pp. 4-5.)

* See Nature, Vol. liv, p. 569, where there is a review by Galton of the Signaletic
Instructions, emphasising the superiority of the English finger-print system and direct in-
dexing of the prints to the French anthropometric system or "bertillonage." Galton therein
prophesies what has since come to pass, that the former would ultimately supplant the latter
completely.

•)• "L'absolu de nos affirmations dans les questions d'identite, et notamment dans les cas plus
difficiles d'identification entre deux photographies, etonne encore les fonctionnaires de la police
ou de l'ordre judiciaire auxquels une longue pratique n'a pas deja enseigne ce qu'on appelle au
Palais notre in/aiUibilile. Nous nous devions a nous-meme de d<5montrer que le peremptoire
habituel de nos reponses ne resultait pas d'un temperament risque-tout, mais ^tait la consequence
raisonnee de la combinaison de divers precedes dont l'application, quand elle en a ete correcte-
ment faite, ne laisse pas la moindre place a 1'indecision.

"Puisse le present volume satisfaire a ce programme et contribuer ainsi a assurer la survi-
vance de la rn&hode dont nous sommes a la fois et L'lN VENTEUR EXCLUSIF ET
PARTOUT UN PEU L'ORGANISATEUR " (pp. x-xi). Capitals in original. Galton's
view was that bertillonage could not be infallible owing to the high correlations of many of
its measurements which its creator neglected.

Personal Identification and Description 145

Bei'tillon's letter to Gal ton of 1894* (see above) indicates where the
inspiration originated. Galton was ever ready to acknowledge others' work
in any field, and not less in finger-printing. Thus in 1891 he gave a full
account of Forgeot's excellent work on blurred finger-prints t, and of the
latter 's methods of bringing up and photographing greasy finger marks on
glass or metal. We have still in the Galtoniana the exhibit Galton made at
the Royal Society Soiree of that year of Dr Forgeot's imprints of the entire
hand.

In 1905 Dr Henry Faulds published a work entitled: Guide to Finger-
Print Identification. It would have been in some respects a useful book had
it not made exaggerated claims for the author's achievements in this field,
which are accompanied by remarks belittling what Sir William Herschel had
practically achieved and what Galton had carried out experimentally. Dr Faulds
entirely overlooks the fact that up to 1904, beyond his original letter of 1880
in Nature, he had himself published nothing on the subject, which could reach
men of science. That letter, if suggestive, was by no means convincing; it needed
the experience that Herschel provided of the permanence of types, and of
the practical utility for identification to induce a man in the first rank of
science to take up the subject and study it effectively. It is noteworthy that
Dr Faulds in his chronological bibliography of the subject of finger-printing,
starts with his own letter in Nature of 1880, and proceeds nearly year by
year till he comes to 1890, and then passes to 1894 omitting from his biblio-
graphy all reference to Galton's memoirs and books ! The whole tone of the
book was distinctly unpleasing and seemed directly calculated to excite
resentment in the minds of workers in the same field, who had done far more
than Dr Faulds for the subjectj. In regard to the claims of Dr Faulds we
must remember that his original letters to Darwin and to Nature were
written from Japan. The letters from Kumagusu Minakata to Nature, Vol.
li (1894), pp. 199 and 274 prove that the use of the finger-print as a sign-
manual on legal documents was familiar in Japan up to 1869 ; thus when
a husband divorced his wife, he signed the statement of reasons with his own
index-finger. The use of the finger-print as a sign-manual seems to have come

* A further letter of Bertillon's of July 3, 1896, indicates his view of finger-prints even two
years later:

" Jusqu'a ce jour, en effet, les empreintes digitales n'ont ktk prises dans mon service qu'a titre de marques
particulieres, destinees a affirmer l'identit^ individuelle, et cela en dehors de toute classification au moins
quant a present."

t " Imprints of the Hand," by Dr Forgeot of the Laboratoire d'anthropologie criminale,
Lyon, Journal of the Anthropological Institute, Vol. xxi, p. 282, November 10, 1891.

\ "Of Sir William's mute, or at least inarticulate, musings over a period of some twenty years
in India, I in Japan knew nothing" (p. 37). "Mr Galton who frequently acts as a graceful
chorus to Sir William" (p. 36). "Mr Collins (now Inspector), who after some training by Mr
F. Galton, who had recently begun the study, took charge of the Finger Print Department"
[i.e. at Scotland Yard] (p. 5). It is needful to repeat that Galton began his researches early
in 1888, that he had by 1895 accumulated from all quarters of the world a larger collection of
finger-prints than any other living man, and had published more work about them of a high
scientific order than any one previously and, I may add, since.

pgiii 19

146 s Life and Letters of Francis Galton „

together with Japan's old laws from China*. Presumably these facts were
unknown to Dr Faulds when he wrote his letters or he would have mentioned
them. Fourteen years after his. first letter, on the publication of the Parlia-
mentary Blue Book in 1894, he wrote to Nature challenging the statement
in the Blue Book that the Finger-Print system was "first suggested and to
some extent practically applied by Sir William Herschel," and demanding
that this claim should be " brought out a little more clearly than has yet
been done, either by himself or Mr Galton" [Nature, Vol. L, p. 548, October
4, 1894). Herschel replied in a letter of November 7 (Nature, Vol. Li, p. 77,
November 22, 1894), which must be convincing to any unprejudiced mind.
A few extracts will suffice:

"To the best of my, knowledge, Mr Faulds' letter of 1880 was, what he says it was,
the first notice in the public papers, in your columns, of the value of finger-prints for the
purpose of identification. His statement that he came upon it independently in 1879 (? 1878)
commands acceptance as a matter of course. At the same time I scarcely think that such
short experience as that justified his announcing that the finger-furrows were 'forever-
unchanging.'

"How I chanced upon the thing myself in 1858 and followed it up afterwards, has been very
kindly stated on my authority by Mr Galton, at whose disposal I gladly placed all my materials
on his request Those published by him were only a part of what were available (see his Finger
Prints, p. 27, and his Blurred Finger Prints). To what is there stated I need now only add,
at Mr Faulds' request, a copy of the demi-official letter which I addressed in 1877 to the then
Inspector-General of Jails in Bengal. That the reply I received appeared to me altogether dis-
couraging was simply the result of my very depressed state of health at the time. The position
into which the subject has now been lifted is therefore wholly due to Mr Galton through his large
development of the study, and his exquisite and costly methods of demonstrating in print the
many new and important conclusions he has reached." [Italics in the last paragraph are the
biographer's.]

There follows a copy of the demi-official letter sent to the Inspector-
General of Jails in Bengal on August 15, 1877. From this letter it appears
that Herschel bad .tested the permanence of the finger-furrows for 10 or 15
years, that it had been used for years in the Registry for Deeds at Hooghly, and
that Herschel had taken thousands of finger-prints in thecourse of the previous
twenty years, and had tried it recently both in the jail and among pensioners.
He recommended it strongly for similar purposes throughout India. Herschel
wrote as one official to another with whom he was on friendly terms, and
so, while giving the office of his correspondent did not think it needful to
mention his name.

Dr Faulds did not reply at the time and one might have hoped the matter
would have been considered settled. But in 1905 he returned in his book
to the fray: "The letter, or report, or book, is addressed to some mysterious
personality [Sir William Herschel distinctly states that it was sent to the

* Camel drivers in Tibet sign their contracts with a thumb smeared with ink. Even at
the present day, a Japanese Professor working in my laboratory informs me, a native of his
country signs a document with his personal seal, but if he has not his seal with him or has
mislaid it, he is allowed legally to sign with his finger-print as a means of identification, the
latter method being a relic of a custom established for many generations. It does not seem to
me that Herschel has done full justice to Japanese claims in this matter in his Origin of Finger
Printing (see p. 40).

PLATE V

•

'1 .„''#'.

-vi^>.

Rajyadhar Konai's Contract made at Hooghly, 1858. which at Sir William J. Herschel's
he signed with an imprint of his right hand as an identifiable sign- manual.

request

Personal Identification and Description 147

Inspector-General of Jails in Bengal], known only to literature* as 'My
dear B — ' and is luminously certified as 'True copy of office copy,' but by
whom certified is not stated." (Guide to Finger Print Identification, p. 36.)
It was clearly impossible to deal patiently with a controversialist of this type,
who first demands to see a document and when it is exhibited waits ten years
before attempting to throw discredit on it ! I have rarely known Galton
moved. He certainly was moved on this occasion. He wrote the notice of
Faulds' book which appeared in Nature, Vol. Lxxn, Supplement, p. iv
(October 19, 1905). Anyone who has read the literature on this topic up
to 1905 can only agree with what Galton states. If it is severe on Dr Faulds,
the severity was warranted. I cite a portion of it :

"Dr Faulds was for some years a medical officer in Japan, and a zealous and original in-
vestigator of finger-prints. He wrote an interesting letter about them in Nature, October 28,
1880, dwelling upon the legal purposes to which they might be applied, and he appears to be
the first person who published anything, in print, on this subject. However his suggestions of
introducing the use of finger-prints fell flat. The reason that they did not attract attention
was presumably that he supported them by no convincing proofs of three elementary pro-
positions on which the suitability of finger-prints for legal purposes depends : It was necessary
to adduce strong evidence of the, long since vaguely alleged, permanence of those ridges on the
bulbs of the fingers that print their distinct lineations. It was necessary to adduce better
evidence than opinions based on mere inspection of the vast variety of minute details of those
markings, and finally, for purposes of criminal investigation, it was necessary to prove that a
large collection could be classified with sufficient precision to enable the officials in charge of it
to find out speedily whether a duplicate of any set of prints that might be submitted to them
did or did not exist in the collection. Dr Faulds had no part in establishing any one of these
most important preliminaries f. But though his letter of 1880 was, as above mentioned, the
first printed communication on the subject, it appeared years after the first public and official
use of finger-prints had been made by Sir William Herschel in India, to whom the credit of
originality that Dr Faulds desires to monopolise is far more justly due

"The question of the priority of dates is placed beyond doubt, by the reprint of the office copy
of Sir William's 'demi-official' letter of August 15, 1877, to the then Inspector of Prisons in
Bengal. This letter covers all that is important in Dr Faulds' subsequent communication of
1880, and goes considerably further. The method introduced by Sir Wm. Herschel, tentatively
at first as a safeguard against personation, had gradually been developed and tested, both in
the jail and in the registering office, during a period from ten to fifteen years before 1877 as
stated in the above quoted letter to the Inspector of Prisons.

"The failure of Sir Wm. Herschel's successor, and of others at that time in authority in
Bengal, to continue the development of the system so happily begun, is greatly to be deplored,
but it can be explained on the same grounds as those mentioned above in connection with
Dr Faulds. The writer of these remarks can testify to the occasional incredulity in the early
'nineties concerning the permanence of the ridges, for it happened to himself while staying at
the house of a once distinguished physiologist, who was the writer when young of an article on
the skin in a first class encyclopaedia, to hear strong objections made to that opinion. His

* The India List for 1876-1877 would have at once informed Dr Faulds that Mr Beverley
was, in August 1877, Inspector-General of Prisons in Bengal. Herschel also wrote to the
Registrar-General, Sir James Bourdillon, who later expressed regret that he had allowed the
suggestion to slip through his fingers. See Sir William J. Herschel, The Origin of Finger
Printing, Oxford, 1916, p. 25.

t Actually after his letter to Nature of 1880, he published no scientific contribution to the
subject before Galton took it up in 1888; he wasted eight years. Then Galton published his
books and papers, and only in 1905 does Dr Faulds issue a work which could be even considered
a scientific contribution to the subject, and then of so acrimonious a character that it is of
negligible value.

19—2

148 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

theoretical grounds were that the gland, the ducts of which pierce the ridges, would multiply
with the growth of the hand, and it was not until the hands of the physiologist's own children
had been examined by him through a lens, that he would be convinced that the lineations on
a child's hand might be the same as when he grew up, but on a smaller scale. . . .

"Dr Faulds in his present volume recapitulates his old grievance with no less bitterness than
formerly. He overstates the value of his own work, belittles that of others, and carps at evidence
recently given in criminal cases. His book is not only biased and imperfect, but unfortunately
it contains nothing new that is of value, so far as the writer of these remarks can judge, and
much of what Dr Faulds seems to consider new has long been forestalled. It is a pity that ho
did not avail himself of the opportunity of writing a book up to date, for he can write well,
and the photographic illustrations which his publisher has supplied are excellent."

This is a long extract and the subject is a painful one, but it has to be
definitely asserted that it was to the experience of Sir Wm. Herschel and to the
laborious studies of Sir Francis Galton, and not to anything Dr Faulds wrote
or said, that we owe the adoption of finger-print identification for criminal
investigation at first in England and since then throughout the whole civilised
world*. There has been a tendency to obscure this great achievement of
Galton's not only by confusing finger-printing with bertillonage, which it
ultimately killed, but owing to Dr Faulds' continual attempts to monopolise
all credit for both the discovery and the practical application of finger-printing.
Like all arts it has developed in practice. But even as the credit for metal
bridges is not due to the man who suggested that bridges might be made of
metal, nor to those who changed cast iron to wrought iron or wrought iron
to steel bridges, but to the man who made the first metal bridge, and induced
people to walk over itf, so the credit for finger-print identification in criminal
matters is due to Herschel and Galton, or even as the former has generously
said — "the position into which the subject has now been lifted is there-
fore wholly due to Mr Galton" (see our p. 146).

On October 21, 1893, Mr Asquith appointed a Committee { consisting of
Mr C. E. Troup of the Home Office, Chairman, Major Arthur Griffiths,

* My Japanese friend, referred to in the footnote on p. 146, said very definitely, that while
the Japanese had resorted very early to finger-prints as personal sign-manuals, yet the Japanese
criminal investigation usage did not arise from this, but was imported de novo from Europe.

f Thomas Paine, author of The Rights of Man.

X The origin of this Committee is fully described in a letter of Galton to the Times, July 7,
1893. The British Association in its Edinburgh Meeting of the previous year had listened to a
paper by Manouvrier of Paris on bertillonage and another by Benedict on the modified system
used in Vienna. As a result a resolution was carried by the Council in the following terms :

" Considering the need of a better system of identification than is now in use in the United Kingdom and
its Dependencies, whether for detecting deserters who apply for re-enlistment, or old offenders among those
accused of crime, or for the prevention of personation, more especially among the illiterate, the Council of the
British Association express their opinion that the anthropometric methods in use in France and elsewhere deserve
serious inquiry, as to their efficiency, the cost of their maintenance, the general utility, and the propriety of
introducing them, or any modification of them, into the Criminal Department of the Home Office, into the
liecruiting Departments of the Army and Navy, or into Indian or Colonial administration."

Galton was not in Edinburgh nor responsible for the resolution but he was a member of the
Committee appointed in connection with it. It will be seen that the recommendation does not
go beyond bertillonage. Galton, as this letter to the Times amply demonstrates, at once pro-
ceeded to introduce the idea of finger-printing into the proposals for a better method of identi-
fication (see also Galton's letter, Nature, July 6, 1893, Vol. xlviii, p. 222), and four months later
when Mr Asquith appointed his departmental committee finger-printing was ab initio included
among the matters for examination. I know of no other reason but Galton's activities for its
inclusion in Mr Asquith's programme.

Personal Identification and Description 149

Inspector of Prisons, and Mr M. L. Macnaghten, Chief Constable of the
Metropolitan Police Force, to inquire (a) into the method of registering and
identifying habitual criminals now in use in England; (b) into the "Anthro-
pometric System" of classified registration and identification in use in France
and other countries; (c) into the suggested system of identification by means
of a record of finger-marks, and to report whether the anthropometric system
or the finger-mark system can with advantage be adopted in England either
in substitution for or to supplement the existing method. It will be seen
that the inquiry resulted from Galton's work of 1892 and earlier, and if the
evidence given be examined *, it will be found that the Committee were really
considering whether bertillonage, or what we may call galtonage in contra-
distinction, or a combination of the two should be adopted. Galton was the
only finger-print expert examined as a witness, and the Committee visited
his laboratory, saw finger-prints being taken, and the relative ease with
which Galton picked out from his cabinet the finger-prints of an individual,
whose prints were provided in duplicate. It is noteworthy that Galton, with
a foresight for possible difficulties, gives a very simple arrangement for a drawer
into which it is impossible to place a card which does not belong to that
drawer. It could be easily adapted to work for a finger-print index, but
Galton actually arranged it in his illustration on the basis of five bodily
measurements each grouped in three categories (see p. 81 and plate). There
are two other appendices by Galton, the first (p. 79) giving directions for
taking finger-prints, and the second for searching a cabinet of finger-prints
indexed by a simple form of bertillonage. When the Committee came to
report on the Finger-Print System (pp. 25 et seq.) it is of Galton and his work
alone that they speak. They write:

"The second system on which we are specially directed to report is that now associated with
the name of Mr Francis Galton, F.R.S., though first suggested and to some extent applied

practically by Sir William Herschel A visit to Mr Galton's laboratory is indispensable in

order to appreciate the accuracy and clearness with which finger-prints can be taken and the
real simplicity of the method. We have during this inquiry paid several visits to Mr Galton's
laboratory ; he has given us every possible assistance in discussing the details of the method
and in further investigating certain points which seemed to us to require elucidation. He also
accompanied us with his assistant to Pentonville Prison and superintended the taking of the
finger-prints of more than a hundred prisoners.... The patterns and the ridges of which they
[finger-prints] are composed possess two qualities which adapt them in a singular way for use
in deciding questions of identity. In each individual they retain their peculiarities, as it would
appear, absolutely unchangeable throughout life, and in different individuals they show an
infinite variety of forms and peculiarities.

"Both these qualities have formed the subject of special investigation by Mr Galton, and
having carefully examined his data, we think his conclusions may be entirely accepted." (p. 25.)

The difficulty that arose in the minds of the Committee will be a familiar
one to students of the subject, namely the large classes formed by some
of the loop categories. Galton was not wholly prepared to meet this difficulty
of indexing, although he was already counting the ridges of loops, and dif-
ferentiating them in other ways by the nature of their cores. It was not till

* Blue Booh (C. — 1763). Identification of Habitual Criminals Report, Minutes of Evidence
and Appendices.

150 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

1895 that he was prepared with his full ideas of indexing by finger-prints
alone*. He was clearly in doubt in 1893 — because his own scheme of
indexing was not yet fully developed — as to whether a population of 30,000
to 50,000 could be adequately indexed solely on their finger-prints, and
because the Committee shared his doubts, it is a misrepresentation to assert
that they condemned his work f. In his evidence he exaggerated nothing,
and placed his methods and their difficulties frankly before the Committee.
It is idle to say either that Galton failed to get an independent system of
finger-printing carried, or that the Committee condemned his system. Finger-
printing was destined to become wholly independent of bertillonage ; it very
soon did become so, as the study of finger-prints advanced, but in 1893 no
one had published a complete system of indexing, and Galton was the only
man who was able to make even suggestions in this matter. Above all to
this day the all-important problem of indexing single prints seems to be
unsolved J. The Committee laid down the following three main conditions for
deciding what system should be adopted :

"(1) The descriptions, measurements or marks, which are the basis of the system, must be
such as can be taken readily and with sufficient accuracy by prison warders or police officers
of ordinary intelligence.

"(2) The classification of the descriptions must be such that on the arrest of an old offender
who gives a false name his record may be found readily and with certainty.

"(3) When the case has been found among the classified descriptions, it is desirable that
convincing evidence of identity should be afforded."

Applying these conditions to galtonage, the Committee reported that:

"The 1st and 3rd of these conditions are met completely by Mr Galton's finger-print method.
The taking of finger-prints is an easy mechanical process which with very short instruction
could be performed by any prison warder. While in M. Bertillon's system a margin greater
or less has always to be allowed for errors on the part of the operator, no such allowance has to
be made in Mr Galton's. Finger-prints are an absolute impression taken directly from the body
itself; if a print be taken at all it must necessarily be correct. While the working of this system
would require a person of special skill and training at headquarters, it would have the enormous
advantage of requiring no special skill or knowledge on the part of the operators in the
prison §, who would merely forward to headquarters an actual impression taken mechanically
from the hand of the prisoner. With regard to the third condition again, as we have already
pointed out, Mr Galton's system affords ample material for conclusive proofs of identity. . . .

"The Committee were so much impressed by the excellence of Mr Galton's system in com-
pletely answering these conditions that they would have been glad if, going beyond Mr Galton's
own suggestion\\, they could have adopted his system as the sole basis of identification." (p. 29.)

* See later our account of his Finger Print Directories, 1895.

t Dr Faulds, loc. cit. p. 41, "Mr Galton's own system, afterwards expounded in a work
[i.e. his Finger-Prints of 1892] abounding in grave errors and set forth in a way which the
Blue Book of 1894 characterises." Of. our pp. 145-147.

J Suppose a single print is found after a burglary and we need to ascertain whether the
burglar was a known criminal, i.e. on the finger-print record. We may not even know of which
finger it is a print, and yet the single print is perfectly individual and would identify the
culprit were we able to index our single prints.

§ I have examined the finger-prints on many hundreds of practice sheets of prison warders,
and can certify that this statement has been amply confirmed by experience.

|| Italicised by biographer. The whole essence of the Report was the abandonment of
Bertillon's " distinguishing marks," the use of his system as merely a method of indexing, and
the ultimate identification by the finger-prints (see p. 20).

Personal Identification and Description 151

The result of the Committee's deliberations was the recommendation that
identification should be made by finger-prints, but that the indexing of the
finger-prints should be by bertillonage. After recommending the appointment
of a scientific adviser to the Convict Office, the Committee remark :

"Moreover, when practical experience had been obtained of the use of finger-prints, he
would be able to revise the suggestions which we have made as to the respective place of the
Bertillon and the Galton methods in the system, and might possibly find it advantageous to
extend the Galton method of classification further than, with the limited experience we possess
of its practical application, we have ventured to propose." (p. 35.)

It appears to me that the Committee went just as far towards replacing
a tried system, bertillonage, by a new system, galtonage, as it was safe at that
time to do. They even foresaw that with a really scientific adviser the latter
system would entirely replace the former. In 1895 Dr Garson was appointed
as scientific adviser to the Convict Office, and Inspector Collins* was sent
to Galton's Laboratory to be instructed in finger-printing, and he ultimately
took charge of the Finger-Print Department. Unfortunately Dr Garson,
"being a skilled craniologist and writer on human measurement, was perhaps
somewhat biased towards bertillonage f," and little was done towards
following out the Departmental Committee's suggestion of indexing by the
finger-prints themselves as experience in their use increased.

Sir E. Henry, who had adopted finger-print identification in India, with
as far as I can judge only small modifications of Galton's old method J, became
Chief Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in 1903. Of him Galton
writes §:

"When Sir E. Henry became Chief Commissioner six years ago, full of zeal for finger-prints,
well experienced in their use and master of the situation, I felt satisfied that their utilisation
had become firmly established, and I ceased to do more than observe its developments from

* Probably the official who has risen to fame recently in less scientific activities. His
teaching of the local prison warders in finger-printing certainly produced excellent results.

t "Identification by Finger-Prints," a letter of Galton's to the Times, Jan. 13, 1909.

% I judge this chiefly from his letters filed in the Galtoniana, and notes of Francis Galton
himself.
Thurs. Oct. 10/94 :

"Mr Henry came today 10J to 12J to my laboratory by appointment.. ..I showed him much about finger-
prints. He had spent hours at the lab. in my absence. Agreed that my part now- is to write an illustrated
paper on classification. He undertakes to get me as many specimens as I want from India. I am to write to him
there (he returns next week). In meantime I am to make some trials from my collection and I will talk to
Macmillan." [This has reference to the proposed book, i.e. Finger Print Directories.]

The correspondence with regard to finger-prints continued after Mr Henry's return to India,
being dated from the office of Inspector-General of Police, Calcutta. In the following year Mr
Henry submitted a "Note on Finger Impressions" for the guidance of the Lieutenant-Governor.
From this it appears that identification was to be by the prints and indexing by bertillonage,
i.e. the system of the Report of 1893. Numerous letters, thanking Galton for communications,
asking him for further information, and stating how the matter progressed in India followed in
1895, 1896 (with a further Report to the Chief Secretary in Bengal, still emphasising the doubt
as to how to index the finger-prints of 20,000 persons ; the letters urge the need for this indexing
to replace the difficulty of exact anthropometric measurements under Indian conditions), 1899
(Henry describes his own new method of indexing) and 1900 (announcing that from April 1st
the Indian Government had finally discarded anthropometry for direct finger-print indexing
on Henry's system).

§ Ibid.

152 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

time to time. Of course all new methods require time for development and growth, and though
very much has been done under Sir E. Henry's vigorous administration, I doubt whether
finality has even yet been reached ; for example, whether the power of lexiconising single prints
has been developed to its utmost."

The letters of Herschel, Henry and Galton In the possession of the Galton
Laboratory trace clearly the history of finger-printing. It was Galton, who
by his books, memoirs and constant letters to the press got the matter
ventilated and ultimately forced the subject on the attention of the police-
authorities; he might not have been successful had not Herschel's practical
experience and evidence of permanence* been at his service. It was Henry
who during 1898-1900 in India reduced the indexing of finger-prints to a
workable system, and ultimately abolished the laborious and in the hands of
careless observers the even dangerous anthropometric system f.

But if a name is to be given to the system of finger-print identification
in the same manner that bertillonage was attached to anthropometric
measurement}, then the right term is undoubtedly galtonage.

Of course every idler, who had not taken the trouble to investigate the
subject, was up in arms against reform, as all such have ever been — "It may
answer well enough on the Continent, where every one submits patiently to
the inevitable, but it would not do in England, and I trust that the
recommendations of the Committee— opposed as they are to the sentiments
and principles of Englishmen — will not meet with the approval of the
Secretary of State." (Times, March 23, 1894, Letter signed "Observer.")
How many times have we read those words, when a powerful mind has
pointed the way to a beneficial reform!

Yet even as late as 1909 misrepresentations were made as to the
originator of the police system for the identification of criminals by finger-
prints. The Times in an article on the Metropolitan Police published on
January 4 of that year attributed the system of identification by finger-prints
to Sir Edward R. Henry ! What the writer should have said was that a

* Herschel in a letter of Oct. 28, 1896 writes: "I have just compared my own mark of
June 1859 with that of Oct. 1896. The identity is perfectly amazing, even to me. How nature
can preserve such soft tissues for 37 years, renovating them constantly, yet preserving their
delineation so precisely is not clearly intelligible to me."

+ It is only fair to Bertillon to remind the reader that the anthropometric measurements
were even in Bertillon's system primarily a method of indexing, and the identification depended
on the record of bodily marks and characters together with the photographs. For Galton the
best bodily marks were not moles, cicatrices, etc. but the finger patterns.

J Those who have studied all Galton wrote on the subject of Finger- Prints before 1895 and
after doing so turn to Sir E. R. Henry's Classification and Uses of Finger Prints (1st Edition
1901, 3rd Edition 1905) may be inclined to think that the latter work does inadequate justice
to Galton's labours. Henry's system of classification follows closely on Galton's and where he
departs from it by the introduction of a very heterogeneous class of "Composites," it may well
be doubted, if he has really succeeded in simplifying matters. His method of "ridge-tracing"
for breaking up large whorl groups is essentially that of Galton's "Basis of Classification" in
the 1890 Phil. Trans, paper (see our pp. 163-4); while "ridge-counting" was introduced
originally by Galton himself to get over the large loop aggregation difficulty. Whether Henry's
numerical symbolism for the various index classes gains in brevity what it loses in perspicacity
can only be determined after a wide experience of the use of both full and "shorthand " formulae.

Personal Identification and Description 153

modification of Galton's method of indexing was introduced by Sir Edward
Henry*. In 1895 Galton had published his Finger' Print Directories, which
contained a great improvement on his previous method of classification; this
later method was in most essential points identical with that in use in 1909
at Scotland Yard. The article in the Times called Sir George Darwin into
the field ; he concluded a letter which puts forward the simple facts of the
matter with the words :

"Sir Edward Henry undoubtedly deserves great credit in recognising the merits of the system
and in organising its use in a practical manner in India, the Cape and England, but it would
teem that the yet greater credit is due to Mr Francis Galton."

One has to remember that identification by finger-prints was in use at
Scotland Yard long before Sir Edward Henry came on the scene t, but the
indexing was by bertillonage. Dr Garson, the former director, was too much
of an anthropologist and had a mind of too little inventive power to give up
the anthropometric index. A dozen different ways of breaking up the large
loop categories would occur to an inventive mind, and as soon as one of these
had been tried and found successful bertillonage was bound to disappear.
The fact remains that nothing was done and no progress made in abolishing
bertillonage, until Sir Edward Henry succeeded Dr Garson. This absence
of progress was not Galton's fault, but lay with the Government, which
selected for the post of director an old-school medical anthropologist rather
than a finger-print expert.

While it is absolutely impossible for one who has really studied finger-
prints to confuse A's prints with those of B, it is always possible for a clerk to
make an error in extracting the dossier, which corresponds to the identified
finger-prints. Such a clerical lapse occurred in a case tried at the Guildhall
in 1902, and the occasion was seized upon to attack the finger-print method
by certain newspapers. Galton wrote a letter on the matter to Truth (October
2, 1902, Vol. lii, p. 78G). He pointed out that there was no doubt about the
identification, but when it came to turning up the record attached to the

* In March 1897 Major-General Strahan and Sir Alexander Pedler reported on the system
of identification by Finger-Prints as adopted in India. It was really a report on Henry's work
and methods. In the course of the Report the three conditions laid down by Mr Asquith's
Committee (see our p. 150) are cited and the following words occur :

" In the same report it is acknowledged that Mr Galton's finger-print method completely met the first and
third conditions, but they disapproved of his method of classification."

This is a complete mis-statement of what the Committee did. Galton was not prepared at
that date to provide a comprehensive method of indexing, accordingly it was impossible for
the Committee to disapprove of his method of indexing. It was Galton himself who suggested
indexing by bertillonage and this the Committee accepted, although both they and he looked
upon it as a temporary stage. Galton's Secondary Classification was complete and published in
1895 (see our pp. 199 et seq.), and in the present writer's opinion there is little in Henry's book of
1901, which cannot be found, often better expressed, in Galton's of 1895 or in his earlier writings.
The numerical notation is the chief novelty. We do not think the statement we have quoted
above should have been allowed to appear without a qualifying note in Henry's Classification
and Uses of Finger Prints (p. 112).

t I myself witnessed the rapid identification of criminals by their finger-prints in 1900.

p o ni 20

154 Life ana Letters of Francis Galton

impressions, a mistake had been made in the reference number and a wrong
dossier was produced. Galton writes :

"I wish to point out the moral of this. In every system there must be some clerk-work and
a consequent liability, however small, to clerical blunders. In the system by measurements at
least five have to be made and recorded for each person, and they each require three figures to
express them. The frequent occurrence of mistakes in this complicated process was the main
motive for abolishing measurements altogether, first in India, and now in this country. In the
finger-print system all the above clerk-work is done away with because the hand of the accused
person prints its own impression. As regards the comparative trustworthiness of the two
systems, there can be no reasonable doubt. I took, as you may be aware, great pains in testing
them, with the result that it is inconceivable to me that an expert to whom the impressions
have been submitted of two different persons, taken with the cleverness that is habitual in prisons,
should ever mistake one set for the other."

§ II. Popularisation of Finger-Printing.

I propose in this section to give an account of some of the minor papers
and letters to newspapers by which Galton made the idea of finger-printing
familiar to his countrymen. I think this plan is better than scattering them
chronologically between his more solid contributions to the science of the
subject, which will be dealt with in the remaining section of this chapter.

In August 1891 Galton published in the Nineteenth Century (Vol. xxx,
pp. 303-311) an article entitled "Identification by Finger-Tips." It contains
a resume of his Royal Society papers in a popular form, an account of his
apparatus and a suggestion that professional photographers should take up
finger-printing as part of their trade. He concludes with the prophecy :

"I look forward to a time when every convict shall have prints taken of his fingers by the
prison photographer at the beginning and end of his imprisonment, and a register made of them ;
when recruits for either service shall go through an analogous process ; when the index-number
of the hands shall usually be inserted in advertisements for persons who are lost or who can-
not be identified, and when every youth who is about to leave his home for a long residence
abroad, shall obtain prints of his fingers at the same time that the portrait is photographed,
for his friends to retain as a memento." (p. 311.)

Another matter in connection with finger-prints which excited Galton's
attention and has very considerable scientific interest is the question of scars
and wounds as influencing the ridges. On Plate VI are given illustrations
of this matter which I have found in the Galtoniana. In Fig. (v) we have an
enlarged print of a graft on the bulb of a thumb. In this case J. R. H., a
solicitor in large practice, sliced oft' a piece of the flesh of his thumb; it was
promptly picked up, replaced in what was thought to be its original position
and the thumb tightly bandaged. The print taken thirty years later shows
that the ridges had not been properly adjusted, the orientation of those on
the graft being almost at right angles to their true position* !

In Fig. (i) a-d we have a good illustration of the effect of a burn,
which occurred in the case of Sergeant Handle, Galton's assistant. In
Fig. (i) b taken immediately after the accident, the ridges have entirely
disappeared, but Fig. (i) d indicates that if the injury has not been too

* See Nature, Jan. 30, 1896 (Vol. liii, p. 295).

PLATE VI

(a) Before
Burn

(6) Just after
Burn

Fig. (i). Restoration of Hidges after a not too severe Burn.

(</) Ultimate
Restoration

Effect of an Ulcer

Tailor's Finger
Fig. (ii).

Effect of a Cut

Fig. (iii). Scar in Adult, at Four Years' Interval.
10

Fig. (v). J.B.H., a Solicitor, sliced a piece

of his thumb off ; it was promptly replaced

and bound up. His finger-print shows by

the ridges that the slice was put on wrong

—30 wa y round !

Fig. (iv). Scar in Boy, at Two Years' Interval.

Effects of various injuries on the pattern of the Finger-Print. Enough minutiae
are, as a rule, left for identification purposes.

Personal Identification and Description 155

great, they develop again on the old sites. Figs, (ii), (hi) and (iv)* show the
effect of an ulcer in destroying the ridges, the changes produced by the
occupation of tailoring, and the marks left by scars and cuts. It will be
recognised at once how injuries of this kind fail to destroy completely
the minutiae of the ridges on which identification depends. Indeed if they
were in existence when the earlier print was taken, they form themselves
very valuable contributory factors in the recognition of identity. It is
singular how little Galton left unobserved when he came to deal with a
new topic; his fruitful mind seemed to envisage all possibilities that might
detract from or aid the enterprise he had in hand. He collected material
from all quarters, but the subject was so vast that even he left much that
would still be worth gleaning. I think a wide study of finger-prints from the
standpoint of occupations might still indicate interesting possibilities. The
carpenter's, the metal worker's, the shoemaker's, the seamstress's, the typist's,
the laundrymaid's, and even the textile worker's finger-prints may all show
individual wearings of the ridges, if they were attentively studied in large
numbers; and so might well replace some of the information which Bertillon
drew from the shoes and trousers, etc. of his subjects.

In an article entitled "Enlarged Finger Prints" which appears in the
journal Photographic Work, February 10, 1893, Galton emphasises the pro-
posal that professional photographers should master the art of finger-printing
and the enlargement of prints.

"It seems not unreasonable to suppose that many persons would like to possess so curious
and unchanging an evidence of their own identity, and that the wish to have prints taken of
the finger might become a fashion which photographers would find it lucrative to promote."

He gives two excellent enlargements to a sixfold size, in which the sweat-
glands, the "islands," ridge terminals, forkings and all the minutiae are very
distinct. We reproduce his two figures (p. 156). Fig. 17 is the print of a
well-known explorer and contains at least 39 minutiae, Fig. 18 some 30. As
Galton says every one of these minutiae may be expected to persist, not only
during life, but after death also, until they are effaced by decay.

Galton describes his apparatus for taking prints and refers to his original
and to his later enlarging cameras.

Two further letters from Galton may here be mentioned. On October 1 9,
1893 he wrote to Nature (Vol. xlviii, p. 595) stating that finger-prints had
been adopted as a means of identification for recruits in the Native Army of
India (Circular, August 25, 1893). Galton points out the necessity for clear
prints and also suggests for the purpose of comparing two prints the use of a
mounted watchmaker's lenst, and further of four "pointers," two for each
print. One pointer is used for each print to mark an origin of reference and
the others to indicate the special minutiae which are to be compared in the
prints under comparison.

* See Finger Prints, 1892, Plate 4, Fig. 7 a, b, c, p. 59.

t Galton's own lens neatly mounted is still in use in the Galton Laboratory : see the foot-
note on our p. 178.

20—2

156

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

"They are T-shaped ; their long arms are six or seven inches long, they are roughly made of
wood as thick as the thumb, so that they are purposely not over light. Each pointer stands on
three supports, viz. on the point of a bent pin, whose headless body has been thrust into the
end of the long arm of the T, and on the ends of two nails or better on staples, one of which
is driven under either end of the cross-arm. It is most easy to adjust the point of the bent pin
upon any desired character in the finger-print. Both hands of the observer are thus left free
to manipulate other pointers, when desired. The stationary pointers are a great help in
steadying the eye while pursuing a step by step comparison between two finger-prints."

We may remark that, the pointer being raised from the paper, the bent
pin scarcely obscures any part of the print.

The second letter appeared in the Times of December 27, 1893, and
contains a suggestion which it was certainly undesirable that the authorities

Fig. 17. Fig. 18.

Early Examples of Galton's Method of Finger-Print Enlargement.

should have entirely disregarded. It was that depositors in the post-office
savings bank should have their fingers printed in their deposit books and
that these should be used as a means of identification, when the depositor
sought to draw money from a post-office where he was not known. This
brings us indeed to a matter Galton had much at heart ; he did not think
finger-prints were useful solely as a matter of criminal identification. The
art of comparing finger-prints is so easily learnt that it might well be part
of the training of many minor civil servants, postmasters, Public Trustee
employees, War Office and Admiralty pension-officers, and many other
similar officials. Two lectures and two practical classes of a few hours each
would suffice to give the necessary instruction to a group of twenty or

Personal Identification awl Description 157

thirty minor officials of average intelligence. It would include the taking of
clear (non-blurred) prints, and the rapid identification of prints. A signature
can be forged, and it changes with age and illness, or even with the nature
of the pen with which it is made. The finger-print remains with all its
minutiae throughout life incapable of being forged. Unless a man be a
criminal there is no central office in existence even at the present day,
where his finger-prints could be registered, and he could be certain of identi-
fication for legal purposes at any time during his life, and for some time after
his death. For many legal purposes such a registration might be as valuable
as a land-registration office, and ownership of many personal effects, securities,
bonds, passports, etc. might be testified by simply finger-printing them, if
the finger-prints like a trade-mark had been duly registered. It is almost a
catastrophe that the process of finger-printing should have become tainted
in the popular mind by a criminal atmosphere.

In 1900 Galton wrote another paper in the Nineteenth Century (Vol .xlviii,
pp. 118-126) under the title of "Identification Offices in India and Egypt":

"There are many Identification Offices, supported by Governments and known by various
titles, in different parts of the world. Their number increases, and so does that of the purposes
to which they are applied ; a knowledge of them is, however, confined to a few persons. This
is especially unfortunate, because a fair amount of popular interest would ensure their adequate
support, and would check the common tendency of all Government institutions to slackness of
management, which is particularly fatal to the efficiency of Identification Offices." (p. 118.)

He then refers to the work of Henry in India and Harvey in Egypt,
where Galton had seen the working of the central office in Cairo. Speaking
of Egypt he writes :

"The difficulty of identification is increased by the roaming habits of the natives, many of
whom travel great distances for pilgrimages, petty commerce, or change of employment, so that
witnesses may not easily be found to identify them. Again, while the natives of India and of
Egypt have beautiful traits of character and some virtues in an exceptional degree, their warmest
admirers would not rank veracity among them. It is not insinuated that false testimony is
unknown in English courts of justice, or in England generally; indeed I find, on a rough attempt
at a vocabulary (made for quite another purpose), that more than fifty English words exist
which express different shades and varieties of fraud*; but if a map of the world were tinted
with gradations of colour to show the percentage of false testimony in courts of law, whether
in different nations or communities, England would be tinted rather lightly and both Bengal and
Egypt very darkly. So, whether it be from the impossibility of identifying the mass of natives
by their signatures, or from the difficulty of distinguishing them by name, or from their roving
habits, or from the extraordinary prevalence of personation and false testimony among them,
the need for an Identification Office has been strongly felt both in India and in Egypt."

Galton gives a list of eight ways in which finger-prints were already
in use in India, namely: (l) Pensioners, civil or military; (2) Transfer of

* It may be worth while to give these words. The list is imperfect but will do: cant, cheat,
chicanery, circumventing, counterfeit, chouse, connivance, cozen, crafty, cunning, deceit, defraud,
delude, dishonest, dissemble, dissimulate, dodge, duplicity, fallacious, feign, flattery, fraud,
furtive, hoax, humbug, hypocrisy, insinuation, intrigue, Jesuitical, jobbery, knavery, lying,
mendacious, peculating, perfidious, perjury, personation, rascality, roguery, scheming, scoundrel,
sharper, shuffler, slanderer, slimness (a new word due to the Boers), slyness, sneaking, spying,
stratagem, subterfuge, traducing, treachery, trickery, wiles [the last two added by Galton in a
corrected copy of the article, which I follow. The reader will find it quite easy to add to the list,
e.g. guile, imposture, fake, mislead, gerrymander, graft, etc., etc.].

158 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

property; (3) Advances by Opium Department to cultivators; (4) Receipts
of employers for wages to labourers ; (5) Survey of India, workers on engage-
ment, to prevent their re-enlisting in a distant area after discharge for mis-
behaviour; (6) Director-General of Post-offices in similar cases; (7) Medical
Department before granting certificate to examine; (8) In plague regulation
and for controlling the Mussulman pilgrims to Mecca. All these cases are in
addition to the matter of criminal identification. Galton suggests that
finger-prints should be used in cases of life-insurance, and after registering
for authenticating wills. The Indian Legislature had passed an act amending
the law of evidence, by declaring relevant the testimony of those who
had become proficient in deciphering finger-prints. It was clear that finger-
printing had taken on in India, and most of this was due to the energy of
Mr (later Sir) E. R. Henry.

Galton discusses the classification for research, alludes to the difficulty
of the great preponderance of ulnar loops, which have to be distinguished
mainly by lineations. Galton himself counted the number of lineations from
"core" to the "V" or point of divergence of the ridges*.

"Mr Henry reckons lineations on more than one finger, with the simplification of merely
noting whether their number exceeds or falls short of the average, and is thus able, as he states,
to cope successfully with his far larger collection than mine. His success in this respect seems
to me so surprising that I should greatly like to witness his methods tested on a really large
collection, say of 100,000, in which there would probably be found no less than 6000 cases of
all-loops of the ulnar kind, to be distinguished mainly by the method of lineations f."

Galton then speaks of the Cairo Office, of which he had seen the working.
He notes several cases in which its efficiency had been proved, and this not
only for criminal purposes, but for the advantage of honest men, who were
given a registration and could thus demonstrate to a new employer that they
were the actual men, whose merits had been testified to by former masters.
Some such registration of servants would render written characters of more
value than they are at present in our own country.

"Space does not permit me to go more fully into this large and interesting subject. It will
be a real gain if these remarks should succeed in impressing the public with the present and
future importance of Identification Offices, especially in those parts of the British Empire
where for any reason the means of identification are often called for and are not infrequently
absent. I think that such an institution might soon pi - ove particularly useful at the Cape."

By such articles and frequent letters to the newspapers Galton kept the
topic of finger-printing to the fore. When in 1900 he read a paper before
the Khedivial Society of Geography in Cairo {, comparing the Egypt of
1846 with that of 1900, and spoke of the influence which D'Arnaud Bey had

* Later termed the delta.

f Henry was ultimately driven to count the ridges on the first two fingers of both hands,
and to make sixteen classes of the four numbers so obtained. But even this was not sufficient,
and for his indexing he counts the ridges on the little finger of the right hand with the view
of arranging in the order of that count the schedules in each of the sixteen classes. Galton
started the ridge counting and had already applied it to fore and middle fingers to break up
the large simple loop groups.

I Bulletin de la Societe Khediviale de Geographie, V c Serie, No. 7, pp. 375-380.

Personal Identification and Description 159

had on his life, converting his conception of travel from pleasure to purpose,
Galton could not refrain from discussing finger-prints. It is almost impos-
sible to overrate the energy Galton displayed in making the general public
familiar with the idea of finger-print identification. We have not only a
whole series of letters to such journals as the Times and Nature, but Galton
did not despise more popular organs of communication. Thus there appeared
a paper in the Sketch, entitled: "The Wonders of a Finger- Print," with a
portrait of Galton (November 20, 1895), and another in Gassell's Saturday
Journal, March 25, 1896. The latter took the form of an interview, and
perhaps a few lines of it are still worth recalling :

"There are about thirty characteristic points on an average in a finger-print," Mr Galton
continued. " As I have said you will find no two pairs of fingers alike ; it is like comparing the
ground plans of two different cities."

"But suppose an old and hardened criminal, whose finger-print was in your possession,
hacked his fingers about with a knife," I asked: "would that cause you confusion on his re-
capture 1"

"Plenty of material for identification would still be left. He would never be able to
obliterate all the ridges unless he cut off both his hands. But I don't want you to think that
finger-prints are only of value for the identification of criminals. I want other people to take
the finger-prints of their children for possible use in identification in after life."

"You remember what a stir there was when the rumour spread of a plot to kidnap the Duke
of York's baby*. Think of all the national difficulties that would have arisen had he been lost
and then professed to be found, but his identity doubted. Many people urged me at the time
to propose that his finger-prints should be taken, but I hesitated to move seriously in the
matter."

In the same year Galton read a paper entitled "Les empreintes digitales"
at the Fourth International Congress of Criminal Anthropologyf . In this
paper he briefly describes the facts he had demonstrated in his Finger Prints,
then he turns to the question of nomenclature and classification, and notes
his "shorthand" method of indexing. What, however, he particularly insists
upon is the need for an international concordat in the matter of nomenclature
and indexing so that it would be at once feasible to telegraph the finger-print
formula of a suspected person. Galton proposed :

"Qu'il soit fait des recherches dans les administrations de police des diffeYentes nations pour
determiner la nomenclature la plus convenable et les autres details relatifs aux empreintes
digitales pour les services internationaux, c'est-a-dire pour communiquer, par lettre ou teld-
graphe, et en termes generalement intelligibles, le signalement par les empreintes digitales des
personnes soupcpnnfes." (p. 37.)

The noteworthy points about this paper are :

(i) That as early as 1896 Galton had freed himself entirely from the
anthropometric system; there is not a reference to bertillonage as a system
of indexing, but the indexing is to depend entirely on finger-print classification.

(ii) That although the system had only been a few years at work in
England and was just started in India, Galton envisages an international

* The present Prince of Wales.

t Comptes-rendu8, Session de Geneve, 1896, pp. 35-38.

160

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

system of finger-print Identification Offices with a common nomenclature,
a common method of indexing and a common code.

Realising how such Identification Offices, depending wholly on finger-
printing, now stretch from London to Tokyo, from Tokyo to San Francisco
and thence to New York, we see how Galton recognised a widespread need,
and how by his ceaseless energy he carried through a great reform. What-
ever influence his idea of correlation may have exercised in the field of
scientific investigation — and it has been indeed deep and far-reaching — the
establishment throughout the world of finger-print identification is a no less
astonishing mark of his power of achieving on the practical side.

On October 16, 1902, Galton has still another letter in Nature (Vol. lxvi,
p. 606). It is entitled "Finger-Print Evidence." The problem he is concerned
with here is to find the best manner of convincing a judge and jury that an
accused person is really one whose finger-prints are already on the criminal
register. Owing to the courtesy of Scotland Yard he had received two

Fig. 19. Ridgc-tracing Method of identifying Finger- Prints.

enlarged photographs of thumb-prints. The first is that of an impression
left on the window frame of a house where a burglary had occurred, and the
second that of the left thumb of a criminal who had been released and whose
finger-prints were preserved and classified at Scotland Yard. Galton applies
the method of his Decipherment of Blurred Finger Prints (see our p. 194),
" believing that to be the readiest way of explaining to a judge and jury the
nature of the evidence to be submitted to them. ...The questions of the
best mode of submitting evidence and the amount of it that is reasonably
required to carry conviction deserve early consideration, for we may have a
great deal of it before long." In the accompanying diagrams it will be seen
that Galton has selected and numbered ten minutiae for identification and
comparison. It is scarcely conceivable that any twelve reasonably intelligent
men would fail to be convinced of the identity of the two thumb-prints,
although conviction would be still further strengthened were a third random
thumb-print of the same type presented, which would undoubtedly lack
corresponding minutiae.

Personal Identification and Description 161

§ III. Scientific Papers and Boohs.

A. The Royal Society Papers.

Gal ton's first important scientific paper on Finger-prints was published in
1891 in the Philosophical Transactions*. It is entitled: "The Patterns in
Thumb and Finger Marks ; on their arrangement into naturally distinct
classes, the permanence of the papillary ridges that make them, and the
resemblance of their classes to ordinary genera." It was actually received by
the Royal Society on November 3 and read November 27, 1890. It may
be described as the fourth scientific contribution to the subject, the first
being that of Purkenje in his Comment atio of 1823, the second that of
Alix in his memoir of 1868, and the third the work of Kollmann in 1883
(see our pp. 141-143, and 174). While these authors endeavoured to give
names to various types of finger-prints, none of them had formed a con-
siderable collection of human prints, by aid of which it would be possible to
describe anything like the variety of types and subtypes which occur, or give
even the roughest measure of their relative frequencies. Galton, with his
usual insight, grasped the essential point that not only a classification of
types was needful, but a study of their relative frequency. He also recog-
nised that mere assertion of their permanence must be replaced by a definite
demonstration thereof!. In the present case Galton's main data consist of
both thumb-prints of 2500 persons taken at his second Anthropometric
Laboratory. I do not think Galton had fully realised at that time the amount
of correlation that exists between the type of pattern and the individual
finger, and that accordingly the frequencies of the thumb-prints cannot
without further consideration be applied to those of finger-prints in general.
Very soon after the publication of this paper Galton started to take the
prints of all ten digits, and formed the large and representative collection
now in the Galton Laboratory J.

The paper first refers to Kollmann's paper (see our p. 141) for the origin
of the ridges, but states that no reason has yet been given why the promi-
nences tend to arrange themselves in continuous ridges and not to form
isolated craters. Galton next describes how he takes impressions, and how it
is advantageous to take duplicate impressions on tracing cloth, so that the
pattern can be reversed by viewing it face downward§. (I may note that
it is always an advantage to take finger-prints in duplicate, for one set can
then be used for pencilling in ridges and defining the core.) If the hands be
placed palms downward on the knees, so that the thumbs correspond to

* Vol. 182 B (1891), pp. 1-23.

t In the Royal Institution lecture of May 25, 1888, Galton had given, owing to the kind-
ness of Sir W. J. Herschel, two illustrations of permanence, but even these had not been fully
and adequately investigated (see our p. 142).

J He was taking prints of the fingers as well as the thumbs among his circle of friends in
December 1890 and he began early in 1891 a more systematic collection.

§ It must be remembered that the finger-print is always a reversed impression of what one
sees directly.

pgiii 21

162

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

the great toes, it will be seen that the thumb is inward and the little
finger outward. [Finger-prints taken in this order from left to right are in
"natural order."] Inward and outward are respectively thumb-side and
little finger-side, but these terms are awkward when we have to use them
for the thumb and little finger themselves, and the same criticism applies to
the anatomical terms radial and ulnar when applied to those bones them-
selves*.

Next Galton gives for the first time his explanation of the manner in
which the "core" of a pattern originates ; he held that it is due to the nail;
the ridges, instead of going straight across the bulb of the finger, are dis-
torted to cover the top of it; the space between the originally adjacent
parallel ridges Galton terms the "core." This core or interspace is filled up

Arch
(side tfieuj)

Arch
(front uieu)

Interspace
(side uieu)

Primary or Arch ; formation of Interspace.

Loop

Various Whorls

Fig. 20. Cores in Interspace, showing " deltas."

with an additional scroll work of ridges, which in themselves form the
pattern on which classification depends. When the scroll work of the core
consists of a series of ridges separated on the central portion of the bulb by
wider intervals than at the sides of the bulb, Galton in this memoir terms
it a "primary," but later he uses the term "arch." Next the "deltas" are
defined. These are the small "islands" at the points where the adjacent
parallel ridges begin to diverge to form the core. In a primary there are no
deltas, in a loop one and in a whorl usually two are discoverable. When
there are two deltas, the line joining them and its perpendicular bisector
serve as axes of reference ; when there is only a single delta, in a loop, Galton

* Galton unfortunately transposed "inner" and "outer" in this memoir, calling the inside
of the thumb that "nearest to the rest of the hand" (p. 4). He corrected this error in his
Finger Prints (p. 70).

Personal Identification and Description

163

takes one axis of reference to be the "axis of the loop," i.e. a line drawn to
bisect the loop "at the upper end of its innermost bend," and the other axis
of reference the line through the single delta perpendicular to the loop axis.
This loop axis is very important, for it is the line upon which Galton first
counted the number of ridges, and much depends on two observers con-
structing identical loop axes before proceeding to count ridges in comparing
prints*. It must be remembered that the two observers may be comparing
two separate prints at a distance and, owing to the termination of ridges
and to the forking of ridges, a slight difference of position in the loop axis
may lead to divergent results.

In Fig. 21 IT is "outside," 7 is "inside," the print. All in Fig. 21 (hi)
and (iv) is the loop axis on which Galton originally counted the ridges from
A to II, that at A counting zero. When the loop axis exactly passed through
a bifurcation Galton counted the ridges as \ r (1 + 2) = 1 \. He omits to tell us
what happened when it exactly passed through a ridge terminal — presumably
he counted it as \ — or what he did in the case of an island.

(ii) (Hi)

Fig. 21. Finger-print axe.s for measurements or counting of Ridges.

Galton next proceeds to his first basis of classification. It consists in
paying attention solely to the deltas and the core boundaries. There may be
no deltas, i.e. we have a primary or arch. If there are deltas we can trace
the adjacent ridges from one or both deltas upward and downward. These
ridges will either reach the other delta, or pass above or below the corre-
sponding ridges from the other delta. There are thus three cases for the upper
and three for the lower boundary of the core, or with the primary cases ten
cases in all. Galton denotes the summit of the core on the central line of the
bulb by S, and the bottom of the core on the same central line by B. Then
the possible cases are

= primary or arch ; 1 - WSV - WBV; 2 = SW-BV;

Z = SV-BW; 4 = SV-BV; 5=WSV-BV;

6 = SV-WBV- 7=SW-BW; 8=WSV-BW;
9 = SW-WBV.

* Galton remarks: "There is usually quite enough length in a straight line of the upper-
most portion of the inner bend to indicate the direction of the required axis" (p. 9). I am less
confident of this. I should be inclined to replace Galton's axes by drawing a tangent from the
delta to the head of the loop, and taking this and the perpendicular to it through the point of
contact as the axis of reference, denning this perpendicular as the "loop axis."

21—2

164 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

These are represented in the following diagram:

wsv

WBV

Fig. 22. Classifying by nature of Ridges from Deltas.

We can, perhaps, improve somewhat Galton's indexing in the following
manner*. Consider the digits taken in order from little finger of left hand to
little finger of right (as the hands are placed palms downward on the knees)
to occupy the places from first to last of a ten-figure number, e.g. 32881,56490,
then this would be interpreted as me/ming that the little finger of the left
hand was SV— BW, the ring finger SW— BV, the pointer and the forefinger
WSV-BW and the thumb WSV- WBV; the thumb of the right hand
would be WSV — BV, and so on down to the little finger of the right which
would be an arch. Thus a thousand million variations would be possible, and
every individual would have his own ten-figure index number, which could be

Fig. 23. " Outlining" a rolled pattern.

recorded in numerical order in the index. The question, however, of how
many of these would be "repeats" remains to be considered. Galton shows
how, after outlining the pattern, it is fairly easy to classify a great variety of
patterns according to his scheme (see his Fig. 9, p. 7, which contains forty

* Galton later drops without comment his classification of prints from the contours of the
cores. He nowhere states why. Probably he found it not adequately discriminative for large
numbers, or perhaps he discovered the personal equation involved in drawing contours.

Personal Identification and Description 105

typic.il forms). Unfortunately loops occur in two of Galton's classes only, i.e. as
inward and outward loops, and thus the system fails to break up the large class
of plain loops which is one of the difficulties of indexing. Further, to be effective,
it involves pencilling in the core. However, I feel confident that the choice of
a numeral place for each digit and ten classes for each pattern, which need
not necessarily be the same for each digit, since the relative frecpjency of each
pattern varies from digit to digit, ought to be the basis of any sound system of
finger-print indexing. Here, however, it is the difficulty of breaking up the
nearly 50 °/ o of plain loops which requires ingenuity and study, and for this
Galton could only suggest ridge counting. Breaking up the 25 % of "whorls"
is a relatively easy matter. Even if we proceed to consider the " nuclei" of the
cores (Galton, p. 8) we have five belonging to the whorls, and only two

<§) M'

D I

a bed e f $

Fig. 24. " Nuclei " of cores, a, b, c, d, e are " nuclei " of whorls, / and g of loops.

provided by the loops. Thus, considering "inward" and "outward" loops, we
have at most four loop classes, and we require greater subdivision. This
problem was left unsolved by Galton in this his first memoir (1890), unless his
suggestion of ridge-counting be considered adequate. Our author next proceeds
to deal with the identification of patterns. He draws attention to the fact
that the patterns may become distorted, either by age or decay, if the times
of taking prints are at long intervals. "They may change their shape just as
the pattern on different portions of the same piece of machine-made lace may
become variously stretched by wear, or shrunk by wet, or even torn" (p. 9).
Exactly as we might proceed to identify the lace by counting the threads of
corresponding parts of the lace pattern, so we may count the ridges on corre-
sponding parts of two finger-prints. For this purpose Galton uses the axes of
reference which I have already discussed.

Besides the counting of ridges Galton also uses the minutiae of which he
gives examples in his Fig. 11, but he is careful to warn the reader that two

Fig. 25. Ambiguous minutiae.

prints of the same finger may show one a fork of ridges and the other a
continuous ridge and the terminal of a new ridge, i.e. one may show a and
the other b or c of the above figure. The reason for this is that the ridges

166

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

are not all of equal height, and occasionally will escape being inked or, even
if inked, fail to be pressed on the paper. Those familiar with various types
of engraving by gelatine processes will have noted like divergences when
comparing pulls from the same stone under a lens. In like manner, even
different copies of the same plate of Albrecht Diirer's Apocalypse woodcuts
show similar variations, but no connoisseur would assert on that ground that
they were not pulls from the same block. Notwithstanding this it is the
minutiae which provide the best means of identifying two prints, and these
are very numerous, if the finger be rolled.

The next section in Galton's memoir deals with the Persistence of Patterns
(pp. 10-13) and here he had the advantage of Herschel's material. We may
give a brief resume of his table on p. 11:

Individual

Age at

Interval in

Total number

and Plate

First

years before

of minutiae

number

Second Print

identified

7 A

Adult

Thus a total of 296 minutiae were identified.

"The upshot of a careful step by step study is that I have found an absolute and most
extraordinary coincidence between the details of each of the two impressions of the same finger
of the same person. There was, as the table shows, a grand total of no less than 296 (say roundly
300) points of comparison and not a single one of them failed, though I had much trouble in
deciphering the ridges, especially about the F-point [inward delta] in Case 5. There was no
one case found of a difference in the number of ridges between any two specified points. Never
during the lapse of all these years did a new ridge arise, or an old one disappear. The pattern
in all its minute details persisted unchanged, and, a fortiori, it remained unchanged in its
general character." (p. 12.)

Galton's method of comparing minutiae at this time was by outlining the
ridges of the two " allochronic " prints. I have arranged Galton's persistency
data, outlines next prints, on our Plates VII and VIII in a manner slightly
different from that of the original plates of his memoir. This outline method
has distinct advantages, if it be not here as complete as in Galton's later
development of it.

Galton added a line or two to the memoir on January 28, 1891, to say
that he had examined a number of other pairs of impressions in the same
manner, and had found only one instance of fundamental discord, where a
ridge had been partly cleft in a child, but when the child had grown to a boy
the cleft had disappeared. Thus Galton, with the aid of Sir W. J. Herschel's
material, satisfactorily established for the first time the permanence of finger-
prints.

PLATE VII

1881

1. A.EHH lr 1990.

1831

2. AE.HH. 3r. 1890.

•*■>

1 A.E.H.H. lr.

2 A.EHH 3r.

>»v .-.-. -

1862

KHT 2r

1630.

3. N.H.T. lr. + NHT 2r

Persistence of minutiae at intervals of nine and twenty-eight years.

PLATE VIII

jr-.\V.\W>\".

5 F K.H \r

1888.

1659.

1890.

5. F.KH lr.

R.F.H.Sr.

6 W.J.H. 3

690

6. W.J.H. 3r

Persistence of minutiae at intervals of twenty-six, thirty and thirty-one years.

Personal Identification and Description

167

After a few remarks on scars, which consist chiefly in noting how few he
had found which destroyed the patterns to any considerable extent, and how
even in these cases with "rolling" generally enough is left for sound identi-
fication (see our Plate VI, p. 154), Galton turns to another matter, which
needs possibly more criticism or at least an ampler treatment. He considers
that there are certain main types of finger-prints, "arches," "loops," "whorls,"
etc. There are also, he admits, transitional forms which create difficulty in
classification, but he says the result of statistical observation shows these
intermediates to be relatively few. He considers therefore the finger-print
types to be analogous to ordinary genera, and in order to illustrate this he
takes the case of the loop, and (a) counts the number of ridges in AH (see
our Fig. 21 (iii) and (iv), p. 163), (b) measures the index VY/OI, and (c) the
index AO/AH. Using both hands, and populations numbering 140 to 176
individuals only, he forms six frequency distributions, reducing them to
percentages. For example:

Percentage Number of Rid yes in 166 Right Thumb Loop Prints.

2 3

6 7 8 9 1 10

12 13

15 | above
l

2 2

8 8

11 1 9

1
10 7

Percentage Value of Index VY/OI in 149 Left Thumb Loop Prints.

0-3—0-4

0-5—06

0-7—0-8 0-9—1-0

1-1—1-2

1-3—1-4

1-5—1-6

1-7—1-8

1-9—2-0

2-1—2-2

above

I
14 18

Galton does not apply an individual test for normality of distribution to
these rather abnormal-looking distributions*, but reducing them to their
medians and quartiles (see our Vol. n, pp. 385-6, 401) compounds them
together to form a single average "ogive" curve (see our Plate II, p. 31).
His final comparison is as follows:

Ordinates of Ogive Curve from S

ix D

istributions and the com

puted Values.

Six Distributions
Computed

-231
-244

-182
-190

-117
-125

- 93 - 73

- 100 - 78

-37

-38

+ 1

+ 38
+ 38

+ 77
+ 78

+ 107
+ 100

+ 139
+ 125

+ 213
+ 190

+ 260
+ 244

Grades 5

30 40

80 90

Considering that we have 965 observations to start from, this does not appear
on the face of it a very good agreement, and even Galton (p. 22) contents

* He merely places his observed values alongside the normal curve results, and says that
considering the paucity of observations "there is nothing in the results that contradicts the
possibility of much closer conformity when many more observations are dealt with." (p. 19.)

168 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

himself by calling it a " quasi-accordance with the theoretical law of Frequency
of Error." Personally I do not see why it is needful to show accordance, quasi
or otherwise, with the normal law of error. It might have served Galton's
purpose to show "tailing off" in his distributions of measurements. But it
does not seem to me that measurement or enumeration is really what he
needs, or it must be measurement or enumeration of characters which belong
alike to the various genera, not to a loop alone. The transitions from loop to
whorl are qualitative rather than quantitative, and it is the frequency of
these qualitative intermediates that we need to analyse. I am inclined to
think that this was later recognised by Galton, for I have several times heard
him say that there appeared to him nothing to be measured in finger-prints
in general; could I not suggest a measurable character? I still know of
nothing that will apply satisfactorily to all types, and I hold that scientific
finger-print classification must be qualitative*.

As I have said, I do not see, even if Galton had proved that measurements
on loop finger-prints only followed the normal law of distribution, that it
would follow that types of finger-prints are genera. In order to prove this
we should need to measure characters which run through the whole series
of types and this is precisely what it does not appear feasible — at any rate for
the present — to achieve. Undoubtedly finger-print patterns do occasionally
blend, if such occasions are less frequent than the instances in which they
appear to be exclusive (see our Plates XIII and XIV, p. 181). It seems
therefore that the key to the matter lies in a closer study of the heredity
of finger-prints than has yet been made. With this Galton certainly would
have agreed. He writes (p. 21):

"There is reason to believe that the patterns are hereditary. I have no adequate amount
of data, whereby to test the truth of this belief by a direct inquiry, but rest the belief partly
on analogy, but more especially on the ascertained existence of a considerable tendency to
symmetry. When, for instance, there is a primary pattern on one thumb, there are not far
from ten chances to one in favour of its being found on the other. Again, if there is a loop in
one thumb, there is a strong chance that it will be found in the other thumb also. Similarly
as regards each pair of corresponding fingers. Therefore the causes of the pattern must not be
looked for in purely local influences. Some of the causes why it and not another pattern is
present, are common to both sides of the body and may therefore be called constitutional, and be
expected to be hereditary."

Galton continuing next states that finger-prints form an "instructive
instance of the effects of heredity under circumstances in which sexual
selection has been neutral." He seems to think that sight could be the only
sexual selective factor, for he says that finger-prints are too small to attract
attention. He remarks that they appear to be uncorrelated with any desirable
or repellent quality. Galton holds that they might possibly be related to
sensitivity, the average breadth of a ridge-interval being possibly a measure
of delicacy in the sense of touch f. But he states that this could have nothing

* I write this fully aware of the attempts made by Kristine Bonnevie [Journal of Genetics,
Vol. xv, pp. 46-54) to give a common measurable characterisation to all types of finger-print
pattern.

t Experiments on this point wore soon after made for Galton by Titchener, who found no
relation between ridge-interval and sensitivity.

Personal Identification and Description 169

to do with the attractiveness or otherwise of any particular pattern. I do not
believe that Galton has quite plumbed the possible depths of the action of
sexual selection in this matter. Touch is one of the least studied, and there-
fore the least understood of the sexual factors. The question is not that of
sensitivity in the producer of a sensation, but of the feelings excited in the
recipient. It is not, perhaps, probable, but it is still possible, considering how
huge a part touch plays in courtship, that the shades of feeling excited by
it may be associated with finger-print pattern. Those who straight-away
dismiss any slender possibility in this direction have hardly the true
measure of our present scientific ignorance, and probably do not realise
how much greater a part touch plays in the sensitory life of the female than
of the male.

Galton holds that there must have been complete promiscuity of matings,
or as it is now called, panmixia, with regard to these patterns, and that con-
sequently they ought to have hybridised. I cannot see that this argument is
any more valid than the argument that iris-colours ought to hybridise. It is
true that both iris-colours and finger-prints do blend under certain rare
physiological conditions that we do not yet understand, but I can see no
necessity for a universal rule which anticipates that blending must follow
hybridisation. The mere fact that the individual can have finger-prints of
various patterns suggests hybridisation, and it seems to me that the question of
racial differentiation in finger-print frequencies wants renewed investigation,
starting very nearly from the point where Galton left it (see our pp. 140, 193-4).

We next turn to the question of natural selection and here we read :

"As regards the influence of all other kinds of natural selection, we know that they co-
operate in keeping races pure by their much more frequent destruction of the individuals who
depart more widely from the typical centre. But natural selection is wholly inoperative in re-
spect to individual varieties of patterns and unable to exercise the slightest check upon their
vagaries. Yet, for all that, the different classes of patterns are isolated from one another,
through the rarity of transitional cases, just as thoroughly, and just in the same way, as are the
genera of plants and animals." (p. 22.)

In the words I have italicised Galton seems to me to have departed from
his usual cautious restraint in the matter of dogma, and some suspicion
may be thrown on his conclusion from his own data. On p. 21 of the memoir
are given measurements of the core and the number of ridges in loop finger-
prints of the left and right thumbs. From this it appears that the right thumb
exceeds the left thumb in these measurements and in the number of ridges.
Is this relation reversed in left-handed persons? Nowadays we know that
the finger-print types are not scattered at random among the digits, there is
association between individual digit and individual type. Can it be that there
is any reversal of this association in left-handed persons? We do not know;
but if it should prove to be so, the first step would have been taken to
show a relation between finger-print pattern and manual efficiency. It
is never safe to dismiss all relationship of a character to natural selection
because we cannot for the moment see any link between the character and
fitness.

pgiii 22

170 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton having dismissed both sexual and natural selection from past or
present influence on finger-print patterns, argues that natural selection has
had no monopoly in producing genera.

"Not only is it impossible to substantiate a claim for natural selection that it is the sole
agent in forming genera, but it seems, from the experience of artificial selection, that it is
scarcely competent to do so by favouring mere varieties, in the sense in which I understand the
term.

"My contention is that it acts by favouring small sports. Mere varieties from a common
typical centre blend freely in the offspring, and the offspring of every race whose statistical
characters are constant, necessarily tend, as I have often shown, to revert to their common
typical centre*. Sports do not blend freely ; they are fresh typical centres or sub-species, which
suddenly arise, we do not yet know precisely through what uncommon concurrences of circum-
stance, and which observations show to be strongly transmissible by inheritance.

"A mere variety can never afford a sticking point in the forward course of evolution, but
each uew sport implies a new condition of internal equilibrium, and does afford one. A change
of type is effected, as I conceive, by a succession of sports or small changes of typical centre,
each being in its turn favoured and established by natural selection to the exclusion of its
competitors. The distinction between a mere variety and a sport is real and fundamental. I
argued this in a recent work [see our discussion pp. 58-62 above of Galton's Natural Inheritance,
1889], but had then to draw my illustrations from non-physiological experiences. I could not at
that time find an appropriate physiological one. The want is now excellently supplied by observa-
tions of the patterns made by the papillary ridges on the thumbs and fingers." (pp. 22-3.)

While I am very loath to say that -Galton is in error, I think that he has
far from demonstrated the correctness of his views. I have cited his paper at
considerable length because I want to indicate how keen a "mutationist" he
was. We can claim that he was the first to assert a distinction between
"mutations" (sports in his terminology) and " fluctuating variations " (varieties
round a typical centre, as he would call them). If the Biometric School has
been unable to follow him whole-heartedly in this path, it is because in his
case the conclusion was only in a very minor degree based on observation ; in
the main it flowed from a misinterpretation of his own great discovery of
regression f.

Finger-Print Indexing. In the year following the presentation of this
memoir Galton read a second paper before the Royal Society (April 30, 1891).
It was entitled: "Method of Indexing Finger-Marks," and was published in
the Roy. Soc. Proceedings, Vol. xlix, pp. 540-548. Our author points out that
the indexing of finger-prints is not only of importance for criminal identifi-
cation, but for racial and hereditary inquiries. He especially emphasises their
value in the latter case :

"The patterns are usually sharp and clear and their minutiae are independent of age and
growth. They are necessarily trustworthy, and no reluctance is shown in permitting them to be
taken, which can be founded either upon personal vanity or upon an unwillingness to communi-
cate undesirable family peculiarities." (p. 540.)

* [This is the old error of the misinterpretation of regression, which led Galton so often
and so far astray ; see our pp. 31, 48 and 83. K.P.]

t An additional point in this memoir (p. 20) may, perhaps, be just noted. Galton compares
the index found from the ratio of means of two absolute variates, with the mean of all the in-
dices found from the individual values of the variates. He shows that the two are nearly the
same. We now know the proper corrective factor required to pass from one to the other.

Personal Identification and Description

171

It appears, possibly for reasons to which we have already referred
(see p. 163), that Galton had by this time put aside his earlier method of
indexing, and he remarks :

" Without caring to dwell on many of my earlier failures to index the finger-prints in a satis-
factory way, my description shall be confined to that which has proved to be a success. It is
based on a small variety of conspicuous differences of pattern in each of many digits, and not
upon minute peculiarities of a single digit." (p. 541.)

Galton had now obtained the prints of all ten digits of 289 persons, though
his indexing applies only to the first hundred of these.

He here introduces for the first time the Arch-Loop-Whorl classifi-
cation*, which has formed the basis of all later attempts at indexing.
If a line be drawn from the tip of the forefinger to the base of the little
finger, this is roughly the usual slope of the " axes " of the finger-prints if
they be not symmetrical. Galton uses the odd numerals 1, 3, 5 for sym-
metrical forms or for sloped forms with the usual or " normal " slope, the even
numerals 2, 4, 6 for the unusual or "abnormal" slopes, in the three classes,
arches, loops, whorls. There is little difficulty as a rule in allotting a print
to one or other of these six classes. It is only when the rarer compounds (later
termed "composites") appear that some difficulty may arise. Galton's scheme
is provided in the accompanying diagram.

Elemgntar^
divisions

i Index
number

Symbols of Patterns f no > e J\\

symmetric.

sloped.

mumden 1

Primary.

a b o

d e /

Whorls

@ @

h i

J * t

^ 3 OR 4

Loops

n o

all it oped

4>:%^^ P \. P

p ([ r s t w r

\ 5ob 6

Fig. 26.

He does not arrange his numerals which denote the character of the
finger-print in the natural order of the digits, i.e. from little finger left to
little finger right. His reason for this is thus stated:

"The forefingers are the most variable of all the digits in respect to their patterns, their
slopes being almost as frequently abnormal as notf; the third fingers rank next ; the little finger
ranks last, as its pattern is a loop in nine cases out of ten. I, therefore, found it convenient
not to index the fingers in their natural order, but in the way that is shown at the head of the

* Galton still uses the term "primary" for arch,
t i.e. as frequently radial as ulnar.

22—2

172

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

columns of figures on the left side of Fig. 27. There, the sequence of the numerals that express
the patterns on the digits is divided into two groups of three numerals and two groups of two
numerals, as 355, 455, 55, 35. The first group 355 refers to the first, second and third fingers of
the left hand*; the second group 455 to the first, second, and. third fingers of the right hand ; the

L R

L ,R

Left

Right.

1 — 1 1

Inc/ex

123 , >Z5

Ta.T*

4 3

i i

1 2 3

35,35

/? ©^

38.2

553,333

35,35

</(§/?

19.2

353.353

15 , 55

@ © ft

<§

^ %

6.2

353,653
355,353

35 ,35
55, '35

a p ft

17. 1
16 1

355,455
365,355

55,35
55,55

vW4

f? ©
ft \>

p ^ \\

^
^

49.1
3.2

415,555

35,55

O a

21. a
! 1

Fig. 27.

third group 55 to the thumb and fourth finger of the left hand ; the fourth group 35 to the thumb
and fourth finger of the right hand. The index is arranged in the numerical sequence of these sets
of numbers as shown in Fig. 27 1." (pp. 542-3.)

It will be seen from Fig. 27 that Galton drew a rough symbol denoting
the nature of his subclasses, the a to w of Fig. 26 in his index. The symbols
with dots attached mark cases in which there may be doubt as to classifica-
tion. Thus the primaries / and g may have been classed by another as
loops. If there has been hesitation about them, after seeking them as loops, a
second reference to the index should be made, treating them as primaries.
When a whorl is "crozier" shaped, as j, k, I, m, it lies in a loop, and may
when it approaches the plain eyes t, u give rise to hesitation and a dot is
then added, as at I, m. Galton says that he has not found much difficulty
with transitional cases, and considers it could be well surmounted if a standard
collection of doubtful forms were established to ensure that different persons
would abide by a common rule.

Galton (pp. 545-6) gives an index based on the ten finger-prints of 100
persons. In this index there are nine cases of duplicated numbers and three

* Galton's first finger = forefinger, second finger = middle finger, third finger = ring finger,
and fourth finger = little finger. Galton's purpose is clear, but there are distinct and greater
advantages in the "natural" order.

t The last column in Galton's figure, our Fig. 27, requires explanation ; it is the page
reference to his records where the actual finger-prints will be found. The word "Index" at the
head of the column is, perhaps, not explanatory enough.

Personal Identification and Description

173

cases of triplicated numbers. In other words the index number alone would
not suffice to identify an individual in about a quarter of the indexed cases.
Now if the index contains 100,000 instead of 100 individuals, it is clear
that these multiple cases, instead of being counted by twos and threes, would
be counted by hundreds, and the number of references required to the prints
themselves would become most fatiguing. The source of this evil is fairly
clear if we examine Galton's Table II (p. 548). It classifies the patterns that
occur in 100 prints of left forefingers. It is obvious that we have gained very

Forefinger of Left Hand.

Pattern

Classificatory
Number

Number of
Occurrences

Primary, plain ... ... ... ...)

Primary nascent loop, slope normal ...j
Primary nascent loop, slope abnormal
Whorl, plain ... ... ... ... 1

Whorl, with tail, slope normal ... |
Whorl, with tail, slope abnormal
Loop, slope normal
Loop, slope abnormal ...

4
5
6

6
21
20

Total eases

100

little indeed in the case of primaries and whorls by taking the nature of the
slope as a characteristic. The four groups of 26, 23, 21 and 20 still remain far
too large. We need to break up the primaries into three nearly equal groups,
not into two of 26 and 4; the same applies to the whorls, while each group
of loops requires bisecting. This would give us ten classes, and fit in well with
a ten-figure index number. The scheme of indexing Galton proposed in this
paper could not be final, yet it was pioneer work*; no one but our author
himself had so far published or even suggested a plan for indexing, and there
still remained much spade-work to be done before an adequate scheme was
evolved. Galton himself recognised the difficulty, thus he writes:

"The greatest difficulty in constructing a uniformly efficient catalogue lies in the troublesome
frequency of plain loops, so that even the method of picture writing fails to analyse satisfactorily
the numerous 555, 555, 55, 55 cases. When searching through a large number of similarly indexed
prints for a particular specimen, it is a very expeditious method to fix on any well-marked
characteristic of a minute kind such as an island, or enclosure, or a couple of adjacent bi-
furcations, that may present itself in any one of the fingers, and in making the search to use
a lens or lenses of low power, fixed at the end of an arm, and to confine the attention solely to
looking for that one characteristic. The cards on which the finger marks have been made may
then be passed successively under the lens with great rapidity. I fear that the method of
counting ridges (as the number of ridges in All of my previous memoir [see our pp. 163, 167])
would be difficult to use by persons who are not experts. Anyhow, I have not yet been able to
devise a plan for doing so that I can recommend." (p. 547.)

* The diagrammatic symbols used by Galton are the basis from which his fuller classification
in Finyer Print Directories starts (see our pp. 199 et seq.).

174 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Another point dealt with by Galton in this memoir is the relative ad-
vantage gained in indexing by the first two fingers of the left hand, the first
three fingers of the left hand, the first three fingers of both hands or by all
ten digits ; he finds the numbers of different patterns occurring are respectively
16, 27, 65 and 83. The ten-digit indexing is now in general use, and of course
provides a greater field for identification, if the indexing be somewhat more
cumbersome.

B. Finger Prints, 1893.

We now reach Galton's fundamental book on finger-prints, namely Finger
Prints* (Macmillan, 1893). Chapter I (pp. 1-21), entitled Introduction,
gives a brief account of the subject referring to Purkenje and the pioneer
work of Sir William Herschel; it further provides a synopsis of the contents
of the entire bookf.

Chapter II (pp. 22-29) deals with Previous Use of Finger- Prints. It
recounts the use of nail-marks or finger-marks among barbarous or semi-
civilised people rather as a superstitious sign of personal touch than of personal

Chinese Coin, Tang Dynasty, about 618 ad., with nail mark of the Empress Wen ten,
figured in relief.

Fig. 28.

identity. It notes also the frequent appearance of finger-impressions upon
ancient pottery. Here, as in the case of a Greek impression found by Sir
Charles Walston on a steatite seal at the Argive HeraeumJ, it is somewhat

* It is an interesting example of the futility of some reviewers, that the critic who wrote
the notice of Galton's Finger Prints in the Athenaeum of Dec. 24, 1892, expressed the wish that
he might devote his brilliant powers to "subjects of greater promise of practical utility"; and
again : "Whether the practical results to be derived from his researches will repay the pains
he has bestowed upon them we must take leave to doubt. It will be long before a British
jury will consent to convict a man upon the evidence of his finger-prints ; and however perfect
in theory the identification may be, it will not be easy to submit it in a form that will amount
to legal evidence."

t At the end of this chapter Galton thanks Mr Howard Collins for his very material aid.
The correspondence between Galton and Collins during the progress of the work was consider-
able, and of some scientific value. In 1911 I issued a request in the Times and other journals
for letters or copies of letters written by Galton. The response was very disappointing. During
the last nine years the Galton Laboratory has had frequently to purchase letters of Galton
sold by their recipients or the assigns of the latter to booksellers or autograph dealers. Among
such purchases the Laboratory obtained from a Birmingham bookseller, whose catalogue the
Director luckily chanced to see, Galton's numerous letters to Collins on the subject of finger-
prints.

} The Illustrated London News, Feb. 7, 1925, p. 231.

Personal Identification and Description

175

doubtful if the impression was purely accidental, arising simply from touching
by chance the wet clay, or was the result of moulding with the thumb the
small base of an object, or was actually intended as a potter's mark. Galton
next refers to Bewick's impressing his thumb-mark and a finger-mark on a

Fig. 29. Thomas Bewick, his mark.

block of wood, engraving them and afterwards using them for ornaments in
his books*; this approaches the use of a finger-print for a sign-manual.
Galton continues:

"Occasional instances of careful study may also be noted, such as that of Mr Faulds (Nature,
Vol. xxn, p. 605, Oct. 28, 1880), who seems to have taken much pains, and that of Mr Tabor,
the eminent photographer of San Francisco, who, noticing the lineations of a print that he had
accidentally made with his own inked finger upon a blotting-paper, experimented further, and
finally proposed the method of finger-prints for the registration of Chinese, whose identification
has always been a difficulty, and was giving a great deal of trouble at that particular time ;

O^;^^ 9, /St J,.

Order on a Cainp Sutler, by the officer of a surveying party in New Mexico
Fig. 30.

1S82.

but his proposal dropped through. Again Mr Gilbert Thompson, an American geologist, when
on Government duty in 1882 in the wild parts of New Mexico, paid the members of his party

* See for example History of Birds, Vol. I, p. 180, edn. 1805. It is not in my edition (1807)
of the General History of Quadrupeds. Sir William Herschel reproduces in his book, The
Origin of Finger Printing, 1916, p. 33, a receipt of Bewick from 1818, in 1918 in the possession
of Mr Quaritch. The print is a very delicate one, and has the attached words "Thomas Bewick,
his mark." Sir William thinks that these marks of Bewick, known to him as a boy, may have
unwittingly led him to study such prints.

176 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

by order of [? on] the camp sutler. To guard against forgery he signed his name [? wrote the
amount] across the impression made by his finger upon the order, after first .pressing it on his
office pad. He was good enough to send me the duplicate of one of these cheques made out in
favour of a man who bore the ominous name of 'Lying Bob' [see Fig. 30 on p. 175]. The im-
pression took the place of scroll work on an ordinary cheque ; it was in violet aniline ink, and
looked decidedly pretty. From time to time sporadic instances like these are met with, but none
are comparable in importance to the regular and official employment made of finger-prints by
Sir William Herschel, during more than a quarter of a century in Bengal. I was exceedingly
obliged to him for much valuable information when first commencing this study, and have been
almost wholly indebted to his kindness for the materials used in this book for proving the
pei-sistence of lineations throughout life.

"Sir William Herschel has presented me with one of the two original 'Contracts' in Bengali,
dated 1858, which suggested to his mind the idea of using this method of identification*. It was
so difficult to obtain credence to the signatures of the natives, that he thought he would use
the signature of the hand itself, chiefly with the intention of frightening the man who made
it from afterwards denying his formal act ; however, the impression proved so good that
Sir W. Herschel became convinced that the same method might be further utilised. He finally
introduced the use of finger-prints in several departments at Hooghly in 1877, after seventeen
years' experience of the value of the evidence they afforded. A too brief account of his work
was given by him in Nature (Vol. xxm, p. 23, Nov. 25, 1880). He mentions there that he had
teen taking finger marks as sign-manuals for more than twenty years, and had introduced them
for practical purposes in several ways in India with marked benefit. They rendered attempts
to repudiate signatures quite hopeless. Finger-prints were taken of Pensioners to prevent their
personation by others after death ; they were used in the office for Begistration of Deeds, and
at a gaol where each prisoner had to sign with his finger. By comparing the prints of
persons then living, with their prints taken twenty years previously, he considered he had
proved that the lapse of at least that period made no change sufficient to affect the utility of
the plan. He informs me that he submitted, in 1877, a report in semi-official form to the
Inspector-General of Gaols, asking to be allowed to extend the process ; but no result followed.
In 1881, at the request of the Governor of the gaol at Greenwich (Sydney), he sent a description
of the method, but no further steps appear to have been taken there.

"If the use of finger-prints ever becomes of general importance, Sir William Herschel must
be regarded as the first who devised a feasible method for regular use, and afterwards officially
adopted it." (pp. 26-29.)

I have cited this long passage because I wish to give evidence that Galton
did ample justice to his predecessors, more justice than has since been done
to his own workf. Galton never claimed to have invented the idea of
identification by finger-prints. What he did do was to take up the matter
from the scientific standpoint to establish certain principles and the prac-
tical methods of operating them. It was his publications and his energetic
demonstration of the value of finger-print identification, not occasional
newspaper diatribes, which led to its adoption by the English Prison Service,
and ultimately to its acceptance throughout the civilised world. Much solid

* One is reproduced on our Plate V, p. 146 and the other in Sir William Herschel's The
Origin of Finger Printing.

f "In discussing the true natural history of the minute ridges upon the fingers Galton goes
no further than did the first physiologist of note who drew attention to their presence. This
was Nehemiah Grew." Louis Robinson in North American Review, May 15, 1905. Again:
"Mr Galton distinctly says in his Finger Prints, p. 2: 'My attention was first drawn to the
ridges in 1888,' etc. It is not a little remarkable to my mind that that date should so nearly
coincide with the period when I was interesting Sir Wollaston Franks, of the British Museum,
and other scientific authorities in the importance of this means of identification." Birmingham
Post, May 16, 1905. Dr Faulds cites only the first words of Galton's paragraph on p. 2. For
the full citation see our p. 142.

Personal Identification and Description 177

work had to be done before the mere idea of identification by finger-prints
could be transformed into its full realisation as a practical criminal procedure.
For that actual transformation we have to thank neither Nehemiah Grew
nor Dr Faulds, but Francis Galton expanding and working on the experiences
of Sir William Herschel.

Chapter III (pp. 30-53), entitled Methods of Printing, gives a very
full description of methods for the permanent preservation of finger-marks.

Galton starts by indicating a way of getting very perfect finger-prints,
which has been since used very largely for detective purposes. The reader
can easily try it for himself; let him pass his finger over the hair at the back
of his head, and then press the bulb of his finger on a window pane, that of
a recently cleaned window if available; he will find a very perfect imprint of
his finger lineation, and there it may remain decipherable for days — under post-
war conditions of domestic service! If the finger be merely moistened the
impression soon evaporates ; the essential need is to oil the finger very
slightly, and this is adequately achieved by the natural oiliness of the hair.
Similar finger-prints may be obtained on polished steel — a razor blade — or
on table plate. Now-a-days for the purposes of criminal investigation such
accidental finger-prints can be reproduced and preserved. Galton next pro-
ceeds to give accounts of laboratory and also of pocket apparatus for finger-
printing; the important factors are the persistent cleanliness needful in the
apparatus, and the extreme thinness of the ink layer on the finger, if a good
impression is to be obtained*. This chapter is replete with suggestions such
as we have recorded of the younger Galton with his mechanical "dodges."
A thin sheet of copper which I found in one of Galton's diaries puzzled me,
till I re-read Finger Prints, and there noted that it was to receive soot from
a candle (or even a match) to blacken fingers for their prints.

"Paste rubbed in a very thin layer over a card makes a surface that holds soot firmly, and
one that will not stick to other surfaces if accidentally moistened. Glue, isinglass, size, and
mucilage, are all suitable. It was my fortune as a boy to receive rudimentary lessons in drawing
from a humble and rather grotesque master. He confided to me the discovery, which he claimed
as his own, that pencil drawings could be fixed by licking them ; and as I write these words,
the image of his broad swab-like tongue performing the operation, and of his proud eyes gleam-
ing over the drawing he was operating on, come vividly to remembrance. This reminiscence led
me to try whether licking a piece of paper would give it a sufficiently adhesive surface. It did
so. Nay, it led me a step further, for I took two pieces of paper and licked both. The dry side
of the one was held over the candle as an equivalent to a plate for collecting soot, being saved
by the moisture at the back from igniting (it had to be licked two or three times during
the process), and the impression was made on the other bit of paper. An ingenious person
determined to succeed in obtaining the record of a finger impression can hardly fail altogether
under any ordinary circumstances." (pp. 48-9.)

I should like to have asked Galton what he would have done had there
been no paper t ; I feel sure he would have been ready with a substitute ! The
chapter concludes with remarks on the photography of finger-prints and on

* The Galton Laboratory, which collects finger-prints of families, finds that an operator can
he easily taught to take decipherable finger-prints with a simple pocket apparatus, which it
circulates for this purpose.

t Quite good impressions can be made with bird lime and candle black, specimens in
Galtoniana.

p Q in 23

178

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

methods of enlarging them. In the Galtoniana we have still his special
' camera for enlarging finger-prints (see our p. 215), his much enlarged series
of finger-prints used for fine classification (reproduced for this work, and to
be found in a pocket at the end of this volume) and the watchmaker's
glass mounted on a stand for directly examining them*.

Chapter IV (pp. 54-63) deals with The Ridges and their Use. Galton
starts with the ridges of the palm of the hand, and indicates that they are
not very closely related to the "creases," so that the latter cannot be the
cause of the former. He also refers to the ridges on the soles and toes, but
ultimately confines his attention to those on the fingers. Here he defines
two important terms: first, Minutiae, which are the minute peculiarities
characterising an individual ridge. A ridge may divide into two or unite
with another (see Fig. 31, a and b), or it may divide and almost immediately

CJi*.ra.cleri»tio Peculiarities irz Ridges.

(ibout 8 \im.e.$ the natural Si& 6 )
Fig. 31.

reunite, enclosing a small circular or elliptic space (c); at other times it
may begin or end abruptly (d and e); or lastly the ridge may be so short
as to form a small island (f). Secondly, Patterns: whenever an interspace
is left between the boundaries of different systems of ridges, it is filled by a
small system of its own which will have some characteristic shape. This
shape is termed a pattern (see Figs. 20, 21 on our pp. 162, 163). The
descriptions of minutiae and of patterns belonging to an individual are of
special value for the purposes of identification.

On the whole there is little known of the origin and use of the ridges,
beyond the fact that they carry the sweat pores. Nor is their origin or use
of much importance for the purpose of identification provided we can be
assured of their persistency during life. Titchener, as I have noted (p. 168),
made, at the suggestion of Galton, a series of experiments with the aesthesio-
meter, and proved that the fineness or coarseness of the ridges in different
persons had no effect whatever on the delicacy of their tactile discrimination.

* This finger-print glass appears in Furse's painting of Galton; see the Frontispiece to Vol. I.
It is worth noting that Galton selected this piece of apparatus as the most characteristic of his
many activities.

PLATE IX

THE STANDARD PATTERNS OF PURKENJE

7 8 9

Reproduced de novo from the copy of Purkenje's Commenlatio in the
Library of the Royal College of Surgeons.

The Cores or the above Patterxs.

4 % #

Galton's Patterns from Purkenje's Types.

Personal Identification and Description 179

Also he found it made no difference whether one or hoth points of the
compass rested on the ridges or in the furrows. Nor again was the width
of the ridge interval any test of the relative power of discrimination of the
different parts of the same hand (p. 62). Galton himself suggests that the
ridges may serve the purpose of enabling us to judge the relative roughness
of surfaces by touch, and so to determine their nature. If a blindfold person
be asked to determine an object by touch, he will be observed to rub the
surface with his finger.

"The ridges engage themselves with the roughness of the surface, and greatly help in calling
forth the required sensation, which is that of a thrill ; usually faint, but always to be perceived
when the sensation is analysed, and which becomes very distinct when the indentations are at
equal distances apart as in a file or in velvet. A thrill is analogous to a musical note, and the
characteristics to the sense of touch, of different surfaces when they are rubbed by the fingers,
may be compared to different qualities of sound or noise. There are, however, no pure overtones
in the case of touch, as there are in nearly all sounds." (p. 63.)

I should be glad to have the experience of any of my readers on this
point. T wonder if this thrill is universal ; personally I am unable to associate
even uniform roughness of a touched surface with anything of the nature of
a thrill. Two other men were like myself Of three women tested one had
no sensation of thrill, a second failed with file and a stiff brush, but was
doubtful in the case of velvet ; the third felt a thrill — chill in the spine — on
rubbing with the finger-tip file, velvet or brush.

Chapter V (pp. 64-88) is entitled Patterns: their Outlines and Cores.
Galton opens this chapter by referring to Purkenje's types*, and states that
he had entirely failed on trial to classify prints by mere inspection and the
use of Purkenje's types. He had accordingly devised his method of "outlining"
the pattern in order to classify it. He took as material for his classification
504 prints of right thumbs enlarged two and a half times their natural size, so

* Galton (pp. 85-88 of this chapter) provides a translation of the portion of Purkenje's Com-
mentatio which deals with types, and also a plate of Purkenje's nine types, accompanied by Galton's
own outlining of the cores. Purkenje's nine types are the following: (i) Transverse Flexures =
Galton's "primaries." In the course of his description Purkenje used the word "arch." I think
this must have led Galton to replace his term "primary" of 1890 by "arch" of 1892. (ii) Central
Lonijitudinal Stria = Galton's "tented arch." (hi) Oblique Stria = (I think) Galton's "nascent
loop." (iv) Oblique Sinus = Galton's "plain loop." (v) Almond = (I think) "circlet in loop," a sub-
type of Galton's "whorl" (see his Plate 8, No. 22). (vi) Spiral = Galton's "whorl," sub-type "spiro-
w-horl" (see his Plate 8, No. 26). (vii) Ellipse, or Elliptic whorl = Galton's "whorl" (ellipses),
(viii) Circle, or Circular Whorl = Galton's "whorl" (circles), (ix) Double Whorl = Galton's "whorl"
("duplex spiral"), see his Plate 8, No. 29. The reader who attempts to classify prints by Purkenje's
nine classes will soon find, if he follows Purkenje's rather elaborate descriptions, that they
exclude many frequently occurring cases. His definitions are indeed not broad enough to embrace
the innumerable variations which arise. It is perhaps worth noting that Purkenje under the
definition (vi) of "Spiral" introduces the word "composite" but not in its modern sense to denote
a compound of two patterns, but for a spiral made up not of a single line, but of two or more
lines proceeding from the single focus or pole. I imagine Galton would have called Purkenje's
"composite spiral" a "whorl," sub-type "twist" (see Plate 8, No. 52 and Plate 16, Nos. 36, 37,
where, however, no name is provided). Purkenje does not figure his "composite." He refers to
the "small triangles," Galton's "plots," "deltas" or "islands," under his definitions (iv) and (vi).
This footnote will suffice to indicate the extent to which Purkenje anticipated Galton in
matters of nomenclature. See also our Plate IX.

23—2

180

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

that each print was about playing card size. Galton found that on repeated
trials he did not, by inspection only, deal these out into the same classes. The
same failure occurred when he selected standard types and endeavoured to
sort into groups by aid of these. Mere judgment by the unaided eye is liable
to be influenced by the intensity of inking of some ridges; two prints will not
always give the same extent of pattern. "A third cause of error is still more
serious; it is that patterns, especially those of a spiral form, may be apparently
similar yet fundamentally unlike, the unaided eye being frequently unable
to analyse them and to discern real differences" (p. 66). Accordingly Galton
introduced his system of "outlining" the pattern. To this we have already
referred in discussing his Phil. Trans, memoir (see our p. 164). His Plate 5,
here reproduced as our Plate X, shows samples of outlined patterns. Whether
it is needful for an expert always to outline is another question, but to become
an expert in classification, it is undoubtedly necessary to gain experience in
grouping by outlining, even if the classification is only to be in the broadest
categories. The chief reason for this is that the existing classification
schemes are in truth largely artificial. There is really no generic difference
between a "tented arch" and a "tented loop," or between an "eyeletted
loop" and a "small spiral in loop" which Galton reckons a whorl. There are
numerous such cases where the classification can only be by arbitrary
standardisation. We reproduce as our Plates XI, XII and XllI Galton's
Plates 7, 8 and 6 which will aid any reader desirous of learning to classify
by outlines; yet even then he will undoubtedly find rare patterns, which he
can only hope to thrust into a miscellaneous group of "composites." Galton's
Plates 9 and 10 (see our Plates XIV and XV) give threefold enlargements
of troublesome transitional patterns, the first between arches and loops and
the second between loops and whorls. The beginner should attempt to classify
them, and then compare his results with Galton's views on pp. 79-80.

/. Inner or
Radial side

from both sides

/ and both absent.

Spirals

from / side

above

Rinds

from neither side

I and both present

Loops

from / side

from side

absent

Duplex Spirals

from both sides

upper supply from

I side

side

<£?v

Spirals

from side

0. Outer or
Ulnar aide

Fig. 32. It is necessary to suppose the finger-prints are from the right hand.

On pp. 80-81 Galton repeats the classification of his Phil. Trans.

PLATE X

Examples of the outlining of Patterns to assist Classification.

The specimens are rolled impressions of natural size. Galton was the first writer on the subject
to introduce "rolling." All impressions are now rolled, a and /are loops ; b, c, d, e,yand h
are various types of whorls. Finger Prints, Plate 5.

PLATE XI

Outlines of Patterns in Arches and Loops.

ARCHES.

Plain Arch.

Forked Arch.

Tented Arch.

(See Loops, 12.)

(See Whorls, 22.)

Arch with Ring.

(See Whorls, 24.)

LOOPS.

(Ste Arches, 2.)

9
Nascent Loop.

Invaded Loop.

12
Tented Loop.

13
Crested Loop

£yeletted Loop.

(See Whorls, 21.)

Loop with nascent curl.

18
(Set Whorls, 21.)

(See Whorls, 22.)

Galton's nomenclature as aids to description and classification. Arches and Loops.
From Galton's Finger Prints, Plate 7.

PLATE XII

Outlines to Patterns in Whorls. Types of Cores.

WHORLS.

Small Spiral in Loop.

Spiral in Loop.

22
Circlet in Loop.

Ring in Loop

Rings.

Ellipses.

26
Spiro-rings.

27
Simple Spiral.

Nascent Duplet Spiral.

29
Duplex Spiral.

Banded Duplex Spiral.

CORES to LOOPS.
Rods :— their envelopes are Indicated by dots.

fli /# //I) /§ (B

Single.

32 33 34 35

Eyed. Double. Multiple. Monkey.

Staples : — their envelopes are indicated by dots.

3tf 37 38 39 40 41 42

Plain. {parted. I parted. J parted. Tuning fork. Single eyed. Doobleeyed.

Envelopes whether to Rods or Staples :-here staples only are dotted.

43 44 46 46 47 46

Plain. J parted. J parted. } parted. Single eyed. Double eyed.

CORES to WHORLS.

Circles,

Ellipses.

Spiral.

Twist.

Plait

Deep Spiral

Galton's nomenclature as aids to description and classification.
From Galton's Finger Prints, Plate 8.

6
|

tf(

(((

((I

«(l

E
J

«e

PLATE XIV

Transitional Patterns — Arches and Loops.

y*^f -*V ^ '■ ■ ■■ ^ M alw^Mfc^

(Enlarged three times)

Transitional Patterns from Galton's Finger Print*, Plate 9, with suggested symbols.
The prints are supposed to be of left-hand fingers.

PLATE XV

Transitional Patterns — Loops and Whorls.

if)

(Enlarged three times)

Transitional Patterns from Oalton's Finger Prints, Plate 10, with suggested symbols.
The prints are supposed to be of left-hand fingers.

Personal Identification and Description

181

memoir (see our p. 164). Unfortunately he uses the letter j throughout
his Plate 1 1 (our Fig. 32) for what he terms u in the text.

"The divergent ridges that bound any simple pattern admit of nine, and only nine, distinct
variations in the first part of their course. The bounding ridge that has attained the summit
of any such pattern must have arrived either from the Inner plot (/) [radial delta], the Outer
plot [ulnar delta], or from both. Similarly as regards the bounding ridge that lies at the
lowest point of the pattern. Any one of the three former events may occur in connection with
any of the three latter events, so that they afford in all 3x3, or nine possible combinations.
It is convenient to distinguish them by easily intelligible symbols. Thus, let i signify a
bounding line which starts from the point 7, whether it proceeds to the summit or to the base
of the pattern; let o be a line that similarly proceeds from 0, and let j be a line that unites
the two plots [deltas] I and either by summit or by base. Again let two symbols be used,
of which the first shall always refer to the summit, and the second to the base of the pattern.
Then the nine possible cases are jj, ji, jo; ij, ii, io; oj, oi, oo. The case of the arches is peculiar,
but they may be fairly classed under the symbol jj." Finger Prints, pp. 80-81, with j as in
figure replacing u of Galton's own text.

Galton next refers to measurements on the print and states that the
average ridge interval should be taken as unit of measurement for comparative

Fig. 33. Illustrations of Ambiguities in minutiae, a may appear as b or c, d as e or/.

purposes, especially where prints of non-adults are concerned. Plate

(our Fig. 33) gives illustrations of ambiguities in minutiae to which we have
previously referred (see our p. 165).

Chapter VI (pp. 89-99) deals with Persistence. It is an extension of the
evidence partially given in the Phil. Trans, memoir (see our p. 166 and
Plates VII and VIII). Galton has here studied between twenty and thirty
different digits and compared minutiae to the number of 700 (p. 96) and
only found the one discrepancy to which reference has already been made
(see last lines on our p. 166). We reproduce Galton's Plates 13 and 14 (our
Plates XVI and XVII) as an illustration of his methods of comparing
minutiae, and of the periods for which persistency was demonstrated. Galton
again emphasises that it is in the minutiae, not in the measurements of the
pattern, that persistency lies (p. 98). After indicating that for the four periods
of life there is no change, and that we may expect in 700 minutiae only one
to fail us, Galton continues :

"Neither can there be any change after death, up to the time when the skin perishes through
decomposition ; for example, the marks on the fingers of many Egyptian mummies, and on the
paws of stuffed monkeys, still remain legible. Very good evidence and careful inquiry is thus
seen to justify the popular idea of the persistence of finger markings, that has hitherto been too
rashly jumped at, and which wrongly ascribed the persistence to the general appearance of the
pattern, rather than to the minutiae it contains. There appear to be no external bodily
characteristics, other than deep scars and tattoo marks, comparable in their persistence to these

1^2 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

markings, whether they be on the finger, on other parts of the palmar surface of the hand,
or on the sole of the foot. At the same time they are out of all proportion more numerous than
any other measurable feature ; about thirty-five of them are situated on the bulb of each of the
ten digits, in addition to more than 100 on the ball of the thumb, which is not one-fifth of the
superficies of the rest of the palmar surface. The total number of points suitable for comparison
on the two hands must therefore be not less than one thousand and nearer to two ; an estimate
which I verified by a rough count on my own hand ; similarly in respect of the feet. The
dimensions of the limbs and body alter in the course of growth and decay ; the colour, quantity
and quality of the hair, the tint and quality of the skin, the number and set of the teeth, the
expression of the features, the gestures, the handwriting, even the eye colour, change after
many years. There seems no persistence in the visible parts of the body, except in these minute
and hitherto too much disregarded ridges." (pp. 97-8.)

Chapter VII (pp. 100-113) is entitled Evidential Value. Its object is to
give an approximate numerical idea of the value of finger-prints as a measure
of Personal Identification. Galton's method is a somewhat elaborate one. If
we take a square of one ridge interval, and place this on our finger-print,
we can almost certainly draw on its surface correctly the ridge or ridges
which lie behind it. When we take an opaque square of side 6-ridge
intervals, and fasten this blank square to the finger-print and then recon-
struct the system of ridges which lies behind it we are rather more often
wrong than right in our reconstructed ridges. Galton thinks that a square
of 5 -ridge intervals would probably allow reconstruction as often right as
wrong. He made two series of experiments of this character, with the
enlargements double and sixfold. Then he made a twentyfold enlargement,
and placed upon it a chequerboard arrangement of 6-ridge interval squares ;
he reconstructed the whole finger-print, each square from the four adjacent
ones, which bordered the unseen square. There were in this case seven rightly
and sixteen wrongly constructed. He now makes a rather drastic assumption
"that any one of these reconstructions represents lineations that might have occurred in Nature,
in association with the conditions outside the square, just as well as the lineations of the actual
finger-print (p. 107). ...It therefore seems right to look upon the squares as independent variables,
in the sense that when the surrounding conditions are alone taken into account, the ridges may
either run in the observed way or in a different way, the chance of these two contrasted events
being taken (for safety's sake) as approximately equal." (p. 108.)

There being about 24 6-ridge interval squares in any finger-print,
Galton makes 1/2 24 to be the chance of the actual system of ridges appearing.
He now proceeds to give a rough approximation to two other chances,
which he considers to be involved : the first concerns guessing correctly the
general course of the ridges adjacent to each square, and the second of
guessing rightly the number of ridges that enter and issue from the square.
He takes these in round numbers to be 1/2 4 and 1/2 8 , so that the whole
chance of the observed system is 1/2 36 . Now the total number of persons in
the world has been reckoned at about 16,000,000,000 and the chance of a
particular observed arrangement is of the order 1/64,000,000,000, or the
odds are very roughly 39 to 1 against the particular arrangement occurring
on a single definite digit of any existing human being*.

* Galton in his own copy has a pencil note "repeat calculations" and corrects the total
population of the world which in his text he has made ten times too great. I have corrected
the figures in the last paragraph of his p. 110 accordingly.

PLATE XVI

V. H. H-D set. 2i in 1877,
and again as a boy in Nov. 1890.

lr 1877

V H. H-d

V. H.H-d

••r>'T

3r 1877

V. H. H-d

3r 1890

V. H. H-dl

To illustrate Persistence of Pattern in Finger Prints.
From Galton's Finger Prints, Plate 13.

PLATE XVII

Persistence of Finger-Print Patterns with corresponding minutiae like numbered.

Intervals of 9, 9, 26, 28, 28, 30, 31 and 31 years. Galton's illustrations from
HerschePs material, Finger Prints, Plate \i.

Personal Identification and Description 183

While convinced that the chance of two individuals actually possessing the
same finger-print in all its minutiae is infinitesimally small — as small as the
chance that two woodcutters given the same topic would produce two blocks
identical in every line and dot — yet one recognises that Galton's treatment,
however ingenious, lacks the power of compelling conviction. Nature probably
works more definitely to form a whole pattern than can be mimicked by
Galton's 24 "independent variable" squares. He himself writes that

"it is hateful to blunder in calculations of adverse chances, by overlooking correlations between
variables, and to falsely assume them to be independent, with the result that inflated estimates
are made which require to be proportionately reduced. Here, however, there seems to be little
room for such an error." (p. 109.)

It is the last sentence only we would call in question. After all it is the
minutiae, rather than the pattern, by which identification is determined. Hence
we might consider the problem as follows : These minutiae are not points, the
ridges having a measurable thickness. Let us suppose a ridge-interval square
to cover the area within which, if two such minutiae occurred in two prints
under comparison, we should hold these minutiae to be identical in
position. Galton's 6-ridge interval squares contain 36 little 1 -ridge interval
squares, and the chance of a given minutiae occurring in one of these

is — , say - roughly. Now Galton takes 24 such squares to a finger-print,

and roughly there are 20 to 30 or even more minutiae in a print, say one to
each 6-ridge interval square; then the probability that the minutiae will be
placed each in its right compartment in its 6-ridge interval square is less

than f — t I , i.e. less than — . Actually it is considerably less than this because

although the minutiae do not tend to cluster each one of them is not con-
fined to its own 6-ridge interval square. Further all minutiae are not alike,
e.g. ridge terminals. I think we may suppose a far more random, that is,
less correlated, distribution of minutiae, than of parts of a pattern, and
still conclude with Galton that it is very unlikely that two persons in the
universe have the same print on any digit, as judged by its minutiae, still
less on all ten digits.

Galton concludes this chapter characteristically as follows :

" We read of the dead body of Jezebel being devoured by the dogs of Jezreel, so that no

. man might say, 'This is Jezebel,' and that the dogs left only her skull, the palms of her hands,

and the soles of her feet; but the palms of the hands and soles of the feet are the very remains by

which a corpse might be most surely identified, if impressions of them during life were available."

(p. 113.)

Chapter VIII (pp. 114-130) is entitled Peculiarities of the Digits. The
data Galton uses in this chapter are the prints of the ten digits of 500 different
persons. His objects are twofold : (i) to find the association of particular
patterns with the individual digits, and (ii) to determine, if a particular
digit has a given pattern, what is the chance that any other digit will have
the same pattern. In discussion of these problems Galton uses only the triple

184

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

classification arch, loop, whorl, and states that by including forked arches
and nascent loops (see our Plate XI, p. 181) as arches, he has given a more
liberal interpretation to the latter category in the tables of this chapter than
he has done elsewhere. His fundamental table is the following :

Percentage Frequency of Arches, Loops and Whorls on the different
Digits from Observations on 5000 Digits of 500 Persons.

Digit

Right Hand

Left Hand

Arch

Loop

Whorl

Total

Arch

Loop

Whorl

Total

Thumb
Fore Finger
Middle Finger
Ring Finger
Little Finger

17
7

53
53

78
53
86

44
30

15
45
13

100
100
100
100
100

5
17
8
3
2

65
55
76
66
90

30
28
16
31

100

100
100
100
100

Total

323

147

500

352

113

500

Percentage
(Whole Hand)

100

From this table the following inferences may be drawn:
The patterns are not distributed indifferently either on the hands or on the
individual digits. The right hand has a redundancy of whorls and the left
of loops. The Fore Finger and to a lesser extent the Middle Finger have a
redundancy of arches, the Little Finger and the Middle Finger a redundancy
of loops, while the Thumb, Fore Finger and Ring Finger have the highest
number of whorls. When we compare the corresponding digits of the two
hands, we see little differentiation of pattern in Fore Finger, Middle Finger
or Little Finger, but a more marked difference between the Thumbs and
Ring Fingers of the two hands. While in the first group the percentages
differ - in the three fingers but are the same in the two hands, in the second
group they are nearly the same in the two fingers but differ in the two
hands (pp. 115-118).

Dealing with the slope of the loop Galton notes that the "inner" slope
is much the more rare of the two for all the fingers but the forefingers,
where the proportions of inner to outer slopes are about in the ratio of 2 to 3

(397. and 617.)*. ,, ' . _

The second problem, that of the resemblance of pattern in different digits,

is divided by Galton into two sections, that of the resemblance in the same

digits of the two hands, and that of the resemblance of different digits either

in the same or different hands. He omits the little fingers because in 86°/ c

to 90 7 o of cases both are loops.

* Purkenje appears to consider that while the inner slope is the more rare, it is actually in
the forefingers in excess of the outer.

Personal Identification and Description

Percentage of Cases in which the same Class of Pattern occurs
in the same Digits of the two Hands (500 Persons).

185

Couplets of Digits

Arches

Loops

Whorls

Total

Two Thumbs
Two Fore Fingers . . .
Two Middle Fingers
Two Ring Fingers

2
9
3
2

48
38
65
46

74
67

77
74

Mean of Total

This table as it stands is not very illuminating ; take for example the
middle fingers, and suppose there was no association of pattern between the
same digits of the two hands. Then from the previous table the percentage
probability of both being loops would be 100 x t^X t ^ = 59"37 - Similarly
the percentage chances of both being arches and whorls are 0"6°/ o and 2*4 °/ o
respectively. Accordingly we must conclude that 62°/ of the observed 77° j
of coincidences would arise from mere chance, if the patterns were indepen-
lent; it is the 15 °/ balance which really marks the tendency to resemblance.
Walton's second table (p. 120) is as follows:

Percentage of Cases in which the same Class of Pattern occurs
in various Couplets of different Digits (500 Persons).

Couplets
of Digits

Of Same Hands

Of Opposite Hands

Arches

Loops

Whorls

Total

Arches

Loops

Whorls

Total

Thumb and Fore Finger
Thumb and Middle Finger
Thumb and Ring Finger
Fore and Middle Fingers
Fore and Ring Fingers
Middle and Ring Fingers

2
1
1
5
2
2

35
48
40
48
35
50

16
9
20
12
17
13

53
58
61
65
54
65

2
1

1
5
2
2

47
38
46
35
50

15
8
18
11
17
12

50
56
57
62
54
64

Means of the Totals

The remarkable part of this table is that no marked change occurs in
the percentage of resemblances whether the couplet of digits is from the
same or opposite hands.

Of this result Galton writes:

" Though the unanimity of the results is wonderful, they are fairly arrived at, and leave no
doubt that the relationship of any one particular digit, whether thumb, fore, middle, ring or
little finger, to any other particular digit is the same, whether the two digits are on the same
or opposite hands. It would be a most interesting subject of statistical inquiry to ascertain
whether the distribution of malformations, or of the various forms of skin disease among the
digits, corroborates this unexpected and remarkable result. I am sorry to have no means of
undertaking it, being assured on good authority that no adequate collection of the necessary
data has yet been published." (p. 122.)

PGiii 24

186

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Here again we have to remember that the amount of resemblance is not
really measured by the numbers given ; they might, as in the previous case,
be merely the result of chance. Let us work out how much is due to chance
in the case of the thumb and ring finger.

Percentage of Cases in which the same Class of Pattern occurs
in Thumb and Ring Finger.

How
found

Of Same Hands

Of Opposite Hands

Arches

Loops

Whorls

Total

Arches

Loops

Whorls

Total

Observed
Chance

40
36

61
51

38
35

18
13

57
48

Difference

The numbers remain very close, when we have deducted the resemblances
due to chance, but perhaps do not look so impressive. Only about one-sixth
of the resemblances in both cases can be attributed to the organic relationship.

Galton, on pp. 122-129, discusses a somewhat unusual method of deter-
mining the degree of association between the patterns on any two digits.
To illustrate it let us take loops on the ring fingers of left and right hands.
These occur in 66 / o and 53°/ o of cases. Or, the chance of a loop is — if the
results were independent — 100 x T %^ x ^^ = 35% nearly. The maximum
possible number of loops common to the two fingers is 53% and the actually
observed number is 46°/ c . We have then the three numbers 35, 46 and 53.
Galton takes the first as a zero relationship and the last as a perfect
relationship, which is represented by him as 100°. On the scale in which 35

represents 0° and 53, 100°, we must have 46 =

48-35
53-3S

100° = 4^ 100° = 61°

He gives a table for these grades of association on p. 129 between digits of
the same and of different hands. According to this table the highest relation-
ship is between whorls on the middle and ring fingers (74°) and the lowest
between loops on fore and ring fingers (13°). Galton is himself somewhat
doubtful as to this method of measuring association, and I have not
accordingly reproduced his full table (p. 129).

In Chapter IX (pp. 131-146) Galton deals with Methods of Indexing.
It does not carry us far beyond the Royal Society Proceedings paper (see
our pp. 170-174). In his main method Galton breaks up only the loops on
the forefingers into "inner" and "outer."* He represents these by i and o.
Thus five symbols are used : a = arch, I = loop, w = whorl, and i = inner loop on
forefinger, o = outer loop on forefinger. He breaks his ten-letter index into
four groupsf , i.e. K hand, fore, middle and ring fingers; L. hand, fore, middle

* The reader must remember that the finger-print is reversed, and not be surprised at Galton
labelling "inner" what appears to the reader, looking at his hand, as an "outer" slope.

f The reason for this has already been referred to (see our p. 184), namely, the greater variety
in the types of forefinger prints.

Personal Identification and Description

187

and ring fingers; R. hand, thumb and little finger; and finally L. hand, thumb
and little finger. Thus Galton's own index formula (see his prints on our
p. 138) is wlw, oil, wl, vol. He indexes 100 individuals in this manner. On the
basis of 500 sets of digits he gives the frequency per cent, of all index-headings
which occur more often than l°/ - The worst of these is oil, oil, 11, 11, which
occurs in 4°/ of occurrences. Thus, if we were dealing with 100,000 cases,
we might have to search among 4000 individuals with this index-heading.
The rapid fall in the number of entries having only a single individual is
evidenced by the following returns which Gal ton gives on his p. 141 :

Total Number of Entries

100

300

500

Percentage of Entries which are
the sole members of their class

49-0

39-8

When we come therefore to indices which embrace 50,000 to 100,000
individuals, it will be seen that it may be needful to go through a large
number of the cards on the o, i, a, I, w system of indexing before we identify
a given individual. Thus even with the use of inner and outer loops on the
forefingers, the great frequency of loops renders this system cumbersome for
large finger-print collections. I do not think that Galton in 1892, although he
suggests (p. 145) counting approximately the ridges, saw his way clearly out
of this difficulty of loop redundancy. Possibly he did not fully realise the
difference between his small collections and those of a national index of
criminals.

In this chapter Galton describes the form of card he used for printing
and his manner of storing such cards (p. 145).

Chapter X is entitled Personal Identification. This chapter contains
much of general interest, which, however, we can only afford space to sum-
marise briefly here. After referring to the ease with which any printer
could take finger-impressions Galton again emphasises the suitability of the
photographer for this work (see our p. 155), as not only can he easily enlarge
prints, but he keeps an index to his negatives. Galton then passes to the
many purposes for which identification is not only desirable but necessary.
He cites some very interesting remarks (pp. 150-152) of Major Ferris, of the
Indian Staff Corps, who, ignorant of Herschel's work, had found the same
series of difficulties in identification and who had seen with much appreciation
the finger-print method of identification at work in Galton's Laboratory —
even as Sir E. It. Henry did later.

In the next place Galton gives on the whole a favourable account of
bertillonage (pp. 154-158), questioning, however, the statements made as to
the independence of the characters measured ; Bertillon had asserted without
demonstrating this independence. Galton shows from data of a similar kind
drawn from his own Anthropometric Laboratory that such variables are not
independent. Starting with five characters, head length, head breadth, span,
sitting height, and middle-finger length, he shows that 167 out of 500 persons

24—2

188

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

measured fall into classes in which there are 7 to 24 repetitions*. But even
the group of 24 individuals could be separated out by taking finer divisions
of the head measurements than the three classes and introducing seven eye-
colour classes. I think Galton was not unnaturally critical of bertillonage,
because it started by theoretically asserting the independence of measurements
which he knew to be correlated^ ; it did in fact overlook one of his greatest
discoveries, the quantitative measurement of the correlation of bodily measure-
ments. Nevertheless Galton is fair to the results of the system :

" It would appear from these and other data, that a purely anthropometric classification,
irrespective of bodily marks and photographs, would enable an expert to deal with registers of
considerable size... it seems probable that with comparatively few exceptions, at least two
thousand adults of the same sex might be individualised, merely by means of twelve careful
measures, on the Bertillon system, making reasonable allowances for that small change of pro-
portions that occurs after a lapse of a few years, and for inaccuracies of measurement. This
estimate may be far below the truth, but more cannot be safely inferred from the above very
limited experiment." (p. 163.)

It may be remarked that Bertillon does not appear to have made even
such a limited experiment before he started his vast collection on the basis
of his "independence" dogma!

Some account is then given of an American system of identification in the
case of recruits and deserters. It seems to be based on height, age (how
judged ?), hair and eye colours for indexing purposes and then on a careful
record of the body-marks placed on outline figures. Body-marks form of
course an important factor of bertillonage (pp. 164-5). Galton remarks that
no system he knows of appears to take account of the teeth. If teeth are
absent when a man is first examined, they will be absent when he is ex-
amined a second time. He may have lost others in addition, but the fact of
his having lost certain specified teeth prevents his being mistaken for a man
who still possesses them (p. 166).

M. Herbette, speaking at the International Prison Congress in Rome,
remarked of bertillonage :

" In one word, to 6x the human personality, to give to each human being an identity, an
individuality which can be depended upon with certainty, lasting, unchangeable, always
recognisable and easily adduced, this appears to be in the largest sense the aim of the new
method."

Galton fitly remarks that these perspicacious words are even more ap-
plicable to the method of finger-prints than to that of anthropometry.
Bertillonage can rarely supply more than grounds for very strong suspicion,
finger-prints alone are amply sufficient to produce absolute conviction of
identity.

Number of Repetitions

Number of Individuals

t Some of the Bertillon measurements are indeed highly correlated. See Macdonell,
Biometrika, Vol. i, pp 202, 212.

Personal Identification and Description

189

Chapter XI (pp. 170-191) discusses the suhject of Heredity in finger-prints.
This is a most difficult problem ; it is not only that certain fingers favour certain
classes of patterns, but that certain patterns classed in different broad groups
are closely associated with each other. If we classify merely in arches, loops and
whorls, we may find two kinsmen who have really kindred patterns, e.g. one
having a plain arch and the other a nascent loop, classified as being as widely
apart, as if the one had shown a tented arch and the other a twined loop.
Again, supposing an extremely rare pattern occurs on the ring finger of one
kinsman, and on the forefinger of the second, are we to dismiss this from our
consideration of hereditary resemblance? It is almost inconceivable that a
mere Arch-Loop-Whorl classification, especially if confined to a few fingers,
can provide a true measure of inheritance although it may demonstrate that
heredity is a factor of finger-print determination. Galton, in his first series
of observations, confines himself to the fraternal relationship (boys and girls)
of 105 pairs, dealing with right hand forefinger only and using the simple Arch-
Loop-Whorl system. As we have remarked, this may show the existence of
heredity, but it cannot really measure its intensity. He obtains the following
table :

Observed Fraternal Coiqrtets.
First Child

Second Child

Arch

Loop

Whorl

Total

Arch
Loop
Whorl

5 (1-7) [10]

42 (37-6) [61]

10 (6-2) [25]

19
61
25

Total

105

Galton then pays attention only to the numbers occurring in the diagonal
column, i.e. identical prints in the fraternal couplet with the Arch-Loop-
Whorl classification. The numbers in round brackets are what are to be
randomly expected, the numbers in square brackets, the highest values
attainable for resemblance, on the hypothesis of independence of the marginal
totals. In every case the observed values lie between the random and the
highest values and Galton takes this as evidence of heredity.

It will be seen that Galton is here aiming if rather ineffectually at some
process like the modern method of contingency. If we apply now his method
of centesimal grades we find for the degree of resemblance :

Arches: 39'8 ; Loops: 18-8°; Whorls: 20-2°.

Of these the last two are probably equal within the error of random
sampling. The first shows about double the relationship of the other two.
I do not believe this is due to a greater intensity of the force of heredity in
arches than loops, but solely to the fact that arches form a relatively rare and
homogeneous group, while loops and whorls are conglomerates and the use of

190 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

these terms tends to obscure finer resemblances. This peculiarity of the
loops recurs in further investigations made by Galton with the aid of
Howard Collins, and the former writes :

" I am unable to account for this curious behaviour of the loops, which can hardly be due
to statistical accident, in the face of so much concurrent evidence." (p. 185.)

But I think the explanation lies in the fact that resemblance is lost when
a very broad category such as "loops" is taken.

Galton, however, did see the difficulties of the Arch-Loop-Whorl classifica-
tion, though not as far as I can judge of the limitation due to "corresponding
finger." He accordingly prepared a set of 53 standard patterns, of which 46
are in pairs for "inner" and "outer," i.e. each pair is a mirror reversal. They
are for the right hand, and the numbers of each pair of the last 46 must be
reversed when we deal with the left hand. He calls this the " (7-set ol
Standard Patterns," as Mr Howard Collins performed most of the tabulation
under the C-set of patterns. The data consisted of right fore, middle and
ring fingers in 150 couplets of siblings*, 900 digits in all. Unluckily the
"C-set of Standard Patterns" is in one, the most important, respect almost
as defective as the Arch-Loop-Whorl classification. While in the former
treatment 129 out of 210 finger-prints fell into the loop category here 291
out of 900 finger-prints fall under the pattern No. 42, which is practically
the simple loop; it is clear that this standard set of 53 patterns has failed to
meet the inherent difficulty of breaking up the bulk of the loops.

Our author proceeds in the same way to deal only with complete re
semblances, i.e. he deals only with the diagonal of his contingency table,
disregarding the possibility that a deBciency below the random value may
be as important in measuring association as an excess above that value. Com-
paring in this way random values, observed values and maximum possible
values, and applying his method of the centesimal scale, Galton obtains the
following results:

Resemblance of Siblings, 150 Couplets: forefinger, 9°; middle finger,
10° ; ring finger, 12°. We have no probable error given for this method of
computing association, but it may be to some extent estimated by the fact
that an additional 50 couplets, worked out for middle finger only, gave a
value of 21°. For loops on the middle finger only, the 150 couplets gave r25°,
and the 50 couplets 8°, indicating little if any association. In nearly all
cases the random values were below the observed; in the few cases where
they are not so they were only slightly in excess. I think there is enough
to show that fraternal resemblance exists, but I personally hold that the
classification is rather inadequate, and the statistical method of reduction is
unsound.

Galton next turns (p. 185) to the degree of resemblance in twins. Here
he has two series, each of 1 7 sets of twins for the fore, middle and ring fingers
of the right hand. In the first series 19 of the 51 finger-print pairs gave the
same pattern for the same fingers of both twins, 13 gave partial resemblance
and 19 disagreement. Or, as he puts it, of 17 sets of three fingers, two
* Pairs of children with the same parents without regard to sex.

—

Q
X

ffyjCMOQ

pun W

Z
<
X

X
U

I— «

E-

hlQOJlOQ

punjAl

Personal Identification and Description 191

sets agreed in all their three couplets of fingers; four sets in two, and
five sets in one of their couplets. There are instances of partial agreement
in five others, and only complete disagreement in one. Of the second series
of 17 twins Galton contents himself by saying that two sets agreed in two of
their couplets and five agreed in one, without giving details. He concludes that :

" there cannot be the slightest doubt as to the strong tendency to resemblance in the finger
patterns of twins." (p. 186.)

Unfortunately Galton gives no measure of the probability of the random
occurrence of similar resemblances, and we are unable to compare what is
the relative degree of resemblance of twins and ordinary siblings.

Perhaps the best appreciation the reader can rapidly form of the degree
of resemblance in the finger-prints of like twins can be obtained by carefully
examining our Plate XVIII which gives the finger-prints of a pair of like
twins from the Galtoniana.

The last problem Galton touches on is that of parental heredity. Here
he has only 27 pairs of parents, whom he chooses because on one of the three
fingers, fore, middle, or ring, they have the same pattern. He has 4 cases of
the forefinger, 14 of the middle finger and 9 of the ring finger. These 27
pairs of parents have 44 sons and 65 daughters; 22 out of the 44 sons, 37
out of the 65 daughters have the same pattern on the same finger as their
parents. In 19 cases out of the 27 both parents had loops of type No 42, and
in 48 cases out of their 75 children there was also a loop on the same finger;
that is to say, in about 64 °/„ of cases, while the normal percentage is about
33 °/ - Thus, according to Galton's method, the resemblance is about 48°.
This seems to show a much greater value for filial resemblance in looping
than had been found for fraternal resemblance. Yet in analysing these
parental sets, Galton is rather apt to desert the method he adopted
for fraternal resemblances, namely, of terming two points like or unlike
according as they are of the same or not the same pattern in his C-set of
53 patterns. Thus he has 3 parental sets with No. 14 tendrilled loops; they
have 17 children of whom only 3 have No. 14 pattern; he says, however, that
No. 14 counts as a whorl, and that the 17 have 11 whorls and only 6 loops.
Few, however, of the remaining 8 whorls bear close resemblance to No. 14.
Galton gives no general measurement of parental heredity.

This raises, indeed, the broad question whether it is really the pattern
which is inherited, or merely a tendency to arch, to loop, or to whorl with-
out regard to the individual character of the pattern. Galton remarks
(p. 187) that the finger-prints of twins while tending to be of the same
pattern, cannot be mistaken one for the other; in other words, the number of
ridges and the minutiae differ*. Thence he leads us to a very fertile suggestion,
which neither he nor anyone else later, so far as I know, has ever worked out :

" It may be mentioned that I have an inquiry in view, which has not yet been fairly
begun, owing to the want of sufficient data, namely to determine the minutest biological unit
that may be hereditarily transmissible. The minutiae in the finger-prints of twins seem
suitable objects for the purpose." (p. 187.)

* Our Plate XVIII suggests that Galton in this statement has somewhat over-emphasised
the divergence between the finger-prints of twins.

192

Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

The last section of this chapter is entitled the Relative Influence of the
Father and the Mother. The fore, middle, and ring fingers of the right hand
of the father and mother of 1 36 sons and 219 daughters were tabled under
the 53 standard patterns, and I present Galton and Collins' results in the
form of percentages of likenesses found in the case of the three fingers. It
will be seen that for the fore and ring fingers there is no difference.

Percentages of Same Finger-prints in Parents and Offspring on
the basis of 136 Sons and 219 Daughters.

Relationship

Fore
Finger

Middle
Finger

Ring
Finger

Total Percentage
of Sameness

Father and Son
Father and Daughter

12-5 •/.
13-2 7 o

25-7 7
23-5 7°

20-6 7
14-0 7°

58-8 74 54 . 7 o,
50-7 7 J M ' >°

Mother and Son
Mother and Daughter

13-2 7

17-4 7°

36-8 7
34-3 7°

19-1 7
16-0 7°

69-1 7J fis ...
67-7 °/J 68 4 /-

I think it may be safely inferred from these percentages :

(i) that the Son has no greater degree of resemblance to the Father than
the Daughter has ;

(ii) that the Son has no greater degree of resemblance to the Mother
than the Daughter has;

(iii) that there is no sensible degree of difference between the resem-
blances of Father and Mother to their offspring in the fore and ring fingers;

(iv) that there does appear to be a difference in the middle finger, and
this alone causes the Mother's total of resemblances to be greater than the
Father's.

Are we to assert as a result of these conclusions (a) that the heredity
factor has greater influence in the case of the middle finger, and (b) that
the mother has more influence than the father on the finger-prints of the
offspring?

Galton does not pledge himself to (b), but merely throws it out as a
suggestion. We must, however, note that the resemblances here given include
not only the hereditary but the organic factor, and the values of the per-
centages given if they were corrected for random agreement might show very
different results. The middle finger has a far higher percentage of loops (see
the table on our p. 184) than the fore or ring fingers, hence there will be a
far larger number of random coincidences to be corrected for. Until that is
done we cannot accept (a) as true on the basis of the above table. Further,
Galton has not given the digital distribution of patterns for the two sexes,
and if these be not the same we cannot straightaway assume that (b) holds,
or indeed that either parent has the like influence on son and daughter.

Personal Identification and Description

193

I have discussed this chapter at length, primarily because Galton was
undoubtedly the first to take up the subject of the inheritance of finger-
print patterns, and it is desirable that later workers should see how he
approached the problem, and so try to avoid the difficulties be encountered.
Our statistical tools are better now than such tools were in 1892, but still the
problem remains of transcendent difficulty. Secondly, I have done so because
Galton provides as usual many suggestions for further inquiry. Here as else-
where we come across the urgent problem of a standard set of patterns, which
will subdivide plain loops into small approximately equal subclasses. Galton's
set of 53 standard patterns provides at once too many and too few. There
is no great advantage gained by dividing whorls into "inner" and "outer,"
and the division of loops into "inner" and "outer" is not division enough.

Chapter XII (pp. 192-197) deals with Races and Classes. Galton obtained
finger-print series for the English, Pure Welsh, Hebrew, Negro and Basque
races. These were dealt with in a variety of ways and he concluded that
there was no peculiar pattern which characterises persons of the above
races. Many tabulations to discover racial differentiations appear to have
been made without any great success. As an illustration Galton gives the
following table:

Percentages of Arches in the Right Forefinger.

Number of Persons

Race

Percentage

250

1332

250

English
Welsh
Hebrew-
Negro

13-6

10-8

7-9

11-3

Galton considers that there may be a significant difference between the
percentages of arches in the English and Hebrew races. Now the probable
error of his percentage value for English is 1*5 with a slightly greater value
for the Welsh and Negro. Accordingly we see that the three series of 250
are too small to show significant differences if they really exist between these
three races. The difference between Hebrew and English is 3 to 4 times its
probable error and may be significant. The point needs further inquiry on
longer series. Although no statistical differentiation of the Negro was found,
Galton remarks:

"Still, whether it be from pure fancy on my part, or from some real peculiarity, the
general aspect of the Negro print strikes me as characteristic. The width of the ridges seems
more uniform, their intervals more regular, and their courses more parallel than with us. In
short, they give an idea of greater simplicity, due to causes that I have not yet succeeded in
submitting to the test of measurement." (p. 196.)

Galton considers that this matter should be pursued further, especially
"among the Hill tribes of India, Australian blacks and other diverse and so-
called aboriginal races." I would venture to add the amplest study of the

PGIII

194 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Oriental Races, Japanese, Chinese, Aino and Tibetans, whose anthropological
characters are so distinctive *. Further, an investigation should be made of the
finger-prints of prehistoric man, especially of palaeolithic man in the caves f-
Nay, we may go back further and ask what are the finger-prints of Tarsius,
to whom some anatomists, at any rate in the matter of the hand, believe man
to be more closely linked than to the anthropoids. The ancestry of man
might possibly be illuminated by still further study of the primates' finger-
prints. It is almost impossible to believe that the Urmensch had all men's
present finger-print patterns scattered in a roughly promiscuous way over
his digits! If he had, then it forms a huge stumbling-block in the evolution
of man from a primate form.

Galton concludes his chapter by stating that he has studied the finger-
prints of men of much culture and of scientific achievement, of labourers and
artists and of the worst idiots.

" I have prints of eminent thinkers, and of eminent statesmen that can be matched by
those of congenital idiots. No indications of temjjerament, character, or ability can be found
in finger marks, so far as I have been able to discover." (p. 197.)

Chapter XIII (pp. 198-212), the final chapter, is entitled Genera, and as
it is substantially a reproduction of the matter on this topic in the Philo-
sophical Transactions (see our pp. 167-169), it seems unnecessary to analyse
its contents or repeat the criticisms already made on it by the present writer.

Taking Galton's work as a whole we have to remember that it is the first
treatise on finger-printing and none has been published since. That it is full
of novel matter and teems with suggestions. That from the time of Purkenje
(1823) to Alix (1868) there had been no scientific contribution to the subject,
nor anything published which could provide Galton with material for study,
until his own Royal Society memoirs were issued. The whole of the scientific
treatment of finger-prints and the art of identification by means of them,
now spread over the civilised world, arose from Galton's labours, especially
those in this book. If anyone doubts this let him point to a single scientific
memoir on identification by finger-prints which antedates Galton's publica-
tions, or his campaign for finger-printing as an expert art. No one can realise
how insignificant were the results before Galton, who has not read his
Finger Prints.

Decipherment of Blurred Finger Prints, 1893. In the following year
Galton issued a booklet of the above title, with the subtitle Supplementary
Chapter to "Finger Prints." Slender as is this volume (18 pp.), the important
part of which consists of sixteen plates, it is again a pioneer work. It shows
for the first time in numerous instances how evidence should be prepared which
might convince a jury of the identity of two finger-prints, even if one or both
those prints are badly impressed, or, as Galton puts it, "blurred."

* I have already indicated why I do not think the researches of Kubo or Collins conclusive
as to racial differences. See the footnote p. 140 above.

t See E. Stockis, " Le dessin papillaire digital dans l'art prehistorique," Revue Anlhropo-
logique, annee 30, 1920, p. xliii et seq.

Personal Identification and Description

195

" The registration of finger-prints of criminals, as a means of future identification, has been
thought by some to be of questionable value on two grounds — first, that ordinary officials
would fail to take them with sufficient sharpness to be of use; secondly, that no jury would
convict on finger-print evidence. These objections deserve discussion, and would perhaps by
themselves have justified a supplementary chapter to my book. It happens, however, that
there are strong concurrent reasons for writing it. I have lately come into possession of the
impressions of the fore and middle fingers of the right hand of eight different persons made
by ordinary officials, in the first instance in the year 1878 and secondly in 1892. They not
only supply a text for discussing both of the above objections, but they also afford new
evidence of the persistence of the minutiae, that is of the forks, islands and enclosures, found
in the capillary ridges." (p. 1.)

The reader will remember (see our p. 176) that Sir W. J. Herschel in 1877
had taken finger-prints for the registration of deeds at Hooghly. Galton in
his Finger Prints (p. 89) had suggested that it might be well worth while to
hunt up such of these Hindoos as were still alive and retake their finger-prints.
Through the mediation of Sir William it was possible to obtain from the
magistrate and sub-registrar of Hooghly not only fresh prints of the fore and
middle finger-prints of eight persons, who had impressed their finger-prints in
the Register of Deeds of 1878, but also these earlier prints themselves. In all
cases the range of interval was about 14 years, so that Galton got evidence of
persistence roughly between the following ages: I, 51 to 65; II, 50 to 64;
III, 38 to 52; IV, 28 to 42; V, 48 to 62; VI, 38 to 52; VII, 40 to 54; VIII,
32 to 46 (p. 4). But his task was not an easy one; not only were the paper*
and the inking on both earlier and later prints very defective, but the prints
were not rolled prints and in a number of cases only a portion of the bulb had
been impressed. Thus some of the minutiae were lost on each separate print
and this in itself caused a double loss on comparison. Galton contented himself
with a full discussion of eight out of the sixteen finger-prints and found
the following results :

Personal
Number

Finger

Number of
Agreements

Number of
Disagreements

Patterns

I
II

III

VI
VII
VIII

Fore

Middle

Fore

Middle

Fore

7
19
15
30

Loop

Whorl

Loop

Whorl

Average

—

15-6

—

Galton discusses each finger in detail (pp. 11-15), commenting on various
peculiarities and difficulties. He remarks that his evidence for correspondence

* They were on a common kind of native-made paper, worm eaten, with many holes
Several of the Hindoos were old for their race and showed signs of much manual labour
wearing down the sharpness of the ridges.

25—2

196 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

is drawn from the minutiae and not from the general pattern ; for though no
one can mistake a decided whorl for a decided loop, lesser differences are often
deceptive to the untrained eye, especially when only a portion of the pattern
has been impressed.

But the chief interest of Gal ton's present work lies not in the identification
of poor impressions at fourteen years' interval by aid of their minutiae but
in his manner of presenting the evidence. His aim is to show that rough
impressions such as may be taken by ordinary officials (or left behind by the
burglar) can be made to afford evidence strong enough to convince a jury
that two finger-prints had been made by the same person. "It is of course
supposed that the cogency of the finger-print argument will be presented to
the jury in that lucid and complete form in which it is the business of barristers
to state and support their case, when they are satisfied of the integrity of
the evidence on which it is based" (p. 2). Galton's method is best grasped
from his plates rather than from a verbal description. He first enlarges his
prints 2^ times photographically. The enlargements, eight to the page, occupy
Plates I-IV. These give him a general impression of the patterns, and the
particular cases and the parts of the particular cases he considers it desirable
to study further. These selected parts of particular cases are now photo-
graphically enlarged to seven times natural size. These enlargements occupy
Plates V-VIII, and are printed in black. Thus far the work, except for the
choice of parts, has been largely mechanical. Now comes the labour of the
expert: the outlining of the ridges on these blurred prints. In doing this
tracing paper may be used by the draughtsman, but Galton thinks a better
plan is to do the outlining on the back of the print placed against a pane of
the window or on a photographic retouching frame.

"The axes should be drawn with a finely-pointed pencil, and with care, down the middle
of the ridges. Slap-dash attempts are almost sure to be failures. It is advisable to take pains
to determine a common starting point, before proceeding to draw any lines at all ; then to
proceed from point to point in the two prints alternately, at first with wariness but afterwards

much more freely The continuous course of every line has to be made out from beginning

to end, and the lines must nowhere be too crowded or too wide apart, and they must all flow
in easy and appropriate curves ; also as much regard must be paid to such blanks as are not
obviously due to bad printing as to the markings. The general effect of these conditions is that
a mistake in deciphering any one part of the impression nearly always introduces confusion at
some other part, where the lines refuse to fit in." (pp. 10-11.)

On Plates IX-XII Galton gives his outlinings, the blurred ridges being
now printed in orange with the outlining in black, still on a sevenfold scale.
Tiny circles mark the ends or beginnings of ridges, but as Galton warns his
readers some of these may well be forks (see his p. 8 and our pp. 165, 181).

Lastly Galton provides on the same sevenfold scale the outlinings of the
ridges without the blurred ridges at all. Here in the juxtaposed prints
corresponding minutiae are given the same small numbers, so that it is
perfectly easy to refer to one after another of the correspondences. The whole
series of plates forms a singularly lucid illustration of what it is possible to
do even with badly printed and partial impressions. No reasonably thought-
ful counsel ought with such evidence to fail to convince a jury that Dwarika

I— I
X

<
■J

—

PLATE \\

Selected Corresponding Portions of the Hooghly Doublets (1878 and 1892) from Plate XIX.

Enlarged Beven times preparatory to drawing central lines of ridges,

m«m&>&*

PLATE XXI

Skeleton Charts of the Central Lines of the Ridges of the Hooghly Doublets 1878 and 1892,
drawn by aid of tracing paper from the prints on Plate XX.

Corresponding numbers in upper and lower prints indicate persistence of minutiae.

PLATE XXII

Superposition of Central Lines of Ridges on enlarged Finger-Prints, i.e. Plate XXI overprinted

on Plate XX, reproduced in fainter ink.

Personal Identification and Description 197

Nath Banerji, who had impressed his fingers in 1892 afresh, was the same
man who had impressed them on Deed No. 28 in 1878 !

We reproduce Galton's:

Plate II, Plate III left-hand side, Plate IV left-hand side (see our
Plate XIX);

Plate VI and Plate VIII (see our Plate XX) ;

Plate X and Plate XII (see our Plate XXI);

Plate XIV and Plate XVI (see our Plate XXII).
These plates form the best — a graphical — illustration of Galton's methods.

On pp. 1 7 -1 8, we have some useful suggestions as to enlargingfinger-prints,
but such work is now much more generally understood and accurately done
than in 1892. Galton's two enlarging cameras are in the possession of the
Gal ton Laboratory (see our p. 215). Our Author concludes with the following
remarks :

" Photographic enlargements save a great deal of petty trouble. It is far easier to deal
exhaustively with them than it is with actual impressions viewed under a magnifying glass.
In the latter case, a few marked correspondences, or the reverse, can readily be picked out,
and perhaps noted by the prick of a fine needle, the point of a pin being much too coarse. It
is thus easy to make out whether a suspicious print deserves the trouble of photographic
enlargement, but without previous enlargement a thorough comparison between two prints is
difficult even to an expert, and no average juryman could be expected to make it." (p. 18.)

The Second Attempt at Indexing Finger- Prints. Galton provided another
Finger-Print Index to 100 persons in July 1894. It is entitled "Physical
Index to 100 persons on their measures and finger-prints (set up in two parts
as an experiment)? Here the two parts consist: first, of an index based
primarily on five measurements as in bertillonage, and secondarily on finger-
prints; and again of an index based primarily on finger-prints, and secondarily
on the five measurements. I cannot find that this index was ever published
although it appears to have been printed, stereotyped and circulated among
Galton's friends and correspondents. It possesses in arrangement greater
brevity than that of the Finger Print Directories of the following year, and
yet gives more information since the anthropometric measurements and certain
other data are included. The whole space occupied by any entry is 36 x 17 mm.,
and Galton considers that, if the entries were cut up and pasted on to cards,

"a cabinet of 27 broad and shallow drawers measuring, over all, less than 12 inches in
height and 4| feet in width, would contain more than 100,000 of these small cards arranged
as a catalogue."

Each entry or label consists of four lines (see table on p. 198). In the
first line on the left is the anthropometric formula, on the right the finger-
print formula. These are the bases on which the indices of Part I and Part II
respectively are formed, the entries being made in order of letters and numbers
in the formulae taken in consecutive order.

The second line gives the five anthropometric measurements in the order
from left to right of (i) head length, (ii) head breadth, (iii) extreme breadth
between cheek bones, (iv) length of left cubit, (v) length of left middle finger.
To obtain the anthropometric formula, these are divided into a, I, w, which
signify short, medium, long. The medium limits are for (i) 191 to 196,

198

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

(ii) 150 to 156, (iii) 129 to 136, (iv) 450 to 464, (v) 113 to 116, all inclusive.
The danger of the anthropometric formula will arise when we have one or
more measurements in the neighbourhood of these limits. Galton uses the
five-symbol classification for his finger-print formula, namely A = arch, L = loop,
W = whorl, U and R being used for ulnar and radial loops on forefingers only.
He adopts the numerical abbreviations of his later work, i.e.

\=aa or A A, 2 = al or AL, 3=aw or AW,

A=la or LA, 5 = 11 or LL, 6 = Iw or L W,

7 = wa or WA , 8 = wl or WL, 9 = ww or WW.

The third line is the secondary classification of the finger-prints, but he
takes only the following six fingers in the order : fore, middle and ring fingers
of the right hand, and then fore, middle and ring fingers of the left hand. In the
secondary classification the symbols Galton uses are those of his Finger Print
Directories with two additions, i.e. b = partially burnt by fire or chemicals,
or so spoilt by work as to leave granulations in place of ridges, and m = the
pattern is minute, so small that two specimens of the characteristic portion
would occupy less space than that covered by a single dabbed print. As there
is no secondary classification for thumb or little finger, the description is not
so full as in the later work. Ridges are counted in the same manner as
we describe on pp. 201-2 ; and are given for the forefingers when they are
loops, and for the middle finger when it is needful to distinguish between
individuals having the same primary classifications. The fourth line gives the
initials of the subject, the year of birth, the year of measurement, and the
registered number of the subject, so that his finger-prints may be found.
The following individual cases will illustrate the compactness of the arrange-
ment and explain its interpretation :

58a

A6 B5, 88

89«> lib Rb, 55

47a WG W6, 88

196 153 138

454 111

203 151 137 486 121

195 148 140 446 111

v • v 8' ■

- * —

6 16 — || 2a — y

O V wv

G.K. 1862-94

6590

C. J. E. 1870-94 6547

G. A. 1839-94 6578

They are taken from the finger-print index. 58a = llwla ; thus G. K., whose
finger-prints were registered as No. 6590 and who was born in 1862 and
measured when he was 32 years old, was in the medium classes for length
and breadth of head and for left cubit ; he was wide in bizygomatic or cheek
bone width and had a short left middle finger; the second line gives his actual
measurements. His finger-print formula was ALW, RLL, WL, WL. Both
his thumbs were whorls, and his little fingers loops; no further information
is given. His right forefinger was an arch, there being a needle or racquet-
shaped ridge therein ; his right middle finger was a loop invaded by a blunt
system of ridges; his right ring finger was a whorl with a racquet-shaped core.
On the left hand the forefinger was a radial loop, and the ring finger a non-
radial loop, the middle finger was a non-radial loop with the inner part of the

Personal Identification and Description 199

pattern more or less hooked. C. J. E. was born in 1870 and measured when
24 years old. His finger-prints will be found under register number 6547.
His anthropometric formula is 89w = ivlwww, or he is of medium head breadth,
but large in all his other measurements. His finger-print formula is

U5R5,55 = ULL, RLL, LL, LL,

or he belongs to the class of which all the ten prints are loops. We are only-
told that the right forefinger has an ulnar and the left a radial loop. The
number of ridges on the right forefinger is 6, and on the right middle finger
16. The left forefinger with its radial loop has only two ridges and might
also be called an arch (a) ; the left ring finger loop has a racquet-shaped core.
Finally G. A., born in 1839 and measured at 55 years of age, has for
register number 6578. His anthropometric formula is i7a — lawaa, or he is
small in head breadth, left cubit and left middle finger, medium in head length
and large in facial breadth (bizygomatic). His finger-print formula is

W6 W6, 88= WLW, WLW, WL, WL.

Thus his thumbs are whorls and both his little fingers loops; both his fore-
fingers are whorls with well-defined rings round the core ; his right middle
finger is a loop invaded by a blunt system of ridges and the same is true for
the left middle finger, the print of which might, however, be mistaken for a
whorl; there is no characterisation for either ring finger beyond the statement
that both are whorls.

It is clear that Galton was at this date feeling his way up to a more com-
plete secondary classification. Dropping the anthropometric data — although
be it remembered they are useful when the police need to give the public some
rough particulars of a criminal — there is ample space for a full 10-digit print
formula in the first line, which would get much more differentiation into the
uncharacterised L's and W's. Something of this was introduced by Galton
into his Finger- Print Directories of the following year, and we shall see that
it can be easily extended. We note that for the all-loops formulae he introduces
ridge counting on fore and middle fingers, and this was the method adopted
by Henry from Galton, although he then proceeded for ridge frequency to
follow Bertillon in using only broad categories. Galton admits that this index
was only experimental, but its arrangement is suggestive especially in the
cases where anthropometric measurements are also desirable. It has the
advantage that as the frequency under any formula increases, it is always
feasible to add more detailed secondary classification in the third line. For
example, it would be at once feasible in the last illustration to break up the
six whorls into those fed radially, ulnarly or from both sides, and again into
right-handed and left-handed screw classes.

The Final Work on Indexing Finger- Prints. Galton's third volume on the
subject of finger prints appeared in 1895 ; it is entitled Finger Print Directories,
and is gracefully dedicated to Sir William J. Herschel*. The main purpose

* " I do myself the pleasure of dedicating this book to you, in recognition of your initiative
in employing finger-prints in official signatures, nearly forty years ago, and in grateful
remembrance of the invaluable help you freely gave me when I began to study them." Here,
as elsewhere, Galton very fully acknowledges his indebtedness to Herschel's aid.

200

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

of the book is to provide a method of indexing 200,000 to 300,000 individuals.
Galton assumes that five anthropometric characters will each be divided into
three classes as in bertillonage, and accordingly, if this provides for 3 5 = 243
classes, we need only to secure some method of finger-print indexing which
will leave very few multiple entries in 1000 cases. This is the problem Galton
sets himself; it will be seen that in 1895 he still thought it desirable to use
a small dose of bertillonage to aid his index, if it was to provide rapid references
to more than 1000 to 3000 individuals.

Galton here starts from the old Arch-Loop- Whorl classification with
the addition of the inner and outer slope of loops on the forefinger, only now,
I think unfortunately, he changes many of his symbols and some of his previous
terminology. Having preferred in his earlier works "inner" for the thumb
side and "outer" for the little finger side, he now adopts radial and ulnar
formerly rejected ; thus the symbols i and o are replaced by r and u. He still
works in this index with the 10 digits arranged thus*: Right, fore, middle,
ring fingers; Left, ditto. Right, thumb, little finger; Left, ditto — which in
his old treatment gave 10 letters. He reduces them, however, to eight, by
noting that a, I, w can only occur pair by pair in nine ways, and he gives
the first nine figures to these, so that it is possible to represent thumb and
little finger prints by a single figure. Thus far it is difficult to see that much
has been gained on his earlier classification. Indeed with slight changes of
notation Galton's present Primary Classification is his old a, I (i, o), w system.
Now the defects of this as the sole classification are well exhibited in the
following table which he gives (p. 77):

Formulae with Frequencies 10 and over in 1000 Tests.

Order of
Frequency

Formula

Frequency of
Occurrence

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

ull, ull, 11, 11
rll, rll, 11, 11
ull, rll, 11, 11

www, WWW, WW, WW
rll, ull, 11, 11
ulw, ull, 11, 11
ulw, ulw, 11, 11
www, www, wl, wl
wll, ull, 11, 11
ull, ull, 11, 11

59
35
24
19
17
14
12
11
10
10

Total 211

* He states, however (pp. 72 and 111), that he has modified this view for the purpose of
indexing and now prefers to take his finger-prints in order from left little finger to right little
finger. There is little doubt that the latter, the " natural " order, and also the one in which the
impressions are collectively dabbed and usually rolled, is less liable to errors of reading. At
the same time as it starts with the little finger it gives far less variety to the initial letters of
the index.

Personal Identification and Description 201

In other words, between a fifth and a quarter of the sets fall into groups
which are far too unwieldy for rapid index searching. It is clear that the
loops and whorls are the chief source of this trouble (see our pp. 149, 165 and
173) and Galton proceeds to break them up by what he terras a Secondary
Classification, or a system of adding subscripts to the letters of his primary
classification. The subscripts or suffixes as Galton calls them are very
numerous, although some can only be attached to certain patterns. For
example, what would have appeared in his old (his present primary) classi-
fication as

oiviv, oil, vow, 11,
now becomes

uw v w, ul~\l vy , w lvy w, ll v ,

where subscript y means that the core of the corresponding whorl is pear- or
racquet-shaped ; f denotes that there was a scar on the middle finger of the
left hand; l vy denotes a loop with invasion of ridges from the side and with
a racquet core ; w lvv means a whorl which might be mistaken for a loop, has
an invasion of ridges from the side and a racquet core, and l v denotes a loop
with a like invasion only. Thus 18 symbols are used to index the set. Galton
defines and discusses 28 letters and symbols which may be used as suffixes.
Obviously the above system of subscripts is one liable to error either in writing
or printing, and Galton, although he suggests its use, does not actually adopt
it in the Directory he publishes of 300 sets of prints of the 10 digits. Here
he gives the primary classification symbols on the left of his page, and then
on the right in 10 columns the suffixes to be attached to each of these
symbols. For example, the above formula appears as

| Uivw \ull\9,5\\ — ,y, — | — , f , vy \ Ivy, — | — , v\,

where the last 10 columns correspond to the digits in order of the primary
formula (9 = ww, 5 = 11, the thumb and little finger formulae of right and left
hands : see our p. 198).

Besides the 28 symbols which are chiefly devoted to breaking up the
large loop and whorl groups, Galton introduces for the troublesome all-
loops group the counting of the ridges on the forefingers. This counting he
now does in a different manner from that of his earlier papers, and one which
seems less liable to misinterpretation. He first determines a better line for
counting the ridges on (see his pp. 78-80) than he had previously selected (see
our pp. 163 and 165). The following are his rules (see Fig. 34, p. 202):

"The terminus from which the count begins is reckoned as 0; it proceeds thence up to, and
including, the other terminus.

"The inner terminus lies at the top of the core of the loop, the outer terminus at the delta,
but it is necessary to define their positions more exactly, as follows :

"Inner terminus. There are two cases :

"(a) The core of the loop may consist of an uneven number of ridges, as in each of the two
figures, a 1 and a 2 ; then the top of the central ridge is the inner terminus*.

* I think there is a risk of confusion here to which Galton does not refer. The ridge or
ridges within the "staple" may or may not meet the latter. In Figs, a 1 and a 3 the inner
ridges are made to meet the staple, and the inner terminus is not put at the top of the
pa in 26

202 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

"(b) The core may be a circumflex or 'staple'; then, the shoulder* of the staple that is
farthest from the delta is taken for the inner terminus, the nearer shoulder counting as a
separate ridge (Fig. b).

ff'i

delfa.

Inner Terminus Outer Terminus

Fig. 34. Inner and Outer Termini for Ridge Counting.

"Outer terminus. Here also are two cases :

"(c) Where the upper and lower sides of the delta are formed by the bifurcation of a single
ridge. Here the point of bifurcation forms the outer terminus. It sometimes happens that
successive forks or branches are thrown off from the same ridge first at an acute angle and
progressively becoming more obtuse. In this case the branch to be considered as forming one
side of the delta is the first that makes not less than a right angle with the stem (Fig. c).

"(d) Where the upper and lower sides of the delta are formed by two ridges that had
previously run side by side, and then suddenly diverge. Here the base of the delta is the
outer terminus. The nearest ridge in front of the place where the divergence begins, even if it
be a mere dot, and whether or no it is independent of, or springs from one of the divergent
ridges, is considered to form the base of the delta, and the outer terminus.

" If scrupulous care is taken by the beginner, first in selecting the termini that best fulfil
the above conditions, and afterwards in counting the ridges, his eye will soon become accus-
tomed to the work, and the process may then be effected both quickly and trustworthilyf. It
is usually easy to determine narrow limits within which the number of ridges will always be
held to lie."

Galton tells us that the 156 (ull, ull, 11, II)' s of his collection of 2632 sets
showed, counting as above, all numbers of ridges from 3 to 16 with fairly
equal frequency. He had also a few "under 3" and eight cases above 16;
roughly these 15 groups would reduce the 156 to groups of about 10 sets.
But Galton considers we must search not only the observed count-number,
but two count-numbers on either side of it, or practically (having regard to

central ridge. If it had been, then, I think, it is clear that with the delta in relatively the
same position as in Fig. b one less ridge would be counted in Fig. a 1 and two less in Fig. a 2 .
It is possible that the engraver erred in carrying the ridges quite up to the staple. Or,
it may be, remembering what Galton has said about cols, i.e. that we cannot be certain
whether a ridge terminates or forks, we ought always to put the inner terminal, as in Figs, a 1
and a 2 above, not where the central ridge meets the staple, but at about a ridge interval from
the meet.

* The term "shoulder" is somewhat vague; the ridge-counts might well differ according
to the choice of "shoulder." If the word means where the sides of the staple become
parallel, then the engraver of Fig. b has hardly hit this off. I believe it would be preferable
to define the shoulder as about a ridge interval below the summit. Galton's Plate 4 (our
Plate XXVI), entitled "Counting Ridges," hardly seems to meet my difficulties in this and in
the previous footnote. If Fig. 82 be a case of Fig. a 1 , then Galton does not appear to put the
inner terminus at the top of the central ridge ; had he done so, I think the ridges would be
12 instead of 13.

t Galton's illustrations of ridge-counting are given on our Plate XXVI and would have been
more helpful with a finer counting line. A thick line runs into the stem and occasionally
obscures the finer parts of the delta.

Personal Identification and Description

203

terminal groups) about a group containing 4£ ridges on the average. Each
of these groups would contain 40 to 50 individuals of the 156, or less than
\ and more than \ of the whole. Hence to count ridges in the first finger
presenting a loop would reduce to less than a frequency of 10 all the groups
of large frequencies except those under the formulae ull, ull, 11, 11 and www,
www, ww, ww (see the table on our p. 200). For the former group Galton
suggests in addition counting ridges on the middle finger, and is thus able to
break up his material into groups of less than 10 sets*. Here he introduces an
interesting point; he gives a partial table (p. 82) for the number of ridges
which occur in right middle and ring fingers for certain values of the
count on the right forefinger. If the means of the former be found we
have :

Number of

Ridges in

Fore Finger

Mean number of Bidges in

Middle Finger

Bing Finger

8
12
16

9-8
10-4
11-8
13-7

14-4
14-9
14-2
15-3

This suggests that there is correlation between the number of ridges at
any rate in the fore and middle fingers of the same hand, and indicates
a possible line of inquiry for the inheritance of ridge-numbers, when loops
are available in both relatives.

We have next to consider how Galton meets the difficulty of the www,
www, ww, ww class of pattern and others with numerous whorls. The main
idea he uses is that if the tail of a whorl or the ridges which form it come
from the radial side, the subscript or suffix r is used. If they come from the
ulnar side the suffix u might be used, but Galton says this is so frequent
that he does not use it. Hence w standing alone might mean fed from
both sides, from neither side, or from the ulnar side. The suffix s is,
however, used for whorls fed from both sides, but this may occur in three
different ways:

(i) The ridges from either side may double back upon themselves, so that
the contributory portions have blunt ends = sb.

(ii) The ridges from the two sides may be twisted together almost to
a point = sq.

(iii) One set of contributory ridges may spring normally from one side of
the finger, the other 'from one side of the tail of a tailed whorl = sv.

There are other symbols used by Galton in relation to whorls, namely g,

* The reader must remember that these numbers are based on a standard of 1000 sets.
100,000 sets some of the groups might still be too large.

26— 5

For

204 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

when the whorl has a great core, o, when there is at least one complete and
detached ring in the whorl*.

Eicht Forms of Whorl, (fruo deltas)

/^M

Open, on one side

Closed OfJer? on both sides

Ojierc on one side Supplied both sides Open on both sides

Fig. 35. Types of whorls from Galton's Finger Print Directories.

Galton remarks that it is best to leave a whorl ambiguous rather than
attach a v or a q to it which it does not clearly and distinctly demand. "The
omission of a suffix is of little harm ; the insertion of a wrong one is. Cases
should be dealt with merely as ambiguous, no suffix being attached to them,
when the outline followed from the inner delta to a point above the outer delta
or below it, as the case may be, does not suggest the same suffix as it does
when the outline is followed in the opposite direction. The test in question
is rapidly made and effective" (p. 94). It is, however, on the r and s sub-
classification that Galton chiefly depends for breaking up the all or many
whorl groups. Thus he writes :

" It is mainly through the help of the r and s suffixes that it is possible to discriminate
between the all- whorls which occur 19 times in every 1000 cases [see our p. 200]. The whorls

* According to Galton's nomenclature, when in tracing any part of a pattern the direction
changes so as to have pointed to all parts of the compass, that pattern is to be called a whorl.

Partial, and ComPL.ETE CrRcurrs

Fig. 36 a.
Illustration of complete circuits needed to classify a pattern as a whorl.

Hence arches with elliptic or circular rings between their arched ridges are classed as whorls.
See Plates 7 and 8 of Finger Prints (our Plates XI and XII) and the accompanying cut,
Figs. 36 a and 36 b, where, however, a print like Fig. 36 b, for which the compass point 4
might easily be non-existent, is still counted a whorl.

Personal Identification and Description 205

in that particular group are curiously monotonous in their general aspect and size, the
conspicuous characteristics of b, q and v appearing rarely, and being therefore of little service
in differentiation ; neither is any method of counting ridges of value, for their numbers are
much alike. But when the whorls are looked at carefully, and their contours followed a short
way with a pointer, the variety in their r and s characteristics becomes distinctive. It may be
pressed into the service of sub-classification, the sets admitting of being arranged in the order
of the number of r's that they severally contain, irrespective of the fingers on which those r's
appear." (pp. 95-6.)

A point which I think would be of value, but has not, I think, been noted
by Galton, is the character of the whorl or spiral. Starting from the pole of
the spiral does it correspond to a right or left-handed screw motion, i.e. is
the rotation clockwise or counter-clockwise ? It appears to me that these two
types occur in not such unequal numbers, and at once divide whorls into two
classes. Of course a clockwise or right-handed screw whorl on the actual
finger is reversed on the imprint, but we may confine our classification to the
imprints.

A further classification which might also be made in the case of simple
spirals — and which easily admits of four classes — is the direction of the whorl
or spiral at its pole or terminal. Is this direction generally upwards or
downwards, generally radial or ulnar? There would be some doubt as to
the 45° slopes, but as a rule the general polar slope is fairly obvious. I think
there is thus actually small difficulty in breaking up the whorls for the
purposes of indexing.

Galton makes only one division of arches in his Primary Classification,
namely into Plain and Tented Arches (see our Fig. 37). The symbols k, r, u,
or v may, however, be attached in the Secondary Classification.

We have already seen that Galton uses counting of ridges on the fore-
finger and if necessary on the middle finger in order to break up the loop
groups. But he admits that this is scarcely adequate in itself to deal with
an index of 3000 sets or persons. Accordingly he uses other suffixes to dif-
ferentiate loops by their cores. He considers the following three types will
suffice:

Two Forms of Arch /ro delfe)

Three Forms of Loop

Cflht-fl

> , '

Plain Arck Tented Arck i f c

Fig. 37. Fig. 38. Classification of Cores of Loops.

i is a central rod, whose head stands quite distinct and separate from the
ridge curving round it. Galton says there is no need to fear a col, if there be
the distance of a furrow between central rod and staple. / covers the cases
in which the central rod forks whether it reaches the staple or not ; it may

206

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

reunite forming the eye of a needle, or there may be an imperfect eye. The
main point is that the core is not a simple rod; the several conditions do not
need symbolising severally, they are all expressed by /.

c represents the case when the core within the loop is a second staple
wholly detached from the outer staple which curves round it.

Galton uses still further symbols in his secondary classification — k, v, x, y,
and three others to denote conditions of the print itself, namely : d, f and *.
d marks a damaged print, either owing to the condition of the finger, or to
the printing. If the print be wholly unreadable, then d is inserted in its
proper place in the primary 10 symbols; if the print be only partially damaged,
then d is to be used as a suffix, "f denotes the scar of a cut, and should be
used, however small the scar may be, as it is a valuable means of identifica-
tion. * denotes that a portion of the finger has been more or less smashed,
and should be combined with d.

Of the other four symbols x denotes that there is something very peculiar
or questionable about the pattern.

v indicates what Galton terms an invaded loop. Usually the ridges enter
through the open mouths of the loop, curve round and take their exits

Fig. 39. Secondary Classification of Loops, Galton's y and v.
Four Forms of- Loop (one delta)

Pkirz Loop Eyed Loop founded Loop Hooked Loop

Fig. 40. Secondary Classification of Loops, Galton's y, v and k.

parallel to their entrances. Sometimes, however, a system of ridges instead of
entering from the mouth, springs out from one of the sides and destroys the
symmetry of the pattern. Such a loop is an "invaded loop" and symbolised
by v. Galton holds y to be one of the most generally useful of suffixes ; it is
the formation in the inner part of the loop of an eyed form. In the ordinary
loop the ridges after turning back run parallel ; in the eyed loop they reunite
after recurving and enclose a minute plot, y must be distinguished from /,
which latter is an island or approximate island in a central rod.

Finally k denotes a curvature sometimes affecting the whole of a loop,
turning it into more or less of a solid hook, i.e. not a hook formed by a single

Personal Identification and Description 207

terminated ridge. It may be applied not only to loops, but to whorls and
even to arches to signify that they have an inner curl or hook.

It must at once be admitted that Galton requires a most imposing battery
of additional suffixes and symbols to obtain his Secondary Classification, and
further that when this has been accepted and we are able to classify some
3000 sets, so that only the slightest difficulty arises in entering or leaving
an index, there still remains the fact that difficulties will steadily increase
as we mount up from 3000 to 100,000 entries. There may, as Galton himself
thought, still be need for three or four anthropometric characters — not for the
purpose of identification but for classification. Again, this heavy array of
symbols involves much additional work at first in indexing new sets of prints
and in reading sets for identification J. When I first read Galton's Secondary
Classification and became acquainted with his battery of suffixes, it seemed
too unwieldy to be practically applicable, but' a little examination of im-
pressions under a lens convinced me that it was reasonably easy for a moderate
expert to get a grip upon it. Such experts would be in every "Identification
Bureau," and for the mere trained impressor of fingers, such as the prison
warder, it is rarely that any necessity arises for reading the prints them-
selves.

More serious defects of Galton's classification are its cumbrous character,
and the fact that the letters he uses as subscripts do not convey any hint of
their significations. I doubt whether the latter difficulty can possibly be met ;
characteristic symbols cannot be found for 20 to 30 subclasses, and if we once
realise this, then it does not much matter whether we use numbers or letters
provided we use a single one only. If we exclude numbers of ridges in loops,
which might be placed as Roman figures in brackets after the index number
itself, I believe that ten symbols with powers ought to describe any set of
prints. The particular finger — supposing these taken in natural order from
left to right — is indicated by the corresponding symbol taken in order from
left to right. Now what are the symbols to be? They may be either letters
or numbers. At first one might prefer the latter, because if we choose three
forms of alphabet, say Greek, Roman and Italic letters, although we can go
beyond ten corresponding letters of each, the printed mixture looks clumsy
and can only be read out letter by letter. On the other hand, if we use
numerals of three types: — say, Roman, Italic and Block — the printed number,
while still looking clumsy, if less so, is capable of being read aloud as so many
millions, so many thousands, hundreds, tens, etc. The grave disadvantage of
the numerical scheme is that it is far less readily adaptable to a written index,
where it is not easy to distinguish between Roman, Italic and Block numerals.
We shall probably do better therefore to adopt three alphabets, say, the
Greek, Italic small and Italic capital. Let us see how this will work.
We will first get Galton's symbols d, x, * and f into slightly simpler form.
A simple note of interrogation (?) denotes that the print is missing, cannot
be taken or is unreadable. A short rule over a letter denotes the print is

| Of course in about three-quarters of the inquiries it would not be needful to examine the
secondary classification at all.

208 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

damaged (c) = Galton's d. A short quantity over a letter (#) denotes a
questionable pattern = Galton's x. A single dot (sign of fluxion), as m, denotes
the scar of a cut = Galton's f; two dots (second fluxion or "Umlaut"), as c,
denotes a smashed finger = Galton's *. Thus we replace these four subscripts
by symbols already familiar to the printer. We then propose to adopt the
Greek alphabet to represent arches, small italic letters to represent loops, and
capitals to represent whorls. It is thus at once feasible to disregard all
individual letters and write down the common Arch-Loop-Whorl formula by
regarding alphabets only. The individual subspecies are represented by the
individual letters. But we soon find that if we are to have only as many
subspecies as Galton deals with, we shall need more letters than exist in
any of the three alphabets ! We are thus driven back to suffixes, but here
we find it easier to write numerical powers than to use subscript letters.
Further, as we only want 10 characteristics, the 10 numerals will suffice.
They are as follows:

= Galton's o, or the core of the whorl has a detached ring.

1 = Galton's 6, or the end of a single spiral or the two ends of a double spiral

are blunted.

2 = Galton's q, or the core of the spiral is made of ridges twisted up into

a point.

3 = Galton's g, or the core of the whorl is very large.

4 = Galton's k, or the body of the loop or whorl is curved like a hook, or some

of the inner ridges are hooked.

5 = Galton's v, or there is an invasion of ridges from the side of loop or whorl.

6 = Galton's y, or the core of a loop or whorl, or even sometimes of an arch,

has an eye shaped like a pear or racquet.

7 = Galton's c, or the upper part or innermost core of the loop is shaped like

a staple detached from the enveloping ridge.

8 = Galton's f, or the innermost core of the loop forks like a tuning fork ; it

may afterwards reunite, enclosing a space like the eye of a needle (or like
a broken eye).

9 = Galton's i, or the innermost core of the loop is a rod whose head is

separate from the enveloping ridge. Multiple rods may also be included
under 9.

It will be seen that the first four numerals (0, 1,2,3) apply only to whorls ;
the last three (7, 8,9) only to loops; the remaining three (4, 5, 6) to any
species of print. A little practice soon causes one to remember the significance
of these numerals as easily as Galton's letters. Any combination of these
numerals may appear as a power. Thus k 54 we shall see denotes a radial loop
with some resemblance to an arch, with an invasion of ridges from the side,
and one or more hooked ridges; again A 10 denotes a simple right-handed
screw radial whorl with a completed circle and a ridge hooked round. Galton
would represent this as w(r, ko), where w denotes the whorl, r that it is radial,
and ko that there is a coil of ridges enclosed in a complete or nearly complete
ring. So much for the power suffixes.

Personal Identification and Description 209

It should be noted that the order of the numerals in the power is in-
different. We may now turn to the subspecies of the main species indicated
by different letters of their special alphabets.

Arches:

a = simple arch ; /? = tented arch ; y = arch with a central dot or very small

circle ;
k = arch approaching radial loop ;
X = arch approaching ulnar loop;

(jl = arch which might equally well be classed as a radial loop;
v = arch which might equally well be classed as an ulnar loop ;
7r = arch approaching a radial whorl;
p = arch approaching an ulnar whorl;

<r = arch which might equally well be classed as a radial whorl;
t = arch which might equally well be classed as an ulnar whorl ;
I = tented arch which might be confused with a loop fed from both sides.

It will be seen that k, \ are nascent loops, it, p nascent whorls, and /j., v, a-, t
quite ambiguous forms, which it may be needful to look out under other
headings when searching the index.

Loops :

a = radial loop ; b = ulnar loop ; c = loop fed from both sides ;

d = loop which cannot be clearly classed under a, b or c ;

e = double adjacent loops; /= double superimposed loops;

g = loop resembling a tented arch ;

h = loop which somewhat exceeds the limit at which it could be classed as

an arch (or nascent loop) ;
k = radial loop whicli has some likeness to an arch;
/ = ulnar loop which has some likeness to an arch;
m = radial loop which might equally well be classed as an arch ;
n = ulnar loop whicli might equally well be classed as an arch;
u = radial loop which has some likeness to a whorl ;
v = ulnar loop which has some likeness to a whorl ;
x = radial loop which might equally well be classed as a whorl ;
y = ulnar loop which might equally well be classed as a whorl ;
z = loop fed from both sides which might be classed as a tented arch.

As before it will be seen that m, n and z are ambiguous cases inter-
changeable with fjt., v and £; h and / ought not to be, but may sometimes be
confused with k and X.

Whorls:

Thus far our symbolism has only been an attempt to abbreviate Galton's.
In the case of whorls we think it desirable to introduce certain additional
broad classes, besides Galton's radial (r), ulnar (u) and fed from both sides
(s). In the first place we distinguish between a simple spiral and a compound
spiral with several whorling ridges linked at the pole. In the next place we

pgiii 27

210 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

distinguish starting from the pole between clockwise and counter-clockwise,
or right handed and left-handed screw motion. We have thus twelve primary-
classes :

A = simple radial right-handed screw whorl ;

B= „ ulnar

C= ,, fed from both sides right-handed screw whorl;

Z> = compound radial right-handed screw whorl;

E= ,, ulnar „ „

F= „ fed from both sides right-handed screw whorl;

G = simple radial left-handed screw whorl ;

H= „ ulnar

/= ,, fed from both sides left-handed screw whorl;

J= compound radial left-handed screw whorl;

K= „ ulnar

L = ,, fed from both sides left-handed screw whorl.

For the resembling and the ambiguous cases we have:

P = radial whorl approaching arch ;
R = ulnar whorl approaching arch ;

S= radial whorl which might equally well be classed as arch;
T= ulnar whorl which might equally well be classed as arch;
U= radial whorl approaching loop;
V= ulnar whorl approaching loop;

X = radial whorl which might equally well be classed as loop;
Y= ulnar whorl which might equally well be classed as loop.

Clearly X, Y are interchangeable with x and y, and if the index shows
no U or V, then u or v should be sought for.

Unfortunately Galton's index does not record directly whether his whorls
were simple or compound, or whether they were right or left-handed screws.
Accordingly, in writing down his symbolism and that above for a few cases,
we shall assume, where there is nothing to guide us, that his whorls were
simple spirals and right-handed screws. I have chosen ten cases nearly
at random from Galton's index of 300 sets of prints, only taking care that
the selected individuals had very ample secondary classifications.

The table below gives the two notations.

In the condensed system, the indexing should be by order of letters, but
for the same letter the Greek should stand before the small italic letter and
the small italic before the capital, e.g. /8 before b and b before B.

It will be seen that it is possible to put an even finer classification based
on Galton's into a very concentrated form. Therein alphabets indicate the
genera, or primary classification, letters the species or subclasses, and powers
the individual peculiarities. In this way many thousand finger-print sets may
be indexed without reference to anthropometric characters. But we have
always to remember that to avoid multiple entries more and more symbols
must inevitably be used. A very little practice, however, teaches anyone
the meaning of the symbols employed. It does not seem possible to adopt

Personal Identification and Description

211

any system in which the symbols will be self-explanatory, and neither in
Galton's original, nor in the present condensed system has this been attempted.
The problem of the Identification Bureau is to balance the time lost in writing
down and in reading a complicated system, against the time lost in examining
the multiple entries of a more simple classification.

Table illustrating hoiv Galton's System of Finger-Print indexing may be
condensed and at the same time further developed.

Directory

Right
Hand

Left
Hand

00 V

A *

£ H

Right Hand

Left Hand

Right
Hand

Left
Hand

Number in
Register

F.M.R

F.M.R.

F. M. R.

Th. L.

A al

Rll
Rhv
Rlw

Ull

Ull
Ulw

Wll
Who

all

rll
rww

ull
wunv

ull
www

rlw

rll
itnvw

5 5
5 5

8 8
5 5

9 5
5 5
5 8
8 8
8 8
8 8

_ I —

12 — vi)

k — v

kvw r by

10c — ' vyc

V V V

kvr — —

— — yw

— ky y
vk sb sb

Say — —

rko s s

i c —

r ko —

avk — ryl

2 t -

iy - t

v —

V .

sb —

t -

9 —

O V

vw —
sb —

sq —
s —
gs —

3550
3531
2351
3660
1985
3617
3560
3498
3554
738

The following are the values on our present condensed system :

b u 6

b a

b b e

6 48 a

b G 1

C 1 a 54

C 1

{3} b b

b P

b C

C A«

b b

V b»

b B

B i0 A

b U e

b A"

{2} b b

b a

C 3

b B

B V s

b* a k b b

3550

b* abb* b {xii}

3531

B a 4 b b* b

2351

¥ »« a B 16 b

3660

C l 6* b B B

1985

b V b 6 s67 b {x}

3617

v* V 6 6 V b

3560

B b b B b

3498

B 3 A K b b b

3554

B> A b B b 6

738

With Galton : Th. = Thumb ; F. = Fore-
finger ; M. = Middle finger ; R. = Ring finger ;
L. = Little finger. In the condensed system,
the fingers are in " natural order from left
little to right little finger." The vertical
is placed between the two thumbs.

We have now to consider briefly the remainder of this last finger-print
work of Francis Galton.

In the Introductory Chapter Galton clearly defines his aim. Scotland
Yard was beginning to form a vast collection of finger-prints, but these were
to be primarily classified by four or five anthropometric measurements, so
that the number of finger-prints in a group would not amount to more than
a few hundreds or at most to, perhaps, 3000. It was the large groups in these
subindices which Galton desired to break up. He was not describing how to
deal with indices of 100,000 to 200,000 sets; that is a more modern problem.

* See our p. 198.

27—2

212 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Yet, I believe, the extension I have given above of Galton's classification would
readily admit of dealing with far larger numbers than he was considering.
The important feature of Galton's present work is that he does not give
merely definitions of his symbols for secondary classification, but he provides
also illustrations of the various finger-print anomalies and characteristics he has
symbolised. It is a misfortune that of the nine plates of finger-prints which
accompany the memoir, all but two have the impressions natural size, and
very often, to detect Galton's point, it is needful to use a magnifying glass.
As the work has been long out of print and as there is, so far as I am aware,
no published series of typical prints available, these plates are reproduced
here on an enlarged scale to indicate Galton's ideas*. He is very modest
about what he has achieved. The work, I think, shows some signs of haste,
not in the studies on which it is based, but in the manner in which it is put
together as if to supply some pressing need. He writes :

"The methods I have used undoubtedly admit of many improvements, and I shall myself
suggest important ones ; still they are the result of prolonged trials and much painstaking.
They are therefore more likely to fulfil their purpose than any one alternative scheme that has
not been worked out under similar conditions. In short, those who will consent to stand on
my shoulders, are likely to see their way to improvements more surely than if they do not
accept that aid.

" It must not be supposed that the classification of sets of finger-prints for the purpose of a
directory is especially difficult. The art of classifying rapidly and correctly, like every other
art, requires instruction and practice, but it does so in no exceptional degree. I can speak with
much more assurance on this point than was possible three years ago, when I wrote my first
book on Finger Prints, or even than was possible one year ago, at the time when that com-
mittee was sitting [see our pp. 148 and 174] Having studied and during the last few months

having re-studied many thousands of sets of finger-prints, and therefore many tens of thousands
of individual ones, I can say with confidence that it is rare to find a pattern whose peculiarities
are not due to a few easily recognisable characteristics, occurring singly or in combinations of
two or three. It is true that patterns occasionally fall between two of my primary headings,
and that a double reference may be needed ; but these ambiguous patterns are recognised at
a glance, and the alternative references that have to be made are obvious. "

Chapter II (pp. 7-47) largely reproduces the Report of the Departmental
Committee. With this I have dealt very fully on our pp. 148-151. Chapter III
(pp. 48-59) contains Conditions and Requirements which to the reader of our
present chapter will be already familiar; they concern the breaking up of
the larger groups which arise in the ALW(+ UR) primary classification.
On pp. 58-9 are some interesting observations on the amount of work which
would be needful in order to register the 35,000 annual recruits to the British
Army by their finger-prints, and so to stop desertion followed by re-enlistment.

Chapter IV (pp. 60-77) Primary Classification, and Chapter V(pp. 78-107)
Secondary Classification, we have already summarised (see our pp. 203-205
above). Together with the plates (our Plates XXIII — XXX), they form by
far the best account a novice in finger-printing can study even to-day.
Chapter VI, a brief one of only three pages, deals with Ambiguous Patterns.
This is a most valuable chapter as indicating how we must treat intermediate

* Some further understanding of his classificatory system may be obtained from the much
reduced set of standard types, which will be found in the pocket at the end of this volume.
The originals in three large frames are in the Anthropometric Laboratory at University
College, London.

PLATE XXIII

Types treated by Galton as Arches.

18 («, org

PLATE XXIV

Types treated by Galton as Loops.

42 ?Arch (lev)

48 Loop (ft)

PLATE XXV

Types treated by Galton as Whorls.

54 Whorl (y)

06 Whorl (y)

72 Whorl (6«)

PLATE XXVI

Galton's method of counting the Ridges in Loops. The number of ridges as determined
by him are given in the left-hand top corner of each print: see our pp. 201-202.

A dabbed and a rolled print of the same linger to indicate how the former may lead one
to classify as a loop, what the latter shows to be really a whorl : see our p. 213.

PLATE XXVII

Illustrations of Gal ton's Symbols i,/and c. (See our p. 205.)

PLATE XXVIII

Illustrations of Galton's Symbols y, v, vy. (See our p. 206.)

126 (vy)

144 (vy)

PLATE XXIX

Galton's Symbols applied to Noteworthy Peculiarities. (See our p. 208.)

118

164

162 (t)

icn (t)

PLATE XXX

Various Prints with Galton's Classifications.

1G9
Loop (a)

170
Loop («)

171
Loop (a)

172
Loop (a)

173 174

Imperfect Forms of Tented Arch

175
Whorl (ky)

176
Loop (»)

177
Loop (t)

178
Whorl (ofc)

179
Whorl («&)

180
Loop (y)

181
Loop (y)

182
Whorl (y)

183
Whorl iy)

To illustrate the Symbols of Galton's Secondary Classification.

Personal Identification and Description 213

patterns. I transcribe two-thirds of it for the benefit of those who can no
longer obtain Galton's original work*.

"The chief peculiarities of individual Arches, Loops and Whorls having now been described,
it becomes easy to discuss the frontiers of the primary classes and the debatable country
between them.

"A to L [i.e. Arch to Loop]. The frontier between A and L ceases to be distinct at the point
where A is just short of developing into a nascent loop. In the Figures 169 to 172 that point
is just, but only just passed, so all those figures should count as loops with an a suffixed.
The debatable ground lies between these and unmistakable arches, and in that debatable
ground, A is held to predominate over L under any one of the following conditions:

" 1. When the loop is formed by no more than one complete bend or staple, which may,
however, be perfectly distinct, and may also enclose a rod (Fig. 21).

"2. When it consists of two or even three imperfect bends (Figs. 19, 20), especially if they
converge and unite.

"3. Offsets at acute angles (Fig. 10) from the same ridge or from the same furrow do not
rank as heads to loops.

"4. When two symmetrically disposed loops are enclosed in the same curved ridge
(Figs. 173, 174) they are counted as an imperfect form of tented arch, being noted as A with
the suffix t or tur.

" Generally speaking A is held to predominate whenever the pattern has no continuous
contour, even though there may be a fairly distinct delta (Fig. 20), but it would be proper to
unite the suffix I to this." (pp. 108-9.)

Clearly since Arches form a relatively small group, it would be to the
advantage of the indexer, if frontier cases were allotted as far as possible to
Arches.

"A to W [i.e. Arch to Whorl]. Between A and W a very small, or else an imperfect circle,
or dot sometimes appears between two ridges of a pattern which is an arch in all other respects
(Figs. 15, 17 and perhaps 18, which is ambiguous, and might be called a loop). If the diameter
of the whorl does not exceed the width of one of the adjacent ridge intervals, the pattern
does not lose the right to be called an A, but should for distinction's sake have a y suffixed
to it. W is certainly reached when the little circle contains a central dot as in Fig. 175 which
I should call Wky.

" L to W [i.e. Loop to Whorl]. Between L and W a large class of transitional cases have
been sufficiently discussed in speaking of complete and incomplete circuits!. See Figs. 180-183.

"The specimens Figs. 176 to 179 show the relationships between whorls to which the
suffix sb is applied (Fig. 178), with loops. In Fig. 176 we see a loop that throws off a curious
crest from the upper part of its outline, and which is here and elsewhere a striking appear-
ance; but in Fig. 177 the same peculiarity is much less distinct, while the number of cases that
exist between extreme distinctness and extreme indistinctness is so great that crests are not
allowed to have a suffix. Their conspicuousness in individual cases certainly depends to a
considerable degree on the printing, whether more or less ink and pressure are used. When,
however, the ridges cease to be given off from the outside of the contour of the loop, and
recurve upon themselves as in Fig. 178, forming a blunted end to that part of the pattern, the
result is a well-defined whorl. Another intermediate form between a loop and a whorl is produced
in another way, and is recorded by vy as already explained." (pp. 109-10.) [See our p. 206.]

Lastly Galton refers to the case in which a real whorl may be mistaken
for a loop because enough of the finger ridges have not been imprinted by
rolling. This is especially a danger with "dabbed" prints. See our Plate

Chapter VII (pp. 111-115) is entitled Suggested Improvements. Here,
as I have said, Galton gives up his special finger arrangement in favour of the

* I have retained Galton's figure numbers, and the figures to which he refers will be found
on our Plates XXIII— XXX.
t See our p. 204 footnote.

214 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

" natural order" (see our p. 200). We have seen that in the earlier publications
Galton used o and *', "outer" and "inner," to mark his directions; in this work,
to begin with, he uses "ulnar" and "radial" and the symbols U and R (or
u and r) instead of o and i. He now appears to discard U and R, writing as
follows :

"As regards the Z7and R notation, I am now decidedly in favour of the plan tentatively
suggested in my answer to Question 207 [Departmental Committee Report (Evidence)], namely
that it would be far better, on the grounds of diminishing error and fatigue, to regard the
slope of the print relatively to the paper on which it is made, and not relatively to the Radial
or Ulnar direction in the hand that made it. The slope relatively to the paper admits of uniform
interpretation ; the slope relatively to the hand does not, for what is R in the one hand is U
in the other*." (p. 112.)

Galton next suggests a symbolic notation for the arch, whorl and two

kinds of loops, i.e.

r\ \ / O

Arch Loop Loop Whorl

He says that the relief to eye and brain by this simple notation is very
great. The pencil seems inclined to gallop over the cards automatically, because
the attention is no longer strained by an endeavour to interpret the prints
into alien symbols. The hand has merely to make abbreviated copies of what
the eye sees, and thought is almost passive while doing so (p. 112). Galton
does not, however, suggest how with such symbols the secondary classification
is to be worked out.

This chapter concludes with an account of Galton's finger-print enlarging
camera, which will magnify up to sixfold. We have already referred to this
instrument (see our p. 197). Chapter VIII (pp. 116-123) contains the Specimen
Directory of 300 Sets. At first the variety of symbols in the Secondary Classi-
fication is somewhat trying, but after a little becomes easily interpretable.
Besides the numerals which are provided for the forefinger in the case of the
ridge-counts in the formula III, III, 11, 11, other numerals occur in the index ; they
never exceed 4, and they may stand alone or be associated with a or I. They
are in the Secondary Classification, and I cannot find that Galton has any-
where explained their meaning. This I am unable to supply. As I have said,
I think the secondary classification needs condensation. It is also desirable
that the method should be applied to several thousand sets of prints to
ascertain, by an actual statistical experience, where the grading is still too
coarse, or where it is over fine. If a student of finger-prints should, however,
question me as to where he could learn how to index several thousand sets
of finger-prints, I still could not refer him to anything better than Galton's
Finger Print Directories of more than thirty years ago !

* Galton does not say how he proposes to symbolise the particular slope. As far as I can
see, the result would be that two radial whorls on homologous fingers, say, which might be
practically identical instead of being represented by the same symbol, would be represented by
different symbols, which for any scientific purpose (e.g. inheritance) would be disastrous. If
the finger-prints are taken in natural order, I see no difficulty in inscribing the letter U outside
both.little fingers and the letter R in the middle of the set of prints, between the adjacent
thumbs. They might even be printed in these positions on the blanks which serve for the
finger impressions. If the slope is then downwards from forefinger towards the little finger it
is ulnar, otherwise radial.

Personal Identification and Description 215

The reader who has had the courage to follow Galton's biographer through
the intricacies of this chapter will, I am sure, be convinced not only of the
labour Galton devoted to his finger-print studies but also of the amazing
energy he exhibited in acquainting not only administrative bodies but the
public at large with the possibilities which then lay hidden in finger-printing,
and this not solely for scientific but also for practical purposes. If the reader
can find anyone who before 1895 had published a tithe of what Galton had

Fig. 41. Galton's Finger- Print Enlarging Camera.

issued on this topic, then I will admit him also to be a pioneer ; if he can
find anyone who has since 1895 done more than amplify in minor, often in
very minor points Galton's work, then I will admit him a worthy successor
to Galton.

Finger-printing as a science and finger-printing as an art are both alike
the product of Galton's insight, ingenuity and tireless activity; the attempts
to belittle the credit due to him can only spring from those who for their
own purposes choose to ignore the literature of the subject.

216

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Note to Chapter X V.

Finger-Prints as Reminiscences. As some collect autographs and others
photographs, so we may collect finger-prints as mementoes of friends or of great
men. Such a collection was formed by Francis Galton, and, the circumstances
not always being favourable for a printer's ink impression, he not infrequently
fell back on sealing-wax. In the Galtoniana are many sealing-wax impressions
of Galton's friends. Thus we have Herbert Spencer's and quite a number of
Sir W. R. Grove's* prints. The process of pressing the finger on hot wax was
not always without pain, as is indicated in the accompanying 1893 Christmas
greeting of Addington Symonds' daughter Katherine to Francis Galton.

Fig. 42. A Christmas Greeting to Francis Galton "from an affectionate and admiring friend."

Among the prints of famous men to be found in Galton's Album of Prints
are those of Gladstone, Zola, Wallace, Herbert Spencer, etc. ; the Darwins,
the Vernon Harcourts, the Garrods and many other families also appear.
Galton himself had a seal cut from his right ring finger print, and this is
still used on the name cards at the Annual Galton Laboratory Dinner. There
are many other relics of Galton's early finger-print collecting days, e.g. prints
of idiots, of farm labourers, of the Herschels at different ages, and occasionally
foot and hand prints, as well as some finger-prints of apes. For some years
Galton must have always had a finger-printing apparatus in his pocket, and
possibly, like all men with a dominating hobby, have been somewhat of a
trial to his acquaintances.

* Of combined legal and scientific fame !

PLATE XXXI

Francis Galton, the Founder of the Science of Eugenics, from a photograph of 1902,
by the late Mr Dew-Smith. (By kind permission of Mrs Dew-Smith.)

CHAPTER XVI

EUGENICS AS A CREED AND THE LAST DECADE OF GALTON'S LIFE

" No custom can be considered seriously repugnant to human feelings that has ever pre-
vailed extensively in a contented nation, whether barbarous or civilised. Any custom established
by a powerful authority soon becomes looked upon as a duty, and before long as an axiom of
conduct which is rarely questioned." Francis Galton, 1894.

(l) Introductory. The careful reader of this work will have realised how
deeply impressed Galton was by the idea that with man himself lies the
possibility of improving his race ; and this impression existed long before
Galton initiated active propaganda for Eugenics as a social and political
creed. Indeed, although Galton's earlier writings reached a limited and partly
prepared audience, it was not till the beginning of the present century
that he considered the time ripe for a more general public appeal, or sought
proselytes to the new faith. There are some creeds, and more sciences, of
which it is nearly impossible to name a single individual as the creator. When
we speak of Christianity we forget, or wilfully disregard, Paul ; Einstein was
not the first to see material phenomena in the curvature of space ; nor did
Darwin stand alone when he propounded evolution through natural selection.
But what student of evolution before Galton, realising the past ascent of man,
grasped that his future lies with himself, if he be willing to study and control
his own breeding ? It is given to few men to name a new branch of science
and lay down the broad lines of its development ; it is the lot of fewer still
to forecast its future as a creed of social conduct. In the thirty years which
have elapsed, since Galton started his public teaching, what gratifying progress
has been made, not only in establishing institutes and laboratories for research
in Eugenics*, but also in familiarising the people at large with the code of
conduct which an acceptance of eugenic principles involves ! It is as if the
Great War had so thoroughly demonstrated the pitiable failure of humanity,
that its thinkers and leaders felt that the old man must be replaced by a new-
born Apollo f, the worn-out creed which had failed him by a more adequate

* Institutes primarily for Eugenics research exist to my knowledge in England, America,
Sweden, Norway, Russia, Switzerland, Germany, Poland and probably elsewhere. Popular
Journals or Eugenics Societies have been started in England, America, Germany, France,
Italy and Russia.

t " Grief overcame,

" And I was stopping up my frantic ears,

" When, past all hindrance of my trembling hands,

" A voice came, sweeter, sweeter than all tune,

"And still it cried, 'Apollo! young Apollo!

"The morning-bright Apollo! young Apollo!'

"I fled, it follow'd me, and cried 'Apollo!'" Keats, Hyperion.

r g in 28

218 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

faith. We know little of how it came about that Aurignacian man replaced
Mousterian man ; but the ascent was a steep one, and man needs once more
some such rapid elevating. With our present acquaintance with the laws
of heredity, with our present knowledge of how customs and creeds
have changed, can we not hasten the evolutionary process of fitting man to
the needs of his present environment ? It is indeed a great task because it
involves control of the most imperious instinct of living beings, so imperious
that Nature's method of improvement has been to provide quantity and seek
therein for quality. The new creed bids us seek quality and restrict quantity ;
separate, where race demands it, the scarce controllable instinct of mating
from the parental instinct, and teach nations to pride themselves on the
superior type of their citizens, rather than on their material resources. The
eugenic dreamer sees in the distant future a rivalry of nations in the task of
bringing to greater perfection their human stocks, and this by an intensive
study of biological law applied to man, and its incorporation, it may be
gradually, but surely, in a revised moral or social code.

(2) Address to the Demographers. A paper which bridges the gulf
between the Inquiry into Human Faculty of 1883 and the Huxley Lecture
of 1901 is Galton's" Presidential Address "of August 11, 1891, to the Division
of Demography of the Seventh International Congress of Hygiene and
Demography*. The word "Eugenics" does not occur in the address, it has
no topical title, and yet it is an insistent demand for the study of eugenic
problems. The paper has escaped and is likely to escape attention, it is not
as far as I am aware included in any list of Galton's published papers, nor are
copies of it among his offprints or in the bound volumes of his memoirs. Yet
the address is of very great interest, not only for its intrinsic suggestiveness,
but because it shows how during twenty years Eugenics had retained a fore-
most place in Galton's mind. His appeal, however, produced as little effect
on the demographers as it did later on the anthropologists.

The topics with which the address deals are the relative fertility of various
classes within a nation, and the relative fertility of nations among them-
selves— intranational and international fertilities — whereby tendencies arise
for one class or one race to supplant another. Referring to the hypothesis
of Malthus, Galton asks :

" Is it true that misery, in any justifiable sense of that word, provides the only check which
acts automatically, or are other causes in existence, active, though as yet obscure, that assist
in restraining the overgrowth of population ? It is certain that the productiveness of different
marriages differs greatly in consequence of unexplained conditions.... One of the many evidences
of our great ignorance of the laws that govern fertility, is seen in the behaviour of bees, who
have somehow discovered that by merely modifying the diet and the size of the nursery of any
female grub, they can at will cause it to develop, either into a naturally sterile worker, or into
the potential mother of a huge hive." (p. 8.)

Galton is here foreshadowing the sterilisation of those sections of the com-
munity of small civic worth, which has since become a pressing question of
practical politics. He suggests that if persons are graded in a nation on

* Transactions of that Congress, pp. 7-12, London, 1892.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 219

physical, intellectual and moral grounds, there must essentially be a least
efficient as there will be a most efficient class. If inheritance holds for these
characteristics then the relative fertility of these classes is of the utmost
national importance. The same is true of the relative fertility of races and
nations :

"The frequency in history with which one race has supplanted another over wide geo-
graphical areas is one of the most striking [incidents] in the evolution of mankind. The denizens
of the world at the present day form a very different human stock from that which inhabited it
a dozen generations ago, and to all appearance a no less difference will be found in our successors
a dozen generations hence." (p. 10.)

Galton notes the Europeans who have swarmed over all the temperate
regions of the globe, forming the nuclei of many future nations, the dis-
appearance of the American Indian and the appearance of 8,000,000 negroes
in America. He might have added many other instances even within Europe
itself. It is indeed true that we hardly allow our thoughts to rest on the
startling racial changes which have occurred in Europe in the last three or
four thousand years, and on the still more significant changes in dominant
races all over the world during the last few hundred years. Those who fully
realise the marvellous evolution of certain types of humanity at the expense
of others will smile — sadly, it may be — and wonder whether it is feasible for
any League of Nations, however strong, to fix and maintain national and
racial boundaries, unless it shall have first fixed the relative fertility of all
the tribes of man and, what is more, internationalised all the world's resources !
As interclass struggle finds its hope of solution only in the socialism which
teaches the nationalisation of the materials and means of production, so inter-
national struggle can only reach its conclusion by the universalism which
demands internationalisation of the world's wealth. In the first case, national
eugenics is the only means left to provide any nation with men strong in
mind and body ; in the second case, international eugenics is the sole
possibility of producing finer races of mankind. The men or group of men
who can say to a nation large or small : " This is your frontier and you must
keep to it," will be forced ultimately and logically to the point, not only
of internationalising the world's wealth and its means of transport, but
also of saying : " This is your appropriate fertility and you must keep to it."
New modes of transport are rapidly making the world too small for mankind.
Any plant or animal that overcrowds its proper region ends by destroying its
fellows. The domesticated herd can alone thrive and progress on a limited
pasture because the breeder stringently restricts its numbers, and picks from
them those best fitted to their environment. Man, if he is to be freed from
class struggle and from racial contests — that is to say, if he is to become
thoroughly domesticated — can only thrive and progress if he breeds himself ;
in other words he must replace the harsh processes of Nature, which in the
long run grant survival solely to the physically and mentally strong — to
brain and muscle — by the milder practice of eugenics studied from the
national and even the international standpoint. In the dimmest of distant
futures we may see man fitting man to each region of his earth, and not

220 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Nature very slowly developing man, or man hoping to mould Nature to his
present self. But such knowledge is far from us at present. As Galton puts it :
" Much more care is taken to select appropriate varieties of plants and animals for planta-
tion in foreign settlements, than to select appropriate types of men. Discrimination and fore-
sight are shown in the one case, an indifference born of ignorance is shown in the other." (p. 11.)

But Galton was not pressing for immediate action, only for early study,
because these great questions of civic and racial worth

" may unexpectedly acquire importance as falling within the sphere of practical politics, and
if so, many demographic data that require forethought and time to collect, and a dispassionate
and leisurely judgment to discuss, will be hurriedly and sorely needed." (p. 7.)

In conclusion he emphasised the fact that
"the improvement of the natural gifts of future generations of the human race is largely,
though indirectly, under our control. We may not be able to originate, but we can guide.
The processes of evolution are in constant and spontaneous activity, some pushing towards the
bad, some towards the good. Our part is to watch for opportunities to intervene by checking
the former and giving free play to the latter. I wish to distinguish clearly between our power
in this fundamental respect and that which we also possess of ameliorating education and
hygiene. It is earnestly to be hoped that demographers will increasingly direct their inquiries
into historical facts, with the view of estimating the possible effects of reasonable political
action in the future, in gradually raising the present miserably low standard of the human
race to one in which the Utopias* in the dreamland of philanthropists may become practical
possibilities." (p. 12.)

The garden of humanity is very full of weeds, nurture will never transform
them into flowers ; the eugenist calls \ipon the rulers of mankind to see that
there shall be space in the garden, freed of weeds, for individuals and races of
finer growth to develop with the full bloom possible to their species. I believe
I am justified in the interpretation I have placed on Galton's address, and
if there be a "national" eugenics, those words in themselves connote — as he
himself indicates in his discussion of relative racial values — that there is also
a science of " international " eugenics. This, if as we all trust the League of
Nations survives, is bound to be the League's helpmate in the treatment of
the most difficult problem with which its future is threatened.

I may indicate here what I think Galton planned as the course to be run
by his new science. Laboratories were to be created where man should be
studied from the standpoints of heredity, anthropology and medicine ; journals
and lectures were to be provided whereby the results reached should be
popularised and a new morality inculcated. He had in view Eugenics not
only as a science, not only as an art, but also as a national creed, amounting,
indeed, to a religious faith. He never to my knowledge underestimated the
difficulties, nor the slowness of its probable progress. A letter to William
Bateson written in 1904 will indicate how Galton at that date visualised
eugenic progress f :

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. June 12, 1904.

Dear Me Bateson, Your letter of May 28 should have been answered earlier, had I not
delayed in hope of receiving your promised answers to my "Ability in Families" circular j,
and replying to both at once.

* For Galton's own "Utopia in the dreamland of philanthropists" see later in this chapter,
t I am permitted to publish this letter by the courtesy of Mrs William Bateson.
\ See p. 121 of this volume.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 221

I quite understand now (I think) your point, and to a great extent agree with it. But
what are we humans to do, if any "eugenic " progress is attempted 1 We can't mate men and
women as we please, like cocks and hens, but we could I think gradually evolve some plan by
which there would be a steady though slow amelioration of the human breed ; the aim being
to increase the contributions of the more valuable classes of the population and to diminish
the converse. We now want better criteria than we have of which is which.

Do what we can (within reasonable limits as regards mankind), fraternal variability will
never be much lessened; but I do think that the fraternal means might on the whole be raised.

That is the problem, as it seems to me, to be held in view ; also that an exact knowledge
of the true principles of heredity would hardly help us in its practical solution.

I do indeed fervently hope that exact knowledge may be gradually attained and established
beyond question, and I wish you and your collaborators all success in your attempts to obtain it.

Very faithfully yours, Francis Galton.
Do you want your cobs of maize back 1

This letter is of great importance ; it indicates that Galton had in view
only a " steady though slow amelioration of the human breed"; but it further
shows that in his opinion the exact mechanism of heredity, even if we could
find it out, was not of the highest importance. As an evolutionist he saw
mass-changes taking place, and he recognised that the statistical solution is
the one that has most importance for the eugenist. His statement that
fraternal variability — by which he certainly meant heritable variability — will
never be much lessened, is one with which I should personally agree, but the
reader must remember that it cuts at the root of the " pure line " hypothesis*,
and must not pass over its significance for Galton's own views. His remark
also that the fraternal means might on the whole be raised suggests that the
work of the biometricians had convinced him before 1904 that there was not
a continuous regression of a selected group to the population mean ; and that
sports were not essential to progress.

(3) Definition of Eugenics. We have already seen that the term
" Eugenics" was introduced by Galton in 1883 into his Inquiry into Human
Faculty. See our Vol. II, pp. 249 ftn., 251, 252. Romanes in a review in
Nature^ of Galton's Record of Family Faculties and Life History Album in
the following year (1884) uses the term "Eugenics" thrice and in one case
speaks of the " science of Eugenics." " Mr Galton," he also tells vis, " is inde-
fatigable in his zeal to promote the cause of Eugenics." Thus born in 1883,
the term had come into an accepted use in 1884.

Before we turn to Galton's propagandist lectures it is well to consider the
definition of Eugenics. In 1883 Galton had defined Eugenics as the science
of improving stock, not only by judicious mating, but by all the influences
which give the more suitable strains a better chance. In 1904 Galton
determined to take a step forward in his purpose by founding a research
fellowship in National Eugenics, and addressed the following letter to the
Principal of the University of London, Sir Arthur Rucker. This letter

* The reader may consult "A New Theory of Progressive Evolution" by the present biographer
in the recently issued Vol. iv, Part i, of the Annals of Eugenics, published by the Galton
Laboratory ; it contains a discussion of the present position of the " pure line " hypothesis.

t Vol. xxix, p. 257, January 17, 1884.

222 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

contains his own first definition of Eugenics, and whereas in the Inquiry we
find the term may be applied to animals as well as man, it is now implicitly
limited to mankind:

University of London. October 10, 1904*.

Dear Sir Arthur, I desire to forward the exact study of what may be called National
Eugenics, by which I mean the influences that are socially controllable, on which the status of
the nation depends. These are of two classes: (1) those which affect the race itself and (2) those
which affect its health. It is the numerous influences comprised in (1), whose several strengths
are as yet only vaguely surmised, that I especially want to have submitted to exact study.
Class (2) is already the subject of much research, but I fear that here also the results arrived
at require much more exact analysis by the higher methods of statistics than they have yet
received.

If a scheme can be worked out that, on the one hand, fits in with the arrangements of
the University of London and, on the other hand, is satisfactory to myself, I am prepared as
a first instalment to give £1500 to serve for three years to carry out my purposes. If, but
only if, the working of the proposed plan proves as satisfactory as I hope, I will reconsider
the question witli the view of making the endowment permanent of about £500 a year.

I presume that the University will supply accommodation for the person appointed at, say,
£200 to £250 a year, and for a clerk, say, at £80 to £100 a year, leaving £150 to £200 for
expenses. Also that the stamped official writing paper of the University may be used.

One part of his [the Fellow's] duties would be to establish a collection of records relating
to those families of England who are remarkable for the number of near kinsfolk whose deeds
have been noteworthy.

I feel some hesitation in drafting a statement of proposed duties for the "Research Fellow,"
or whatever his title may be, as they ought to fit into, and not overlap, what is already well
done. Be that what it may, I think that " National Eugenics " would be good, as it is an
exact title for what I wish to see done. Yours very faithfully, Francis Galton.

This letter is important with regard to the definition of Eugenics, as it
clearly indicates when and why the term "National" was introduced. The
University appointed a committee to consider the offer and draft a scheme
for the Research Fellowship in National Eugenics. It consisted of Sir Edward
Busk (Chairman of Convocation), Francis Galton, the Principal of the Uni-
versity, Mr Mackinder and myself. This committee met on Oct. 14th and
drew up a scheme for the Fellowship. My recollection of the meeting is that
most of the time was spent in drafting a definition, which ultimately differed
somewhat widely from that of Galton's letter of Oct. 10th, but which he finally
approved. It heads the Draft Scheme and runs :

"The term National Eugenics is here defined as the study of the agencies under social control
that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations either physically or
mentally."

The scheme itself contains the usual regulations as to manner of appoint-
ment, the constitution of a special recommending Committee, Galton reserving
a right of veto on the first nomination, the salary of the Fellow and his
assistant, who if suitable was to be termed the Francis Galton Scholar. The
duties of the Fellow are of more permanent interest : he was to devote all his
time to Eugenics, in particular he was required:

"(a) To acquaint himself with statistical methods of inquiry, and with the principal re-
searches that have been made in Eugenics, and to plan and carry out further investigations
thereon.

* I do not know whether this is a clerk's error in printing Galton's letter or whether he
actually wrote it in the precincts of the University.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 223

"(b) To institute and carry on such investigations into the history of classes and families
as may be calculated to promote the knowledge of Eugenics.

"(c) To prepare and present to the Committee, though not necessarily for publication, an
annual Report on his work [to be done under general direction of the Committee]. To give from
time to time, if required or approved by the Committee, short Courses of Lectures on Eugenics,
and in particular on his own investigations thereon.

" (rf) To prepare for publication at such times and in such manner as may be approved
by the Committee (and at least at the end of his tenure of the Fellowship), a Memoir or
Memoirs on the investigations which he has carried out."

The origin of the trend on which the Galton Laboratory of National
Eugenics was developed later will be found in this Draft Scheme.

The University Senate on October 17th accepted the Draft Scheme
without emendation, voted its cordial thanks to Francis Galton for his
gift, and appointed as a Special Committee to recommend a Fellow and
afterwards direct him*, Sir Edward Busk, Mr Mackinder, Francis Galton
and myself. It also directed the Principal to issue an advertisement of the
Fellowship and its conditions. This Sir Arthur Rucker did, but either out
of sheer perversity, or through some clerical error, the word " morally " was
substituted for " mentally " in the definition, and National Eugenics appeared
in the advertisement as " the study of agencies under social control that may
improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations either physically
or morally." Quite recently this absurd definition was communicated to me
by a member of the executive of the University as the work of the Special
Committee ! It has, I believe, no standing whatever, except that of an
advertisement issued by the executive f, for which neither Galton, nor the
Special Committee, had any responsibility. Galton, in his Herbert Spencer
Lecture at Oxford in 1907, cites the definition correctly, and in his Memories
of my Life, 1908 (p. 321), he writes that Eugenics is officially defined in the
Minutes of the University of London as " the study of agencies under social
control that may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations
either physically or mentally," I do not know whether this definition fully
covered his original views or not. I only know of one occasion on which
during his life he departed in public from it. This was during a talk with an
interviewer from the Jewish Chronicle, July 20, 1910. He then defined
Eugenics with a slight difference as "the study of the conditions under human
control which improve or impair the inborn characteristics of the racef ." It

* There was too much " direction " about the scheme as originally planned. Galton, as
I have previously remarked (see p. 135 above), was in my judgment too fond of working
through committees. Beside the University Special Committee, which on the whole did little
more than leave the first Research Fellow and Galton to their own devices, there was an
"Advisory Committee" nominated by Galton, which met at the Eugenics Record Office and
achieved little beyond hampering the Fellow. On this point the reader will find further remarks
later.

t It is to be noted that in an announcement of the Fellowship in The Times of Oct. 26,
1904, the word "mentally" occurs in its proper place.

| In this interview Galton stated that it is one part of Eugenics to encourage the idea of
parental responsibility, the other part is to see that the children born are well born. Galton
considered that the Mosaic code had enjoined the multiplication of the human species, but it
was really more important to prescribe that the children should be born from the fit and not

224 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

is clear from this wording that Francis Galton was not wholly satisfied with
the term " qualities." When did he change it? In the Codicil, dated May 25,
1909, of his Will of October 20, 1908, and in the cancelled clause, Galton
defined the purpose of his foundation to be :

" to pursue the study and further the knowledge of National Eugenics, that is of the agencies
under social control that may improve or impair the racial faculties of future generations
physically or mentally."

He thus cast his vote for " mentally." And this was undoubtedly well, for
the term " mental " is wider than " moral," and the latter does not include
the former, while at least many will be content to consider morality a mental
characteristic. Galton was less fortunate, I think, in replacing " qualities" by
" faculties." There seem to me many characteristics or qualities of the mind
or body which it is desirable for the Eugenist to study, and which it is
difficult to force into the category of " faculties." Perhaps they may be
admitted to our studies as often associated with the faculties of mind or body
to which the definition appears to limit eugenic research. It is worth noting
that Galton's Memories citing the Committee's definition of Eugenics appeared
in October, 1908 — I got my copy on the 9th — and that on October 20th Galton
signed a will in which "qualities" is replaced by "faculties." It might be
thought that " faculties" was a word handed down from an earlier will, but
this is not so. It was in the autumn of 1906 that Galton first told me of his
plan to found a professorship of Eugenics in the University of London. I find
that his letters to me of November and December, 1906, deal largely with
the wording of the clauses in his Will as to his foundation for the study of
Eugenics ; they also deal with the proposed Weldon memorial and of his own
desire to free himself from the direction of the University Eugenics Record
Office, which was becoming too much for his strength. To these matters I shall
refer later, but I think the reader will pardon me for taking one letter here
out of its natural order in the history of Galton's plans for Eugenics ; it demon-
strates that even in his testamentary deposition of 1906 he fully accepted
the definition of 1904. The letter runs as follows:

7, Windsor Terrace, The Hoe, Plymouth. Nov. 15, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, Enclosed is Mr Hartog's reply (1695. 11) to my "semi-private"
letter. Please ultimately return it to me. It is quite satisfactory from my point of view, how
would it be from yours ? — Could you be persuaded to take control of the Eugenics Office as a
branch of the Biometric Laboratory, working it in your way on "secular" biometric problems
that have a distinct bearing on Eugenics 1 It cannot be under two heads or guidances so
I willingly resign mine, perhaps keeping a nominal connection with it as " consultative*." It

the unfit. He did not allow that this latter principle was inculcated by the Jewish code. The
Jewish Chronicle in a leader on the interview endeavoured to magnify the eugenic influence
of the Mosaic code, in particular quoting the warning words spoken from Sinai about "visiting
the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generations." But surely
these words had no relation to physically or mentally feeble parents refraining from parent-
hood, but were a threat of the law-giver to induce his race to be faithful to their tribal deity,
and prevent them worshipping (should their god fail them) at the altars of other gods ! It is
only in modern days that we have adopted them as appropriate to heredity in disease.
* Galton was a "consultative" editor of Eiometrika, see below, p. 245.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 225

would enlarge your means of work and from that point of view would be agreeable, I think
and hope.

It is, perhaps, well that I should copy out the paragraph in my Will, which refers to the
residue after paying various legacies, the amount of which residue will be fully what I told
you and somewhat more.

" I devise and bequeath all the residue of my estate and effects both real and personal unto
the University of London to be held, assigned and disposed of by the Senate of that University
in the furtherance of the study of National Eugenics, that is of the agencies under social
control that may improve the racial qualities of future generations either physically or mentally.
Provided always that it shall be lawful for the Senate by a majority of not less than two-thirds
of all its members at any time after ten years shall have elapsed from the date [1906] of this
my "Will to divert part or the whole of the then remaining sum to the study of such other
branch or branches of Biometry, Statistics or of Sociology as they may then think more worthy
of support."

If you think this could be amended by a Codicil, pray tell me.

Mr Heron comes to see me tomorrow till, I believe, Monday morning ; I will write the
results of what I may learn from him, etc.

I hope that your reply to this may justify my telling Hartog that all the arrangements for
filling up the Eugenics vacancy and its future control will be in your hands, and no longer in
mine, that I wish to retire wholly and that in all matters concerning its management, except
financial, he must henceforth communicate with you — May it be so !

Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.
I shall think of you on the 24th*.

Plymouth is a success in all essentials as warmth, cooking and comfort, but the sky and
air are somewhat depressing.

This letter shows that in 1906 Galton preferred " qualities " to "faculties '
in his definition of Eugenics. In the wording of both the Will of 1908 and
the Codicil of May 25, 1909, the latter term replaces the former. I find from
letters that passed between Galton and myself between May 4 and May 18,
1909, that he consulted me as to the drafting of this later Codicil, actually
putting a copy (returned to him) before me for my suggestions, which turned
solely on the desirability of granting power to the University to delay the
appointment of a Galton professor, if no suitable man was at once available.
If the word " faculties " replaced " qualities " in this draft, probably Galton,
and certainly I, overlooked its introduction.

Historically the origin of the definition of Eugenics is of interest ; its
three forms, that in the Minutes of the University as to the duties of the
first Galton Research Fellow, which has been invariably used by the Galton
Laboratory ; the unsanctioned change in Sir Arthur Rucker's advertisement ;
and finally that of the Codicil defining the bequest to the University, have
already been the subject of inquiry from America. If the University were
ever to insist in practice on a rigid interpretation of the phrasing of the
bequest, the word "faculties" might hamper a future f occupant of the
Galton Chair. It would be most undesirable that he should be precluded
from studying any characteristic quality — iris pigmentation, constitution

* I was probably giving a public lecture on that date, but do not remember topic or place.

f Hardly in the case of the present Galton professor, as the Will permits him to associate
the Biometric Laboratory with the Galton Laboratory, and biometry at least covers the
"qualities" as well as the "faculties" of man !

pom 29

226 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

of blood or size of thyroid gland, etc. — which, without being a "faculty,"
might tend to throw light on hereditary processes in man. I have therefore
ventured to place on record here that to the best of my knowledge and
belief Galton, by the use of the term "faculties" in the Codicil of 1909,
in no wise wished to set any limitation on the definition of Eugenics which
he fully accepted in his Memories of 1908 (p. 321).

(4) The Huxley Lecture of 1901, and Allied Matters. Before entering
into more detail as to the steps Galton took to develop the research side
and the popular side of Eugenics, it may be convenient to pass under review
the publications which he issued in this last period of his life. It is true
that they were written more from the popular standpoint than his earlier
papers on statistics and heredity, but they lacked little of the old fire, and
were eminently suited to his purpose, viz. that of creating a national movement
in favour of a eugenic policy. His work may best be reviewed in chronological
order, thus forming a history of the last eleven years of his life, 1901 to 1911,
from his 79th to 89th year. We have seen* that in the winter of 1900 Galton
was in Egypt and spoke before the Khedivial Society for Geography on the
Egypt of 1846 f and of 1900. On his return in 1901, he was invited to give
the Huxley Lecture and receive the Huxley medal of the Royal Anthro-
pological Institute. Tbese events took place on October 29th %, and the lecture,
entitled "The possible Improvement of the Human Breed under the existing
Conditions of Law and Sentiment," was published in Nature, Nov. 1, 1901,
and again in the Report of the Smithsonian Institution, pp. 523-538. It seems
to have been published only in abstract by the Anthropological Institute. It
is noteworthy that Galton in his early days tried to induce the physical
anthropologists of that Institute to adopt a scientific technique. In his old
age he endeavoured to prove to them that a study of racial characters finds
its practical outcome in the art of Eugenics. In neither case was he really
successful. It is the Eugenics Laboratories springing up over Europe which
are adopting anthropology as an auxiliary science and revivifying its technique
and aims ; it is the older institutes of anthropology which have not grasped
that their study of the evolution of man's past has for its main purpose the
direction of man's future — therein alone it finds its full justification.

Galton opened his Huxley Lecture by stating that he proposed to treat
broadly a new topic belonging to a class in which Huxley himself would have
felt a keen interest. He had accordingly selected a topic, which had occupied
his thoughts for many years, and to which a large part of his published
inquiries had borne a direct though silent reference. His remarks would
serve as an additional chapter to his books on Hereditary Genius and Natural
Inheritance, and we may add also to his Inquiry into Human Faculty, wherein
he first defined and used the term "Eugenics," and talked of the possible
purposeful improvement of the human breed§.

* See the present volume, p. 158.

t Actually 1845-6: see our Vol. I, pp. 198-205.

% With Lord Avebury (formerly Sir John Lubbock) in the chair, a very fit choice.

§ See our Vol. n, pp. 252, 264 et seq.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Gallon's Life 227

The topic, he stated, had not hitherto been approached along the path
that recent knowledge has laid open, and as a result the subject had
not held as dignified a position in scientific estimation as it ought to
do. "It is smiled at as most desirable in itself and possibly worthy of
academic discussion, but absolutely out of the question as a practical
problem " (p. 523*). The object of the lecture was to show cause for a
different opinion.

" Indeed I hope to induce anthropologists to regard human improvement as a subject that
should be kept openly and squarely in view, not only on account of its transcendent importance,
but also because it affords excellent but neglected fields for investigation. I shall show that
our knowledge is already sufficient to justify the pursuit of this, perhaps the grandest of all
objects, but that we know less of the conditions upon which success depends than we might
and ought to ascertain. The limits of our knowledge and of our ignorance will become clearer
as we proceed." (p. 523.)

Thus Galton attempted to introduce the science of Eugenics to anthro-
pologists, cautiously screening the label on his draught !

He first pointed out that the natural characters and faculties of human
beings differ at least as widely as those of domesticated animals, such as
dogs and horses :

"In disposition some are gentle and good-tempered, others surly and vicious; some are
courageous, others timid; some are eager, others sluggish; some have large powers of endurance,
others are quickly fatigued ; some are muscular and powerful, others are weak ; some are
intelligent, others stupid ; some have tenacious memories of places and persons, others frequently
stray and are slow at recognizing. The number and variety of aptitudes, especially in dogs, is
truly remarkable ; among the most notable being the tendency to herd sheep, to point and to
retrieve. So it is with the various natural qualities which go towards the making of the civic
worth in man. Whether it be in character, disposition, energy, intellect or physical power,
we each receive at our birth a definite endowment, allegorized by the parable related in
St Matthew, some receiving many talents, others few." (p. 524.)

It is to be noted how artfully Galton chose the very characteristics
of the dog which correspond to those of man, and led up his artless listeners
without direct statement to the inference that what you can certainly
breed for in the dog, you might equally well breed for in man ! Galton
realised to the full that the best method of making converts is to
allow the average man an opportunity of independently discovering your
truth. In the pride of himself finding a nugget (conveniently placed),
he is far less inclined to assert without examination that the whole field
is non-auriferous.

Pushing the parable of the talents further, Galton, rather quaintly,
proceeds to put it into numbers, taking the quartile deviation ("probable
error ") to represent one talent, and using the normal frequency distribution
to express the frequency of the various grades of qualities in a nation. He
justifies the use of the normal distribution on the ground that experience
has shown that it is a fair approximation in the case of a number of qualities.

* My references are to the pages of the Smithsonian Report.

29—2

228

Life mid Letters of Francis Galton

He thus obtains the following distribution for 10,000 individuals of any
character in a nation :

Defect talents

Excess talents

Under -4-4 -3 -2 -1 Mean 12 3 4 Over 4

Total

180

672

1613

2500

1613

672

180

10,000

■

The letters below mark the particular classes for purposes of reference,
the small letters denoting classes with the corresponding range of defect
of talents below mediocrity and the capital letters the classes with excess
of talents above mediocrity. The reader will note that with a different
nomenclature the distribution is one very familiar to statisticians. Beyond
V and v Galton supposes classes W, X, etc., w, x, etc., each corresponding to
a range of one talent. He illustrates this scheme from his own data for male
stature where the mean was 5' 8", the "talent" If" nearly, and where
accordingly class U would contain men over 6' l£", "quite tall enough to
overlook a hatless mob." Then he continues :

" So the civic worth (however the term may be defined) of {/-class men, and still more of
K-class, are notably superior to the crowd ; though they are far below the heroic order."
(p. 526.)

In round numbers about one man in 300 belongs to the F-class.

In the next place Galton proceeds to compare his normal distribution scale
with the classes A, B,...H, into which Mr Charles Booth divided the
population of London in his noteworthy survey. He concludes that Mr
Booth's class H corresponds to his own T, U, V and above. Further, his own
t, u, v and below correspond to Mr Booth's class A, criminals, semi-criminals,
loafers, and a few others, and to his class B, very poor persons who subsist on
casual earnings, many of whom are inevitably poor from shiftlessness, idleness
or drink. Galton rightly considers that, from the standpoint of civic worth,
classes t, u, v and below are undesirables.

The next section of the lecture is entitled Worth of Cliildren. The lecturer
points out that the brains of the nation lie in the W- and .X-classes, and if the
people, who would be placed in them as adults, could be distinguished as
children, were procurable by money, and could be reared as Englishmen,
it would be a cheap bargain for the nation to buy them at the rate of several
hundreds or even thousands of pounds per head. He refers to Dr Farr's
estimate of the value of the baby of an Essex* labourer's wife at £5 and says
he believes that on the same actuarial principles an X-class baby might be
reckoned in thousands of pounds. While some such "talented" folk fail,
most succeed and many succeed greatly:

* Dr Farr's analysis seems based on the wages of agricultural labourers in Norfolk, not
Essex : see Journal of R. Statistical Society, Vol. xvi, pp. 38—44.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 229

"They found great industries, establish vast undertakings, increase the wealth of multitudes,
and amass large fortunes for themselves. Others, whether they be rich or poor, are the guides
and light of the nation, raising its tone, enlightening its difficulties, and imposing its ideals.
The great gain that England received through the immigration of the Huguenots* would be
insignificant to what she would derive from an annual addition of a few hundred children of
the classes W and X. I have tried but not yet succeeded to my satisfaction, to make an
approximate estimate of the worth of a child at birth according to the class he is destined to
occupy when adult. It is an eminently important subject for future investigators, for the
amount of care and cost that might profitably be expended in improving the race clearly
depends on its result." (p. 528.)

Thus far it will be clear to the reader that all that Galton does is to assert
and assert with truth that in any scale of civic worth, whether it be one of
brains or energy, artistic power or skill, the classes W and X are of the
highest value to a nation, and should be multiplied if possible, the classes t, u, v
and below are undesirable, and should be decreased if feasible. It is difficult
to see how anyone can deny this, for by the very definitions of those classes
they are the best and the worst in the community.

Galton now passes to " the descent of qualities in a population." Here he
makes use of the conception of regression as he has discussed it in his Natural
Inheritance, and makes the parental correlation one-third. As in that work
he indicates with a diagram how a population reproduces itself. The same
criticism may be made here as earlier on our pp. 18, 23 and 65, namely in the
first place the parental correlation is actually .much higher than he assumes
it, and secondly he supposes the ancestors of the parents in all cases to be
mediocre, whereas these ancestors will most probably deviate from mediocrity
in the same direction as the parents themselves do. Luckily these slips do
not invalidate his conclusions, for, if corrected, his case for obtaining F-class
offspring most economically by encouraging parentage in V-, U-, or T-class
individuals is greatly strengthened. If the reader will bear in mind that
Galton's statements owing to the above reasons give results far less favour-
able than they should be to F-class parents, we need not hesitate to cite his
sentences on p. 531 :

"Of its [the T-class in new generations] 34 or 35 sons, 6 come from V parentage, 10 from U,
10 from T, 5 from S, 3 from R, and none from any class below R; but the number of the
contributing parentages has also to be taken into account. When this is done, we see that
the lower classes make their scores owing to their quantity not to their quality, for while
35 F-class parents suffice to produce 6 sons of the F-class, it takes 2500 .ff-class fathers to
produce 3 of them. Consequently, the richness in produce of F-class parentages is to that of
the ^-class in an inverse ratio, or as 143 to 1. Similarly the richness in produce of F-class
children from parentages of the classes U, T, S, respectively, is as 3, 11 '5 and 55 to 1. More-
over nearly one-half of the produce of F-class parentages are V or U taken together, and nearly
three-quarters of them are either V, U, or T. If, then, we desire to increase the output of
F-class offspring, by far the most profitable parents to work upon would be those of the F-class,
and in a three-fold less degree those of the fAclass." (p. 531.)

Here we see Galton fully cognizant of the solution of the paradox which
nearly thirty years later was still troubling the non-statistical mind of
Professor Leonard Hillf .

* This is an illustration often used by Galton, e.g. in his Presidential Address to the
Demographic Congress, 1891, and in the Jewish Chronicle, July 30, 1910.
t See this volume, p. 27.

230

Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Standard Scheitte. of Descent

-3Q -2Q -Q O +Q +2Q +3Q

Either Trent's Grade
Number iri each

Distribution of ITIid-
-parents for 1000 pairs
with assortatioe mating
-2804 and midparental
correlation 7907 as for
stature in Man.
Each pair one male
child.

Regression of
Midparental to Filial
Centres-

Scale of Total Filial
Variability.

21-5 Children of u

67-2 Children of X,

161-3 Children of S

Wodified from Gallon's original scheme by faking better numerical oalues for stature m Man, and the

aasorlatio* m&Iinfi not perfect.

Fig. 43.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 231

Next Galton refers to the important fact that in each class of a community
there is a strong tendency to intermarriage; this not only produces a " marked
effect in the richness of brain-power of the more cultured families " but further
an effect of another kind in the lowest stratum of civic worth. After citing
Charles Booth on this " handful of barbarians*," Galton proceeds as follows :

" Many who are familiar with the habits of these people do not hesitate to say that it
would he an economy and a great benefit to the country if all habitual criminals were resolutely
segregated under merciful surveillance and peremptorily denied opportunities for producing
offspring. It would abolish a source of suffering and misery to a future generation, and would
cause no unwarrantable hardship in this." (p. 532.)

Galton, in his scheme of Standard Descent on p. 529, makes the assortative
mating coefficient perfect. I have replaced it by one [see the opposite page]
in which that coefficient has the observed value for stature. He has also
supposed his filial arrays to regress from the midpoints of the parental
blocks instead of from their means, and used a value lower than I have
adopted for the filial regression. I think my diagram emphasises the con-
clusions he has drawn above. The fact that the population does not reproduce
itself absolutely is due to grouping into blocks instead of dealing with a
continuous distribution.

The following section is headed Diplomas t. Galton considers, and probably
correctly, that there would not be a serious difficulty, if a strong enough desire
were felt, in picking out young men whose grade was of the V, W or X
order. He points out that at any great university the students are in con-
tinual competition in studies, in athletics and in public meetings, and that thus
their faculties are well known to their tutors and associates; he remarks that
civic worth may take various forms, and a considerably high level both
intellectually and physically should be required as a qualification for
candidature. Galton considers that when a limited number had thus been
selected they " might be submitted in some way to the independent votes of
fellow students on the one hand and tutors on the other whose ideals of
character and merit necessarily differ." Finally he would have an independent
committee, who would examine the candidates personally and consider the
favourable points of their family histories, making less of the unfavourable
points, unless they were " notorious and flagrant," because of the difficulty
of ascertaining the real truth about them — a view which is perhaps not wholly
to be commended. As examples of successful working of such committees
Galton cites the selections made by scientific societies, including, perhaps,
the award of their medals, " which the fortunate recipients at least are
tempted to consider judicious J " (p. 533).

* Of this .4-class Charles Booth wrote very curiously : " It is much to be desired and it is
to be hoped that this class may become less hereditary in its character ; there appears to be no
doubt that it is now hereditary to a very considerable extent." This seems to be a misuse of
the word "hereditary."

t The proposal for diplomas or certificates for eugenically fit young people was first made
by Galton in 1873 ; see our Vol. II, pp. 120-1.

% The reader may be reminded that Galton was to receive the Huxley medal at the con-
clusion of this lecture before the Institute.

232 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton next turns to the selection of women which he apparently considers
harder than that of men students, because they are fewer. He would lay
stress on their athletic proficiency and on their capacity to pass a careful
medical examination, and he would pay more attention to their hereditary
family qualities, under which he includes those of fertility and prepotency.

This idea of diplomas may raise a smile, but experience has shown the
present writer its feasibility, when public opinion is ripe for it. In any
university the anthropometric laboratory which tests some 25 or 30 physio-
logical, mental and physical characters, the eugenics laboratory which studies
family pedigrees, the academic examinations and the numerous athletic
competitions could in combination, if guided wisely, place university students
into classes graded sufficiently finely for Galton's aims. I believe there would
be no greater difficulty and considerably more accuracy than was reached
during the Great War in grading conscripts into A, B and C classes and their
subdivisions. But having admitted the possibility of at least approximately
selecting our promising youths* can we be certain of their subsequent perform-
ance? This is the subject of Galton's next section.

He remarks on the real difficulty of the problem whether a classification in
youth would be a trustworthy forecast of qualities in later life, but states that
for eugenic purposes this classification of the relatively young is essential :

" The accidents that make or mar a career do not enter into the scope of this difficulty.
It resides entirely in the fact that the development does not cease at the time of youth,
especially in the higher natures, but that faculties and capabilities which were then latent
subsequently unfold and become prominent. Putting aside the effect of serious illness, I do
not suppose there is any risk of retrogression in capacity before old age comes on. The mental
powers that a youth possesses continue with him as a man, but other faculties and new dis-
positions may arise and alter the balance of his character. He may cease to be efficient in the
way of which he gave promise, and he may perhaps become efficient in unexpected directions.

The correlation between youthful promise and performance in mature life has never been
properly investigated t- Its measurement presents no greater difficulty, so far as I can foresee,
than in other problems which have been successfully attacked.... Let me add that I think its
neglect by the vast army of highly educated persons who are connected with the present huge
system of competitive examinations to be gross and unpardonable. Neither schoolmasters,
tutors, officials of the universities, nor of the State department of education J, have ever to

* It will be seen that the lecturer does not deal with the equally, perhaps more, important
classification of other social grades, for example craftsmen and factory workers.

t E. Schuster, the first Galton Research Fellow, broke ground in this direction in his paper
in the Eugenics Laboratory Memoirs, No. in, " The Promise of Youth and the Performance of
Manhood," but the subject demands the treatment of still ampler material.

\ Some years ago our Civil Service Examinations — the most elaborate system of State
marking — were analysed in the Biometric Laboratory, not only with a view to testing the
very empirical system of marking therein adopted, but also of ascertaining whether the marks
thus settled were a real criterion of relative ability. The sole additional data needed were
appreciations of success in State service after a period of 20 or 25 years. At first one believed
salary might be such a test, but it was soon clear that other factors than ability were liable
to determine salary. A control which I proposed, namely a classification in five classes of
success, the judgment to be made by those acquainted with the inner working of the several offices
(and to be treated as strictly confidential as to the individual), was at first accepted, but later
rejected. Meanwhile the Government appears to have no proof — which must of course be
statistical — either that its system of marking is a real measure of relative ability, or that the
individuals thus selected fulfil in manhood the promise of their youth.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 283

my knowledge taken any serious step to solve this important problem, though the value of the
present elaborate system of examinations cannot be rightly estimated until it is solved."
(pp. 533-4.)

Here Galton's judgment must appeal to every thoughtful man. Educa-
tional methods both in teaching and examination are put into practice on
the balance of opinion in committees, or even by the arbitrary will of par-
ticular headmasters, and when the system is developed no attempt is made
to determine statistically whether it really achieves what it professes to do.
The preparatory schools prepare for the public schools' examinations, the
public schools are again in their teaching controlled by the examinations on
which the universities distribute their prizes, and finally distinction in the
academic graduation examinations is an all-important factor in many lucra-
tive appointments. Our educational system may be the very best available,
as apparently its administrators believe it to be ; but public confidence in it
would be based on a firmer footing if those administrators would occasionally
take stock and prove to us that the promise of youth has been fulfilled in
adult performance. We debate and we legislate, we educate and we examine —
and never take the trouble to inquire after a few years whether the results
we aimed at have been achieved !

Galton next turns to the question of the augmentation of favoured stock.
It is clear that the improvement of the stock of a nation depends on our power
of increasing the productivity of its best members. He considers this of more
importance than repressing the productivity of the worst stock ; he does not
give his reasons for this view, possibly he holds the production of one
superman to be in the long run more profitable to a nation than the repression
of fifty subhumans ; it is better to spend all available funds in the production
of men of outstanding civic worth, rather than in the reduction of the number
of undesirables. Galton's main proposal certainly would involve considerable
expense ; it is that his youths and maidens, selected for all types of outstanding
civic worth, should be put under conditions where early marriage is feasible
and large families are not detrimental to success. He holds that with able
and cultured women in particular there might be a reduction in the age at
marriage from 28 or 29 to 21 or 22, thus prolonging marriage by seven years.
This would not only save from barrenness the earlier part of the childbearing
period of these women, but would shorten each generation by some seven years.
Galton considers that it is no absurd idea that outside influences should hasten
the age of marriage or lead the best to marry the best. " A superficial
objection is sure to be urged that the fancies of young people are so in-
calculable and so irresistible that they cannot be guided." So they are — in
the exceptional case which only proves the contrary rule*. But the anthro-
pologist is only too familiar with the fact that marriage is the most custom-
ridden institution of humanity, and the variations in its customs are as
wide as the races of mankind. At least 95 °'/ o of men and women marry not
only according to the custom of their nation, but according to the habits of

* Galton cites as such the lady who scandalised her domestic circle by falling in love with
the undertaker at her father's funeral and insisting on marrying him !

p a in . 30

234 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

the small section of it to which they belong ; the agricultural lad and lass
early and within their district ; the cultured man and woman late and yet
within their own circle.

"An enthusiasm to improve the race would probably express itself by granting diplomas
to a select class of young men and women, by encouraging their intermarriages, by hastening
the time of marriage of women of that high class, and by provision for rearing children
healthily. The means that might be employed to compass these ends are dowries, especially
for those to whom moderate sums are important, assured help in emergencies during the early
years of married life, healthy homes, the pressure of public opinion, honours, and above all the
introduction of motives of a religious or quasi-religious character.

" Indeed an enthusiasm to improve the race is so noble in its aim that it might well rise
to the sense of a religious obligation. In other lands there are abundant instances in which
religious motives make early marriages a matter of custom and continued celibacy to be
regarded as a disgrace, if not a crime. The customs of the Hindoos, also of the Jews, especially
in ancient times, bear this out. In all costly civilizations there is a tendency to shrink from
marriage on prudential grounds. It would, however, be possible so to alter the conditions of
life that the most prudent course for an X-class person should lie exactly opposite to its present
direction, for he or she might find that there were advantages, and not disadvantages in early
marriage, and that the most prudent course was to follow their natural instincts."

When Galton comes to the consideration of " Existing Agencies," we are
bound to admit how few endowments of real eugenic value exist at present.
Galton suggests what might be done rather than what is already available.
With an annual expenditure of £14,000,000 on charities might not more be
achieved in producing the healthy fit than in tending the unhealthy weak %
How much of this huge charitable expenditure may not really be opposed
to eugenic doctrine in its effects % Galton refers to endowments by scholar-
ships and fellowships, but does not say that their present length of tenure is
inadequate for his purpose ; he thinks that wealthy men might be proud to
befriend poor but promising lads without the patron being " a wretch who
supports with insolence and is repaid by flattery." He commends the wise
landlord of a large estate who builds healthy cottages and prides himself
upon having them occupied by a class of men markedly superior to those in
similar positions elsewhere.

" It might well become a point of honor, and as much an avowed object, for noble families
to gather fine specimens of humanity around them as it is to procure and maintain fine breeds
of cattle, etc., which are costly but repay in satisfaction." (p. 537.)

Our author has his Utopias, as many men have had with less scientific
insight behind them. He dreams of settlements or colleges where promising
young couples might be provided with healthy and convenient quarters.
" The tone of the place would be higher than elsewhere on account of the high
quality of the inmates, and it would be distinguished by an air of energy, intelli-
gence, health and self-respect, and by mutual helpfulness." He dreams again
his dream of 1873* of a great society with ample funds recording the abler
of every social class, seeing to their intermarriage, and establishing personal
relations between them.

But while he dreams he realises that the first thing is to justify a crusade
in favour of race-improvement ; to show step by step that it is both from the

* See our Vol. II, pp. 119-122. He dreamt it again in the Utopia he described in the last
few months of his life: see the letters of the autumn of 1910 below.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Gallon's Life 235

scientific and the practical standpoint possible ; to fill up by research the
gaps in our ignorance and make every stepping-stone safe and secure. He
would be content if his lecture justified men " in following every path in a
resolute and hopeful spirit that seems to lead towards that end." And he
concludes :

" The magnitude of the inquiry is enormous, but its object is one of the highest man can
accomplish.... We cannot doubt the existence of a great power ready to hand and capable of
being directed with vast benefit as soon as we shall have learned to understand and apply it. To
no nation is a high human breed more necessary than to our own, for we plant our stock all
over the world and lay the foundation of the dispositions and capacities of future millions
of the human race." (p. 538.)

Thus Galton concludes the second Huxley Lecture of the Anthropological
Institute; it is possibly the only one of the series which is destined to live,
for it founded a new science, which in truth carried with it the germs
of a great future social movement. But the seed fell on barren soil, it found
no echo in the researches of British anthropologists, and the lecture, perhaps
the most weighty paper their Institute had heard, was never fully published
in their Journal. It attracted more attention and bore ampler fruit in
America than in this country.

Nothing daunted Galton determined to appeal to a wider public and
another class of mind. From now on he made it his chief purpose to
spend his remaining years and energies in teaching the public that they
had to take Eugenics as seriously as any other branch of science with
practical applications.

It must not be supposed, however, that Galton's devotion of his remaining
years to Eugenics cut him off entirely from other interests and from his
habitual helpfulness to other allied causes. I find that the letters interchanged
between us during the years 1900 to 1902 turn largely on the foundation of
Biometrika, and it is pleasing to recall the sympathy expressed and the help
which the Master's letters in those days of stress were to Weldon and myself,
his disciples. Unfortunately it is not possible to understand the setting of
Galton's letters or the frank and generous relationship between the older man
and his lieutenants without publishing certain letters of the latter, which
maintain the thread of the narrative. My own correspondence with
Francis Galton is scattered over nineteen years, and only small portions of
it can be published in this chapter. I shall select here a portion from the
correspondence for the years 1900-1902, which, we must remember, were
marked for Galton by (i) the foundation of Biometrika, (ii) the delivery of the
Huxley Lecture, (hi) the award of the Darwin Medal, and (iv) the election to
an Honorary Fellowship at Trinity College, Cambridge.

The following letters bearing on these points may first be cited as throwing
light on parts of that correspondence :

Inmsfail, Hills Road, Cambridge. 24 June 1901.
My dear Mr Galton, I have been commissioned by the Council of the Anthropological
Institute to ask whether you would do us the honour to deliver the Huxley Lecture this autumn
or early winter, and at the same time to receive the Huxley Medal.

30—2

236 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

We would like in this way to emphasise our appreciation of the value of your researches,
which have placed biological data on a prime mathematical basis. You have been the pioneer
in the Mathematical School of Evolution, and Anthropology has benefitted enormously, not
only by your investigations, but by those which you have directly or indirectly instigated and
inspired. Who then is better fitted to discourse to us than a Pioneer Investigator in one
corner of that field of which in other departments Huxley was a brilliant exponent t

We sincerely trust that you will add another self-denying good deed for the sake of
Anthropology, and will favour the Institute, and benefit our Science, by acceding to our
urgent request. Believe me, my dear Mr Galton,

Yours most faithfully, Alfred C. Haddon.

This letter shows a real appreciation of Galton's services to Anthropology,
hut, as I have indicated, his lecture found no response in the writings of
English anthropologists.

In announcing the award of the Darwin Medal to Francis Galton on Dec. 1 ,
1902, Sir William Huggins said it was conferred

"for his numerous contributions to the exact study of heredity and variation contained in
Hereditary Genius, Natural In/ieritance and other writings. The work of Mr Galton has long
occupied a unique position in evolutionary studies. His treatise on Hereditary Genius (1869)
was not only what it claimed to be the first attempt to investigate the special subject of the
inheritance of human faculty in a statistical manner and to arrive at numerical results, but in
it exact methods were for the first time applied to the general problem of heredity on a com-
prehensive scale. It may safely be declared that no one living had contributed more definitely
to the progress of evolutionary study, whether by actual discovery or by the fruitful direction
of thought, than Mr Galton."

And, now the letter which Francis Galton valued more than all ! It runs :

Trinity College, Cambridge. Nov. 14, 1902.

My dear Frank, Many happy duties have come to me in my life, but few happier than
that of now informing you, by the direction of our Council, that we have today elected you
an Honorary Fellow of the College under the provisions of our Statute XIX, as a "person
distinguished for literary and scientific merits."

We are electing at the same time Mr Balfour, Sir William Harcourt, Lord Macnaghten
and Professor Maitland. Our other Honorary Fellows, since the deaths of Bishop Westcott
and Lord Acton, are Lord Rayleigh and Sir George Trevelyan.

Need I say how it delights me to think that all your long and brilliant services in the
cause of many a science should again link you in the later years of your life with the College
to which, as I know, you have always been so loyal 1

Believe me, very affectionately yours, H. Montagu Butler.

Can you kindly let me know by Telegraph whether you accept ? I should like, if possible,
to announce the five Fellowships together.

Since writing the above I have just seen the award of the Darwin Medal ! Very delightful.

When a man is young, honours are a powerful incentive to further work,
and as the years go by they test the judgment of those who conferred them.
When a man is old — Galton was 80 years of age, and the wider world had
long pronounced its judgment— honours mean far less to him, and need little
exercise of judgment on the part of the givers*. There is a form of honour,

* Putting aside membership of learned societies at home and abroad and the holding of
offices therein, I may note the following honours conferred on Galton : Gold Medal, Royal
Geographical Society, 1853; Silver Medal, French Geographical Society, 1854; Royal Medal
of Royal Society, 1886; Officier de lTnstruction publique de France, 1891; D.C.L. Oxford, 1894;

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 237

however, which gives most Englishmen intense pleasure. They feel hound, in
a way that many foreigners find it difficult to understand, to their school,
college, or university. These institutions have in many cases fascinating tradi-
tions, stately huildings and beautiful environment; they act on their students
and inmates at a period when their minds are most impressionable, when they
are learning to understand the value of friendship ; when they first begin
to realise all that life may mean for them. This is peculiarly true in the case
of youths like Francis Galton who reach the free atmosphere of a University
without the background of a great public school behind them. Too many
public school boys miss half the joy of their undergraduate days by holding
too tightly to their school traditions and friends, so that the College or
University appears to them chiefly as a club where they can strengthen old
associations. With Galton it was different, like Columbus he discovered the
wonders of a new world, and what was largely due to his own mental growth
he attributed to his College, to the intellectual and physical environments it
provided ; and, as so many have done, he felt a love for it, instinctive, like
that we feel for the mother who reared us, or for our country. Such love is
difficult to defend on rational grounds ; the personnel of a college may be as
"dull as the pictures which adorn their halls," our fellow-students may be
mediocre — but blessed be the man unknown who put those two words
together, Alma Mater, and applied them to the communal homes of
our youth, those ever-verdant pastures, that we always look back to from
the dusty highways of later life ! Their honours are what we value most,
even if their worth be little esteemed by the outer world; — an emotion
no doubt of the heart, not a demand of the head, yet there are times
when Rousseau gives greater delight than Voltaire. And the octogenarian
was moved as he had scarcely been by other honours, much as his simple
modest nature always rejoiced in any recognition, however long, as it seemed
to us outsiders, postponed. Thus Galton wrote to his sister Emma about
the Darwin Medal:

Hotel des Anglais, Valescure (Vab), France. Nov. 14, 1902.

You are so sympathetic that you will be glad to know that the Royal Society has awarded
rue the Darwin Medal for my " numerous contributions to the exact study of Heredity and
Variation." It was established some few years ago, and is awarded biennially (or is it triennially)
without regard to nationality. Grassi, the Italian, got it last time for his discovery of the life
history of eels, whose early life had puzzled zoologists from before the days of Aristotle onwards.
He found that some creatures that were fished up from the Straits of Messina (Sicily) were
young eels and that eels alway go to deep sea waters to breed. — -Well, I am very pleased except
that I stand in the way of younger men. All well, except that my cough plagues me at night,
a little before daybreak. No mosquitoes here. We are the only people in the hotel.

Ever affectionately, Francis Galton.

Wallace, Hooker, I think, and Karl Pearson are, besides Grassi, the previous medallists.

Hon. Sc.D. Cambridge, 1895; Linnean Society Medal (Darwin- Wallace Celebration), 1908;
Knighthood, 1909 ; Royal Society, Copley Medal, 1910; and those recorded above. All, with
the exception of the Geographical Medals, were conferred when Galton was well over 60 years,
and in some cases over 80 !

238 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

But about his Alma Mater he wrote:

Hotel des Anglais, Valescure, prks St Raphael (Var), France. Nov. 16, 1902.

Dearest Emma, Your letter lias just come with the 2 extracts. Thank you much ; I was
sure that you and Bessy and Erasmus would all be glad to hear of the Darwin Medal. But
there is even more to tell, of even yet more value to myself. They have elected me Honorary
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, which is a rare distinction for a man who has not been
previously an ordinary fellow, or who is not a professor resident in Cambridge. The beauti-
fully conceived and worded letter of Montagu Butler, the Master of Trinity, of which Eva
has made a copy for you to keep, will explain much of this. Mr Balfour was, I think, a fellow,
anyhow he was one of the most brilliant men of his year. Sir W. Harcourt and Lord
Macnaghten were fellows, so I presume was Maitland who is a resident professor. Lord Acton
was a professor. Sir G. Trevelyan was 2nd classic of his year, but did not wait long enough
in England to gain his fellowship. It was given him after his successful administration as
Irish Secretary. Bishop Westcott was of pre-eminent reputation as a theologian and as a
classic, and had been an ordinary fellow. So had been Lord Bayleigh.

So I am in very good company indeed. Is it not pleasant 1 This is a sort of recognition I
value most highly. All the more so, as I did so little academically at Cambridge, in large part
owing to ill health. But I seem to owe almost everything to Cambridge. The high tone of
thought, the thoroughness of its work, and the very high level of ability, gave me an ideal
which I have never lost.

So much egotistically. I am getting much stronger here, and have made the discovery that
much of my asthma has been due to warm and overcarpeted rooms. Mine here I have now
had cleared of carpet and underlying straw. It feels so much purer and wholesomer. The first
night after it was done I had no asthma at all. Looking to past experiences, I now see how
commonly warm and carpeted rooms have been associated with my asthma, notably the
drawing room of the Athenaeum Club, where I can rarely sit 10 minutes without beginning
to cough. I am planning the taking up of carpets in my drawing, dining, bed and dressing
rooms at home, and varnishing and staining the floors. I have two uncarpeted rooms there
already where I have long noticed that I cough less than elsewhere (the bathroom and my
workroom*).

The weather has been delicious here this morning. I took a good 4 miles walk without
being tired, which is far in advance of what my powers were during the past summer.
How I wish you f could get up and take walks too ! We have a few friends already
come back

Bessy's journeyings for meals on account of kitchen repairs at her own house are amusing.
So is V... B...'s consignment of beetles !

Loves to Bessy, Erasmus and all. What are Erasmus' walking powers now when at his
best? How many miles does he think he could manage 1 1

Eva sends her love [here the handwriting changes] — and you will be glad to hear
that Uncle Frank is looking remarkably well; this place has done a great deal for him
mentally and physically ; he can walk and eat and sleep like any ordinary person, but
he does not present a very handsome appearance having a head still spotted with about
36 remaining bites from the mosquitoes of Hyeres. We are so happy here, yr. affect. Eva.
[Galton concludes] So much from Eva, who sketches and paints assiduously.

Ever affectionately, Francis Galton.

A characteristic letter showing two sides of Francis Galton's feelings,
towards his Alma Mater and towards his "sibship." One further letter

* The "workroom" at Rutland Gate was a very depressing room, with a single window
looking into a well or high-walled court. On deal shelves were placed boxes of pamphlets and
papers ; it gave one the impression of a store-room rather than a study. I think Galton chiefly
worked, when on the ground floor at a writing table at the dining-room front window and
when on the first floor at an oak bureau in the drawing-room.

t Francis was now 80, Erasmus 87, Emma 91 and Bessie 94 !

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 239

concerning these matters may be printed here. It bears witness to the
widespread admiration and affection felt for Francis Galton*.

Trinity College, Cambridge. 19 November, 1902.
My dear Mr Galton, It was only today I heard, with very great pleasure, that your
old College has done itself the honour of asking you to become one of its Honorary Fellows.
We are proud of the distinction which you confer on the College, and we trust that you will
not refuse to accept this mark of our sense of the great services you have rendered to science.
To me the act of the College gives a personal pleasure, for I shall never forget your kindness
to me at a critical time of my life, and I am happy and proud to think that I have enjoyed
the privilege of your friendship ever since.

Let me take this opportunity of congratulating you on receiving the Darwin Medal. It is
a high distinction, and I am sure you have richly deserved it.

Believe me, dear Mr Galton,

Yours most sincerely, J. G. Frazer.

As I have said on p. 235 the current of Galton's thoughts in these years
and his strong affection will be best made clear to the reader if I print here
a small selection of the correspondence which passed between us in the years
1900-1902. The letters indicate Galton's essential generosity of mind, the
close terms of intimacy he was on with Weldon and myself,— who were proud
to feel ourselves in some measure his lieutenants, — and the keen interest he
had in the early struggles of Biometrika. The feeling of the younger men
among us, who got into close touch with Francis Galton, was something like
that of Aristides to Socrates :

"I always made progress whenever I was in your neighbourhood, even if
it were only in the same house, without being in the same room ; but my
advancement was greater if I were in the same room, and greater still if
I could keep my eyes fixed upon you." It was not Galton's power of solving
problems : suggestive as he was, his analysis often lacked power to cope with
them. It was the atmosphere he cast round every scientific question; he
carried his intimates into a rarefied air, where the one aim was to reach the
goal of truth, not heeding who should get there first, or who should tell
the tale of its discovery. I think the like conception expressed in different
words is provided by Mrs Sidney Webb \ :

" Owing to our [the ' Potter girls '] intimacy with Herbert Spencer we were friendly with
the group of distinguished scientific men who met together at the monthly dinner of the famous
'X-Club.' And here I should like to recall that among these scientists, the one who stays in
my mind as the ideal man of science is, not Huxley or Tyndall, Hooker or Lubbock, still less
my guide, philosopher and friend Herbert Spencer, but Francis Galton whom I used to observe

* Sir James Frazer in kindly granting me permission to print his letter remarks "that the
'critical time of my life' referred to in my letter was in 1885, when my Trinity Fellowship
would in the ordinary course have expired and the question of renewal came before the College
Council. In the same year, shortly before, at Mr Galton's suggestion, I had read my first
anthropological paper ('On some burial customs as illustrative of the primitive theory of the
soul ') before the Anthropological Institute, with Mr Galton as President in the chair, and
when the. question of the renewal of my Fellowship was raised shortly afterwards, I believe
that Francis Galton and my ever-lamented friend Robertson Smith used their powerful influence
to ensure the renewal and were successful. It was indeed a turning point in my life, and I

shall never cease to be grateful to the two friends who stood by me at that critical time

...He [Galton] was indeed an admirable and lovable man from every point of view."

t Beatrice Webb, My Apprenticeship, pp. 134-5, 1926.

240 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

and listen to — I regret to say without the least reciprocity — with wrapt attention. Even to-day
I can conjure up from memory's misty deep, that tall figure with its attitude of perfect physical
and mental poise, the clean shaven face, the thin compressed mouth with its enigmatical smile,
the long upper-lip and firm chin, and as if presiding over the whole personality of the man
the prominent dark eyebrows from beneath which gleamed with penetrating humour, con-
templative grey eyes. Fascinating tp me was Francis Galton's all-embracing, but apparently
impersonal beneficence. But to a recent and enthusiastic convert to the scientific method, the
most relevant of Galton's many gifts was the unique contribution of three separate and distinct
processes of the intellect : a continuous curiosity about and rapid apprehension of individual
facts, whether common or uncommon; the faculty for ingenious trains of reasoning; and more
admirable than either of these, because the talent was wholly beyond my reach, the capacity
for correcting and verifying his own hypotheses by the statistical handling of masses of data,
whether collected by himself or supplied by other students of the problem."

The following letters may serve to illustrate and deepen the above
very admirable characterisation by a skilful artist in words !

(5) Selected Correspondence between Galton and his biographer,
illustrating the years 1900-1902.

Tewfik Pa lack Hotel, Helouan, Cairo. February, 1900.

Dear Prof. K. Pearson, Thank you heartily for letting me see, as a New Year's gift, the
important proof sheets. By much hammering, the bad part of the "law*" will be knocked
out of it and the good, if any, will remain. You know probably that India ink (1) in water and
common ink (2) may look alike, but if you pass the former through a filter of blotting paper
the water alone comes through ; not so with regard to ink. Now a mixture of (1) with water
is not properly a blend, but a mixture with (2) is. When the particles in any case of "particu-
late " inheritance are small and independent, I do not see any sensible difference (within reasonable
limits) between the behaviour of the two. But now comes in the consideration which I take
to be the great problem, and that which as I conceive lies at the bottom of stability of type,
viz.: regarding the imperfectly explored facts of group-correlation. Let, in a given "stirp,"
a, b, c, ... be classes of elements which develop in that order, the several classes consisting of
«i, a 2 , ..., b lt 6 2 , ..., Ac. varieties. Now we find that a certain lineament, or trait, a r , b s , c t , &c.
tends to be inherited. If a, b, c, &c. were independent, the probability against the above
particular combination would be enormous, whereas it is found to be frequent. What then is
the cause? or, in default of knowing the cause, how can we represent to ourselves the character
of the correlation 1 If a, b, c are developed in that order of succession, the particular and not
improbable sequence of a r , b„ must make the next step to c, far more probable than if 6„ had
been preceded by say a„ or some other variety of a.

There must be an accumulating correlation of some kind. But how if a, b, c, &c. are simul-
taneously developed 1 Here I fail to make any picture to my mind of the way in which the
needed group-correlation acts. I often watch the family traits in a party at church, trying to
find out the beginnings and the ends in each inherited lineament of resemblance whether to the
parents or to one another. They are usually indefinite, I think. My servant writes me word
that your "Grammar of Science" has just arrived at Rutland Gate. Thank you sincerely.
I must wait till my return, to read it.

We have had a very interesting and healthful journey to Wady Haifa and back, including a
week's stay with Flinders Petrie at his diggings. The climate here near Cairo is far from
being always benign. There are days of stormy wind with dust, and occasional down-pours
of rain. I can't make up my mind as to the best places for an invalid — certainly neither Cairo
nor Luxor. I have had two pleasant days in the desert with Prof. Schweinfurth the famous
traveller.

I trust you have pulled through the wretched English winter fairly well.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

I hope to be back about Mid May.

* The Law of Ancestral Heredity, especially its application to alternative inheritance.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton' s Life 241

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. June G, 1900.

Dear Prof. Kakl Pearson, On returning from a six months absence in Egypt and Greece,
I found your valuable Grammar of Science on my table, and am reading it straight through
at the rate of about an hour a day, with admiration at your thoroughness. It takes some time,
as I find, to pick up dropped threads, so I have as yet little leisure.

I wonder if you have worked out the relationship between those who are cousins in a double
degree, I mean the issue of the marriages in which 2 brothers have married 2 sisters. Their
ancestry from Grandparents upwards, is identical. I should be very curious to learn what
value you would assign to it in your "table of collateral heredity," p. 481 of the book.

I hope the past cruel winter in England has not hurt you. Weldon, whom I saw last week,
spoke favourably of your health.

My tour has done me a world of good, besides being extremely interesting and pleasant.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Dec. 13, 1900.

My dear Mr Galton, Your kind letter was very welcome tonight. 1 tried some year
ago to sound people with regard to a journal of pure and applied statistics, but found a feeling
pretty general that it might injure the R. S. S. Journal, although the sort of memoirs I had in
view would I think not find a place in that journal. On the other hand I know a good many
papers for which I hardly see a place and there is increasing material being gathered in Germany
and America which is lost among masses of purely zoological papers or published in inaccessible
proceedings. I think if a journal could survive its first two or three years there is a future for
it of great service.

The thing came to an issue just now owing to doings at the Royal. My paper on Homotyposis
was sent for some reason to Bateson as referee — he chose to tell me so himself, and also to tell me
that he had written an unfavourable report. He came to the R.S. at the reading and said there
was nothing in the paper — that it was a fundamental error to suppose that number had any
real existence in living forms. That this criticism did not apply to this memoir only but to all
my work, that all variability was differentiation, etc., etc.

Now all this may be quite fair criticism, but what is clear is that if the R.S. people send
my papers to Bateson, one cannot hope to get them printed. It is a practical notice to quit.
This notice applies not only to my work, but to most work on similar statistical lines. It seems
needful that there should be some organ for publication of this sort of work and talking it over
with Weldon, he drew up the prospectus, I gave a name, — the "K" was mine (K. P. not C. P.),
— and we determined to see what amount of cork was forthcoming to float such a project.
I don't think much can be done if we don't get 150 to 200 promises. But can we? — I fear not.

Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Jan. 2, 1901.

My dear Prof. K. Pearson, Here is the MS. on Eye Colour, which I am delighted is of
use to you still. I hope not to go abroad yet awhile, but it would be safer to write on the
parcel when you send it back, "To await return." Tell me please, in time, whether the answers
you have received relating to the new magazine or journal, are encouraging enough for a prob-
able start.

Bateson's adverse views cannot be finally effective, being opposed to those of many other
no less worthy authorities. But I presume from what you said, that they are effective as against
the. particular memoir on Homotyposis 1 Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Jan. 7, 1901.

Dear Prof. Karl Pearson, Thank you much for the " Lecture." It fits in with much
that I habitually think about. — I wonder if this strikes you as reasonable : —

Probably zeal for military usefulness will cause many men to be physically examined as to
fitness to serve. There are also medico-physical examinations for other services. Could any
sort of Degrees be given to those (a) who simply pass the required standard for the particular
purpose, (6) to those who pass as valid for purposes of hereditary transmission.

poiii 31

242 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

Two other examinations exist, that might he included in the (6) set :

1. That of a Life-Insurance Co. to certify a first-class life, which includes some facts about
parents and brothers, together with local inquiries by their agents. I don't know what the cost
of this may be in each case, but certainly the fact of being accepted as a first-class life by any
notable Life Insurance Co. is an important fact, worthy of recognition.

2. Ordinary literary examination, to show that the man is not a real stupid.

Now fancy that Degrees are offered of a V. H. T. (valid for hereditary transmission of
qualities suitable to a citizen of an Imperial Country) would they meet a want, and would they
help in forwarding marriages of the fittest and discouraging others in any notable degree 1 If a
well considered answer be " yes " I suppose the action would be to write an article upon it,
with plenty of solid stuff in it and then if the idea should take, to follow mainly the direction in
which " the cat may jump." If tried, it ought to be tried at first on a small scale, that is in a
small community by a self-constituted board, laying down their own conditions and giving their
certificate as a " Degree." One great question is that of self maintenance when once fully
started and running. I should think the cost of the mere medical and physical examination would
not be beyond the powers of, say, Cambridge Undergraduates and I fancy that (always sup-
posing the idea to catch) it might be possible to get some help from the present examining
authorities in respect to the (6) condition. I mean that arrangements might be made by which
an Examination by one of these should be accepted by the Certificate or Degree-giving board.

I have thought over the subject a good deal and have more to say, but unless what has been
said above seems reasonable to persons like yourself, the supplementary remarks would be
useless. Will you kindly think this over at odd times during the next 2 or 3 days? I have
written about it to no one else.

There is another important point of " what severity of selection should be aimed at." A
very moderate one would, I think, meet the need. Say that | pass and J fail. The effect on the
hypothesis that the successes alone intermarry and keep up the population would roughly put
the output of children in the hands of the best half of all possible married couples — |ths of
them. (Of course this is the rudest way of putting it; but it will do for present purposes.)
If men, like cattle or Mormons, were polygamous a much severer selection would be wanted.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Jan. 10, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, It would be a very great pleasure to me to know you were going
to take the field with regard to what I am convinced is of the greatest national importance —
the breeding from the fitter stocks. If one could only get some one to awaken the nation with
regard to its future ! — The statesmen, who really have the ear of the populace, never think of
the future. They will not touch the question of coal supply nor that of fertility, and yet I am
convinced these are far more important for the future existence of the nation than any question
of local government, church discipline, or even technical education ! — I think I told you we
had nearly completed the reduction of our measurements on 1 100 families, and one after another
of the results confirm the higher series of values, about - 5 for parental correlation, that I found
from the eye and horse colour data. I shall probably not publish these results for some time, as
I have half made up my mind to accept an invitation to lecture at the Lowell Institute in
Boston this year and these materials would be a good basis for lectures on Heredity. But they
emphasise even more emphatically than your earlier value of ^, the opinions you have expressed
on the great part played by good stock in the community. Heredity is really more intense
than we supposed it to be 10 years ago. Cannot this be brought forcibly home to our rulers and
social reformers?

Now the difficulty in this case seems to me to be twofold. How can you (i) stop the fertility
of the poor stock and (ii) multiply that of the good ? The middle classes are I take it the result
of a pretty long process of selection in this country, and I believe that they alone are the
classes who largely insure. Your scheme therefore would at first apply only to them, and
indeed to the best of them, for the others would not care a rap for a good bill of health, any more
than they do for any moral suasion. You might influence by your health degree a small per-
centage of the whole community, say 4 per cent., but this percentage is probably identical with
those you could equally well influence by moral suasion. I mean by preaching the gospel that
the stability of the nation depends upon the good stocks breeding fully and the weak exhibiting

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 243

restraint. But how are you going to get the better class workman to see that his checking the
size of his family may make matters easier for him, but is at the expense of the nation's future?
He is really unreachable by an assurance scheme, unless you could attach your health degree to
the proposals for old age pensions*. That appears to me a point worth thinking about. As I have
said elsewhere it seems to me that only socialistic measures can touch this population question.
Even if you can by moral suasion lead the better class artizans and the middle classes to see
that limitation of the family may be anti-social (and I believe it might be possible) how are you
going to check the unlimited production of the worse stocks t The " Neomalthusians " — as I
know from sad experience — abuse any one who like myself ventures to criticise their doctrine
of limitation, unless it be accompanied by the words "of the poor stocks first " ; but this abuse
is nothing to what one will arouse, if one ventures to assert that the huge charities providing
for the children of the incapable are a national curse and not a blessing ; that the " widow with
seven children all dependent upon her, husband a clerk who died of consumption aged 35,"
and who seeks your aid to get her children into Reedham, is really a moral criminal and not an
object for pity.

How can a health degree affect this source of rottenness ? I fear hardly at all. Your only
hope is to impress upon the few who really lead the nation, that the matter is one for legisla-
tion, that although we have got rid of Gilbert's Act, the workhouse and charity systems can
still be sapping our national vigour, when coupled with a wide-spread neomalthusianism — due
in the main to Bradlaugh — among the better working classes.

What then it seems to me we mostly need at the present time, is some word in season,
something that will bring home to thinking men the urgency of the fertility question in this
country. There is no man who would be listened to in this matter in the same way as yourself.
You are known as one who set the whole scientific treatment of heredity going ; no one has
ever suspected you of being in the least a " crank," or having " views " to air. You will be
listened to and it will be recognised that you write out of a spirit of pure patriotism. There is
no one else, I believe, of whom this could be said, certainly no one who would be listened to
in the same way. Let us have (a) known facts of heredity, (b) influence of relative fertility on
national vigour, (c) actual statistics of birth rates of different stocks, and (d) proposed remedies
(only, if they include the health degree, tack it on to old age pensions) brought home to those who
think for the nation. Always sincerely yours, K. Pearson.

If Biometrika be started Weldon and I want badly a paper however brief from you for No. 1.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. February 1, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, I have several times planned to write and ask if I might come and see
you, and now you are off before I have done so ! I have been " crawling " through my work
since December somehow, feeling mentally too tired to do more than get through my routine
teaching and making no attempt beyond the day's necessary doings. My helpers go forward but
I can only look on. I suppose one must pay eventually for all overwork, only one longs for a
few more years to "finish up." Yes, I have settled on the American Lectures on Heredity
and Variation for October. If any ideas on diagram-illustration occur to you, I should be very
glad of suggestions. I have found a Genometer based on a suggestion of yours very useful at
more than one popular lecture. It contains a gigantic lifeguardsman, a diminutive sailor and
a " mean " man and illustrates the effect of any number of ancestors or collaterals of these types
by means of a string working up and down. It always amuses people.

You will share my pleasure in the acceptance of the Homotyposis paper for the Phil. Trans.
I hope we may float Biometrika so that one could to some extent relieve the pressure on the
R.S. space, which I think is to some extent grudged. We bad however only about 12 English
acceptances, and we cannot venture even a first number without something like 100. We are
BOW circularising everybody in America, Germany and Italy, but I am not very hopeful.

I suppose the Riviera is hardly a place where birds' eggs abound 1 I want to measure
another 100 clutches of some species but hardly know which to select or where to go for it.

* [Galton wanted a medical examination such as the better insurance offices insist on
extended to all classes of the nation. My suggestion was that a grading of lives was essential
to a really sound national provision for sickness and old age pensions, proposals for which
were then creating some stir. K. P.]

31—2

244 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

I fear that to ask for 100 thrushes or blackbirds nests in England would raise a scandal. I got
much reproved for my 200 house sparrow nests last year. I trust that your journey may be
a pleasant one and that you may escape the horrors of February and March, which my Wife
tells me occasionally reach the South of France. You know Miss Shaen is at San Itemo ?■ — May
I still keep the eye colour MS. 1 If you would prefer its return before you leave, just say so
on a postcard. Always yours sincerely, Karl Pearson.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. April 18, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, I wonder if you are back from your winter journeyings. I want to
toll you about the present state of Biometrika. We have about GO promises of subscription,
and we shall hardly get more now until the journal is definitely announced as coming out or
until it has come. We have been talking over the matter with various publishers and printers, and
so far the most reasonable terms seem to be those of the X — Press. Now it would be a great
point to have the advertisement of this Press and the goodness of its get up, if we can. They
are willing to take the journal on the same terms as they do the Annals of Y, which, with
more expensive plates than we should think of, pays its way with some 270 subscribers. But
they require a guarantee fund of £200. This they had in the case of the Annals and drew on
pretty largely at first, but it is now refunded to the extent of £160. Whether we shall be
equally successful is of course a very different matter, but I think there is no doubt that such
a journal as Biometrika is wanted, and if we tide over the first few years, the journal will live.
Weldon who was staying a few days with me this week wanted to take the whole risk on
himself. This does not seem to me right. The natural thing would be for him and for me to
share the risk, but with our very precarious condition at University College, this is out of the
question. I can only guarantee a very modest sum. My view was that we should try and dis-
tribute the £200 about. Of course any one who subscribes may stand a very poor chance of
seeing his money again, and to those to whom I have written I have said it must be looked
upon as a loss until it reappears (if ever it does) as a stroke of fortune. I take it that the
money would be banked and could be drawn only by joint order of Editors and Secretary of the
X — Press.

Now I am writing to ask if you will aid to any extent in this proposal. T feel the less
hesitation in frankly asking you because you are one of the men who I think can frankly
say no, and the " no " would not affect our mutual relations.

Quite apart from this question, and I am sorry to refer to it in this letter, Weldon and I
discussed two points : (1) The desirability, if you do not feel it involves you in worry and work,
of getting you to join in any way the editorial committee. This consists at present of Weldon,
myself and Davenport of Chicago, as American editor to collect material there. Of course we
should be glad of any suggestion or aid you may care to give, but on the other hand we don't
want to bother you with the hard work of the journal, and still less to make you in any way
responsible for matter or method you might not sympathise with. (2) We want very badly to
have a paper by you however long or short for our first number, a "send off" of some kind.
Will you promise us this 1 You hardly know perhaps how much of weight your sympathy
expressed in some form will carry with it, especially in America ; it will be an uphill battle
for some time with the biologists. Anyhow please let me know first your views as to my last
two questions (1) and (2) and then rather more at your leisure whether you care to aid in the
guarantee fund ? I trust you have had a pleasant sojourn in the South. We are now having
beautiful weather in Surrey. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

Hotel Bella Vista, Boudighera, N. Italy. April 23, 1901.

My dear Prop. Karl Pearson, The straight-forwardness of your letter as to the probable
total loss of the guarantee fund for Biometrika, is much more attractive to me than an enticing
programme, for I like "forlorn hopes" in a good cause. I can just now spare the whole £200
and you shall have it, and I enclose the cheque, so you will be no longer bothered with that
matter, and can give your spare energies wholly to starting the Journal.

As regards joining the Editorial Committee, if it could be done in a way that carried both
in reality and in the eyes of the public no more responsibility and work than the position of
" Consulting Physician " does in respect to a Hospital, I should be pleased to do so. Would

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 245

"Consulting Editor" after the names of yourself and Weldon as Editors do? Of other titles,
" Referee " is almost the only one that occurs to me ; probably you can suggest something.
Of course a good-looking and well-printed title-page (not heavy-looking) is commercially helpful.

About writing a short "sending off" paper I think I could manage one on " Biometry," — on
its general aspect and principles. I have nothing serious enough in the way of original inquiry
to give. Please send me a couple of copies (by return of post) of the programme, that I may
better understand what may remain to be said. I trust you will see your way to make a con-
siderable part of the contents of the Journal intelligible to those scientific men who are not
mathematicians. It ought to be attractive to medical men and such like ; also to statisticians
of the better kind. Short notices of original work abroad always attract.

We stay here for a full week longer, I think, — and will leave address for letters that may
arrive shortly after leaving. But 42, Rutland Gate will always find me in time.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. April 27, 1901.

My dear Mr Oalton, Your letter met me on my return home an hour ago. We have
not any further programme printed at present than the circular I sent you some months ago
of which I enclose two copies. Your letter made me very happy, partly because you so readily
consented to my proposals as to editorship and giving us a " send off," partly because of the
generally kind tone and sympathy it exhibited for our endeavours. As to your name as "Con-
sulting Editor" and your proposed paper on the Aims of Biometry, these we may consider as
settled, but I must consult Weldon before I reply fully as to your liberal offer. I think that
he feels very much that you have done a great deal from the monetary side for biometry and
that he would be unwilling to allow you to take so much of this burden on your shoulders.
My view was to spread what I am unwilling until we have made trial to look upon as anything
but a loss, over a number of guarantors, for I cannot carry my share of a moiety myself. But
about all this I will write in a day or two when I have had an opportunity of considering the
matter with Weldon. I don't propose to say what I personally feel about your readiness to
aid, because it would be making into a personal kindness what I know is enthusiasm for the
study of your life. I can only hope Biometrika will forward that, but it will have an uphill
fight. Always yours sincerely, Karl Pearson.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. April 30, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, I have considered the matter of the Biometrika guarantee fund with
Weldon and his view is that we should as frankly accept your offered aid as it is frankly given.
It places us in a position to survive for at least four years and I think if we can survive the
risk of infantile mortality we shall live on. At any rate we shall do our best to make the thing
run and supply what we are sure is a real need. We want to make the science into a really
great organ of discovery. It is almost pitiable to see how good material is wasted. I was
reading a few days ago a paper by an American on colonies of statoblasts in which he had
measured the variability in the general population and in the fraternity or colony. He introduced
what he called a coefficient of heredity = (variability in population — variability in fraternity) h-
(variability in population), and found this to be what he called small. Then he went into long
reasons why heredity should be small in a colony of statoblasts. I found on working from his
own data that the fraternal correlation came out '44 or nearly exactly what it is for stature oj
brothers in man, or for their eye colour or anything else ! In other words he had really
demonstrated heredity in these lowly organisms to agree with its value in man and was yet
searching about to show why it was so small ! This is only one sample of dozens of like papers
now being issued, and which must ultimately cast discredit on biometric processes, if we cannot
indicate how these things ought to be worked out properly. Half the Editors' work will be to
show authors gently how to use their own data! We will send you specimens of title-page as
soon as we can. Also can you let us have your paper at a fairly early date — say before June 30
— so that we may not cover in any other part of the number the same sort of ground. Further
any "Notes" that occur to you on possible biometric work, or notices of books or ideas you
may come across, would be very welcome. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

246 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. June 29, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, I am sending you the first proof of title-page and prospectus, etc.
of Biometrika. You see it will be a capital size for tables and plates. The Syndics of the Press,
Mr Wright told us, are keen on their own shield appearing, and he added, what I think is
undoubtedly true, that it is effective as an advertisement. I felt in the face of this that it was
not desirable to press for our own device. Will you let me have the proof back with any
suggestions that occur to you ? I hope you don't object to the Quaker-like simplicity of the
names on the title-page.

I should have come to talk the whole matter over with you but this is my worst time —
examinations etc. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Monday,
My dear Prof. Pearson, You have arranged a capital title-page, severe in its simplicity,
and the Cambridge Press symbol gives it additional weight. I quite approve. There is no note
that I can see my way to contribute now. Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.
I am just back from Cambridge, so excuse the few hours delay in reply.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. July 3, 1901.
My dear Mr Galton, I have been looking at one or two of Darwin's books to see if he
anywhere emphasises the value of statistical inquiry. I can find nothing; and yet I feel quite
certain he realised that value by undertaking, as he did, the long series of experiments in Cross-
and Self-Fertilisation of Plants. In his book he states that he has appeahd to you for an
examination of his data from the statistical standpoint and for a report. It has struck me that
although that letter is not in the Life and Letters it might possibly have survived. Do you
think you have preserved it, and if so is there any apt remark as to the need of statistical method
in solving such evolution problems? — I should be very glad, if you would let me know if there
is. My address after tomorrow will be Manor House, Througham, Miserden, Cirencester,
Glosters. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 4, 1901.
My dear Prof. K. Pearson, Darwin's letter has not I think survived but I recollect its
terms well. They would not have helped in what you want. He began in his usual kindly and
appealing way, apologising for the trouble, and implying that he had not confidence in his own
power of making the best of the few "ipomaea" statistics, and then asked me to try what
I could do with them. I doubt if he ever thought very much or depended much on statistical
inquiry in his own work, in the sense that most members of the Statistical Society would have
given to it; — though, as you know, he quotes statistical results that others had arrived at, not
infrequently. Probably, or rather certainly, Frank Darwin would be the best authority on this.
I am glad you have got away for a little into the country.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.
42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 8, 1901.
My dear Prof. Karl Pearson, I have just spoken to Frank and to Leonard Darwin, first
separately and then together. Their views about their father's attitude towards statistics are the
same as mine, except that Frank's was more strongly expressed. I fear you must take it as
a fact, that Darwin had no liking for statistics. They even thought he had a "non-statistical"
mind, rather than a statistical one. Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.
I have temporarily mislaid your address, so send this via Hampstead.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Oct. 25, 1901.

My dear Prof. K. Pearson, Biometrika has just come, and seems most appropriate in general
get-up. The printing is beautiful and the size of page excellent. I heartily congratulate you.
One small matter of great comfort to the possessors of a pamphlet, is to have its name printed
along the back: Vol. 1. Part 1. Biometrika Oct. 1901. Do kindly have this done in future
numbers. I have already had to write this along the back of mine as well as I could.

Herewith I send the Abstract of my Huxley Lecture — Oh ! the trouble that the preparation
of the lecture has given ! It was so difficult to make a track free from bogholes, and to keep the
stages in proportion. I hope it will further investigations by others.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton' s Life 247

I have one in view now, that I began upon some years ago, but found that enough years
had not elapsed since the experiment begun to draw useful conclusions, but every year since
has brought a fresh crop of data, and there ought to be enough now. It is the correlation in
the Indian Civil Service between the examination place of the candidate and the value of the
appointment held by him 1 20 (I forget the figure I used) years afterwards. It seems that the
value of an Indian appointment is a very fair test of a man's estimated ability. Mr Tuppy, or
some such odd name, wrote a capital analysis of the careers of Indian Civil Servants. I made
great use of his book and could soon pick up the long-dropped threads. Nothing however could
be successfully done without the cordial and confidential help of the authorities at the India
Office. I dare say I may persuade them to help me again, as they did before.

I wish next Tuesday was well over. The paper will appear in full in Nature on Thursday.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Oct. 25, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, Very many thanks for your kind letter. Certainly the back of
Biometrika ought to have been and shall in future be stamped. I hope No. II may be a little
more varied. Macdonell's article on "Criminal Anthropometry" will be a contrast to Garson's
in the Anthropological Journal! — Latter's on Cuckoos' Eggs will be interesting I think. He
has measured and examined nearly 300. I hope to get also the Naqada Skull measurements
in, and a good many more Miscellanea. Still I fear we shall not be popular enough for a wide
range of subscribers.

I am quite sure your lecture has been a heavy piece of work. I know nothing which tries
one so much as endeavouring to put scientific results in a form that the intelligent layman can
grasp. I am just in the throes of producing two popular lectures for Newcastle — one on Natural
Selection, and the other on Homotyposis — and I can appreciate from your abstract what yours
has cost you.

Please remember Biometrika for the Indian Civil paper.

I have just been dealing with the Cambridge Graduates, correlating their degree with the
shape and dimensions etc. of their head and physique geuerally. We have the full examination
record of upwards of 1000 measured individuals. So far the relationship between size or shape
of head and intellectual ability seems very slight, but the work is not yet completed. It appears
to confirm the view I got from skull measurements, that size has very little to do witli
intellectual grade.

Next we have reduced the results for pairs of brothers measured in schools, and we find
that vivacity, shyness, conscientiousness etc., are correlated precisely as stature, forearm, eye
colour. I think this will be when finished as complete a quantitative demonstration of the
inheritance of the mental qualities at the same rate as the physical as could be required.
I fancy our method of using very simple classification (Memoir VII) would suit your Indian
Civil data. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Oct. 31, 1901.

My dear Prof. K. Pearson, It would be very pleasant if we could meet and have a talk.
On Sunday our routine is Lunch-dinner at 1 ; Tea at 4.30 ; Dinner-supper at 6.45. Could you
come next Sunday for 2 or more of these meals and the intermediate time? If so, please say
what you would prefer.

I should doubt whether the exchange of Biometrika on equal terms for the Anth. Inst.
Journal would be a gain to Biometrika, as so very few of the members of the Institute would
be likely to use it intelligently.

Quere defer the matter. But do as you think best. Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

5, Bertie Terrace, Leamington. Nov. 17, 1901.

My dear Prof. K. Pearson, Bravis-is-is-imo re like inheritance of physical and mental !!
You have made a firm foot-hold here, well worthy of all the elaboration that you have and are
giving to it. What a blessed feeling it is to come to solid rock, when floundering in yielding
mud. I congratulate you most heartily. I write from the country but return by Friday, if not
Thursday.

248 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

There is much to be talked over, amongst the rest the possibility of giving a summary of the
contents of each No. of Biometrika, in language that a newspaper could copy, giving the net
results obtained in the papers it contains, distinguishing between statement of facts that for
the present go no further, and deductions from them. If you thought this feasible, the
existence of such a resume would greatly aid the reader.

You will have before long to give a glossary and definitions of technical words, and references
to the places where they were first employed. Also, a very compact account of the chief
processes used would be of great service to many (with references of course). Doubtless you
have in view the eventual publication of a regular text-book on statistical operations.

I wish we could meet somehow. I could easily be at home next Saturday or Sunday if you
cared to fix an hour and a meal, or meals. Dinner-supper on Sunday is always 6.45 to let the
cook have time to put on her best bonnet for church. Such is the sex.

Ever sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Dec. 26, 1901.

My dear Mr Galton, I have been intending for some days to send you a line of sympathy
on being laid up, but I wanted to enclose a New Year's Greeting from the workers in my
statistical laboratory, and I could not get it finished until this morning. I have always felt
we must go into the point more fully, since you laid stress on the view that ability was
correlated with the size of the head in your criticism of Dr Lee's paper. There is still a chance
that extreme genius may exhibit something abnormal in the size of head, but I think it is now
pretty clear, if we are to look upon ability as normally distributed in the population, there is
only a very small, practically negligible correlation between it and either the size or shape of
the head.

We propose next to find out whether there is a higher relationship between ability and
health, strength and general physique, and then to test its relation to temper and moral characters,
from the school data schedules.

It is a shame to send a gift and then ask for it back ! — But I have not had the chance of
making a copy, and I might possibly find an abiding place for it in Biometrika or elsewhere.
Please let me have also your criticisms and suggestions.

I am sending you besides a paper by Macdonell to appear in the next number of Biometrika.
It is rather long and full of tables, hut it involves nearly 18 months stiff work and the material
is of value for a number of purposes. I think it shows that for many purposes the fourfold
classifications we are now making can safely replace the old laborious tables of correlation.

With the best wishes for the New Year and with the hope that Biometrika may not during
its first year of life disappoint you badly, I am, Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Dec. 31, 1901.

My dear Prof. K. Pearson, The New- Year gift is indeed acceptable both in itself and as
evidence of your continued zeal and power of influencing others to work with you. Hearty
thanks and best New-Year wishes.

The non-correlation of ability and size of head continues to puzzle me the more I recall my
own measurements and observations of the most eminent men of the day. It was a treat to
watch the great dome of Sylvester's head. William Spottiswoode was another of the 5 or 6
largest ; so was that encyclopaedic physiologist Prof. Sharpey. That most accomplished &,
many-sided official, Sir John Lefevre (formerly a senior wrangler), was the largest of all.
Gladstone's head, which I myself measured, was very large. Again, comparatively the other
day, I was one of a deputation of physicists to the Treasury about the National Physical
Laboratory and sitting behind the front row I marvelled at their skulls. Lord Rayleigh, Stokes,
Lord Lister, Lord Kelvin were all remarkable partly perhaps owing to the powerful moulding
of their heads, irrespective of size. A Frenchman collected the recorded weight of brains of
many eminent people and published them in one of the French anthropological periodicals
many years ago. They contained remarkable weights. However I can say nothing against the
validity of your results.

One thing ought to be remembered, that bigness of head and sturdiness of build go together.
A judge (the late Sir Wm Grove), whose large head I often measured, told me that it came

r-3

c"
o

Eugenics as a Creed cmd the Last Decade of G alto ri 's Life 249

before him on evidence that the hats of stablemen were markedly smaller than those of other
people. He inferred that they were less intelligent ; I, that stablemen are always light weights
(in youth). A heavy boy would not do to exercise horses. Another of my 5 or 6 large heads
was Admiral Sherard Osborn. He was very broadset. Also he was considered generally to be
the ablest man of his day in the Navy and the accepted mouth-piece of reform. (He died of
heart spasm while still young.)

I have been quite bad, this is by far the longest letter I have been up to for many days.
I went to Brighton to shake oil' remains of bronchitis and brought it back increased 7-fold. What
with phlegm and spasm I had a fight for it on Xmas Day, but am now mending fast. I dare
not write more now or would have said something on Macdonell's paper. I wish he had seen
his way to express the magnitude of the advantages of scattering the arrangement of the
Register. One good reason for beginning with the head is that a criminal must have a head,
but he need not have a finger or an arm — and these may be contracted.

E. R. Henry, who is now supreme over the identification department in Scotland Yard, is
reclassifying the whole collection, primarily by finger-prints and secondarily only by measure-
ments. He looks forward to abolishing measurements entirely in England, as he did in Bengal,
stating that errors are more frequent than Garson thought and that they shield the culprit,
whereas finger-prints cannot err. I think he overdoes the view, rather, but this is his attitude
and he has the power to carry out his views. I was much pleased with the order and smartness
he has imposed on the office. Garson's connection with it has entirely closed. He, unluckily for
himself, took up a critical position towards Henry, who being his superior and a smart dis-
ciplinarian, would have none of it. If Dr Macdonell induces that vainest of men, Alphonse
Bertillon, to remodel his cabinet it will indeed be a marvel.

I must rest now, with every good wish for you this coming year and for Biometrika.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. Nov. 2 (Sunday), 1902.

My deau Karl Pearson, I am just off to France, arriving on Wed. the 5th at Hotel Con-
tinental — Hyeres (Var) France and staying there a week certain, afterwards according to health
and weather. I will thence write again. Don't post any thing to me there later than on Saturday
next the 8th. I fear it would be too risky to send Beddoe's paper, of which you spoke. Your proof,
that of your latest paper which you kindly sent me, goes with me. What fertility of mathematical
invention you have !

I have recently attacked the finger-print problem (of natural relationship between the
various patterns) in quite a new way (no mathematics in it, however), with most promising
results thus far. It would be tedious to explain, but it will give me a couple of months happy
occupation while abroad at the rate of 3 hrs. a day which is now my maximum of safe
performance. Good-bye, Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. November 21, 1902.

My dear Francis Galton, I have been hoping to hear your address so that I might send
you a line of satisfaction with regard to the Darwin Medal. But as you must have left Hyeres,
and as I do not know how to reach you in Sicily, I send this via Rutland Gate.

It seems absurd for me to congratulate you! I can only just say what I said to Weldon
when he announced the gift of the medal to me four years ago : "Francis Galton ought to have
been given it, not I." To which he replied : "To you it means encouragement to go on, to him
recognition of the achieved, which everybody already recognises.". .."You get honour from the
medal, he would give it honour" — or words to that effect. So it seems also to me that your
receiving the medal will make it of greater value to younger recipients, but hardly give you
that recognition which helps younger men with their work little known. I may write this now,
for the fact that I received the medal four years ago has always had the feeling associated with
it, that you ought to have received it long before I did. I trust, however, it may still give you
pleasure, and for myself I can only say how it enhances the value of my own. I hope you have
been having fair weather and maintained your health. You will have been lucky to escape the
last ten days — the worst November I remember. Dr Beddoe has not yet sent me his article.
T hope to have Vol. I. Part II wholly in type soon. Please remember me to Miss Biggs, and

Believe me, Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

pgiii 32

250 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

(Postcard) H6tel des Anglais, Valescure pres St Raphael (Var), France.

Nov. 27/1 902.

Thanks, hearty thanks, for your very nice letter. My pleasure at the award is and was a little
embittered by the thought of standing in the way of younger men. Of course I value the honour
very highly. Also another most unexpected one of being just elected Honorary Fellow of
Trinity, Cambridge, my old College. Thanks to the pure air here, I have wholly thrown off first
the asthma and then the chronic cough ! I never expected such good luck as this. We shall stay
here a little longer and then to Italy. Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

Glad that the next No. of Biometrika is in type. You are making a success of it, to all
appearance.

Address : Hotel Bristol, Piazza Barberini, Rome.

I shall be there for about 2 months beginning with Dec. 22d.

Dec. 8, 1902.

My dear Karl Pearson, To my surprise the enclosed big cheque reached me this morning.
I had quite forgotten it was part of the award. I cannot think of applying it to my personal
use (as I have as much income as I want), but to some object in accordance with that for which
the Darwin Fund was established, and can think of none more suitable than Biometrika. Please
therefore take it as a sum to be paid in relief, so to speak, of the Guarantee Fund ; not
intended, even if it could be, ever to be repaid but to be swallowed up in the initial expenses. I am
very glad to have the opportunity of thus contributing.

The pure air of Valescure has taken away the whole both of my asthma and of my cough,
at least for the time, and I feel more fit, than for 2 or 3 years past. We leave Valescure
to-morrow, reach Bordighera (Hotel de Londres) next Monday, and Rome the Monday after.

I have no news that you would care about. The finger-prints give daily occupation. It is
curious how many " blind alleys " one strays into, during any new course of inquiry. This one
seems worth a good deal of trouble, but its merits may be more specious than real. Do please
send me Biometrika news to Rome. Ever very sincerely, Francis Galton.

University College, London. Dec. 10, 1902.

My dear Francis Galton, Your letter and its enclosure reached me this morning. I cannot
tell you how I appreciate your kindness and thought in the matter. I am communicating with
Weldon by this post. I know it will give him as much pleasure as it gives me. I think you know
that finally we collected a fund of £400 to start Biometrika with, and that the total call on that
fund as a result of initial expenses was under £70. Against this we have about 250 copies of
Vol. I, which ought to be sold some day*, and which when sold ought really to recoup the Guarantee
Fund as well as the smaller loss of the Press Syndics. What I would therefore propose to do,
if it meets with your approval, would be to recoup the Guarantee Fund, so that we start the
second year again with our £400 balance, and reserve the remaining £30 to help in the publica-
tion of any special memoir which is expensive on account of large tables or plates. I am not
indeed at all sure that to devote the whole sum to one or two important memoirs as they come
in, might not meet your wishes and the purport of the fund best. If so please let me know.
The guarantors were besides yourself —Mr R. J. Parker t — the Attorney General's "Devil," —
Dr W. R. Macdonell, Weldon and myself, and I don't think any of us are very keen on seeing
our money back again, if the Journal can be thoroughly established by its use. Hence, I think,
we should look upon the recouping of the oi-iginal Guarantee Fund rather as an omen that we
had a longer definite life, than as a personal satisfaction. If we devoted £30, or any further
sum to the publication of some extensive paper, please allow us to make a little note stating
that help in the publication of that particular memoir has been obtained from your kindness
with regard to the Darwin Fund.

I am so glad the change has suited you. I have not sent proofs because I thought your
address so uncertain but I will write a " biometric " letter soon.

Yours very sincerely, K. Pearson.

* A prophecy fulfilled as several parts of these volumes have had to be reprinted,
t Afterwards he sat in the House of Lords, as Lord Parker of Waddington.

Eugetiics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Gallon's Life 251

(Address) Hotel Bristol, Rome. Dec. 13, 1902.

My dear Kakl Pearson, Your letter awaited me here at Bordigliera, on arriving this
afternoon. The plan that most commends itself to me is that of paying off the £70, so as to
leave the Guarantee Fund untouched up to the present time, and to use the £30, as you suggest,
for getting good work done especially in plates, that would otherwise be left undone. But please
use your full discretion.

I rather shrink from my name being used as you kindly propose. It is difficult to express
what is wanted without any appearance of glorification, viz.: that I feel that the £100 could
not be bestowed more appropriately than on Biometrika. It is especially difficult to express
this without provoking the rejoinder that that is precisely the view that a Consultative Editor
of the periodical might be expected to take ! Don't put anything in type to the above effect
without my seeing it first, please.

This blessed Riviera air ! There ought to be a Goddess of that name and many temples to
her, all along the coast.

I was amused to read long quotations from you, in the largest of type, impressed into doing
duty as a puff for the Encyclopaedia Britannica, by the " Times." It was about the advantage
of science to modern civilisation and consequently the advantage to everybody of buying that
scientific encyclopaedia. Anyhow they found your weighty words very suitable to their own
commercial object.

We stay 4 days here, 2 at Alassio, 2 at Pisa, and reach Rome on the 22nd. Wishing you
all well through the horrid wintry weather. Ever very sincerely, Francis Galton.

I wrote the above in bad light, when I find both spelling and grammatic composition difficult
on paper. Please on these grounds excuse the many corrections.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Dec. 27, 1902.

My dear Francis Galton, It is with a feeling of shame that I take up my pen, for I had
fully intended to write you a letter to await your arrival in Eome. But a slight attack of
influenza and a general feeling of inertia following on it have made me reluctant to do ought
but the most necessary things. Now your letter comes to reproach me for not having bestirred
myself to send you a Christmas greeting. I forward with this some Biometrika proofs for
Part II of Vol. II. I expect you will have received Part I ere this. It is very late, but I sent
the MS. to Press in August last ! They are very dilatory. I have asked Yule to modify his
article by giving a general popular account of association to start with. I think Lutz's paper
is interesting as strengthening at least for one character the effect of a change of sex. The
mouse paper in Part I is not quite definite enough, but I hope to get a second paper in Part II,
on further results. The Shirley Poppy paper contains a great deal of work, and I wish it were
more definite, but until we get a Biometric Farm where secular experiments of this kind can
be carried out under uniform conditions, I don't think we can do much better. So far as it
goes, it is quite in favour of plants obeying laws of inheritance very like those known to hold
for man and horse. I hope to have a paper on the Law of Ancestral Heredity showing really
what it assumes and how far we can at present assert it to hold.

It is pleasant to hear of breakfast out of doors in Alassio, and of the sun too hot to sit in
at Baliano ! I have just received 200 ants from Petrie's settlement and hear of 100 hornets in
spirit coming. Please don't forget the celandines, if you get further south and find the collecting
not too irksome. I shall hope to get the paper on the first series out in the next Biometrika.

Pray send me any point in the finger- print investigation which you think I might elucidate.
I am much interested in its possibilities, and think it ought to be rendered available for heredity.
Weldon is now in Sicily, most happy over snail finds. Yours very sincerely, Karl Pearson.

(6) Work and Correspondence of 1903. In 1903, largely as a result, if
indirectly, of Galton's influence, a Royal Commission was suggested for the
purpose of inquiring into the asserted deterioration of the British race owing
to bad environmental conditions. Galton grasped at once that a report of
such a commission dealing only with possible degeneration would be of small
service unless a larger object were kept in view in the course of the inquiry

32—2

252 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

itself, namely, the means by which any race can be improved, and these means
were for him undoubtedly selective breeding. Accordingly he contributed an
article to The Daily Chronicle of July 29, 1903, with the aim of propounding
his views in a popular form. The article was headed (probably in the editorial
office) "Our National Physique— Prospects of the British Race — Are We
Degenerating?" As a matter of fact Galton in this article is more con-
cerned with increasing our racial efficiency than with emphasising alarming
reports of its deterioration, with regeneration rather than with degeneration.
He states that he has no intention of confining his remarks to the wastrels
and the slums :

" The questions I keep before me are whether or no the British race as a whole is, or is
not, equal to its Imperial responsibilities, and again how far is it feasible to make it more
capable of the high destinies that are within its reach, if it possesses the will and power to
pursue them. I wish that each one of us should stand aloof from ourselves as a whole, and
should watch the conditions and doings of our race, much as an authority of the Royal Agri-
cultural Society might criticise the stock of his neighbour over the hedge. If we do so we may
learn in what ways our own stock and its rearing are open to improvement and we may perhaps
ensue it."

Galton has no doubt that the pick of the British race are as capable
human animals as the world at present produces. He holds that their chief
defects are to be found in their want of grace and of sympathy,

" but they are strong in mind and body, truthful and purposive, excellent leaders of the people
of lower races. I speak more particularly of those who are selected to go abroad in various
high capacities, whether by Government or by firms to carry out large undertakings under
circumstances where they have to depend much on themselves."

The term "lower races" is very unfashionable at the present time, but it
is a pleasing and emotional sentiment rather than real anthropological acumen
which asserts that all men are of equal value at birth, or that all races are,
physically, mentally and socially, of one standard of fitness. The distinctions
between man and man, and race and race, are in the main inborn and
not "innurtured" — I would say "inbred," but for the double meaning of that
word*.

Of the "lower middle classes" Galton's judgment was very unfavourable.
He finds the average holiday-maker and cheap-excursion tourist unpre-
possessing as compared with the like section of other European races. We
may superficially, perhaps, but nevertheless with some justification, sum them
up as mentally and physically litter-scatterers.

"As regards the physique of Britons, I think we hrag or have bragged more than is right.
Moreover we are not as well formed as might be. It is difficult to get opportunities of studying
the nude figures of our countrymen in mass, but I have often watched crowds bathe, as in the
Serpentine, with a critical eye, and have always come to the conclusion that they were less
shapely than many of the dark-coloured people whom I have seen."

* Few teachers who have had to instruct young men of many races — and usually the best
of the " lower races " — would deny that mentally at least they can be graded. Exceptional
men may possibly arise in any race, but it is the averages we have to regard. It was greed
that introduced the negro into North America; it was lack of insight which did not push him
northwards in South Africa. In both cases the "lower race" now forms a grave and almost
unsolvable problem for the future.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 253

Galton gives an account of the Sandow competition in which the three best
specimens were selected out of some eighty of Sandow's pupils. Galton was
present when the trio was selected and thus states his impressions :

"I did not think these best specimens of the British race to be ideally well-made men.
They did not bear comparison with Greek statues of Hercules and of other athletes, being
somewhat ill-proportioned and too heavily built. I must say that I was disappointed with
them from the aesthetic point of view, though in respect to muscular power they seemed
prodigies. Sandow afterwards exhibited himself in a pose that brought out his chest and arms
to full advantage, and in that statuesque position I placed him as far superior to all the
competitors."

What Galton says about British physique and about the physical beauty
of our trunk and limbs is probably very true. We have recently seen the
foreigner our equal or even our superior at most of our national sports ; he
only needed the proper training to defeat us. Nor is the somewhat low
standard of physical beauty confined to trunk and limbs — anyone who makes
an extensive study of the English skull must be forced to the conclusion that
aesthetically at least it is not of a high type. The stock-breeder "looking
over the hedge" must conclude that these are not directions in which much
can easily be achieved. Yet he would affirm emphatically and

" with justice that the whole of a race which was able to furnish the large supply which is
produced in Great Britain of men who are sound in body, capable in mind, energetic and of
high character, has the capacity (speaking as a rearer of stock) of being raised to at least the
same high level."

This, Galton believes, could be attained by making use of both Nature and
Nurture. Of the former Galton holds that if a strong and intelligent public
opinion can ever be roused in favour of improving our racial breed, then there
are a number of small influences which even now operate under existing
sentiment and law and which are capable by co-operation and development
of producing great results. He admits, however, that we have yet much to
learn that lies well within the province of anthropology, before it would be
justifiable to attempt a crusade; otherwise grave mistakes will be made and
the movement will be discredited.

" My attitude, which has usually been misrepresented, is to urge serious inquiry into specific
matters which still require investigation in the well-justified hope that a material improvement
in our British breed is not so Utopian an object as it may seem, but is quite feasible under the
conditions just named. But whatever agencies may be brought to bear on the improvement
of the BHtish stock, whether it be in its Nature or in its Nurture, they will be costly, and it
cannot be too strongly hammered into popular recognition that a well-developed human being,
capable in body and mind, is an expensive animal to rear."

It will be seen that here as elsewhere Galton places the acquirement of
eugenic knowledge before eugenic action — -Eugenics Research Laboratories
must be developed before Eugenics can be safely preached as a popular creed.
He illustrates this by propounding a problem concerning nurture : If a dole
be available to help in the rearing of a child, at what period will assistance
be most effective ? Is it when it is growing most rapidly and most needs good
feeding, or may irremediable mischief be done by withholding it until that

254 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

age is reached? If the State has only a limited amount of money to spend
on its children, let it investigate first when it is of most use in improving
the bi'eed — whether in infancy, at school age, or during the rapid development
of youth.

The reader may think I have given too much space to an ephemeral news-
paper article. It is not because of the suggestions it contains, but rather
because it exhibits the cautious statements and the moderate proposals to
which Galton gave expression even on a topic about which, as those who
knew him well can testify, he felt with almost religious fervour.

During this year (1903) Galton had turned to finger-prints again, and
was very busy trying to find a measurable character common to all patterns.
He endeavoured to obtain this by what he termed the "interspace" — a
diameter drawn across the core (of loops or whorls) so as to be perpendicular
to both its upper and lower borders. The interspace was to be measured in a
mean ridge interval of the core as unit, this mean ridge interval being obtained
as the average of ten ridges taken along the interspace. The arches were a
serious difficulty, for Galton concluded that they had no interspace, and they
tended to lump up at one end of his frequency distributions. Galton's views
are given in the accompanying letters ; they were never published, although
for the remainder of his life he occasionally returned to finger-print studies.
As they may be suggestive to other workers, I reproduce them.

Grand Hotel, Naples. March 2, 1903.

Dear Karl Pearson, Your card of the 26 th came all right yesterday, but the previous
one which you mention, in reply to my letter enclosing Bicknell's, had and has miscarried.
Hence my eagerness for tidings. You say that subscriptions are falling off — here however you
will find one and probably two new subscriptions. I have written to M r H. to say that I am
forwarding his letter to you for reply and that I am ordering his book. ..to be forwarded to
you also. Please answer to him his quere about the way of remitting his subscription. I know
nothing of hirn.

It is to be regretted that biologists do not welcome Biometrika, but the welcome cannot
yet be expected. Would it be possible to give a summary of work done, that must prove useful
to biology and which without biometric methods could not have been done 1 We seem to need
something of that kind more and more ; something so free from technical language that news-
papers could copy it, and their readers could understand and like it. Of course it could only
contain cream and be in no way exhaustive, but it ought to be so far mentally digestible by the

average biological intelligence as to leave some conviction upon it of the utility of biometry

As regards the finger-prints I am in a little doubt, being not sure how far my collection
of Bengal Criminals may be thought suitable, or even whether they are strictly non-selected.
From the comparative absence of transitional patterns I fear that many of these may have been
sorted out of the collection, which is one of a few hundred duplicates of some of the main
collection of about 6000. They were used to enable M r Henry (now Assistant-Commissioner
at Scotland Yard) to show off the rapidity with which the original of any selected duplicate
might be traced. It is possible that his clerks may have avoided troublesome transitional cases
sometimes, but M 1 ' Henry seems not to be cognizant of this. At all events I should prefer to
work on my own collection, but that, alas, is classified, so I should have to go through the
whole of it, 2600 odd in number, if I touched it at all. This would be a very tedious job, for
I must not draw outlines on the patterns themselves, — which is easy but might spoil them, —
but must trace them, which is very troublesome even with the best tracing paper and the best
light. Would you however look at the enclosed table and tell me how it strikes you 1 Perhaps
you might even get some one to work out the correlation index.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life

[Enclosure in Galton's Letter of March 2, 1903.]

255

M\ Q*uMAl*Lit+ti

• 3a - »jty

IfZjJGUv

lo
/3

200

_flt*k.

l~f.

ihSitk

/^>

■S/uW

<s&-

"HvitA*A)J IMsEJoHk. KXctfQ

H*<^ ^ / Ii^i^jj^u. lis. ustufr *f u M&»n - 72e>&e- A&2*/

S<7 „

-la „

^r7

(<K«.(s '

3? •>* «//

lo
I
i

7^' f ^- /W* ^/^

24
4

/ 3 3

Z 3 1 3

3 2 4 £

3 2 *

/
8

? ■ ; j h- »

f /

2&£

3 /

r-r-*r

4 7^

3 /

9 6> I

z 1 r; /
i * ^

Jri71/4li3|7l25u(|i6[2f|8l6l3

ifl*&

200

TVtkc^ SfUCt*. ^<KAct ICjoT,

256 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

I am quite sure that my way of working on the 2 forefingers is the best for getting at the
relations between the various patterns, and I have already learnt much that is new, but I
shrink from more work on my present material. Finger patterns seem to me an ideally good
subject, not only for heredity work, but for much else of evolutionary interest. If you think
the enclosed table of 200 cases full enough, or nearly so, I should take pains to get that
number, or double that number, printed off at some school or elsewhere, especially for this
inquiry. They would have to be rolled impressions printed in triplicate at least. Such impres-
sions are rapidly taken. I easily take 12 of my own fingers carefully in one minute, when all
is ready, or in five minutes counting from the time of sitting down to the table with my appa-
ratus in my pocket to that of rising with everything cleaned and packed in my pocket again....

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

The weather is becoming cold, not good for travel further.

[Postcard] University College, London. March 6, 1903.

I have just had time to work out your correlation table. I find :

Mean, Left forefinger - 244 mean ridge interval.

S.D. „ „ -1047 „

Mean, Right „ -229 „

S.D. „ „ -1048 „

Correlation = -8203.

The correlation of the distal phalanges of the R. and L. forefingers as given by Lewenz and
Whiteley in Biometrika is -79, i.e. within probable error of your result. Karl Pearson.

I wrote further to Galton asking for information upon the "interspace"
and upon the want of continuity due to the Arches being treated as of zero
"interspace." One of the main difficulties in his restriction of the data to
the two forefingers was that a rare type of print that appears on one fore-
finger may not appear on the other forefinger but on some* other finger of
that hand, and experience seems to show that the prints of all ten digits
must be taken into consideration when judging the resemblance of relatives
by means of finger-prints. I received the following illustrative letter from
Capri :

March 16, 1903.

My dear Karl Pearson, I have at last got your long letter of March 5 and enclosures
at Capri, where we have been 9 days. After a very little more touring we turn homewards.
The loss of 20 subscribers is bad, and so is the attitude of both biologists and mathematicians
to Biometrika, but the second year of a new venture is always the most trying time*. The first
flush of expectation is over, and the solid merits have not had time to assert themselves. It
seems to me to want some cheery writing in good reviews to show in an intelligible form a few
definite blunders into which biologists have fallen for want of biometric methods. I expect
craniology would furnish topics. I recollect once that kindest of men, Sir W 1 " Flower, being
on the verge of wrath because I pointed out the insufficiency of evidence drawn from the mean
values of a few skulls of some savage race (I forget which) in determining the race to which
a particular unknown skull belonged. Craniological literature would contain, I should think,
many rash statements which could be assailed triumphantly by a facile writer and sharp critic.
Dear old Beddoe is the most rambling of thinkers and writers as well as one of the most
industrious of workers. I am not surprised to hear that his paper is far below the occasion,
wrong in its criticism and wrong even in its arithmetic and generally slipshod. The photo-

* [Those were anxious days for the Editors of Biometrika as they watched the slipping away
of their funds. Nowadays several parts of those early years have been reprinted, and complete
series sell at very high prices !]

XI
M
XI

P\W^^

4* -

c !

- :<?

1S#

" 1

M
'u
S 1)

§3

I-H J3

to 3

o ■»

S a,

» 2
m

™* J3

- . Is

■*.s

£ .SP

® '£
*> o

.9 ©

60
T3 ">

•-§

1 §

s -

.sj

CO "{/)

-1
.3 S

60 <B

a &,
•B *

3 «•

o -is
3t

O <D
J.S

S S

I/} X

a 9

3 a
° i

g d

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Gallon's Life •_'."> 7

graph of the skull that you send is exceedingly good, and is I presume (together with the
rest) taken under standard conditions, and selected in some way free from bias, other than
what may be clearly stated about them as intended to be conveyed by the word "English."
English unless narrowly limited includes so great a diversity of type : — dark and fair, Cornish,
Sussex, Midlands, Yorkshire, Welsh, Scotch, Irish, etc. &c. — ill-fed and well-fed, educated and
uneducated, etc. etc. — that it is very difficult to deal with English as a whole, except by taking
homogeneous subgroups*. I found this emphatically the case with my S. Kensington anthro-
pometric data. Out of many thousand cases I failed to form a single homogeneous (quasi-homo-
geneous) group that satisfied me. If you think that your collection is fairly free from this
difficulty, please tell me what you think the cost of printing them would be, and I will see if
it be possible for me to afford it. It is most desirable that some standard and unquestionably
useful work — obviously useful to biologists — should appear in Siometrika.

About the finger-prints, what I sent was a mere scrap and would require a great deal
both of explanation and of collateral conclusions. The lump at the commencement of the
series is to me of the greatest interest, for it emphasises the fact that the patterns do not form
a continuous series, but a group or order composed of many sub-groups or species ; each of
these lias a curve of frequency of its own. They are in some sense convertible, and they form
hybrids, but the arches are far more "pure blooded" (so to speak) than any of the others.
They are antipathetic to whorls. An arch on one forefinger is associated with a whorl on the
other only once or twice in a hundred cases, and then only imperfectly. Then there is the case
of radial and ulnar slopes, and their connection with whorls. We have in fact a menagerie of
different creatures, breeding promiscuously, and yet at all times divisible into a limited number
of definite types, each with its own law of frequency, whose statistical proportions between
themselves seem to be constant. Its study has therefore a very close bearing on the evolution
of species (as indeed I pointed out in my first paper on Finger-Prints iu Phil. Trans.). This
study has the great advantages (1) that age has no effect on the patterns, when the ridge
interval is taken as unit of measurement, and consequently (2) that it would be easy to get
and to use family prints to 3 and even 4 generations, (3) that the data when once obtained
are free from all error of measurement, for they are themselves the things to be measured f.
I send prints of my own fingers, which are a worse example by far than the generality of those
one might get, chiefly because the wrinkles of age leave numerous gaps in the form of white
streaks, and also because I have smeared them by manipulations immediately after they were
made, but they will serve to explain the dimension measured in the table I sent. The loops are
troublesome only in the sense that the very best dimension is hard to define ; on the other hand
many reasonably alternative dimensions give practically the same result. The measure desired

* [The skulls in question all came from a single 17th century pit in Whitechapel, and
were reasonably homogeneous and close to similar series from Liverpool Street and Farringdon
Street. The photographs were the first of the series of standardly orientated crania on a large
scale which have since then continuously appeared in Biometrika. Gal ton's offer was spon-
taneous like several others, but not accepted. " Of course I could not think of your aiding us
further at present. We made up the loss to the reserve fund with your Darwin Medal grant,
and it left £30 to the good which might be reasonably expended on illustration if you approved.
...The photographs were all taken the same distance from the objective and in the same manner
for each aspect, but different aspects had to be treated rather differently — a profile on a smaller
scale than a frontal view, etc. The difficulty of getting a ' mean ' focus on a solid body must
cause some variation, however, even in the distance. On the whole, I think, photographs of
skulls must be taken to represent qualitative characters, which are after all, if indescribable,
realities. I have tried a good deal, but do not believe that cranial photographs will ever serve

usefully purposes of measurement I hope you will come back fit and well for climbing 'May

hill,' which an old medical friend always describes as the great task of the year. I am going
to Newbury to meet Weldon to-morrow to talk over Part III, while I hunt for Easter quarters.
We want to be near Oxford, Weldon for the mice and I for Weldon." K. P. to F. G., March 20,
1903.1

t [I think Gallon must mean here that the stored data are free from error of measurement.
Whether we take head measurements or finger-print measurements (and Galton is speaking of
quantitative not qualitative classification) the measurement must be taken once.]

i' oni 33

258 Life and Letters of Francis Gallon

is the magnitude of disturbance caused by the finger nail. When the disturbance is great
compound patterns tend to appear as the " kernelled loop "
(right ring-finger). [Gal ton gives sketch : see our Plate XI,
Fig. 19.]

In the Arches the disturbance does not occur at any one place,
but is distributed. [Sketch : see our Plate XXIII (1-6).]
When I come back I must begin to collect data : viz. triplicates,
rolled impressions of two forefingers, using a separate half-sheet
of note paper for each person. I now understand quite what I
want, and can use a clerk, working with comparatively slight
supervision after he is well trained and started. The outlining
is very distinct when done with the very black ink used by
artists who draw for " process- work." I have contrived a
wonderfully neat pocket-apparatus for printing, only the size of
a small lucifer match box and value under l' 1 . Very sincerely « ^ p rm t 3 f t wo f ore fingers
yours, Francis Galton. in triplicate.

Galton, when he returned to England, circularised many folk, issuing small
finger-printing apparatus, and asking for the prints of the two forefingers
of as many relatives to be taken as possible. To aid him in the reduction of
these and other data Galton desired to find an assistant. On the advice of
Dr Alice Lee, he selected Miss Ethel M. Elderton — a most happy choice.
She received her first training from Francis Galton, then became successively
Secretary to the Eugenics Record Office, Galton Research Scholar in the
Eugenics Laboratory, then Galton Fellow, and is now Assistant-Professor in
that Laboratory. Perhaps this was the best result that flowed from the
forefingers-print collection !

(7) Work and Correspondence of 1904. Two events of this year had
importance in relation to Eugenics, the one dealing with scientific research
and the other with popularisation. The first was Galton's gift of £1500 to the
University of London for the furtherance during three years of the scientific
study of Eugenics. I have already referred to the Galton Research Fellowship
when discussing the definition of Eugenics. Our correspondence for the latter
end of the year chiefly dealt with the various candidates for the Fellowship
with some of whom I was acquainted as well as with their work. The selec-
tion committee ultimately recommended Mr Edgar Schuster, an Oxford
student of Weldon's, who had already done good biometric work, and Miss
E. M. Elderton was appointed as his assistant. University College provided
rooms at 50, Gower Street, which at Galton's request were entitled the
" Eugenics Record Office." In the same house were lodged for working
purposes two or three post-graduates, an overflow from the Biometric
Laboratory, but there was no other link between that Laboratory and the
Office. Galton himself was in control, and the main scheme in hand was to
form a register of "Able Families," of which only the portion dealing with
Fellows of the Royal Society reached completion*. Schuster during his
tenure of the Fellowship also wrote two memoirs, one on " The Inheritance
of Ability " in conjunction with Miss Elderton and a second entitled " The
Promise of Youth and the Performance of Manhood." These two memoirs

* See the present volume, pp. 113-121.

X
X
X

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 2;">9

were excellent pieces of work*, and I am the more willing to praise them as
I had no connection whatever with the Eugenics Record Office. I was not
on its Advisory Committee, and Galton, knowing how pressed I was at that
time with work, did not as far as I can recollect ever consult me as to the
research in his Office ; once or twice only Schuster asked for aid in dealing with
statistical matters. In the main it was Galton, with some aid from Weldon,
who developed this first attempt at a Eugenics Laboratory. When two years
later Galton asked me to take charge of the Office I was only too glad to
publish Schuster's memoirs as the first and third of the new Eugenics
Laboratory publications. These writings and a couple of papers on the
inheritance of psychical characters and of deaf-mutism demonstrated that
Galton's proposals for eugenetic research were feasible, and that his endow-
ment was not being wasted. If in the future the question arises when and
where did Eugenics as an academic branch of study take its origin, the
answer can only be : In the autumn of 1.904 in the two rooms at No. 50,
Gower Street under the direction of Francis Galton, within a few yards of
the house on the same side of the street where Charles Darwin started his
married life when he returned from his voyage in the " Beagle." When
Eugenics becomes a great factor of academic and political life — as important
as State Medicine, — which I have no doubt it will be in the future, then
that house will deserve to be commemorated !

The second important event for Galton and Eugenics in the year 1904
was really anterior to the foundation of the Eugenics Record Office. I have
already noted that Galton had endeavoured, although not very successfully,
to interest English anthropologists in Eugenics. He now turned with a some-
what greater degree of success to the Sociologists, and in particular to the
newly founded Sociological Society. A lecture was given by him at a meeting
of that Society held on May 16, 1904. It was exceedingly well-staged except
in one unfortunate respect, the choice of a chairman. There was a reasonably
well-directed discussion and there were written expressions of opinion upon
Eugenics as science and art from a number of men with familiar names.
Maudsley and Mercier were doubters and apparently ignorant of the know-
ledge already obtained ; Francis Warner generalised on impressions ; Weldon
preached the sound doctrine " that there can be no doubt whatever that for
the student of Eugenics or of organic evolution generally, the conclusions
drawn from the larger mass of complex material are far more valuable than
those drawn from the simpler, smaller laboratory experiment " ; H. G. Wellsf
was of the opinion that more can be achieved in the way of improving the human
race by the sterilisation of failures than by the selection of successes for breed-
ing; Benjamin Kidd was dogmatic without being convincing; Palin Elderton

* Both now unfortunately out of print.

t This popular author set an absurd myth on foot by saying : " Eugenics which is really
only a new word for the popular American term stirpiculture." " I wish," said the German
Professor, " that Lord Rayleigh would more frequently acknowledge his indebtedness to Mr
Strutt." Galton himself actually invented the word " stirpiculture " and changed it advisedly
to eugenics !

33—2

260 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

considered that actuaries as a body hold that environment operates merely as a
modifying factor after heredity has done its work; L. T. Hobhouse maintained
that if the problem of stock is to be taken into consideration at all, then it
ought to be by intelligently handling the question rather than submitting to
the blind forces of nature, but until there is more knowledge and agreement
as to criteria of conscious selection, " we cannot, as sociologists, expect to do
much for society on these lines " ; William Bateson held that " the ' actuarial
method ' will perhaps continue to possess a certain fascination in regions of
inquiry where experimental methods are at present inapplicable," but urged
that those who have such aims at heart (as Galton) would best further
Eugenics by promoting "the attainment of that solid and irrefragable know-
ledge of the physiology of heredity which experimental breeding can alone
supply"; he did not state the touchstone — faith in the research and the
actuarial treatment — by which we can alone know that the knowledge is "solid
and irrefragable"*; C. S. Lock obviously thought the proposals premature ;
W. Leslie Mackenzie thought that the effects of inheritance were so masked
by nurture that in no individual case could we determine what was due to
the former, and cited as an illustration that the modern movement for
extirpation of tubercular phthisis could not become world-wide until the
belief in the " heredity of tuberculosis " had been sapped ; a view contradicted
promptly by Archdall Reid who held that it was selection by consumption
tbat made the Northern Races pre-eminently strong against consumption ;
J. M. Robertson evidently laid more stress on environment than heredity,
and considered ill-feeding, ill-housing, ill-clothing and early profligacy on
the one hand, and ignorance in child-bearing and begetting on the other, as
the great forces of " Kakogenics " ; Bernard Shaw agreed with the paper
and went so far as to say " that there was now no reasonable excuse for
refusing to face the fact that nothing but a eugenic religion can save our
civilisation from the fate which has overtaken all previous civilisations." He
held that "what we must fight for is freedom to build the race without
being hampered by the mass of irrelevant conditions implied in marriage," and
asserted that "a mere reduction in the severity of the struggle for existence
is no substitute for positive steps for the improvement of such a deplorable
piece of work as man." Shaw cleared away a good deal of the fog of previous
contributors, but went further f than Galton certainly approved, and indicated
methods of improving the race, for which, however biologically fitting, the
time will not be ripe until the less drastic proposals of Galton have bred
" under the existing conditions of law and sentiment % " a more highly social-
ised race. Galton's suggestions may seem very limited as compared with
Bernard Shaw's attitude to race improvement, but he who would practically

* I can remember the day when certain so-called "Laws of Motion" were considered "solid
and irrefragable " ! Most of the progress in science consists in the passage from one " solid
and irrefragable " law to a second.

t If a marriage is from the eugenic standpoint brilliantly successful "it seems a national loss
to limit the husband's progenitive capacity to the breeding capacity of one woman," etc. etc.

I See the title to Galton's Huxley Lecture on our p. 226.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton' s Life 261

reform mankind must not begin by alarming it. We may remind the Editor
of " Fabian Essays " that the doctrines of Eugenics will be best served, like
those of socialism, by a slow process of impenetration.

The drift of the discussion as above indicated was to reveal clearly the past
history, the narrow field of experience, the particular method of experiment
or observation of the individual contributors. Impressions rapidly formed
on a subject, which they had not thought over for years, like Gal ton, were
produced without any foundation of facts or figures; my anticipations of what
would flow from the various heterogeneous elements classed together as
sociologists were realised. But Galton got an excellent advertisement for
Eugenics, which he proceeded to follow up. The paper and the discussion on
it were widely mentioned in the daily press. Sociology for the present bio-
grapher must be a study of man in the mass, the facts on which the science
must be based depend upon averages, variations, associations and correla-
tions— in short, sociology to become a science must be based upon the collection
of data and the statistical treatment of those data. Such treatment I had
found almost wholly missing in sociological memoirs. Sociology appeared to me
to be like psychology before the introduction of the experimental method, like
what physics would be without a mathematical handling, or insurance before
there was an actuarial science ; in the words of Galton, " Until the phenomena
of any branch of knowledge have been submitted to measurement and number
it cannot assume the status and dignity of a science." Until some sociologist
should arise and grasp this fact and apply it to his studies, sociology in
my opinion had not yet its founder*. Holding such a view I was somewhat
astonished to receive a letter from Francis Galton dated April 12, 1904,
running as follows :

My dear Karl Pearson, I hear they have been bothering you to take the chair at
a Sociological meeting on Monday, May 16 th , when I read a paper on Eugenics at 5 p.m. —
However agreeable it might be to myself that you should do so, I beg that you will consult your
own inclinations entirely in the matter, without the slightest regard to mine. I have just had a
talk with Mr Branford who favourably impressed me with the idea that he had clear views of
what the Society might do scientifically, and that he saw his way to give effect to them. The result
is to ease my own mind in respect to ottering the paper, or rather acceding to the request to send it.

What a slashing you administer to Professor Castle. He deserves it.

A book by Havelock Ellis "A study of British Genius" interests me. He has taken the
" National Biography " as his store house, and shows forcibly the great contribution by English
clergy to the ability of the next generation. That is a Eugenic fact for me, not unforeseen, however.

I trust you are all having a happy Easter at Rotherfield Greys. I fear addressing this so,
therefore I send it to Hainpstead. Kindest remembrances. Very sincerely, Francis Galton.

The actual meeting took place in the large hall of the London School of
Economics, and the audience which the veteran of eighty-two years addressed
was numerous and distinguished. The Chairman, in opening the proceedings,
said :

" My position here this afternoon requires possibly some explanation. I am not a member
of the Sociological Society, and I must confess myself sceptical as to its power to do effective

* The reader will appreciate my amusement when the Secretary of the Sociological Society,
Mr V. V. Branford, spent much paper and energy in endeavouring to prove that Vico, Comte
and Herbert Spencer were architects of a science of sociology !

262 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

work. Frankly, I do not believe in groups of men and women who have each and all their
allotted daily task creating a new branch of science. I believe it must be done by some one man
who by force of knowledge, of method and of enthusiasm hews out, in rough outline it may be,
but decisively, a new block and creates a school to carve out its details. I think you will find
on inquiry that this is the history of each great branch of science. The initiative has been given
by some one great thinker, a Descartes, a Newton, a Virchow, a Darwin or a Pasteur. A
Sociological Society until we have found a great sociologist is a herd without its leader — there
is no authority to set bounds to your science or to prescribe its functions. This you must realise
is the view of that poor creature the doubting man, in media vita ; it is a view which cannot
stand for a moment against the youthful energy of your Secretary, or the boyish hopefulness of
Mr Galton, who mentally is about half my age. Hence for a time I am carried away by their
enthusiasm, and appear where I never anticipated being seen — in the chair at a meeting of the
Sociological Society. If this Society thrives, and lives to do yeoman work in science, which,
sceptic as I am, I sincerely hope it may do, then I believe its members in the distant future
will look back on this occasion as perhaps the one of greatest historical interest in its babyhood.
To those of us who have worked in fields adjacent to Mr Galton's, he appears to us as something
more than the discoverer of a new method of inquiry, we feel for him something more than we
may do for the distinguished scientists in whose laboratories we have chanced to work. There
is an indescribable atmosphere which spreads from him and which must influence all those who
have come within reach of it. We realise it in his perpetual youth, in the instinct with which
he reaches a great truth, where many of us plod on groping through endless analysis, in his
absolute unselfishness and in his continual receptivity for new ideas. I have often wondered
if Mr Galton ever quarrelled with anybody. And to the mind of one who is ever in controversy,
it is one of the miracles associated with Mr Galton, that I know of no controversy, scientific or
literary, in which he has been engaged. Those who look up to him, as we do, as to a master
and scientific leader feel for him as did the scholars for the grammarian :

' Our low life was the level's and the night's ;
He's for the morning.'

It seems to me that it is precisely in this spirit that he attacks the gravest problem which
lies before the Caucasian races — ' in the morning.' Are we to make the whole doctrine of descent,
of inheritance, and selection of the fitter, part of our everyday life, of our social customs and
conduct? It is the question of the study now, but to-morrow it will be the question of the
market-place, of morality and of politics.

If I wanted to know how to put a saddle on a camel's back without chafing him, I should
go to Francis Galton ; if I wanted to know how to manage the women of a treacherous African
tribe, I should go to Francis Galton ; if I wanted an instrument for measuring a snail, — or an
arc of latitude, — I should appeal to Francis Galton. If I wanted advice on any mechanical, or
any geographical, or any sociological problem, I should consult Francis Galton. In all these
matters and many others I feel confident he would throw light on my difficulties, and I am
firmly convinced that with his eternal youth, his elasticity of mind, and his keen insight, he can
aid us in seeking an answer to one of the most vital of our national problems: How is the next
generation of Englishmen to be mentally and physically equal to the past generation which
provided us with the great Victorian statesmen, writers and men of science — most of whom
are now no more — but which generation has not entirely ceased to be as long as we can see
Francis Galton in the flesh."

The Chairman then called upon Mr Francis Galton to read his paper on
" Eugenics, its Definition, Scope and Aims*." The theme of the lecturer was
very similar to that of the address to the demographers of 1891, only there
was no screening of the guns, and the word eugenics was freely used. Eugenics
was defined as the science which deals with all influences which improve

* It will be found printed in Sociological Papers, published by Macmillan <fc Co. for the
Sociological Society, 1905, pp. 45-50.

Eugenics as a Greed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life '263

the inborn qualities of a race, also with those that develop them to the
utmost advantage. Galton also limited himself to the inborn qualities of some
one human population, i.e. to "national" eugenics. It will be seen that the
definition is much looser than that of the University Committee of the follow-
ing year, which limited the science to the "study of agencies under social
control." The word "qualities" is used, but the study of "impairment" of
racial qualities is only implicit, not expressed. The second paragraph of the
address emphasises the fact that Galton would be utterly opposed to the word
" moral " coming into the definition of his science; morality, goodness or bad-
ness of character, he tells us, is not absolute but relative to the current form
of civilisation ; the moment we begin to talk about a character as good or
bad hopeless difficulty is raised. We must leave morals as far as possible out
of the discussion. The essentials of eugenics may be easily determined ; all
would agree that it is better to be healthy than sick, vigorous than weak,
well-fitted than ill-fitted for our part in life.

" There are a vast number of conflicting ideals, of alternative characters, of incompatible
civilisations ; but they are wanted to give fullness and interest to life. Society would he very
dull if every man resembled the highly estimable Marcus Aurelius or Adam Bede. The aim of
Eugenics is to represent each class or sect by its best specimens; that done, to leave them to
work out their common civilisation in their own way. A considerable list of qualities can be
easily compiled that nearly everyone except ' Cranks ' would take into account when picking
out the best* specimens of his class. It would include health, energy, ability, manliness, and
courteous disposition. Recollect that the natural differences between dogs are highly marked in
all these respects, and that men are quite as variable by nature as other animals in their
respective species. Special aptitudes would be assessed highly by those who possessed them, as the
artistic faculties by artists, fearlessness of inquiry and veracity by scientists, religious absorption
by mystics and so on. There would be self-sacrificers, self-tormentors and other exceptional
idealists, but the representatives of these would be better members of the community than the
body of their electors. They would have more of those qualities that are needed in a State,
more vigour, more ability, and more consistency of purpose. The community might be trusted
to refuse representatives of criminals, and of others whom it rates as undesirable." (pp. 46-7.)

Galton then goes on to state what would happen if we could raise the
average quality of our nation to that of its better moiety :

"The race as a whole would be less foolish, less frivolous, less excitable and politically more
provident than now. Its demagogues who ' play to the gallery ' would play to a more sensible
gallery than at present. We should be better fitted to fulfil our vast imperial opportunities.
Lastly, men of an order of ability which is now very rare, would become more frequent, because
the level out of which they rose would itself have risen. The aim of Eugenics is to bring as
many influences as can reasonably be employed to cause the useful classes in the community to
contribute more than their proportion to the next generation f." (p. 47.)

* Some formal objection was taken to the use of the word " best," e.g. J. M. Robertson
suggested that " the aim of Eugenics is to promote such calculation or choice in marriage as
shall maximise the number of efficient individuals." There would, he said, always be some best
and it was a contradiction in terms to say they represented their class. Possibly, but not certainly,
" efficient " is easier to define than " best."

f Mr Robertson (see the previous footnote) seems to have overlooked this last sentence, it
covers with greater generality his suggested aim of Eugenics. Under (2) above Galton actually
speaks of civic efficiency.

264 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton next sketches out what procedure an active society promoting
Eugenics might adopt. It might, he considers :

(1) Disseminate knowledge of the laws of heredity as far as known and
encourage their further investigation.

Incidently he emphasises the importance for Eugenics of the actuarial side
of heredity, and remarks on its advance in recent years, and how the average
degree of resemblance — the measure of kinship in each grade — is now obtain-
able, so that in the mass the effects of blood relationship can be dealt with
even as actuaries deal with the birth- and death-rates. This actuarial side
of heredity was ever present in Galton's mind, and was the topic of his
Herbert Spencer lecture on Eugenics.

(2) Inquire into the present and the past rates of fertility of various social
groups- — classified according to their civic efficiency. Galton says that there
is strong reason for believing from the history of ancient and modern nations
that their rise and fall depends upon changes in this relative fertility. He
considers that while there are causes at work which tend to check fertility in
the classes of higher civic worth, nevertheless types of our race may be found
which can be highly civilised without losing fertility, even as some animals
become more fertile the more they are domesticated.

(3) Collect data as to large and thriving families. Galton considers that
a "large" family may be taken as one in which there are at least three male
children. His definition of a "thriving" family is important, and it seemed to
me overlooked in the discussion ; it is one in which the children have gained
distinctly superior positions to those achieved by the average of their class-
mates in early life. It is clear that such a list of " thriving" families — a
"Golden Book," of really noble stirps — must precede any attempt to encourage
fertility in the classes of higher civic worth. But the formation of such a
"Golden Book," even for a single social group such as the clerical, legal or
academic professions, is a matter of extraordinary difficulty. Galton soon
dropped the idea of making it depend on the children reaching "superior
positions." He saw that it must depend upon the achievements of the stirp
or stock as a whole. It was from the standpoint of this idea that Galton set
Schuster to work on Noteworthy Families in modern science; that was to
form the first section of the "Golden Book." Further portions of it were in
part prepared and the "Register of Able Families*" was an offshoot from the
same idea. Judged from the aim of the " Golden Book," Noteworthy Families
(Modern Science) gains more meaning, if we cannot overlook its defects.

What Eugenics needs is a book of "Noble Families" in a modern sense;
it could at first only apply to the upper classes, and there would certainly
be numerous omissions and erroneous inclusions in the early issues. It would
contain, just as a peerage does, a list of all families within which, inside a
given range of ancestry and collaterals, a certain percentage of members had
reached posts falling into a carefully selected list, or achieved results in politics,
art, literature or science of a certain degree of worth. New families would

* See our present volume, p. 121.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 265

always be coming in, old families dropping out, as the one reached, or the
other fell short of the required percentage. Ultimately the book would be
able to base itself upon its own inclusions. It could only be successful, if
prepared by trained genealogists, eugenists and statisticians, working on
pre-arranged rules. It would need an energetic and enterprising publisher,
but it might in the end become as valuable a property as a peerage, the
Medical Directory, or Who's Who. Such would be the final development of
Galton's "Golden Book of Thriving Families," and to be recorded in it would
be a higher patent of nobility than could be marked by any other directory
or roll in the land.

" The Chinese, whose customs have often sound sense, make their honours retrospective. We
might learn from them to show that respect to the parents of noteworthy children which the
contributors of such valuable assets to the national wealth richly deserve." (p. 49.)

Achievements of their offspring would bring parents into the " Book of
Noble Families."

(4) Study the influences which affect marriage. Galton discarded entirely
the notion that the passion of love is so overpowering that it is folly to
determine its course. Social influences and customs have immense power in
the long run. If marriages which were unsuitable from the eugenic standpoint
were socially banned, as marriages between near-kin have often been, such
marriages would very seldom be made. From the origin of human marriage,
and even before, restrictions and prohibitions have existed concerning the
mating of human beings. Let us study how these customs have originated
and what are their sanctions.

(5) Urge persistently the national importance of Eugenics. According
to Galton there are three stages to be passed through : First, it must be made
familiar as a branch of academic study. Secondly, it must be recognised that
the subject demands serious consideration as an art. And Thirdly, it must
be introduced into the national conscience, like a new religion.

Then follow what, in the biographer's judgment, are the most impressive
sentences Galton ever wrote on the subject of Eugenics :

" It has indeed strong claims to become an orthodox religious tenet of the future, for Eugenics
co-operates with the workings of nature by securing that humanity shall be represented by the
fittest races. What Nature does blindly, slowly and ruthlessly, man may do providently,
quickly and kindly. As it lies within his power, so it becomes his duty to work in that direction,
just as it is his duty to succour neighbours who suffer misfortune. The improvement of our
stock seems to me one of the highest objects that we can reasonably attempt. We are ignorant
of the ultimate destinies of humanity but feel perfectly sure it is as noble a work to raise its
level in the sense already explained as it would be disgraceful to abuse it. I see no impossibility
in Eugenics becoming a religious dogma among mankind, but its details must first be worked
out sedulously in the study. Over-zeal leading to hasty action would do harm, by holding out
expectations of a near golden age, which would certainly be falsified and cause the science to be
discredited. The first and main point is to secure the general intellectual acceptance of Eugenics
as a hopeful and most important study. Then let its principles work into the heart of the nation,
which will gradually give practical effect to them in ways that we may not wholly foresee." (p. 50.)

Galton stressed here as he always did the essential need to have a science
of Eugenics before we make propaganda for its principles — the study is to
come before the market-place.

pgiii 34

266 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

A second paper by Galton is published in this volume of Sociological
Studies (pp. 85-99). It is entitled: "A Eugenic Investigation, Index to
Achievements of Near Kinsfolk of some of the Fellows of the Royal Society."
It is a preliminary notice of the material later dealt with by Galton and
Schuster in Noteworthy Families *. As we have already very fully considered
the latter work, discussion of this preliminary study is unnecessary. A few
lines from the "Preface" indicating how confident Galton had become on
certain points may, however, be cited here:

" It is now practically certain from wide and exact observations, that the physical characters
of all living beings, whether men, other animals or plants, are subject approximately to the same
laws of heredity. Also that mental qualities such as ability and character, which are only
partially measurable, follow the same laws as the physical and measurable ones. The obvious
result of this is that the experience gained in establishing improved breeds of domestic animals
and plants is a safe guide to speculations on the theoretical possibility of establishing improved
breeds of the human race.

It is not intended to enter here into such speculations, but to emphasise the undoubted fact
that members of gifted families are, on the whole, appreciably more likely than the generality
of their countrymen to produce gifted offspring." (pp. 85-6.)

Two more letters of this year — out of many others — may be printed here
because they show not only the affection Galton bore to his lieutenants but
also the encouragement he was continually giving them.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 30, 1904.

My dear Karl Pearson, What an admirable paper you have just sent me. Such literature
will help to unite many scattered forces of a higher order than journalists in the good cause.
They exist and want to be found out and incorporated. I have been staying some days in
a country house with Sir John Gorst, who is very keen and earnest about the degeneracy of the
Board School Children. He thinks the Scotch Commissioners' Report, which I have not yet
read, a very good one, but doubts the adequacy of the forthcoming (probably in July) report of
the English Commission. When it is out he thinks that strong action of any or all kinds would
be peculiarly effective. He does not seem to know much about heredity. I will send him your
paper after re-reading it comfortably. He is or was a mathematician.

I never congratulated you on your wonderful show of skull photos at the R. Soc.

Very sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 31, 1904.

My dear Karl Pearson, Your remarks before the Eugenics lecture have just reached me
in print. I had no idea at the time (owing to deafness) that you were saying such very kind —
such over-kind things of me. I write at once fearing you may have thought my silence on the
subject since, due to apathy ; which it was not, but purely to ignorance.

Ever sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

(8) Work and Correspondence of 1905. The meeting at the Sociological
Society in the previous year had undoubtedly been a success, it attracted a
really widespread attention to Eugenics, and this among a circle less rigidly
specialist and academically scientific than Galton's two earlier audiences. So
pleased was he with the result that early in this year (February 14) he read
a further paper on "Restrictions in Marriagef " before the Sociological Society
with Dr E. Westermarck in the chair.

* See our pp. 113-121.

f Sociological Papers, Vol. II, 1905, pp. 1 — 53.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 267

Galton considered that the public conscience as represented by tribal
custom, law or current moral opinion had a powerful influence on conduct.
This public conscience is usually reflected in sanctions enforced by the
religion of the tribe or nation, often by appeal to the super-rational conse-
quences of "sin," i.e. disobedience to the current social code. Occasionally
social needs develop the public conscience more rapidly than the guardians of
orthodox belief are able or willing to expand their religious creed, and there
is friction, slight or grave, between what the forerunners call "progress" and
the priests term "heresy." Somehow religion moulds itself to the developed
public conscience, and all ends happily with the progressive "sinners" being
canonised as saints. Noting the remarks of the speakers and correspondents
which followed or resulted from Galton's paper, we may find the same type of
statement unsupported by the only possible proof — that of statistics- — again
occurring. For example: "the defects of a quality seem sometimes scarcely
less valuable than the quality itself," "it is highly probable that a very slight
taint may benefit rather than injure a good stock," "marry Hercules with
Juno, and Apollo with Venus and put them in slums, their children will be
stunted in growth, rickety and consumptive," "in a low state of civilisation
the masses obey traditional laws without questioning their authority. Highly
differentiated cultured persons have a strong critical sense, they ask of every-
thing the reason why, and they have an irrepressible tendency to be their
own lawgivers. These persons would not submit to laws restricting marriage
for the sake of vague Eugenics*," "at present the care for future man, the
love and respect of the race, are quite beyond the pale of the morals of even
the best," "the rise of intellectual qualities also involves under given condi-
tions a danger of further decay of moral feeling, nay of sympathetic affections

generally Under existing social conditions it would mean a cruelty to

raise the average intellectual capacity of a nation to that of its better moiety
at the present day," with much more half-baked thought.

Some few speakers were more helpful; it may be that Galton, perhaps
purposely, did not sufficiently emphasise the distinction between procreation
and marriage, or indeed note that most primitive taboos concern mating
rather than marriage; yet the distinction was in the minds of some of his
supporters. Dr A. C. Haddon held that marriage customs among primitive
peoples are not in any way hidebound, and that social evolution can take
place. "When circumstances demand a change, then a change takes' place,
perhaps more or less automatically, being due to a sort of natural selection.
There are thinking people among savages, and we have evidence that they
do consider and discuss social customs, and even definitely modify them ; but,
on the whole, there appears to be a definite trend of social factors that cause
this evolution. There is no reason why social evolution should continue to
take place among ourselves in a blind sort of way, for we are intelligent
creatures, and we ought to use rational means to direct our own evolution.

* Why should the precepts of Eugenics be "vague," if they start from scientific know-
ledge 1 Other critics asserted on the contrary that the more cultivated classes would reach
eugenic conclusions, but the uneducated would pay no attention, and so the movement be idle!

34—2

268 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Further, with the resources of modern civilisation, we are in a favourable
position to accelerate this evolution. The world is gradually becoming self-
conscious, and I think Mr Galton has made a very strong plea for a determined
effort to attempt a conscious evolution of the race " (pp. 18-19). Dr F. W. Mott
was strongly in favour of the segregation of defective children, and would
encourage the State to set up registry offices, which could give a bill of health
to persons contracting marriage, and these bills would have actuarial value not
only for the possessors but for their children, and should enable them to obtain
insurance at a lower rate*. Mr A. E. Crawley said that Galton's remarkable
and suggestive paper indicated how anthropological studies can be made of
service in practical politics. He considered that the science of Eugenics should
be founded on anthropology, psychology and physiology — thus leaving out
genetics, actuarial science and medicine, all equally if not more important !
The part that Galton suggested religion might play in Eugenics seemed
to the speaker excellent. "Religion can have no higher duty than to
insist upon the sacredness of marriage, but just as the meaning and
content of that sacredness were the result of primitive science, so modern
science must advise as to what this sacredness involves for us in our
vastly changed conditions, complicated needs and increased responsibilities "
(p. 21).

Dr Westermarck thoroughly approved of Galton's programme, and said
that Galton had appealed to historical facts to show how restrictions in
marriage have occurred ; he saw no reason why the restrictions should not
be extended far beyond the existing laws of any civilised nation of to-day.
He drew attention to tribes which made an exhibition of courage essential
to the permission granted a man to marry, to German and Austrian laws
prohibiting the marriage of paupers, and he saw no reason why similar laws
should not be extended to persons who would "in all probability" become
parents of feeble or diseased offspring. " We cannot wait till biology has said
its last word on heredity. We do not allow lunatics to walk freely about
even though there may be merely a suspicion that they may be dangerous.
I think that the doctor ought to have a voice in every marriage which is
contracted... men are not generally allowed to do mischief in order to gratify
their own appetites."

Besides increased legal restriction Dr Westermarck thought that moral
education would help to promote Eugenicsf . Dr Westermarck concluded with

* This corresponds to the idea on p. 243 above of attaching medical certificates to the
State sickness and old-age pensions scheme.

"j" This has, owing chiefly to the efforts of Galton, progressed largely during the past 25
years. Quite a number of persons have developed the eugenic conscience, and A seeks advice
as to whether it is social to marry B ; or C, having married I), as to whether it is antisocial
to have further children who may turn out like E. The Galton Laboratory is not at present
organised on a scale to answer such problems, although it does its best to do so; but the time
is rapidly approaching when an institution above reproach from the medical standpoint, and
equipped with a staff conversant with the various branches of human heredity and of genealogical
study, might issue case-opinions and certificates. In the distant future it might hope to be
self-supporting.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 269

the following words, which could hardly have been better expressed by Galton

himself:

"It seems that the prevalent opinion that almost anybody is good enough to marry is
chiefly due to the fact that in this case the cause and the effect, marriage and the feebleness
of the offspring, are so distant from each other that the near-sighted eye does not distinctly
perceive the connection between them. Hence no censure is passed on him who marries from
want of foresight or want of self-restraint, and by so doing produces offspring doomed to misery.
But this can never be right. Indeed there is hardly any other point in which the moral
consciousness of civilised man still stands in greater need of intellectual training than in its
judgments on cases which display want of care or foresight. Much progress has in this respect
been made in the course of evolution, and it would be absurd to believe that men would for
ever leave to individual caprice the performance of the most important and, in its consequences,
the most far-reaching function which has fallen to the lot of mankind." (pp. 24-5.)

It is worth while giving these expressions of opinion, because they
indicate that Galton was beginning to make an impression, and on those
whom it was worth while to impress. The purpose of Galton's lecture
was to combat the objection often raised against Eugenics*, that human
nature would never brook interference with the freedom of marriage. Galton
wished to appeal from armchair criticism to actual facts. He stated that
it is no unreasonable assumption to suppose that, when Eugenics is so
well understood that its lofty objects become generally appreciated, they
will meet with some recognition both from the religious sense of the people
and from its laws. " The question to be considered is how far have marriage
restrictions proved effective when sanctified by the religion of the time, by
custom and by law." Galton next proceeds to show how monogamy and
polygamy have each received religious sanction and religious condemnation
in their place and turn; how celibacy has been a sin and a state of holiness t.
If such customs do not arise from any natural instinct but from considerations
of social well-being, may we not conclude that under pressure of worthy
motives, limitations to freedom of marriage may hereafter be enacted by
law or custom for eugenic purposes ? Galton then turns to endogamy and
exogamy, which in multitudes of communities have been enforced even under
the severest penalties; he refers to the Levirate with its limitation on the
widow's choice — he might have referred to the funeral pyre of the Hindoo
widow — and to the strange custom adumbrated by the tale of Ruth and Boaz.

* To this word in the opening section is a footnote : " Eugenics may be defined as the
science which deals with those social agencies that influence mentally or physically the racial
qualities of future generations." This is not yet the definition of the University Committee, and
a singular history attaches to the footnote. Mr Howard Collins read this paper in manuscript,
and criticised the wording of the definition of the term " Eugenics " ; and in a letter to Calton
of Jan. 15, 1905, he proposed that it should read as follows : " Eugenics is defined as the science
of those social agencies which influence mentally, morally and physically, the racial qualities
of future generations." Galton adopted this wording, striking out, however, the word "morally."
This indicates how far he was from accepting Sir Arthur Kiicker's modification of the University
Committee's definition.

t Galton enlarges a good deal on the celibacy of mediaeval Christianity and opines that
pious efforts as great as those which founded monasteries and nunneries might under religious
influence be directed so as to fulfil an exactly opposite purpose, thus homes or colleges might
be endowed for young married couples from stock of high civic worth : see our p. 78 and the
account of "Kantsay where" later in this chapter.

270 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Marriage within the clan may be considered unmanly — a wife must be
captured. Customs like these are not instincts, they have arisen from ideas
of social profit. Yet they, like the complicated Australian marriage system,
have religious sanction, nay, may be enforced by the penalty of death.

" Eugenics deals with what is more valuable than money or lands, namely the heritage of
a high character, capable brains, fine physique, and vigour ; in short, with all that is most
desirable for a family to possess as a birthright. It aims at the evolution and preservation of
high races of men, and it as well deserves to be as strictly enforced as a religious duty as the
Levirate law ever was." (pp. 6-7.)

Next Galton refers to the influence of taboo.

"A vast complex of motives can be brought to bear upon the naturally susceptible minds
of children, and of uneducated adults who are mentally little more than big children. The
constituents of this complex are not sharply distinguishable, but they form a recognisable
whole that has not yet received an appropriate name, in which religion, superstition, custom,
tradition, law and authority all have part. This group of motives will for the present purpose
be entitled ' immaterial ' in contrast to material ones. My contention is that the experience
of all ages and all nations shows that the immaterial motives are frequently far stronger than
the material ones, the relative power of the two being well illustrated by the tyranny of taboo
in many instances, called as it is by different names in different places." (pp. 8-9.)

The mere terror of having unwittingly broken a taboo may fill a man with
the deepest remorse, or even kill him.

Under our own " civilised " law also and with religious sanctification, we
meet the taboos of the prohibited degrees of marriage. They are in many cases
not questions of instinct, but are primarily designed to preserve family life.

"The marriage of a brother and sister would excite a feeling of loathing among us that
seems implanted by nature, but which further inquiry will show has mainly arisen from
tradition and custom." (p. 9.)

Galton holds that a repugnance to inbreeding may have arisen from harm
arising from too close inbreeding, but biologically the evil appears — when
the stock is good — to have been much exaggerated. He thinks therefore
that desire not to infringe the sanctity and freedom of the social relations of
a family group has led to the taboo. " It is quite conceivable that a non-
eugenic marriage should hereafter excite no less loathing than that of a
brother and sister would do now." (p. 11.) Personally the biographer would
consider the marriage of two individuals both members of unrelated stocks
tainted with insanity as more heinous than the marriage of a brother and
sister of sound stock — the risk of the latter to offspring depends on the
existence of unrecognised and undesirable latent characters ; there is almost
certainty in the former case that a definite percentage of the children will
either exhibit or transmit the taint. The thorough conviction by a nation
that no worthier object can exist for man than the improvement of his own
race is for Galton in itself the acceptance of Eugenics as a national religion.
If we examine the reasons for such irresistible streams of popular emotion
as are vaguely symbolised in respect for the national flag, in the King
as personifying our country, indeed in all phases of patriotism, we shall
discover that their springs lie in Galton's "immaterial motives," and it

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 271

is in precisely such almost instinctive motives that he hoped to find
ultimately a foundation for that highest form of patriotism, eugenic
morality. Several of the contributors to the discussion emphasised the
difference between "barbarous" and "civilised" peoples, suggesting that
what anthropology tells of the former cannot be applied to the latter. To
the careful student of mankind there are no rigid categories such as
barbarism and civilisation ; to him the civilisation of to-day is the barbarism
of to-morrow, and he can only smile when he is told that civilisation was
born in and spread from Egypt. The man of to-day believes, of course, that
his religions and his institutions are products of his "high " civilisation ; he
does not see their growth through the ages and their roots in the fertile
mud of what he terms "barbarism." He believes that the basal laws of his
own psychic growth differ in some undefined way from those which controlled
that of his far-distant ancestor. Galton thought otherwise :

"The subservience of civilised races to their several religious superstitions, customs,
authority and the rest, is frequently as abject as that of barbarians. The same classes of
motives that direct other races direct ours, so a knowledge of their customs helps us to realise
the wide range of what we may ourselves hereafter adopt, for reasons as satisfactory to us in
those future times, as they are or were to them at the time when they prevailed." (p. 12.)

I have had several times to refer to Galton's views on religion in the
course of this biography. The study of evolution had brought him freedom
from the traditional faiths ; like many of the leading men of science of his
day he was an agnostic. But he was not an iconoclastic freethinker, he was
willing that old faiths should remould themselves to new ideas, where some
would have felt that it was futile to jxmr new wine into old skins. Even the
ancient faiths in their old skins might help certain natures to-day. I well
remember what he said to me when one of his closest relatives was received
into the Catholic Church : " It may be a stable guide for emotional natures,
it would be of no service to you or me." He was not only tolerant of others'
views, but his sympathy induced him to satisfy where it lay in his power
their religious cravings, even at the risk of his action being misinterpreted*.

* I venture to quote here a very characteristic and beautiful letter to his niece dated from
42, Rutland Gate, July 30, 1907:

" I should lie glad to have family prayers as of old. The household needs a few minutes of daily companion-
ship in reverent thought and ritual. The first morning when I had returned home after dear Louisa's death,
we the remainder of the household reassembled as usual, but — oh the pitifulness of it — when half-way through
the prayers, I lost all control of my voice, and fairly broke down, and dismissed the household. I never recom-
menced the custom ; partly shrinking from its memories ; largely because I felt that at least one of the heads
should be able to join in the prayers without any reservation. This as I understand from your letter you would
do now.

" I have again looked at the old and well-remembered prayer-book. It is sadly dilapidated and when last used
required caution in handling. I will bring it with me. It might be replaced with advantage. Both Louisa and
I felt that the psalms became monotonous, and that it would be well to read alternatively or otherwise parts
of the rest of the Bible. I will get a Bible for the purpose of marking out suitable passages, also a prayer book.
(It interested me much to find that the published list of Mr Gladstone's favourite psalms was almost identical
with my own selection. ) It would also be well to increase the variety of the prayers. Mine were 14 collects,
two for each week day. We will consider all this at Hindhead. You know and will respect my limitations in
selecting passages. I must be true to my own convictions as you will be to yours."

Galton's conviction was that prayer is subjective in its influence and should be an inspira-
tion, not a petition. I may quote extracts from three letters to his nieces, which support this
statement. April 9, 1907 : "I think in earnest prayer of you and poor Fred, for I can pray

272 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Galton had in reality a deeply religious nature, and in this sense we
must read the concluding sentences of this memoir in which he again
emphasises the conception that Eugenics will hereafter receive the sanction
of religion, even of the present Christian doctrine.

"It may be asked 'how it can be shown that Eugenics falls within the purview of our
own faith.' It cannot, any more than the duty of making provision for the future needs of
oneself and family, which is a cardinal feature of modern civilisation, can be deduced from
the Sermon on the Mount. Religious precepts founded on the ethics and practice of olden
days require to be reinterpreted to make them conform to the needs of progressive nations.
Ours are already so far behind modern requirements that much of our practice and our pro-
fession cannot be reconciled without illegitimate casuistry. It seems to me that few things are
more needed by us in England than a revision of our religion, to adapt it to the intelligence
and needs of the present time. A form of it is wanted that shall be founded on reasonable
bases, and enforced by reasonable hopes and fears, and that preaches honest morals in unam-
biguous language, which good men who take their part in the work of the world and who
know the dangers of sentimentalisin may pursue without reservation." (pp. 12-13.)

Such was Galton's view on the need for the reform of religion. There are
several addenda to this paper which I will briefly note here.

In his Reply to speakers (pp. 49-51) Galton remarked that Eugenics is
a wide study with an excessive number of side paths into which those that
discuss it are apt to stray. Such was essentially the case in the present
instance where Galton in his paper had limited himself to the question of
whether communities will submit to restriction in marriage. The subjects
dealt with in the reply were:

(i) Certificates. These were to be of mens sana in corpore sano and
were to regard ability, physique and hereditary factors. Of these Galton says
that such Eugenic certificates could only be issued at some future time
dependent on circumstances. He admits that mistakes may be made at first
in devising a satisfactory system but is hopeful for the future. As we
shall see later, Galton in the following year actually drafted a scheme for
Eugenic certificates. In the surviving fragmentary chapter of his utopia
" Kan tsay where," dealing with the College of that place, there is a very full
account of the examinations for Eugenic certificates.

(ii) Breeding for Points. Critics had suggested that breeding of domes-
ticated animals is successful because they are bred for individual points.

and do pray conscientiously and fervently, though probably in a different form from that you
yourself employ." May 12, 1907 : " Did I ever tell you that I have always made it a habit to
pray before writing anything for publication, that there be no self-seeking in it, and perfect
candour together with respect for the feelings of others." And again, Jan. 20, 1910: "I have
read a most interesting article in the English Review by Prof r Murray, the Professor of Greek
at Oxford, on the working religion of the Pagan Greeks at about a.d. 400 (Marcus Aurelius'
time). He gives extracts from two writers of that date beautifully expressed. One of them is a
man named Eusebius (not the Eusebius) which is in the form of a prayer such as I would employ.
It is not 'give me this or that,' but 'may I not fall into this or that faulty conduct.' It is an
aspiration not a solicitation. The prayer in question would be a valuable addition to any
prayer-book to say the least. I should like it and others like it to replace almost all that are
there."

This is the opinion of a man whose paper on prayer of 1872 had led to his treatment as
a very flippant freethinker ! See our Vol. n, pp. 115, 175, 258, etc.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton' 8 Life 273

Galton says that some contributors to the discussion had been unnecessarily
alarmed. No question had been raised by him of breeding men like animals
for particular points, to the disregard of all-round efficiency in physical and
intellectual (including moral*) qualities and in the hereditary worth of their
stock. (Personally also I very much doubt whether most breeders select
animals for individual points without close regard to other characteristics.)
Galton l-emarks that

" Moreover, as statistics have shown, the best qualities are largely correlated. The youths
who became judges, bishops, statesmen, and leaders of progress in England could have furnished
formidable athletic teams in their times. There is a tale, I know not how far founded on fact,
that Queen Elizabeth had an eye to the calves of the legs of those she selected for bishops.
There is something to be said in favour of selecting men by their physical characteristics for
other than physical purposes. It would decidedly be safer to do so than to trust to pure
chance." (p. 50.)

(iii) The Residue. Galton does not make here a very strong reply to those
who objected that, after the selection of the fitter, the residue would inter-
breed and grow increasingly inferior f. He appears to overlook his own point,
that it is essential to create a differential fertility, so that the better stocks
increase at a greater rate.

(iv) Passion of Love. To the argument that " Love is lord of all," and will
not be restrained, Galton replies that a slight inclination and falling thoroughly
in love are two different things, and it is against the former that taboo applies,
whether it is due to rank, creed, connections or other causes. "The pro-
verbial 'Mrs Grundy' has enormous influence in checking the marriages she
considers indiscreet." (p. 51.)

(v) Eugenics as a Factor in Religion. Here Galton adds to his memoir
two additional pages (pp. 52-3) as a short essay on this topic. He considers
that Eugenics strengthens the sense of social duty in so many important
ways — for it promotes wise philanthropy, the notion of parentage as a serious
responsibility and a higher conception of patriotism— that its conclusions
ought "to find a welcome home in every tolerant religion." There follows a
vivid description of "mechanical" evolution — one of the finest word-paintings
that perhaps anyone has made of the world's history — and then the state-
ment that man has already largely influenced the quality and distribution of
organic life on the earth and that if he will only recognise it, it largely lies
in his power to influence the evolution of humanity itself. The brief essay
concludes with the lines that occupy a place of prominence in the Galton
Laboratory of National Eugenics as among the most stimulating words of its
Founder :

"Eugenic belief extends the function of philanthropy to future generations, it renders its
action more pervading than hitherto, by dealing with families and societies in their entirety,

* This confirms my view (see p. 224) that Galton would have included the moral with the
mental characters.

t He supposes that in the future there would be a freer action for selective agencies, e.g.
there would be a reduction of indiscriminate charity, but this seems a return, with emphasis,
to the crude processes of natural selection.

pain 35

274 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

and it enforces the importance of the marriage covenant by directing serious attention to the
probable quality of the future offspring. It sternly forbids all forms of sentimental charity
that are harmful to the race, while it eagerly seeks opportunity for acts of personal kindness,
as some equivalent for the loss of what it forbids. It brings the tie of kinship into prominence
and strongly encourages love and interest in family and race. In brief, Eugenics is a virile creed,
full of hopefulness, and appealing to many of the noblest feelings of our nature." (p. 53.)

Besides the two memoranda to which we have just referred, Francis Galton
presented a short paper entitled "Studies in National Eugenics," which was
appended to his "Marriage Restrictions." He refers to the appointment of
Mr Schuster to the Research Fellowship, and sketches out the various inquiries
which the new Eugenics Record Office might undertake. They form indeed
an excellent scheme for any laboratory proposing to undertake eugenic research.
Most of Galton 's problems still remain unsolved owing to the difficulty of
procuring accurate and adequate data, and they will remain so until the
public at large is willing first to fill in at all, and secondly to fill in veraciously
investigators' schedules, and until the State recognises how important it is
that school, asylum and prison should be treated as laboratories, where under
suitable regulations men of science may work*.

As confirming Galton's view that probability is the basis of Eugenics we
may note that the bulk of his suggested problems demand the collection of
data and their statistical treatment.

I. The first problem is the estimation of the average quality of offspring
from that of their parents and ancestry, and this covers questions of relative
fertility. Under this heading Galton includes genealogical work on (a) Gifted
Families ; (b) Capable Families ; (c) Degenerate Families ; (d) Extent of social
class interchanges, to what extent do "castes" rule in modern civilised
communities; and (e) Possibility of obtaining valuable eugenic data from
Insurance Office records.

II. The Effects of Action by the State and by Public Institutions. Under
this heading we may deal with (a) Habitual Criminals, and the problems of
their origin and segregation ; (6) Feeble-minded and Insane, their origin and
the restriction of their reproduction ; (c) Grants for higher education, how far
these are advantageously used, and to what extent they might be employed
to encourage fertility in eugenic marriages; (d) Indiscriminate charity,
including out-door relief and perhaps we may now add "the dole." Have
they, as there is reason to believe, tendencies other than eugenic?

III. What factors in religion, custom or law, and what social influences
tend to restrict eugenic marriages or reduce their fertility?

IV. Heredity. "The facts after being collected are to be discussed for
improving our knowledge of the laws both of actuarial and physiological
heredity, the recent methods of advanced statistics being of course used " (p. 1 6).
Galton suggests two special problems of great interest: (i) Effect on offspring

* Schoolmaster, medical officer and governor of prison have no time for statistical inquiries.
Too often on retirement they publish statements based merely on impressions, and none knows
better than the statistician how fatally inaccurate these may often be.

Eugenics as a Creed and, the Last Decade of Galton's Life 275

of differences in parental qualities* and (ii) a thorough study of characters
in Eurasians in order to test the applicability of the Mendelian hypothesis to
man.

V. A Bibliography of papers bearing on Eugenic topics is desirable.
Many papers already exist, published in scientific transactions and journals,
which bear on the Eugenists' problems; such a bibliography should include
papers of breeders and horticulturists. Considering the enormous development
nowadays of Genetics it would probably be well to treat separately Genetics
and Eugenics.

VI. Co-operation between students of Eugenics. Probably Galton had
in mind here special journals, societies, and congresses.

VII. Certificates of Eugenic fitness. To these we shall return later.

It will be seen that Galton's programme did not lack comprehensiveness.

Another event of this year was the invitation to Galton to accept the
Presidency of the British Association at the York Meeting in 1906. It is
desirable to indicate that it was not from want of asking — and even of gentle
pressure — -that the Association missed the honour of numbering Francis
Galton among its past presidents. In this he stands with his cousin Charles
Darwin; the names of two of the most original scientists of the Victorian epoch
fail to appear on the presidential roll.

The following letters received by Galton on May 8 and answered on
May 9 explain the situation.

British Association for the Advancement of Science. May 5, 1905.

Dear Mr Galton, At the meeting of the Council of the British Association held at
Burlington House this afternoon, it was unanimously resolved that you be nominated as
President of the British Association for the meeting to be held at York in 1906. The proposal
was received by the Council most cordially, and the officers were instructed to communicate
with you and ascertain whether you will agree to the nomination.

* I do not know on what Galton's suspicion rested of a marked influence on the characteristic
(c) of a child, if there was a great difference (8) between the paternal (f) and maternal (to)
characteristics. Theoretically, if « be the coefficient of assortative mating, r of parental heredity
supposed the same for both parents, a- a standard deviation, and r Sc the correlation of 8 and c,
then :

V("/- Vm)* + 2o /0"m (1 - «)

Since the coefficients of variation are nearly the same in man and woman, we have, if M l and M,
are mean values in father and mother,

r *- r J Sf l+ (M t -M t f ■

In the case of absolute measurements in man and woman, M l = (\ + T ^) M 2 and e = -2 roughly.

Accordingly r ho ~r v. -069 = -03, approximately.

Hence, statistically, there is no significant influence of the difference of parental characters on
the character of the child. Physiologically, of course, there may be some influence of extreme
differences, but such being rare it may not be detectable in the statistical treatment.

35—2

276 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

May I add that I am sure it will be a matter of rejoicing and gratification to Biologists
geuerally if you see your way to accept this position and become our President at the next
meeting iir this country. I am asking Professor George Darwin, the President-Elect for this
year's meeting, to write to you also — so I hope you will receive a letter from him in the course
of a day or two. I am, dear Mr Galton, Yours very sincerely, W. A. Herdman, Gen. Secretary.

This letter was backed up by one from George Darwin.

Newnham Grange, Cambridge. May 6, 1905.

My dear Galton, You will perhaps already have received an official intimation that you
were yesterday unanimously nominated Pres*. of the B.A. for the York meeting. I had the
pleasure of proposing your name, and I pointed out that you ought to have been nominated
years ago, and that the fact that men of science were formerly somewhat blind to the great
work that you have done gave no excuse for omitting even this belated recognition. That you
may not think that this is merely my personal opinion, I should add that speaker after speaker
endorsed what I have said. We all hope that you may feel yourself able to accept the nomina-
tion. It was pointed out as an objection that your deafness would be a difficulty in as much
as presiding at the Council meetings could hardly be carried out efficiently by you. To this
most, perhaps all, considered that there was a complete answer — you have only to absent your-
self from Council meetings. During the present year Balfour never comes — as we knew he
would not — and we get through our business with the aid of the V.P.'s.

I hope that you will not allow this consideration to deter you from acceptance, and, if you
will take it, my advice to you would be that you should not attend any Council meetings
during your year of office, when you would have to take the chair, or at least should ask a
V.P. to preside. I cannot of course judge whether you will feel yourself disposed to undertake
the duties, but I can only very heartily express the hope that you will feel you have the
strength to do so. Yours very sincerely, G. H. Darwin.

To this letter I add Galton's reply :

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 9, 1905.

My dear George Darwin, It was only last night that I returned and found your very
kind letter and that of Prof. Herdman to whom I have just written. I am deeply sensible of
the proposed honour and fully recognise the unique opportunity afforded to the President of
the Brit. Assoc" of drawing the attention of the whole scientific world to such views as he may
put forward. Also I am cordially grateful to the thoughtful way in which you propose to make
the work less laborious and independent of my deafness. But the fatal fact remains that I am
not strong enough even under all these alleviations. The preceding excitement would be enough
to upset me. I cannot stand even a moderate amount of flurry. It is of no use for me to fight
against impossibilities. Long since I have learnt to renounce many tempting pleasures, and
must do so now. The only chance I have of doing useful work during the remainder of my
life, lies in doing it quietly and living very simply much like an invalid, and in never undertaking
to tie myself to a day when I might prove quite unfit. Once before when Sir William Flower
was President and the names of possible persons were to be considered at a Council meeting
at which I was present, he with the previous assent of the other General Officers, emphatically
proposed me at the first. I immediately begged to be left out of account, being too painfully
conscious even then of the limitations of my strength. Notwithstanding kindly pressure, I
persisted in the refusal. It would be foolishly rash if I made the venture now.

Ever sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

P.S. I have had a pleasant and healthful 2| months in the Riviera (Bordighera), but missed
your sister. I saw Miss Shaen during her brief visit there. What an eventful August you will
have at the Cape. I heartily wish you -every possible success and pleasure. But what a racket
it will be !

During this year Galton was very busy with the superintendence of his
Eugenics Record Office and many of his letters relate to proposed work, to

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 277

developments at the office, or to suggestions and criticisms touching the
biographer's researches. I give three illustrations to show how keenly alive
he still remained to all going on in our joint field of work.

42, Rutland Gatk, S.W. May 31, 1905.

My dkar Karl Pearson, If your timely and most useful article on Dr Diem's material
in the Brit. Med. Journ. is intended to start an organised inquiry, towards which I can in any
way help, pray command me. It is just one of the things I want to see done. Quere, a reason-
able plan would be to reprint your article in a pamphlet form, with tables to show exactly
what is wanted, and after preparing the way a little to circulate it judiciously. Is there not
an error — at all events the sentence requires explanation — in " Dr Diem's tables show that
nervous disorders are more numerous in the parentages of the sane than in those of the insane " ?
What are "nervous disorders"? Or are sane and insane transposed*? If a pamphlet were
circulated the meaning of the phrases 1 to 5 in Dr Diem's and your list should be defined in it.
As, for example " want of mental balance " ! We are all of us so mad ! How mad must we
be to justify the epithet of " unbalanced mind "1 Parental and fraternal histories ought to be
easily accessible among the insane and feeble-minded, and among the sane still more so. But
in the latter case there are often skeletons hid in closets. One seems to want corroboration of
what is said by others who have known the family intimately. Biographers hb so much. I have
just been reading one that includes two letters praising a man as a gentle angel, whom I recol-
lect as a red pimple-faced obstreperous and most eccentric schoolmaster in my very early days.
Where is truth to be found ? Ever yours sincerely, Francis Galton.

This research was not at the time pushed further. What is essential to
the effective study of the heredity of insanity is a register of the persons in
the kingdom who have at any time in their life been in an asylum (and of
course it must state from what type of mental disease); at present we can
only guess what percentage of the population has been certified at any time
as insane.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 27, 1905.

My dear Karl Pearson, I kept your letter the last to open, as I dreaded it would
contain a grave and well merited rebuke, but it did not, and the motive for the rebuke is
happily dissipated. It was the announcement by Murray that he was about to publish eugenic
matter for the University of London before he had received authority to do so. It was a
stupid blunder of his, for which he wrote a most penitent letter that was laid before the
members of the Senate yesterday, who have condoned it — for their resolution in the University
Intelligence, p. 7, of to-day's Times puts all on a solid footing. The material in question
consists of 65 Noteworthy Families in Modern Science, and " is to appear as Vol. I of the
publications of the Eugenics Record Office." This is a big recognition in my opinion. Murray

is pleased to publish on the i profit system I envy the old biometric teast, but everything

"dehisces." I go north on Saturday towards and then to Westmoreland; Eva Biggs goes south
to Devon, and in the 3" 1 week of August we reunite at Ockham.

Last Monday and Tuesday evenings we spent at that wonderful air-cure Hindhead, where
I had the great pleasure of seeing again Mrs Tyndall, who lives in the house her husband
(Prof. Tyndall) built.

* If " nervous disorders " be used in the sense of slight nervous troubles, hysteria, excit-
ability or depression, far short of insanity, the explanation may be that in the case of stocks
tainted with insanity, these cases are intensified and the sufferers become actually insane.

t For some years Francis Galton and his niece had come within reach of the biometric
holiday workers for a few weeks in the summer. We were often some distance from each other
as at Bibury, Witney and Oxford. The morning was given to work, then the victoria carried
our leader and bicycles the remainder of the party to some inn, in a village if possible with
a beautiful church, and there was a biometric tea, at which discussion turned not wholly on
work.

278 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

I am rather pleased at the way that has occurred to me of explaining why the men of
highest genius have so few able descendants and these often cranks, viz. that there is negative
correlation between their faculties, — sensitiveness and dogged work, imagination and good
sense, etc. — so that the inheritance of such an unstable combination is improbable. There is
much to say, this is only a notice, so to speak.

Ever very sincerely, with kind remembrances to Mrs Pearson, Francis Galton.

Even letters which touched chiefly on personal matters were sure to con-
tain at least a few sentences as to work.

The Rectory, Ockham, Surrey. Aug. 25, 1905.

My dear Karl Pearson, It was with self-restraint that I did not write to say how
grieved I was at your domestic sorrow, and how deeply I sympathise with you. I feared to
extract a reply and knew you were overworked. This note is merely to enclose my brand-new
circular, which I begin to distribute among friends, and hereafter I hope much more widely.
If you think any of your lady co-operators especially are likely to help and take interest,
I would gladly send circulars to them. Miss Elderton is established now at the " Eugenics
Record Office" and at work there*.

This is a pretty and healthy place, and friends are near. Sir H. Roscoe has a beautiful
garden, 600 and more feet above the sea, where everything flourishes. Kindest remembrances
to you both. Eva Biggs is at this moment sketching or choosing a sketching place by an artistic
but foul pond. Ever sincerely, Francis Galton.

(9) Events and Correspondence of 1 906. During this year I do not think
that Galton published any papers, except the Memoir on Resemblance and
the humorous little note in Nature on the cutting of a cake (see Vol. u,
p. 329, and above, p. 124). But it was full both for Galton and his biographer
of new and sad experiences which, as they were to some extent common to
them both, brought them closer together and ripened their friendship. To
the one the loss of a sister f, to the other of a mother; to both of an
irreplaceable friend and colleague, a death rendered the more bitter by its
unexpectedness, and by attendant circumstances, which touched both with
nearly equal sorrow. I had started with a keen appreciation of Galton as a
scientist, I had learnt to value him as friend and counsellor; I now understood
and deeply admired the strength of his humanity and his generosity of mind.
The following letters may give some idea of the warmth of feeling that existed
between Galton and his two lieutenants, even as the tripartite relationship
was dissolved.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Jan. 24, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, May I send just a line of very heartfelt sympathy with you
in the loss of which I have just heard 1 I know it will be the greater in that you were not in
England at the time. I am at the age when these losses begin to be more frequent, and deprive
life of much of its old "go"; and just at present one lives a day at a time, with two or three
of one's own generation and some of the generation above almost more than threatened. Hence
one feels very strongly the closeness and the mystery of death ; and sympathy — which one is
helpless to express — goes out to a friend in like case. I have often thought the only real
expression of a feeling like this is given by the hand and eye, and not by the tongue, which
is so helpless that we had better go on with the old routine of life, speechless on such points.

* As Secretary. Francis Galton hesitated about a woman taking part in academic matters,
although he had begun to realise the good work of the women in the Biometric Laboratory.
He was comforted by the Principal's opinion, " Sir Arthur Riicker speaks highly of lady
secretaries, and generally agrees with what we talked about." Letter to K. P., June 20, 1905.

f " Bessie," Mrs Wheler.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galtori 's Life 279

I have sent Schuster's paper to press. Hartog has paid the account. I was seeing Dr Pearl
yesterday and put my head into Miss Elderton's door ; she seemed bright and fresh, and said
she had plenty to do ; so I hope the work of your Eugenics Office is going forward.

The enclosed letter may amuse you. I think that X. is a very dangerous person, if his
notion of eugenics is the intermarriage of consumptive stocks ! Very many thanks for your
long letter. I wish there were some simple colour register. I don't expect it is easy to get
colours like terracottas and salmons out of Abney's apparatus. I shall send you a copy of the
poppy plate when it comes. I hope Miss Biggs will not be too scornful about it !

Weldon will have told you about Y. and Z.'s attack at the R.S. Weldon had a good paper
last Thursday and Z. drew as usual red herrings across the track.

Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

Feb. 1, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, Thank you very much for your letter of sympathy. I have now
lost the last tie that brought the family's interests together as to a common focus, and kept
each member informed by letter, weekly or otherwise, of the welfare of the rest. To what an
enormous amount of grief do the tombstones of any churchyard bear witness !

The " slasher " against X. is right well deserved. I had always a faint misgiving of his
Oriental ways and fluency, which steadily deepened until I have come to look upon his aid
as unreliable and dangerous. He strikes me as an interesting evidence of the danger of
entrusting political power to Oriental subjects — Indian, Egyptian and others.

I will venture shortly to ask you to do me a very great favour, namely to look over a short
type-written paper on " the Measurement of Resemblance," and tell me what you think of it.
The thing has, as you may remember at Peppard*, been often taken up by me, puzzled over
and temporarily laid down. It is at length worked out, I think, fully and practically, but
before venturing on publication, I should greatly value criticism. At this moment it is only
in an uncorrected draft, and I do hot wish to hurry before putting it into a corrected form
and sending it to London to be typed. The typist will then be instructed (say in a week or
a fortnight) to send you a copyf.

We go to-day to " H6tel de la Rhune, Ascain, Basses Pyrenees," for a week. It is a
picturesque Basque Village, four miles from here. Then we probably return to where I am
writing from, " Hfitel Terminus, S l Jean de Luz, Basses Pyrenees," for a day or two, and
afterwards according to conditions not yet determined on which we are dependent, to some-
where else. These may lead either to a dip of a fortnight into Spain or to another Basque
village, I cannot foresee which. I will send address later on.

The Basque orderliness, thorough but quiet ways, and their substantial clean-looking houses,
tug at every Quaker fibre in my heart, and I love them so far. As to their wonderful language
unlike in syntax to any other, the virtue of these parts is accounted for by the legend that
Satan came here for a visit, but finding after six years that he could neither learn the Basque
language, nor make the Basques understand him, he left the country in despair. With kindest
remembrances to Mrs Pearson. Ever sincerely yours, Francis Galton.

It would be an interesting problem to determine what is the degree of
likeness of a man to himself, by correlating the habits and modes of thought
of individuals at selected ages. We might thus obtain a measure of the per-
manence of individuality. How far is one the same man at 20 and 60 years of
age? Galton at least in his love of travel at 18 and 84 exhibited a marvellous
sameness. His love of ingenious mechanical apparatus also remained fully as
strong, and his humility was not a whit less.

"How curious it is to see," remarks Lord Minto, "how exactly people
follow their own characters all through life."

* The long vacation of 1903 was spent at Peppard, the Galtons on the Green, the Pearsons
at Blount's Court Farm, the Weldons at the far end of the village, and various biometric
workers round about. It was a delightful and fertile summer.

f See the section in Vol. n on the " Measurement of Resemblance," pp. 329-333.

280 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

If Galton's character seemed to me at first to change between 1890 and
1910, it was only because with ever increasing intimacy I learnt to under-
stand him better and better.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Feb. 16, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, Very hearty thanks to Miss Biggs and yourself for your con-
soling words as to the plate of poppy petals. I feared you would be as disgusted with them as
I felt, but you have not the originals to place beside them. I think, however, we shall succeed
in getting something better in the final proof. Your paper reached me safely the day before
yesterday, and I have read it through thrice. It seems to me most suggestive and I want very
much to be making "isoscopes" and practically trying how it works. It would be most satisfactory
to find it giving a higher average degree of resemblance between relatives than between
strangers. You use I suppose one eye only to see both objects simultaneously? Would it not
be well to get a simple instrument made by Beck or Baker from your drawings with an ocular
micrometer, and test on photographs? or are you thinking of finger-prints? Would you like the
paper in Biometrika or do you want a wider audience? I need not say we shall be most pleased
to have it. Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

Thus matters seemed to be slipping back into their old channels, with work
in the foremost place. Easter was to be spent by us at Longcot with the
Weldons near at hand in little Woolstone inn at the foot of the hill marked by
the White Horse (or rather "White Dragon"). There were the usual plans
for further work, visits to Oxford to see the mice and cycle-rides to make
lay studies of church architecture. Weldon was not in good health, he was
depressed and thought a visit to a picture gallery in London would be a relief.
He went, and from the gallery passed to a nursing home, and died within
twenty -four hours of double pneumonia.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. April 16, 1906.

My dear Pearson, Weldon's death is a terrible and disastrous blow, so utterly unexpected.
Few if any men will feel it more deeply than you who were so intimately associated with him, not
many more than I do. We have lost a loved friend, and Biometry has lost one of its protagonists.
I feel intensely miserable about it and shall feel the void he has left for probably the rest of
my life. I should greatly have liked to pay the last tribute of friendship to his remains by
attending the funeral, but I dare not risk it. Among other things an incipient mild phlebitis
in a leg prevents my standing during many minutes and my doctor is strict on this.

I do indeed pity Mrs Weldon from my heart. How deeply your Wife will feel it all, and
how helpful she is sure to be, as you are. Give my kindest remembrances to her. We go to
the country on Wednesday but letters will be forwarded from here. It will be a sad day.

Affectionately yours, Francis Galton,

The first part of the funeral service was in the chapel of Merton College,
and to my surprise I saw Galton there.

The Avenue House, Bishopton, Stratford-on-Avon. April 19, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, The card of invitation showed it was possible for me to attend
the first part of the funeral without harm, so as you saw I went, and came on here by a later
train. It is inexpressibly sad. I do not myself yet fully know all the circumstances, but the more
I know the more pity full * it seems. I should be very grateful for tidings about Mrs Weldon,
into whose sorrow I could not venture yesterday to intrude. If you or Mrs Pearson have the

* So Galton wrote, and the words express more than " pitiful."

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Gallon's Life 281

opportunity of doing so pray express my sincerest sympathy with her I do pity you both

in losing so dear and intimate a colleague and in so tragical a manner. ... I am staying with my
niece, Mrs Studdy, here at her house, until Saturday morning, then I go to my nephew Edward
Wheler, Claverdon Leys, Warwick. These two, another dear niece Mrs Lethbridge and
my ageing brother, now exhaust the list of my near relatives. Kindest remembrances to
Mrs Pearson. I heard of her movements from Professor Clifton and knew she was not in
Oxford yesterday.

Ever affectionately, Francis Galton.

The blow struck us both severely ; there was much to think over, and
some things had to be done immediately, Biometrika reconstituted, an eloge
written, a memorial to Weldon instituted and many papers sorted. Without
Francis Galton's continuous sympathy, aid and counsel, it would have been
impossible in that year to continue my work.

First, as to the Weldon memorial ; largely by the aid of two or three
generous donors, of whom it is needless to say Galton was one, enough
money was eventually obtained for a marble bust by Hope Pinker, to be
placed in the Museums at Oxford, and a biennial Weldon medal with pre-
mium for the best biometric memoir published in the immediately previous
years — the medal to be awarded by Oxford electors, but not confined to that
University nor to British subjects. The scheme, as finally drafted and accepted
by the Hebdomadal Council, was largely Galton's creation. I had felt very
strongly that biometry was destined eventually to take an important place
in biology, especially in researches into evolution and that, for an international
prize of this kind, at least in the more distant future, the Council of the
Royal Society would be the fittest judges.

Secondly, sheet after sheet the eloge on Weldon went to Francis Galton
and was returned with criticisms and suggestions. He was especially dis-
satisfied with my brief 1'eferences to Weldon's part in the attempt to remodel
the University of London, and to his work in relation to the Evolution
Committee of the Royal Society. As some history, little recognised, is
conveyed in this interchange of letters, I have ventured to insert several of
them here. They will illustrate the help Galton gave to his younger friends
and the sympathy he felt for all their difficulties.

The wrapper and title-page of Biometrika had to be hastily rearranged,
and I wrote to Galton for advice. His suggestions, very closely followed, ran
thus :

Claverdon Leys, Warwick. April 25, 1 906.

My dear Karl Pearson, Friday, May 4, after your College meeting, will quite suit me to
all appearances... but I can foresee only a short way, and have to mould my plans upon others.
I go to London to-morrow, and am away in Essex, Saturday to Monday, but have no further
engagements. About the future of Biometrika, would not the simplest plan be for you to edit
it solely in your name? Weldon often said that he wished you would do so, for all the work had
been and will be yours. You suggested that "founded in 1901 by Weldon, yourself and myself"
should be inserted. You must not give so much prominence to me. Why not keep to the exist-
ing formula and say: "Founded in 1901 by Professors K. Pearson and W. F. R. Weldon in
consultation with Francis Galton." Then simply "Edited by Karl Pearson"? A list of coadjutors
would scarcely add weight to your name Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.

pgiii 36

282 Life and Letters of Francis Oalton

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. April 29, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, The scrapbook with the photograph* reached me just before
leaving Longcot, and the other book was awaiting my arrival here. I shall endeavour to get
an enlargement, for as you say the attitude is very characteristic, but I fear it will not stand
much enlarging. Please tell Miss Biggs I will take all care of the book. The other book shall
go back to its place on the shelves at Oxford, when I next go down. I found the finger-print
books and the letters in going through the papers at Oxford. I shall keep myself free on Friday
and you will tell me whether you are able to see me. At times there seems so much to talk to
you about and then again it all passes from me. It was possible to go on as long as I was
attempting to put the papers at Oxford in order, but I seem now quite dazed, and for the first
time in all my teaching experience the idea of facing my students and lecturing seems positively
repellent, — at times impossible. I feel wholly without energy to start the term, and if I could
only see the man able to do my work, I would ask for 6 or 9 months leave of absence. I have
only sounded this personal note because I want you to pardon me, if I say or do anything stupid
at present. Yours always sincerely, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. April 30, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, The account of your overwrought spirits and energy quite
distresses me. I look forward greatly to seeing you here on Friday. If there are hopes of your
coming earlier than 4 p.m. on that day please send a postcard that I may not be out. My time

is quite at your disposal Anyhow I look forward to some quiet conversation with yourself

alone. Ever affectionately, Francis Galton.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 7, 1906.

Mv dear Karl Pearson, My attempts have been fruitless to put anything down that
you are not already familiar with, about Weldon's characteristics. The extraordinary fulness
and accuracy of his letters astonished me. He would write almost a treatise, and insert long
tables with apparent ease and as a work of supererogation, which would be a large labour
to most men. I suppose too that a certain pertinacity, in the favourable sense of the word, was
one of his most marked peculiarities. The extraordinarily wide range of his accurate, not super-
ficial, knowledge, was another feature. He was too kindly a critic of things that I asked him
to criticise to be of value to me on those occasions, I am sorry to say. Rightly or wrongly my
impression always was that he needed some one very strong scientific end in view to compel
him to concentrate his remarkable powers more steadily. But I may be judging incorrectly
here. I wish I could think of more, this much is I fear useless to you.

Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. May 13, 1906.

Dear Francis Galton, I want to ask your opinion about resigning my fellowship of the
Royal Society. You will remember that the last paper I contributed to the Society met with
a great deal of difficulty in getting accepted — probably was accepted only on account of your nice
little speech. But the Secretaries communicated a resolution to me that I should be requested in
future contributions not to mix statistics and biology in the same paper. This of course was
equivalent to the intimation that they would not accept future biometric papers from me.
I was at the time — I think it is more than three years ago — sorely tempted to resign, but did
not do so under the impression that it might be looked upon as personal dudgeon. I have not com-
municated any paper of my own to the R.S. since. The one case where I presented a paper was
an application by Miss Cave of our statistical methods to a problem in meteorology. In that
case the Secretary wrote and suggested that I should withdraw the paper as the meteorologists
did not approve the methods usedf . This I declined to do and after some controversy the paper

* Of Weldon; at his death, but few, and those unsatisfactory, portraits could be found.

I A commentary on this judgment is that the Meteorological Office recently sent round a
circular to various persons, including myself, asking if we could provide further correlations of
barometric pressures ! Still the pioneers of correlation work in meteorology were hardly treated.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 283

was printed. I have always meant, however, to test the biometric question again, and when
Dr Pearl gave me what appeared to me a really noteworthy paper — showing for the first time
that even the Protozoa do not mate at random, but assort themselves — the very important
result wanted to show how species can be differentiated, even if all members are fertile inter se —
I presented it to the R.S. as a test case. The Secretary wrote to Weldon who was then Chair-
man of the Zoological Committee and stated that it would be much better to print it in Biometrika
than in Phil. Trans. The paper is a long one with much illustration and as neither Weldon nor
I saw why the Royal Society should be closed to biometricians, the suggestion was therefore
refused. Unfortunately Weldon's death left the matter to be finally decided by the committee
under a new chairman and they have now settled not to publish the paper "mainly on difficulties
felt as to the biological significance of the quantity measured." The quantity measured is the
correlation coefficient in three characters for conjugating protozoa, and it appears to demonstrate
that physiologically in the lowest types of life, like is compelled to mate with like by structural
conditions. It appears to be the first clear demonstration of Romanes' physiological selection,
and supplies the need Huxley felt for evidence that differentiation can arise inside a species
fertile inter se. It is the old tale that men are set to express an opinion on a biometric paper
when they do not know what is the significance of a coefficient of correlation ! But I think
I have really good ground now for doing what Weldon and I more than once talked about,
retiring from the R.S.

My chief work and interests now lie in biometry. If the RS. will have nothing to do with
it, and publishes papers and reports of which the writers lack the most elementary knowledge
of statistics, then the Society ceases to appeal to me in any way. I cannot see that I shall do
any harm in raising my protest, however feeble it may be. It is not, I trust, a personal point,
for I have sent nothing for three years to the Society, but I do not care to sit still and see a
really fine piece of work consigned to the Archives, when the Society ought to have felt it an
honour to publish it. However, tell me frankly your views and I shall abide by your advice.

Always yours sincerely, Kael Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 14, 1906.

Dear Karl Pearson, I fully understand and sympathise with your feelings. It is a disgrace
to the biologists of the day, that their representatives in the Royal Society are incapable of
understanding biometric papers, and of distinguishing between bad and good statistical work.
To that extent I am entirely at one with you, but I do not on the above grounds see that your
resignation would mend matters. It is a very general rule of conduct not to withdraw when in
a minority, because a vantage ground is surrendered by doing so. It is far easier to reform a
society while a member of it than when an outsider. The object is, by direct and indirect means,
as occasion may offer, to educate biologists in the elements of higher statistics. This is being
slowly but surely done by Biometrika, and would be done more quickly if you could find some-
body with a light touch to show as much of the way as biologists should go, and of the false ways in
which they have strayed, as the conditions of the case permit, by writing in popular magazines.
I do not see why the meaning of correlation should not become familiarised, though the methods
of work are technical. And similarly for much more, the objects aimed at may be explained,
though not the processes. There is an Arab proverb about the ease with which the greater
part of the honey in one pot may be transferred to another, and the extreme difficulty of trans-
ferring the whole. —So much for mere elementary education.

As regards higher work, you may be driven to make Biometrika a seat of judgment, not
to argue or to enter into controversy (which I know you hate), but simply to pass sentence
with reason given just like newspapers do. A fair lash, on the proper quarters, at the right

I can recollect two bad cases ; at one university a memoir on barometric cross- Atlantic corre-
lations was refused a prize because the methods were not "original"; at a second university an
elaborate piece of work, showing that there was no correlation between the position of the moon
and any meteorological phenomena, failed as a thesis for the doctorate on the ground that its
results were negative — as if negative results were not in this case as important as positive —
and besides, as the meteorological expert put it, the candidate had omitted to inquire how far
thunderstorms are subject to lunar influence 1

36—2

284 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

moment, bestowed whenever it is deserved, would soon be dreaded, and become a check on
charlatans; it would afford a motive to others towards acquiring biometric knowledge in order
to appreciate the punishment. You can do all, or any part of this, with more effect as a fellow
of the R.Soc, than otherwise, so I should say don't resign, but abide your time, and give a good
and well-deserved slash now and then to serve as a reminder that your views are strong, though
not querulously and wearisomely repeated. Ever yours, Francis Galton.

The above two letters, relating to matters now of the fairly distant past,
are not printed with a view to renewing old differences, or justifying past
phases of feeling, but to indicate how close was Galton's relation to his
younger scientific friends, and how he aided and counselled them in all their
scientific relations. In another matter also he was both materially and ad-
visorily most helpful. The Weldon memorial fund was certain to be sufficient
to provide a bust of Weldon for Oxford, but I was ambitious that it should
do more, and this in the special manner that I thought Weldon himself
would have most approved. I wanted something that should form a per-
manent encouragement to biometricians the whole world round, and I had
specially in mind the younger men. I wanted to see besides the bust, the
institution of an annual or biennial medal and premium. In order to obtain
a greater range of subscribers, I proposed that the three universities with
which Weldon had been associated should in turn adjudicate the proposed
medal and premium, and I drafted the first appeal for the Weldon memorial
fund to this effect and sent it to Francis Galton for his criticism.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. May 27, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, I am heartily at one with you in your object, but see difficulties
in the proposed method of attaining it. They are:

1. The experience of like attempts shows how difficult it is to raise as much money as you
want. I could tell you my own, but being personal do not like to write it.

2. The Royal Society fails to find competent referees in biometry, much more would the
three several universities fail to do so. The dignity of the body which awards medals is of less
consequence than the assurance that the award is just.

3. An annual or biennial medal and premium, to be awarded to each of the three universities
in turn, does not seem a very attractive bait.

I write with much diffidence as to what I think would be preferable :

(a) Mention a medallion as a possible alternative to a bust*. It would be cheaper, and
would serve as an appropriate design for the medal.

(b) Supposing that the assurance of an annual sum of £ — would justify the issue of a medal

I should be prepared to give as much as would purchase £ — consols for that purpose But it

must be anonymous

(c) If this plan seems acceptable I would at once send the sum with an accompanying letter
to this effect: "I enclose the sum in question for instituting a periodical medal or premium in
memory of Prof. Weldon to be awarded to the author of the most valuable biometric publica-
tion of recent date, on the understanding that you will consult biometric friends on the conditions
that are to regulate the award, and more especially to determine whether it should be limited
to one class of English biometricians, to all classes t, or be independent of nationality "

* Probably a bust would need to have been produced to get the medallion, as no portrait in
profile existed. K.P.

f Galton was rightly desirous that the award should not be confined to biological bio-
metricians but should embrace sociology, anthropology, etc. K. P.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 285

Galton next expressed his desire that the medal should be associated
with Biometrika and suggested how this might be done. To this idea, I was
strongly opposed ; it would not have attracted outside support and sympathy,
the journal might cease to exist, its vitality was not then fully established,
and there would be no trustees for the fund. With Galton's gift the medal
was assured ; I had no doubt that the remaining sum needful would be forth-
coming from Weldon's personal friends, and there was no occasion to make
a broad appeal to the three universities. It was possible to stress the inter-
national character of the medal, which I had much at heart.

Please at this present stage, consider nothing of the above as final. I only put it forward
in the form that now occurs to me which would doubtless be much improved by your and other
criticism. Pray give it freely. To-morrow I go out of Town for three nights so excuse me if
I miss a post or two; my letters will be forwarded, of course. Enclosed I return your draft.
With all good wishes for the final success of the plan. Ever very sincerely, Francis Galton.

University College, London. May 28, 190G.

My dear Francis Galton, Yesterday I was looking at a letter from the Weldon series,
dealing with the foundation of Biometrika. I had just written to tell him that the complete
guarantee fund was forthcoming, and the journal could really start. He begins "Dear good old
Galton, dear good old everybody," and that is somehow just how I feel, when I write now to
you ! This is not an answer to your letter because I want to think it over and reword my original
proposals, but I feel quite certain that the annual medal you suggest would not only be invalu-
able as an inducement to men to strive their best for biometric research, but would indirectly
produce some good papers for our journal. I quite agree that it should be open to sociological
as well as purely zoological inquiry. I will write again in a few days. My heart is very full
just now. We have had Mrs Weldon with us for two days going through papers and letters.
I am beginning to see the lines of my memoir a little better.

Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

P.S. I am not at all sure that it would not be of great value in the future to publish some
at least of Weldon's letters. They are full of suggestion for research, and represent his scientific
spirit far more effectively than his published papers.

[Undated, but early June, 1906.]

My dear Francis Galton, Many thanks to Miss Biggs for all the trouble she has taken
in hunting up those letters from Weldon, and you for letting me read them. You need not fear
any criticism of my work by him will influence me. Our friendship had gone through the
fire and nothing could modify my judgment or affection now. But this is a hard week, I have
been at Oxford sorting papers for three days, and I have brought the memoir down to the early
biometric papers. I will send the result to you soon. It is hard now to distinguish exactly
what was yours and what was his, but I don't think you will feel hurt if I have not always put
the praise where it should be. It is easier to praise the dead than the living. Please just stick
to your life, till mine is gone; I can't do all this again. It is the fourth time I have had to
throw all my energy into a dead man's papers and work, and three times the man has been so
to speak a part of my own life. How can one tell the tale? Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. June 28, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, A good and a bad piece of news. In the first place another
anonymous donor wishes to add a second £ — Consols to yours. This is good because we might
hope the fund would go up eventually to £1000 and this would be very good indeed.

In the next place I wrote to Lord Rayleigh asking him whether he thought it at all likely
that the R.S. would consent to act as trustees of a Weldon medal and premium for biometric

286 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

work. He replied that he " would sound the officers." I have his reply to-night, which I am
sending to you. You will see that it is distinctly unfavourable. In the first place, I did not do
more than ask him his opinion as to what the Council would be likely to do, if the proposal
were made to them. You will see that he speaks of referring it to the Zoological Committee.
Now that is hopeless — that body has just refused Pearl's really good bit of biometric work
" principally on the ground that they do not see the biological significance of the quantity
measured," i.e. they do not see what is meant by a correlation coefficient. Further, the idea of
the Evolution Committee having anything to do with the matter is too absurd*. That Com-
mittee is now merely a body for running Mendelism and the last thing to commemorate Weldon
would be to assist that movement.

Now I want you to tell me what to do. Whether : (1) to let Lord Rayleigh put the matter
before the Zoological Committee : in which case the offer will probably be rejected. (2) To write
to Lord Rayleigh and point out that the Zoological Committee — as it does not contain a single
biometrician — can hardly express a useful opinion on the point. I believe it is simply a method
of shifting the decision on to another body than the Council. (3) To ask him to consider the
proposal as withdrawn. (4) To ask him to bring the matter directly before the Council, so that
we may know that they and not the Zoological Committee are responsible for the decision
arrived at.

Kindly let me know what your views may be. Of course other trustees can be found, e.g.
the University of London. But I feel that for the distant future the R.S. would have been the
right trustee for an international thing of this kind. Affectionately yours, Kaul Pearson.

Please return Lord Rayleigh's letter. If you could by any means let me have a reply by
to-morrow, Saturday, night, it might save the matter going further, if that is your advice.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. June 30, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, I think that the R.S. ought to be left severely alone. Their
official representatives repudiate biometry and their Council is already overtasked in awarding
medals. I can quite imagine their doing what the R. Geograph. Soc. have already done, viz.
refuse any offer to found a new prize. Oxford University seems to me far more suitable in many
important respects, and its list of Professors (as given in Whitaker) affords at least 10 suitable
electors,... and there could be no valid objection, I should think, to specifying certain names in
addition. I have not however an Oxford Calendar by me to refer to, for precedent, but will go
to the Club and if there be time, will write again, thereon, to-day. The 10 [1 11] Professors are

Anthropology Medicine

Astronomy (Law of Error) (1) Natural Philosophy — (I don't know in the

Botany least what this is)

Comparative Anatomy Physiology

Geometry Pure Mathematics

Human Anatomy Zoology

I should suggest a short printed circular, enclosed with a few lines of written letter, to each
of these, saying that so much money is already in hand, that it is proposed to found a Weldon
biometric Medal, or other award,— that it is suggested that the University of Oxford would be
the most suitable body to bestow it, — that there are at least 10 professors witli whose subjects
biometry has some connection, from among whom a suitable board might be selected by the
University to adjudge the award. ...Finally to ask for their suggestions and whether they are
willing to co-operate in furthering the proposed plan. — That, after answers shall have been
received, the question of approaching the University will be considered.

Would it be convenient if I called on you to-morrow (Sunday) afternoon 1 I would suggest
at 2 o'clock, but any other reasonable hour would suit me equally well. Will you telegraph 1
and I will abide by what you tell me. Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.

I have an engagement here at 4.15.

I am delighted to hear of the additional £ — . I return Lord Rayleigh's letter.

* The President in his letter had suggested that if the medal were accepted, the Evolution
Committee might be a suitable body to award it. K. P.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 287

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 6, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, The first thing that I heard of the Evolution Cttee was from
Michael Foster who said that the C. of the R. Soc. had been asked to form one, and that they
would on the condition that I would act as Chairman, to which I assented.

The offer of a big sum to help in founding a Darwinian establishment for plants and animals
was made by me tentatively on many occasions, on the condition that the large balance needed
for such an institution could be raised elsewhere. I repeated it more or less formally during the
existence of the Cttee, but the response was quite inadequate. The offer of Charles Darwin's house
in Down at a moderate (1 nominal) rent was made by the Darwin family to the Cttee, but the
double event of cost of maintenance and the practical impossibility of visiting it from London on
Sundays owing to the awkward hours of the trains, made it impossible to accept the offer. No
one benefited by my offer ; " no jackals came down for the spoils*."

The work of the Cttee was a great disappointment to me. For one thing, I had hoped that
it would be sufficiently authoritative, or rather that its weight would suffice to weld numerous
bodies that have gardens or menageries into common action, to allow some plots or cages, tfec.
for research. The Clifton Zool. were prepared to do this, but Thisel ton-Dyer said that
even he could not depend on the gardeners at Kew to carry out any experiment accurately,
so that plan fell through. I knew that the Zool. were untrustworthy helpers — I mean the
keepers.

The Cttee talked more than worked, and Z. was very boring, writing very long letters to me
and always averse to compromise. V., whom he brought in as an Associate, was to my mind,
distinctly objectionable in using the name of the Cttee when he had received no sanction to do
so. On the whole, the Cttee seemed to be doing so little and working with so much friction that
I did not care to be longer connected with it, so I resigned. Weldon did so too, guided by much
the same motives.

This is all I have to say. It necessarily relates chiefly to myself but indirectly perhaps to
Weldon, whom I then found very helpful, as he always was.

Miss Biggs and I have spent a long day in Henley — Peppard — Stoke Row, etc. We saw
Mrs Grey at the Manor House f and the boat races were going on at Henley. It was
a glorious day for us — We passed Blount's Court Farm. — I trust you are now well placed at
Winsley Hill.

Ever yours, Francis Galton.

Winsley Hill, Danby, Yorkshire. July 11, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, I enclose two things. First, a sympathetic card (which please
return) from the Vice-Chancellor, Oxford, as to the Weldon Prize. Secondly, the proofs of the
part of the memoir which I think you have already seen, and also the MS. of the London period.
I hope to get the Oxford period done this week. I want you to let me have the MS. back, if
you can by return, it must go to Press as soon as possible. I have found it very difficult indeed
to write the London part, because the Evolution Committee formed such a very large part of
Weldon's life in those years, and I cannot think it was good for him. You were most kind and
sympathetic, but he felt that he had to do something of moment and to do it quickly. Further
it had to be done under constant fire of unfair criticism. I have found piles of papers about this,
that I knew nothing about before, and it is heartrending to think that I was worrying him
about his mathematics at the same time. Reading the papers through now it seems to me that
a definite plan was formed about 1896 to eject the biometricians and take possession of the
Evolution Committee. But all that Weldon wrote, and he wrote and spoke strongly about the
R.S. publishing the Mendelian Reports in a semi-official way, may be applied equally to his own
work in the early stages. Z.'s attacks did not start until Weldon had reviewed Z.'s book in 1894
or 5, and then they became incessant and ceased only with the death of Weldon. The book was,
I think, faulty, but I looked up Weldon's review (in Nature) the other day, and it in no way

* See, however, our p. 134 above.

f The house occupied by Galton in 1903 during our Peppard stay. We were at Blount's
Court Farm. K. P.

288 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

justified those years of unceasing nagging which led to the capture of the Committee. I suppose
I shall have my years of it now * !

Please write quite frankly and I will endeavour to modify anything which you think must
be altered. You will I know understand that I am placing Weldon alone in the centre of my
stage. Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

* This forecast was confirmed in the same year :

" Of the so-called investigations of heredity pursued by extensions of Galton's non-analytieal method and
promoted by Prof. Pearson and the English Biometrical School it is now scarcely necessary to speak. That
such work may ultimately contribute to the development of statistical theory cannot be denied but as applied
to the problems of heredity the effort has resulted in the concealment of that order which it was ostensibly
undertaken to reveal. A preliminary acquaintance with the natural history of heredity and variation was
sufficient to throw doubt on the foundation of these elaborate researches. To those who hereafter may study this
episode in the history of biological science it will appear inexplicable that work so unsound should have been
respectfully received by the scientific world. With the discovery of segregation it becomes obvious that methods
dispensing with individual analysis of the material are useless. The only alternatives open to the inventors of
those methods were either to abandon their delusions or to deny the truth of Mendelian facts. In choosing the
latter course they have certainly succeeded in delaying recognition of the value of Mendelism, but with the lapse
of time the number of persons who have themselves witnessed the phenomena has increased so much that these
denials have lost their dangerous character and may be regarded as merely formal." Mendel's Principles of
Heredity, Edition 1906.

The attacks made on the early papers of the Eugenics Laboratory were largely encouraged
by writings of the above character (see our pp. 399, 406 and 408). It is, perhaps, needless to
say that it was Galton in his Natural Inheritance and neither Weldon nor myself who were
" inventors of those methods." The author of Mendel's Principles failed to realise that (i) Evo-
lution by Natural Selection depends upon mass-changes, i.e. on selective death-rates which demand
actuarial methods, and (ii) that all scientific knowledge is relative, there is no absolute truth in
science ; we seek the best description of the phenomena we observe, and as there may be more
than one effective description of the group of events we are investigating, there is no necessary
opposition between an analysis of individuals and an analysis of mass-changes. The one may
have as great scientific value as the other.

It is difficult to see how admiration for Francis Galton, and even for parts at least of his
Natural Inheritance, was compatible with a complete contempt for biometric methods, but
William Bateson's view, as expressed in the following letter (which Mrs Bateson most kindly
permits me to publish), seems to indicate the source of our divergence. For me there is no absolute
truth in scientific knowledge or in religious creed, the one provides conceptual models of more
or less descriptive exactness of our sensations of phenomena, the other fits itself to the emotional
needs of differing races, periods and individuals.

Mendelism is only a truth as long as it is an effective description ; a continuous or a discon-
tinuous conceptual model of a group of natural phenomena may be equally valid as " scientific
knowledge."

Mebton House, Gbantchester, Cambridge. 7. vii. 09.

Dear Miss Biiios, I have been in Paris a week and only found your letter on my return. Of course I will
now send the book to Mr Galton, and I am delighted to do so. It did not occur to me that you might have
mentioned our conversation to him. I had greatly wished to send it but came to the conclusion that the simpler
course was to refrain.

I don't think many people admire, or can admire, Mr Galton more than I do. The novelty of his thoughts
and the freshness of his outlook on nature are not to be found in any other living writer, so far as I know.
I often remember the thrill of pleasure with which I first read Hereditary Genius and the earlier chapters of
Natural Inheritance, and every year when I read aloud pieces of those books to my class, as I always do, I can
see what excitement they have the power to cause.

You ask whether "Just as all creeds are right," may not "all the paths of Science and Art" be right?
Hardly, I think, if for the words we substitute the things themselves. In Art, yes : all are surely right which
are sincere ; for to the individual artist that which is sincere is, by that very prerogative, to him, Art. The
multitudinous forms of art are the product of our manifold natures, and no one may decide for another. But
in the natural world of Science, or in the supernatural of the creeds for that matter, I cannot see how there can
be more than one right, nor how the path which ends in the wilderness can, outside the language of compliment,
be called right. How often have I regretted that Mr Galton has not been with us in the past ten years 1 It has
been indeed a strange perversity of chance. Please see to it that he does not trouble in any way to acknowledge
the book for, as I said to you, I shall quite understand. Yours truly, W. Bateson.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton' s Life 289

42, Rutland Gate, S.VV. July 13, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, I return the papers. They greatly interest me. I have put trifling
marks on pages 5, 6 of the proofs and on 61 of the MS. The only remarks I would make on
the MS. are that (1) perhaps the University of London part might be clearer, briefer and more
emphatic, and (2) that I think more might be made of the possibilities of an Evolution Cttee
than is alluded to on p. 64. For my own part, I thought at first, and this was my main motive in
joining it, that the numerous bodies engaged in horticulture and zoology might in one aspect of
their work, be co-ordinated by the Cttee and that research of a scientific kind might be intro-
duced into the proceedings of each of them. A Cttee would help to keep them up to the mark,
and prevent overlappings. But the desire for this seemed too faint to produce any such result.

1 cannot recall the meeting mentioned at the Savile Club, and doubt in consequence whether
I was really present at it. I am almost sure that Michael Foster's asking me to take the chair-
manship was the first thing that I ever heard about the proposed Cttee. Dear ! dear ! what a list
of efforts are included in the life of an actively minded man like Weldon — successes and failures.

I return the Vice-Chancellor's letter, which is excellent so far as it goes.

Heron's admirable paper reached me after I last wrote. Is he the excellent man you spoke
to me about, who was not then quite ripe for the Eugenic Research Fellowship. He seems just
the man to hold such an appointment.

We have just returned from a brief country visit. It is delightful to hear that you are so
pleasantly placed among old Quaker associations. They — the Quakers — were grandly (and
simply) stubborn. I think we shall go again to Ockharo for August but to another house — ■
negotiations are pending. Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.

Winsley Hill, Danby, Grosmont R.S.O., Yorks. July 14, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, Your letter and suggestions are very helpful. Your corrections
to the proof shall be made. The other points I will refer to one by one.

University of Lmvlon. It is awfully difficult for me to give the full account of this. I had
got many men to join the Association, George Meredith, Hardy, Besant, etc., by a more or less
personal appeal stating that we wanted to found a university absolutely homogeneous with
a professor at the head of each department on the lines of a Scotch or German university.
Huxley was elected president after this scheme had been adopted and brought his enormous
force to work on a small executive committee of which I was secretary to carry out a plan of
his own in which we were to compromise with colleges, night schools and the existing university
to get & federal body. He arranged meetings with each of these institutions. The first with the
University of London was to come off in a few days. I protested that this was not the policy
on which the Association had been built up and that the executive committee could not go beyond
its instructions. Huxley with all the force of an old hand completely confused me — all I know
is that I resigned the secretaryship and that the members of the committee asserted that I had
promised not to take action against Huxley's scheme. Personally I don't think I made any
definite promise, but I know that Huxley saw danger to his project and engineered me into
a state of confusion. When I had time to think it over I saw that he had left me in an
absolutely false position. I must either be entirely untrue to the men of weight and name who
had joined the association on the basis of a genuine professorial university or break through
Huxley's entanglements*. This I did by an open letter to him, sent to the Times and to him at
the same time. I put myself right with the members of the Association but entirely in the wrong
with regard to Huxley. Ultimately the Association reversed the whole of Huxley's policy, but
these doings ( 1 ) had killed its effectiveness, (2) hurt Weldon fearfully and (3) made people believe
me impossible on committees. Huxley must be right and such a small person as myself must
be wrong.

* In my opinion to-day Huxley by his action destroyed all the chance there then was of a
real university for London, and left us with the miserable pretence of a university that still
exists. The " Association for promoting a Professorial University in London " had practically
united all the teachers of weight in London and many other men of mark as well. It was
wholly impossible to carry through any pettifogging federal scheme without its sanction.
Huxley had no real academic ideals, and a suspicion of all universities controlled by the
professoriate. His error was to accept the presidency of an association whose programme was
entirely opposed to his own views.

p g in 37

290 Life and Letters of Francis Galton

Looking back on it now, I think Huxley was morally wrong ; he used all the force of his
name and position to get a younger man, who was really responsible for the movement, out of
the way in order that he might carry out a different scheme. I was formally wrong, but morally
right, and nobody saw, not even Weldon, that I, having taken a false step, was doing what was
painful to me to put myself right with men whom I had induced — often by much talk and
persuasion — to join a movement for a great ideal of academic reform.

Now you will see that I cannot put all this directly into Weldon's Life. But it was a re-
markable instance in which his admiration for his hero, and personal affection for a friend came
into opposition, and he succeeded in preserving both, and this although I never gave him as I
have given you the grounds for what I did. It is this element in the whole matter which makes
the account of Weldon's relation to the University movement, as you find it, obscure.

I have put in six more lines about the Evolution Committee emphasising what your aims
were and how they were rendered unavailing by the members pulling in different directions and
the struggle of different schools. To my mind the absence of such an experimental farm as you
suggested has been the great drawback of the past years. We want a land "Marine Biological
Association." But it would never have been possible to combine the thoroughness of Weldon
with the slipshod character of the rival school. Friction would have destroyed everything. The
only hope is that a Dohrn may arise some day, a man with the energy and force of character to
carry it out which marked him. The worst of it is that the Americans have already got such
a station under the Carnegie Institution, but so far they have done nothing very profitable with
it ; it needs as chief a very clear strong thinker. The success of these things always lies in the
strength of the individual who dominates the whole. Dohrn must have been splendid

I enclose a letter to you, which seems to me to confirm my version of the first origin of the
1893 Committee. In 1896 Nov. or Dec. you were so weary of Z.'s incessant letters to the
Committee — the originals or copies occupy an entire box in Weldon's papers — that you suggested
Z. should be added to the Committee. Now was the old Committee dissolved and a new one formed,
or as I suggest were Bateson, Dyer and myself* added to the old Committee and shortly after
many others? There is no definite statement in Weldon's letters, but between Nov. 1896 and
February 1 897 the Committee appears to have taken a new lease of life, the old statistical object is
dropped, many new members appear and the whole scheme of breeding and inquiry by circulars
to breeders comes into being. Can you throw any light on these points 1 I enclose the circular
that Weldon in his letter says he has sent to Darwin, Poulton and Macalister, and received
their assent to. Weldon in a letter of Dec. 4, 1893, says :

" I am writing to ask people to meet on Saturday at 3.0 (Dec. 9th) as you (F. G.) suggested,
but at the Savile Club, 107 Piccadilly." He states that as the Royal Society is not available on
Saturdays he has chosen the Savile. Perhaps the locus was changed later 1

Might I have the enclosed back, so that all the papers may be in order and together, if there
is need for any further reference ? Also will you return the enclosed poem in W. F. R. W.'a
handwriting ? Is it a translation and if so of what 1 It reads rather as if it were. If not, what
made him choose this metre, and what is it the prologue to 1 It is the only poem I have found.
What is the reference to Macrobius ] Affectionately yours, Karl Pearson.

42, Rutland Gate, S.W. July 16, 1906.

My dear Karl Pearson, I have found my (scanty) diaries of 1891-1897, and have been
to the R. Soc. to read the minute book of the Evol. Cttee and refresh my memory. The sequence
of affairs was I think this, so far as I was cognisant. — First Michael Foster's call on me —
I have no record of this, — about the then talked of Cttee. Second the Savile Club meeting,
of which I have no recollection, but believe it must have been just an informal ratification of
views previously well discussed. My diary notes the engagement. Third the appointment of
a R. Soc. Cttee, in the Minutes of whose first meeting Jan. 25, 1896, a letter was read from
me to the R. Soc. " suggesting the desirability of appointing a Cttee for conducting statistical
inquiries into the measurable characteristics of plants and animals." Also, a letter from the
R. Soc. appointing us, myself (as chairman), F. Darwin, Profs. A. Macalister, Meldola, Poulton
and Weldon, giving us £50 to start with, and recommending us to apply to the Govt Grant
Cttee for any further sums we might think necessary.

* The R.S. records show that I was added in 1896: see p. 126 above.

Eugenics as a Creed and the Last Decade of Galton's Life 291

Jan. 1897, Bateson, Godman, Heape, Lankester, Maxwell, Masters, Salvin, were elected
members, and Bateson attended.

Feb. 26 (clearly of the same year, from the above facts) when Bateson, etc. were present, it
was resolved to ask that the objects of the Ottee should include "accurate investigation of
Variation, Heredity, Selection and other phenomena relating to Evolution." In this year it
was briefly called (?for the first time) the "Evolution Cttee."

June 15, 1899, the question was raised "whether the Cttee ought not to cease to exist."

Nov. 29, 1899, Discussed and read a letter (about to be sent?) from me to the Sec. R. Soc.
expressing my view "that the Cttee would not serve any useful purpose by continuing to exist,"
but asking reappointment for one year.

Jan. 25, 1900, Dyer, Meldola, Pearson, Weldon and I all resigned. (The Cttee still lingers
on and meets about once a year.)

There is no indication of any previous Cttee for this or any allied purpose, but Weldon had
many grants, personally, for his shrimp experiments, etc. Neither was there any break in the
continuity of the Evolution Cttee.

I quite see your difficulty about the history of proceedings connected with Huxley and the
University of London, — how to satisfy the reader and yet not be too explicit on painful
subjects.

The allusions to the poem (which I return with Weldon's letters) are not understood by
me. I do not even yet recall who "Macrobius" was — (not a Macrobe, the inverse of a "Microbe"!).

I still think that I must have a lot of Evolution Cttee correspondence someivhere in my
cupboards, etc. If I can find anything worth sending you shall have it, of course.

Affectionately yours, Francis Galton.

7, Well Road, Hampstead, N.W. Oct. 22, 1906.

My dear Francis Galton, I am rather distressed that I have heard n