288 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
FROM PROFESSOR E. B. POULTON : I entirely agree with the aims Mr. Galton has in view, and profoundly admire his papers on this subject. I think they unfold great possibilities for the human race.
FROM HON. BERTRAND RUSSELL : I have read Mr. Galton's two papers in abstract with much interest, and agree entirely with the view that marriage cus- toms might be modified in a eugenic direction. But I have no views of my own worth expressing in a written communication such as is asked for.
FROM PROFESSOR SERGI 8 : As an abstract proposition I believe Mr. Galton's proposal is entirely right and has many attractions. But, nevertheless, it seems to me to be not easily practicable, and perhaps even impossible.
The sexual relations are vital in the life of all animal species. Any restric- tions, to be at all tolerable, must irrefutably demonstrate a great and conspicuous gain. But, unfortunately, we are ignorant of the consequences of restrictions in marriage relations.
It is important in this connection to bear in mind that in modern societies there are certain unmistakable new tendencies at work. These tendencies are all in the direction of dissolving the old restrictions, both religious and social. They constitute, in fact, a movement toward what is called " free love." Now, this tendency runs, it seems to me, counter to Mr. Galton's proposals and makes it particularly difficult to initiate any retsrictions of a new form and character.
It is, I believe, an illusion to expect that from any intellectual convictions there may arise a conscious inhibition of sex-relations in the population generally. Instances are not wanting of men of high culture marrying women who are the daughters of insane and epileptic parents.
But, notwithstanding these objections, which I hold to be a most serious obstacle, and even perhaps fatal to the practical application of Mr. Galton's eugenic principles, nevertheless I believe the studies which, in the second of his two papers to the Sociological Society, he proposes to institute will be both inter- esting and useful.
FROM DR. R. STEINMETZ': I quite agree with Mr. Galton and others (e. g., Dr. Schallmeyer, of Munich, author of Vererbung und Auslese im Lebenslauf der V biker, 1903) that one of the highest objects of applied sociology is the promotion of eugenic marriages. I think there is no worthier object of discussion for a sociological society than that of the means of this promotion. To be sure, the thorough and real knowledge of the true, not the expressed and the reputed, motives for introducing restrictions on marriage might be a means to this end. What we want to know is the real objective cause of these restrictions ; there need not, of course, have been any conscious motive at all.
Coming to detailed examination of some points in Mr. Galton's paper on " Restrictions in Marriage," I would ask : Is it certain that prohibition of polygamy in Christian nations was due " to considerations of social well-being," as Mr. Galton has it? Surely other causes were also at work. I think, where the number of adult men and women is nearly equal, monogamy is the natural result ; polygamy is possible only when, by wars and other causes, this proportion is reversed, and when other circumstances, as social inequality, allow some men to take more women than one.
A special distribution of labor between men and women may contribute to this result, but cannot be the cause of it, as every man wants the assistance of more women when he may get them. And in respect of sexual relations it has to be observed that many are polygamous in intention, and are only deterred by practical difficulties.
Social inequality, poverty, successful wars are the condition of polygamy. Economical or sexual wants drive men to it.
When these conditions are no longer fulfilled, monogamy will replace it. This is furthered by any rise in the position of women, by the freer play of the purer
- Director of the Museum and Laboratory of Anthropology, University of
Rome.
Lecturer on sociology in the University of Leyden.
