This is part two of a dissertation. Part one may be found
here.

In 1871 Charles Darwin published The Descent Of Man, from which his cousin, Sir Francis Galton drew inspiration and this chapter will discuss the origins of the science known as “eugenics” in Victorian Britain and how its principles laid out by Sir Francis Galton influence the novelists of the time. Gillham remarks,
Eugenics … deals with “questions bearing on what is termed in Greek,
eugenes, namely, good in stock, hereditarily endowed with noble qualities.”
And so Galton had brought into the vocabulary a word whose dark connotations
have ever since been associated with his name. (Gillham 2001, 207)

Charles Darwin in The Descent Of Man (1871) states,
‘We civilised men … do our utmost to check the process of elimination;
we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor laws and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of everyone to the last moment … Thus the weak members of society propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man (Darwin cited in Gallagher, 1996: 76)’ (Marks, 1999: 34)

This argument that not allowing people with disabilities to live or die according to natural selection without anybody helping those members of society most in need of aid carried a great deal of weight in the latter half of the nineteenth century. The view that comparing the breeding of animals to produce better stock can be likened to the selective breeding of humans is too simplistic. According to Gallagher,
just what constitutes survival, strength or weakness in the human race is a complex issue with many ramifications. The relationship between prosperity in an industrialised society and survival and selection in the natural chain of evolution is not as clear as the first evolution enthusiasts believed it to be. (Gallagher, 1990: 77. cited in Marks, 1999:34)

That is to say; controlling the breeding of humans to eradicate undesirable traits, mental and physical impairments for example, is extremely complicated. Selective breeding may produce unexpected and potentially disastrous results. Gallagher is also saying that the ability to acquire wealth, power or status is not necessarily as clearly related to natural evolution as early supporters of selective breeding believed.

Since the ideas behind eugenics were very prominently featured in the public arena, it is logical that writers will be influenced by the debate. It would be difficult to establish a “middle-ground”, as it were, about such an emotive subject. That is to say, it is reasonable to suggest that opinions would be either strongly in favour or vehemently opposed to the idea. It would be difficult to imagine that all writers of fiction occupied the same camp either for or against eugenics.

In 1883 Galton published “Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development”
where he pulled together the results of his twin studies, his thoughts
on anthropometries and statistics, and touched upon topics like psychometrics,
psychology, race, and population. It was in this book that he coined the
term “eugenics.” (Gillham 2001, 7)

Galton applied the term to the science of breeding out those members of society who, if allowed to reproduce unchecked, would threaten the survival of the human race. Gillian Beer remarks,
‘Francis Galton’s eugenic theories were an attempt to apply evolutionary theory to the future and Darwin’s own emphasis in The Descent Of Man (1871) upon acts of choice and will in sexual selection (however circumscribed by society’s pressures) brought into the foreground questions of inheritance.’ (Beer, 1983:191).

In the nineteenth century, eugenicists stated that aspects of physical appearance could identify those that needed to be prevented from reproducing.

According to Janet Browne, “Criminologists such as the Italian writer Cesare Lombroso proposed that there were physical stigmata to be seen in social deviants. These were sometimes explicitly linked with apish bodily features” (Browne 2006, 124-125). In the late nineteenth century, as Browne tells us,

The same threat of physical and moral degeneration was taken up … by
Robert Louis Stevenson’s The Strange Case Of Doctor Jekyll and Mr Hyde (1886) where Jekyll’s other self, the evil Hyde, progressively became more apelike as his murderous deeds increased. (Browne 2006, 125)

Mr Hyde is described by Stevenson as, “pale and dwarfish, he gave an impression of deformity without any nameable malformation” (Stevenson 1886, 59). In another story by Stevenson, Treasure Island (1883), Jim describes his apprehension when asked to watch for a one-legged man.

How that personage haunted my dreams … Now the leg would be cut off at the knee, now at the hip; now he was a monstrous kind of a creature who had never had but the one leg, and that in the middle of his body. (Stevenson 1883, 16).

We read in Browne, “Conditions such as epilepsy or gross deformity categorized yet others again as undesirable. It was thought that such unfit individuals could be identified by “signs’ and then removed from society.’ (Browne 2006, 125). It is supposed that a person with epilepsy would be identified when they are witnessed having a seizure, since epilepsy, although a physical disability, does not have any other physical manifestations. It is also worrying that diabetic and epileptic seizures are almost identical and that people with diabetes as well as epilepsy could be removed from society using such reasoning.

According to Gillian Beer, “In Mind 5 (1880) Grant Allen wrote an important article on “Aesthetic Evolution in Man’ which draws heavily on The Descent (Of Man) (1871) and particularly on the idea of sexual selection’ (Beer, 1983: 212)

Allen also asserts, “the beautiful for every kind must similarly be … the healthy, the normal, the strong, the perfect, and the parentally strong” otherwise, “the race or kind must be on the high road to extinction.” (Allen cited in Beer, 1983: 212)

Thus Grant Allen lays down definite criteria for the continued survival of the human race based mostly on the physical attributes of the women that would be used for breeding purposes. Criteria that would exclude most people with physical disabilities and as Beer states, “His concept of beauty brings to the fore the idea of eugenics.” (Beer, 1983: 212). The idea of a fixed set of characteristics to ensure good breeding stock is taken further by Francis Galton. He was invited to deliver the second Huxley Lecture at the Royal Anthropological Institute and Forrest tells us
he begins with a familiar theme: the application of the normal curve to human variation. On this occasion he divides the population with regard to their “civic worth” into five classes (R, S, T, U, V) above mediocrity and five classes (r, s, t, u, v) below mediocrity). (Forrest, 1974: 250)

The Huxley lectures were sponsored by Thomas Huxley – a keen advocate of the eugenics idea. Thomas’s grandson Aldous Huxley advocated the eugenics concept in Brave New World using a similar system of grading the population. In Huxley’s perfect world, the population was genetically engineered, dividing it into five separate classes from Alpha plus – the most intelligent and physically perfect, down to Epsilon minus – simple-minded labourers.

According to Forrest, at another lecture delivered to the Sociological Society on the 16th May 1904 at the London School of Economics, Galton stated that, “the Society would need to be persistent in arguing for the national importance of eugenics” (Forrest, 1974: 257).

Forrest states that Galton also said that three stages would be needed, the first being, “familiarising the public with the topic, the second … persuading people of the importance of implementing eugenic proposals … the third … introducing eugenics into the national conscience like a new religion.” (Forrest, 1974: 257)

The public now becomes familiar with topics largely through television and cinema productions. Therefore, in a similar way, as Jopson suggests, it would be logical to suggest that the concept of eugenics might be promoted through written works in the nineteenth and early twentieth century. Forrest states, “Galton”s paper was followed by a long and general discussion … Among the speakers were Weldon, Benjamin Kidd, and H.G. Wells. Written contributions came from Bateson, G. B. Shaw and many others. (Forrest, 1974: 257). Jopson remarks,
Wells and Shaw represent two of the foremost intellectuals of their day who were motivated to embrace the doctrine of eugenics by a hope that it could effect social change … They also conveyed their eugenic ideas through the medium of their literary works (Jopson 2004, 1)

However Wells did not entirely agree with Galton’s

implied suggestion that criminals should not procreate, since “a large proportion
of our present-day criminals are the brightest and boldest members of families living under impossible conditions and that in many desirable qualities the average criminal is above the average of the law-abiding poor, and probably of the average respectable person.” (Gillham 2001, 329)

In Wells’ The Island of Dr. Moreau (1896), the naturalist Prendick is marooned on an island where the vivisectionist, Dr. Moreau is creating hybrids between men and animals.
Upon Prendick’s first encounter with these men/animals he describes them thus, “Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive,

and you may understand my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me”. (Wells 1896, 57)
In Man And Superman (1903) by G.B. Shaw, “John Tanner explains the socialist element in Shaw”s eugenics: ”Equality is essential to good breeding; and equality … is incompatible with property.”’ (Childs 2001, 15). Childs goes on,
there never will be a God unless we make one – that we are the instruments through which that ideal is trying to make itself reality – we can work towards that ideal until we get to be supermen, and then super-supermen, and then a
world of organisms who have achieved and realized God. (Childs 2001, 15)

An obvious problem with any eugenics programme is the matter of perception. In Britain, The Mental Deficiency Act 1913 made it easier to institutionise people with learning difficulties, or as they were known, those who were “mentally enfeebled”. These institutions, in the past, have been regarded with suspicion by eugenicists such as Francis Galton. He states, “Aid given to institutions for the feeble minded are open to suspicions that they may eventually promote their marriage and the production of offspring like themselves.” (Galton cited in Forrest, 1974: 262). Unfortunately, at that time, people with epilepsy were regarded as being feeble minded. It has since been observed that with improved medication and being afforded equal opportunities for education, people with epilepsy usually possess normal intelligence and in some cases above average intellectual capability.

The Act received support from Winston Churchill who tried, shortly after the Second World War to make sterilisation of the “feeble-minded” compulsory.
Evidently allowing the “feeble-minded” to produce “offspring like themselves” was not part of the eugenicists’ plan to help save the human race.

As well as epilepsy, other learning difficulties that came under a general category of “feeble-mindedness” might have been autism and dyslexia. The Act came under attack from prominent writers of the day such as G.K. Chesterton. Childs tells us,
It was the newspaper founded by Hilaire Belloc, Eyewitness, that, as Jones points
out, ”ran the toughest campaign against the 1913 Mental Deficiency Bill.” 52 As early as 1901, G. K. Chesterton had accused Pearson of preaching ”the great
principle of the survival of the nastiest.”’ (Childs 2001, 19).

In conclusion then, this chapter has studied the rise of a so-called science known as eugenics, developed by Galton and inspired by the work of Darwin. Eugenics advocates the breeding out of existence of certain undesirable traits in the human race, thereby strengthening and purifying it. The interest and support of writers such as Wells, Shaw and Kidd has been looked at as well as the opposition of Chesterton and Belloc.