superior; only experience can determine whether a certain cross will yield inferior or superior types. Society may well attempt to prevent those crosses which produce inferior stock while encouraging those which produce superior types." 8

Some biologists, as for example L. C. Dunn of the Storrs' Agricultural Station, do not believe that, from the standpoint of vigor or fertility, the hybrids of plants or animals are inferior to their parents. In reference to crossings among the races of man, he says: "Are human hybrids more vigorous or less than the parent types? Are they under any biological handicaps such as infertility? Are the new combinations of characters in hybrids disharmonious or incompatible? Dogmatic answers can certainly not be given from the human data. The Boer-Hottentot hybrids and the Norfolk population are certainly at least the physical equals of either parent race. In Hawaii the physical measurements of hybrids, while they do not indicate a pronounced hybrid vigor, show that the hybrids are not inferior. And in the opinion of more than one observer some of the hybrid groups, e. g., the Hawaiian-Chinese, represent a physical improvement of the parent types.

"Disharmonic types undoubtedly do exist among hybrids, but only in the sense that combinations of traits occur which are not normal or frequent in purer types. As far as can be ascertained from physical measurements these new combinations are not injurious, and no derogatory significance need be attached to disharmony. It is a normal occurrence after crossing."

"9

Dunn attaches great importance to the increased fertility which generally results from crossings.

"Striking racial differences exist, which are not abolished, but combine and endure through cross-matings. These diverse combinations and the variability which results may be one condition of evolutionary progress in man as in the lower animals and plants. It may be suggested that in a complex civilization which rests on division of labor, variability is even more essential than in more primitive societies. Real racial differences may then be the raw materials needed for an enlarging society." 10

It is universally understood that race crossing increases variability, but an increase of variability does not necessarily imply an improvement Heredity and Evolution in the Development of Man, p. 301.

"A Biological View of Race Mixture," Publications of the American Sociological Society, Vol. 19, p. 54.

10 Publications of the American Sociological Society, Vol. 19, p. 56.

in racial stock, nor guarantee us against the inheritance of undesirable traits. A visit to any of our institutions for the feeble-minded will show us striking examples of increased variation due to crossings. The introducing of a Holstein bull amongst a herd of Jersey cows might add to the vigor or variability of the herd, but would certainly bring down the quality of the milk.

It does not follow that race mixture is a good thing merely because animal vigor may be preserved by it. The main consideration in the crossing of plants and animals is not the extent of variability nor the degree of hybrid vigor, but the quality of the characters transmitted.

When we seek by artificial process to improve the breed of chickens, hogs, or cattle, we do not assemble a motley collection of all possible breeds, but select one type supposed to be superior, or we cross two slightly unlike types, segregate the offspring, and breed strictly from the selected stock. A prerequisite to the production of any desired type of plant or animal is intelligent selection, followed by segregation which prevents any crossing with another type. To permit free crossing would render impossible the artificial production of any new or improved type.

Biologists who favor amalgamation justify their position upon the ground that, from their point of view, race crossings have not been demonstrated to be bad. In reply to this attitude Holmes remarks: "The inheritance of a superior race is a very precious possession to be conserved at all costs. The argument from ignorance should not be used to defend race crossing because we cannot prove that it is bad; it should be used rather to counsel caution because we do not know that it is not bad. In the light of our ignorance about race crossing, the wisest course is to go slow and play safe. Our ignorance is no justification for taking a leap in the dark." 11

So far as I am able to comprehend the teachings of biological science, the outstanding fact seems to be that plants and animals vary and inherit characters according to Mendelian principles and that an improvement in any variety or type can be brought about only by natural or intelligent selection and not by miscellaneous crossings.

By way of summarizing the biological aspect of amalgamation, I quote as follows from Arthur Dendy, professor of Zoology in King's College, London: "Whatever may be the selecting agent, there is always one thing necessary before it can bring about any improvement, "Studies in Evolution and Eugenics, p. 223.

and that is the isolation of the selected variations, the prevention of interbreeding with the less favored individuals of the race, so that the incipient adaptations shall not be swamped by crossing. For this reason the pigeon fancier keeps his birds in separate cages and the stock breeder is scrupulously careful to allow no random mating. The numerous varieties of domesticated dogs, as is well known, breed freely with one another if allowed to do so, and the results are mongrels. Similarly, when different varieties of pigeons are mated together the offspring tend to revert to the condition of the original wild rock pigeon from which all the varieties were derived. . . .12

"The differences between the various branches of the human family, especially as regards mental and moral development, are enormous, and there can be no doubt that they are maintained by geographical isolation. What, then, is to happen now that this isolation is being every day more completely abolished? Our modern means of communication are rapidly bringing all parts of the world so close together that the natural barriers to migration will soon cease to have any importance. All races will intermingle; they are already doing so. Under these newly arisen conditions, what is to prevent the interbreeding of all types of humanity and the gradual establishment of one vast mongrel population? Any one who is acquainted with the half-caste inhabitants of such a country as, for example, South Africa, will at once realise the dangers attendant upon such a state of affairs. A mongrel is no more desirable amongst human beings than it is amongst domesticated animals.

"The humanitarian, but utterly unscientific, doctrine that all men are equal has much to answer for. If followed out to its logical conclusions it must lead to the general and permanent deterioration of the human race, for the highest types of mankind are in a minority, and it will be a case of levelling down and not of levelling up." 13

"The Biological Foundations of Society, p. 168.

13 Ibid., p. 171.

CHAPTER 54

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF AMALGAMATION

The Cause of Racial Affinities and Antipathies-Natural Impulses Which Develop Consciousness of Kind-Control of Consciousness of Kind over the Social and Sexual Relations between Animal Groups-Illicit Sex Relations between Different Races-Operation of Psychological Laws to Prevent Too Intimate Inbreeding and Too Distant Outbreeding

TUR

URNING now to the psychological point of view, we learn that nature has planted in the animal species and varieties certain dispositions which serve to encourage crossing with varieties offering slight contrasts and to prevent crossing with varieties offering wide contrasts. These dispositions give rise to racial and group affinities and antipathies. The natural disposition of each animal species or variety leads in the first place to associational preferences, or to what we may call group affinities and antipathies; and as a consequence of these there are developed sexual attractions and aversions between different groups.

All animals are more or less gregarious, or show a social preference for their own kind. If the question be asked, why animals of like kind find solace in association the answer would seem to be that the contact with their kind gives play to the emotions of sympathy and wonder. The sensation of a kindred touch is accompanied by a feeling of security which relaxes tension and expands sympathy. At the same time the contact gives play to the emotion of surprise and wonder, and answers to what psychologists used to call the instinct of curiosity. The individuals of any group are more or less differentiated, and the contrasts excite a general pleasurable stimulation of the emotions. In other words, the interest which an individual finds in companionship with another is due to the refreshment he derives from a certain. degree of unlikeness. If the unlikeness is too great, a feeling of fear or repulsion is awakened. That particular degree of contrast which insures pleasure to the members of a herd or group is what we generally call likeness. This tendency of like individuals to form groups is what Giddings calls consciousness of kind, and what he regards as the most fundamental sociological fact. Worms, he tells us, recognize each other

by the touch, and so thoroughout the animal kingdom each individual tends to flock with its kind.

The sex relations of animals are determined by their natural grouping or feeling of consciousness of kind. The sex affinities and aversions of individuals are influenced by the same likenesses and contrasts which influence the animal groupings, but they always arise after the groups are formed. The sex impulse, which only becomes active at a certain age, season, or following a chance affinity, is generally manifested within the circle of consciousness of kind of each individual.

For instance, according to Westermarck, in the forest of Dean, the dark and pale colored herds of deer, which have been long kept together, have never been known to cross. On the Faroe Islands, the half-wild native black sheep are said not to have readily mixed with the imported white sheep. "In Circassia, where six sub-races of the horse are known, the horses of three of these races, whilst living a free life, almost always refuse to mingle and cross, and will even attack each other." It is common knowledge that a mare's aversion to an ass is so strong that it can be overcome only by a ruse.

The feeling of consciousness of kind controls the sex relations among human beings in the same way as among the lower animals. Westermarck tells us that the Indian races of Paraguay "are too proud to intermarry with any race of a different color, or even of a different stock. In Guiana and elsewhere, Indians do not readily intermix with Negroes, whom they despise, . . . in San Salvador in San Salvador . . . a man who had intercourse with a foreign woman was killed. Mr. Powers informs us of a California tribe who had put to death a woman for committing adultery with or marrying a white man; and among the Barolongs, a Bechuana tribe, the same punishment was formerly inflicted on any one who had intercourse with a European. Among the Kabyles, le mariage avec une negresse n'est pas defendu en principe; mais le famille s'opposerait à une pareille union. . . . The black and fair people of the Philippines have from time immemorial dwelt in the same country without producing an intermediate race. . . . And, in Ceylon, even those Veddahs who live in settlements, although they have long associated with their neighbors, the Singhalese, have not yet intermarried with them.

"Count de Gobineau remarks that not even a common religion and country can extinguish the hereditary aversion of the Arab to the Turk, of the Kurd to the Nestorian of Syria, of the Magyar to the Slav. 'History of Human Marriage, p. 281,