The Limits of Heredity: Nature and Nurture in American Eugenics before 1915

Journal of the History of Biology

Volumn 31, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 263-278

  Cooke, Kathy J ^a  

^a QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ENVIRONMENT; HISTORY; MEDICAL GENETICS; UNITED STATES;

ENVIRONMENT; EUGENICS; HISTORY, 19TH CENTURY; HISTORY, 20TH CENTURY; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032084431     PISSN: 00225010     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1004387603971     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Mark Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1963), p. 77.
2. Kenneth Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972); Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Edward J. Larson, Sex, Race, and Science: Eugenics in the Deep South (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), p. 31.
3. Kenneth Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972); Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Edward J. Larson, Sex, Race, and Science: Eugenics in the Deep South (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), p. 31.
4. Kenneth Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society: A Historical Appraisal (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972); Daniel J. Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Edward J. Larson, Sex, Race, and Science: Eugenics in the Deep South (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1995), p. 31.
5. Studies of eugenics outside the United States frequently have paid attention to environmental as well as hereditarian reform. For more on the "eugenics industry" and studies of eugenics outside the United States, see Philip J. Pauly, "Essay Review: The Eugenics Industry - Growth or Restructuring?" J. Hist. Biol., 26 (1993), 131-145; Nancy Stepan, The Hour of Eugenics: Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991); Grant Rodwell, "Nature Enthusiasm, Social Planning and Eugenics in Australian State Schools, 1900-1920," J. Ed. Admin. Hist., 29 (1997), 1-19, on p. 3. Hamilton Cravens has studied the controversy between heredity and environment in the United States, but his book emphasizes the rapid ascendancy of heredity over environment. Although it is a fascinating account of the differences and controversy between these two groups, Cravens's work overlooks the different conceptions of heredity that held sway in the first two decades of the twentieth century. See Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy, 1900-1941 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978).
6. Studies of eugenics outside the United States frequently have paid attention to environmental as well as hereditarian reform. For more on the "eugenics industry" and studies of eugenics outside the United States, see Philip J. Pauly, "Essay Review: The Eugenics Industry - Growth or Restructuring?" J. Hist. Biol., 26 (1993), 131-145; Nancy Stepan, The Hour of Eugenics: Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991); Grant Rodwell, "Nature Enthusiasm, Social Planning and Eugenics in Australian State Schools, 1900-1920," J. Ed. Admin. Hist., 29 (1997), 1-19, on p. 3. Hamilton Cravens has studied the controversy between heredity and environment in the United States, but his book emphasizes the rapid ascendancy of heredity over environment. Although it is a fascinating account of the differences and controversy between these two groups, Cravens's work overlooks the different conceptions of heredity that held sway in the first two decades of the twentieth century. See Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy, 1900-1941 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978).
7. Studies of eugenics outside the United States frequently have paid attention to environmental as well as hereditarian reform. For more on the "eugenics industry" and studies of eugenics outside the United States, see Philip J. Pauly, "Essay Review: The Eugenics Industry - Growth or Restructuring?" J. Hist. Biol., 26 (1993), 131-145; Nancy Stepan, The Hour of Eugenics: Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991); Grant Rodwell, "Nature Enthusiasm, Social Planning and Eugenics in Australian State Schools, 1900-1920," J. Ed. Admin. Hist., 29 (1997), 1-19, on p. 3. Hamilton Cravens has studied the controversy between heredity and environment in the United States, but his book emphasizes the rapid ascendancy of heredity over environment. Although it is a fascinating account of the differences and controversy between these two groups, Cravens's work overlooks the different conceptions of heredity that held sway in the first two decades of the twentieth century. See Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy, 1900-1941 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978).
8. Studies of eugenics outside the United States frequently have paid attention to environmental as well as hereditarian reform. For more on the "eugenics industry" and studies of eugenics outside the United States, see Philip J. Pauly, "Essay Review: The Eugenics Industry - Growth or Restructuring?" J. Hist. Biol., 26 (1993), 131-145; Nancy Stepan, The Hour of Eugenics: Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991); Grant Rodwell, "Nature Enthusiasm, Social Planning and Eugenics in Australian State Schools, 1900-1920," J. Ed. Admin. Hist., 29 (1997), 1-19, on p. 3. Hamilton Cravens has studied the controversy between heredity and environment in the United States, but his book emphasizes the rapid ascendancy of heredity over environment. Although it is a fascinating account of the differences and controversy between these two groups, Cravens's work overlooks the different conceptions of heredity that held sway in the first two decades of the twentieth century. See Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy, 1900-1941 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978).
9. According to Dunn, this division held back the development of genetics itself because it "was only when some biologists were willing to put aside the intractable problem of development and concentrate on transmission that the problem was analyzed and solved." See L. C. Dunn, A Short History of Genetics: The Development of Some of the Main Lines of Thought, 1864-1939 (San Francisco: McGraw-Hill, 1965), pp. 47-48. Garland Allen has shown that until well into the twentieth century many who studied heredity defined it "as both the transmission of elements from parent of offspring, and the 'translation' of inherited information into adult traits." Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935," in A History of Embryology, ed. T. J. Horder, J. A. Witkowski, and C. C. Wylie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 113-146, quotation from p. 113.
10. According to Dunn, this division held back the development of genetics itself because it "was only when some biologists were willing to put aside the intractable problem of development and concentrate on transmission that the problem was analyzed and solved." See L. C. Dunn, A Short History of Genetics: The Development of Some of the Main Lines of Thought, 1864-1939 (San Francisco: McGraw-Hill, 1965), pp. 47-48. Garland Allen has shown that until well into the twentieth century many who studied heredity defined it "as both the transmission of elements from parent of offspring, and the 'translation' of inherited information into adult traits." Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935," in A History of Embryology, ed. T. J. Horder, J. A. Witkowski, and C. C. Wylie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), pp. 113-146, quotation from p. 113.
11. Richard B. Goldschmidt, introduction to L. C. Dunn, ed., Genetics in the 20th Century (New York: Macmillan, 1951), pp. 2-3. George W. Stocking, "Larmarckianism in American Social Science: 1890-1915," J. Hist. Ideas, 23 (1962), 239-256.
12. Richard B. Goldschmidt, introduction to L. C. Dunn, ed., Genetics in the 20th Century (New York: Macmillan, 1951), pp. 2-3. George W. Stocking, "Larmarckianism in American Social Science: 1890-1915," J. Hist. Ideas, 23 (1962), 239-256.
13. Gregg Mitman, The State of Nature: Ecology, Community, and American Social Thought, 1900-1950 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992), chap. 1.
14. Martin S. Pernick, The Black Stork: Eugenics and the Death of Defective Babies in American Medicine and Motion Pictures Since 1915 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 43-60, quotation from p. 44.
15. Marouf A. Hasian, Jr., The Rhetoric of Eugenics in Anglo-American Thought (Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1996), pp. 105, 117. This analysis is a central focus of Hasian's book, but these two pages provide some straightforward examples.
16. Hasian's The Rhetoric of Eugenics in Anglo-American Thought examines the language used by a variety of eugenicists to uncover many permutations of eugenics as it existed within a variety of groups in American and Great Britain. His approach focuses on "rhetoric" and "rhetors," and thus provides a very different look at eugenicists, assessing their language much more than their scientific predispositions.
17. H. E. Jordan, "Heredity as a Factor in the Improvement of Social Conditions," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1991), 246-254, on p. 251.
18. Ibid., pp. 248, 253
19. Ibid., p. 251.
20. Edwin Grant Conklin, "The Mechanism of Heredity," Science, n.s. 27, (1908), 89-99, on pp. 89-90. Conklin seems to have modified J. Arthur Thomson's assertion that "heredity is no entity, no force, no principle, but a convenient term for the genetic relation between successive generations, and inheritance includes all that the organism is or has to start with in virtue of its hereditary relations." J. Arthur Thomson, Heredity, 2nd ed. (London: John Murray, 1912) p. 6. See also E. N. Wentworth, "On the Nature of Heredity," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 210-211.
21. Edwin Grant Conklin, "The Mechanism of Heredity," Science, n.s. 27, (1908), 89-99, on pp. 89-90. Conklin seems to have modified J. Arthur Thomson's assertion that "heredity is no entity, no force, no principle, but a convenient term for the genetic relation between successive generations, and inheritance includes all that the organism is or has to start with in virtue of its hereditary relations." J. Arthur Thomson, Heredity, 2nd ed. (London: John Murray, 1912) p. 6. See also E. N. Wentworth, "On the Nature of Heredity," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 210-211.
22. Edwin Grant Conklin, "The Mechanism of Heredity," Science, n.s. 27, (1908), 89-99, on pp. 89-90. Conklin seems to have modified J. Arthur Thomson's assertion that "heredity is no entity, no force, no principle, but a convenient term for the genetic relation between successive generations, and inheritance includes all that the organism is or has to start with in virtue of its hereditary relations." J. Arthur Thomson, Heredity, 2nd ed. (London: John Murray, 1912) p. 6. See also E. N. Wentworth, "On the Nature of Heredity," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 210-211.
23. F. Adams Woods, "Separating Heredity from Environment," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 194-195.
24. George Stocking evaluated the existence and role of neo-Lamarckian thought in social science in "Lamarckianism in American Social Science, 1890-1915," J. Hist. Ideas, 23 (1962), 239-256, especially on 251.
25. Edwin Grant Conklin, lecture notes for "Some Recent Criticisms of Eugenics," address presented to the American Philosophical Society, January 6, 1928. Edwin Grant Conklin, Professional Papers, Box 16, Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books & Special Collections, Princeton University Library. Published with permission of the Princeton University Library.
26. Carl N. Degler, In Search of Human Nature: The Decline and Revival of Darwinism in American Social Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991).
27. William B. Provine, The Origins of Theoretical Population Genetics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971), pp. 94-96.
28. H. J. Webber, "The Effect of Research in Genetics on the Art of Breeding," Amer. Breeders Mag., 3 (1912), 125-127.
29. Willet M. Hays, "Heredity One of the Large Controllable Forces," Amer. Breeders Mag. 2 (1911), 276-284, on p. 282.
30. Caroline L. Hunt, The Life of Ellen H. Richards (Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics Association, 1942), pp. 171, 269. Hunt cited Richards's speech from the Tenth Lake Placid Conference on Home Economics, held in 1909. Clarence J. Karier has noted that both "eugenics and euthenics were propelled by the enlightenment quest for the perfectibility of man and society in the context of a social and intellectual climate dominated by Darwinian evolution." From Clarence J. Karier, ed., Shaping the American Educational State, 1900 to the Present (New York: Free Press, 1975), p. 130.
31. Caroline L. Hunt, The Life of Ellen H. Richards (Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics Association, 1942), pp. 171, 269. Hunt cited Richards's speech from the Tenth Lake Placid Conference on Home Economics, held in 1909. Clarence J. Karier has noted that both "eugenics and euthenics were propelled by the enlightenment quest for the perfectibility of man and society in the context of a social and intellectual climate dominated by Darwinian evolution." From Clarence J. Karier, ed., Shaping the American Educational State, 1900 to the Present (New York: Free Press, 1975), p. 130.
32. Caroline L. Hunt, The Life of Ellen H. Richards (Washington, D.C.: American Home Economics Association, 1942), pp. 171, 269. Hunt cited Richards's speech from the Tenth Lake Placid Conference on Home Economics, held in 1909. Clarence J. Karier has noted that both "eugenics and euthenics were propelled by the enlightenment quest for the perfectibility of man and society in the context of a social and intellectual climate dominated by Darwinian evolution." From Clarence J. Karier, ed., Shaping the American Educational State, 1900 to the Present (New York: Free Press, 1975), p. 130.
33. Ellen Richards to Miss Boggs, November 18, 1909. Special Collections, Vassar College Libraries, Poughkeepsie, NY.
34. Ellen Richards to Miss Boggs, December 2, 1909. Special Collections, Vassar College Libraries, Poughkeepsie, NY.
35. Sarah Stage, "Ellen Richards and the Social Significance of the Home Economics Movement," in Sarah Stage and Virginia B. Vincenti, eds., Rethinking Home Economics: Women and the History of a Profession (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997), pp. 17-33.
36. "Announcement," J. Home Econ., 1 (1909), 1.
37. Suellen Hoy, Chasing Dirt: The American Pursuit of Cleanliness (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), pp. 82, 123.
38. See Ellen Richards, Euthenics: The Science of a Controllable Environment, A Plea for Better Living Conditions as a First Step Toward Higher Human Efficiency (Boston: Whitcomb and Barrows, 1910). The quotation is from Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, Mich.: Race Betterment Foundation, 1915), p. 147 (hereinafter cited as Official Proceedings), and is reprinted in Karier, Shaping the American Educational State (above, n. 21), p. 135
39. See Ellen Richards, Euthenics: The Science of a Controllable Environment, A Plea for Better Living Conditions as a First Step Toward Higher Human Efficiency (Boston: Whitcomb and Barrows, 1910). The quotation is from Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, Mich.: Race Betterment Foundation, 1915), p. 147 (hereinafter cited as Official Proceedings), and is reprinted in Karier, Shaping the American Educational State (above, n. 21), p. 135
40. See Ellen Richards, Euthenics: The Science of a Controllable Environment, A Plea for Better Living Conditions as a First Step Toward Higher Human Efficiency (Boston: Whitcomb and Barrows, 1910). The quotation is from Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, Mich.: Race Betterment Foundation, 1915), p. 147 (hereinafter cited as Official Proceedings), and is reprinted in Karier, Shaping the American Educational State (above, n. 21), p. 135
41. Charles Woodruff, "Climate and Eugenics," Amer. Breeders Mag., 1 (1910), 183-185, on p. 185.
42. "The Woman Movement and Eugenics," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 228.
43. Hays, "Heredity One of the Large, Controllable Forces" (above, n. 20), p. 281.
44. "The Pedagogics of Eugenics," Amer. Breeders Mag., 3 (1912), 224.
45. Official Proceedings (above, n. 27), pp. 147, 160. The emphasis on hygiene also reflects the relationship between eugenics and larger movements towards good health, and purer air and food that characterized the Progressive Era. Hoy, Chasing Dirt, (above, n. 26), pp. 59-121.
46. Official Proceedings (above, n. 27), pp. 147, 160. The emphasis on hygiene also reflects the relationship between eugenics and larger movements towards good health, and purer air and food that characterized the Progressive Era. Hoy, Chasing Dirt, (above, n. 26), pp. 59-121.
47. For an example of the extreme view against charity, see Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics (New York: Macmillan, 1926), pp. 148-149.
48. Richards, Euthenics, (above, n. 27), pp. 46-47.
49. "The Field of Eugenics," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 139-141, on p. 141.
50. Barbara Kimmelman, "The American Breeders' Association: Genetics and Eugenics in an Agricultural Context," Soc. Stud. Sci., 13 (1983), 163-204, on pp. 186-192. See also "Size of Farms and Farm Families," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 137-139.
51. Barbara Kimmelman, "The American Breeders' Association: Genetics and Eugenics in an Agricultural Context," Soc. Stud. Sci., 13 (1983), 163-204, on pp. 186-192. See also "Size of Farms and Farm Families," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 137-139.
52. "Organization of Coöperative Breeding," Amer. Breeders Mag., 2 (1911), 66-68.
53. Marilyn Irvin Holt, Linoleum, Better Babies, and the Modern Farm Woman, 1890-1930 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995), pp. 49-50.
54. "The Woman Movement and Eugenics" (above, n. 29), 225.
55. Hattie M. Wilson, Review of Women and Labor by Olive Schreiner, Amer. Breeders Mag., 3 (1912), 151-153; Margaret Sanger, Woman and the New Race (New York: Brentano's, 1920), pp. 93-95. Scholars have disagreed about the extent and nature of Sanger's eugenic tendencies. My argument, however, puts those contentions into a new light, since many eugenicists clearly advocated breeding as one of many means to improving the human race.
56. Hattie M. Wilson, Review of Women and Labor by Olive Schreiner, Amer. Breeders Mag., 3 (1912), 151-153; Margaret Sanger, Woman and the New Race (New York: Brentano's, 1920), pp. 93-95. Scholars have disagreed about the extent and nature of Sanger's eugenic tendencies. My argument, however, puts those contentions into a new light, since many eugenicists clearly advocated breeding as one of many means to improving the human race.
57. William E. Kellicott, The Social Direction of Human Evolution (New York: D. Appleton, 1911), p. 43.
58. Kenneth Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society (above, n. 2), p. 27; Leon J. Cole, "The Relation of Eugenics to Euthenics," Pop. Sci. Monthly, 81 (1912), 475-482, on p. 480. Ludmerer includes a good discussion of the racism in eugenics on pp. 25-33.
59. Kenneth Ludmerer, Genetics and American Society (above, n. 2), p. 27; Leon J. Cole, "The Relation of Eugenics to Euthenics," Pop. Sci. Monthly, 81 (1912), 475-482, on p. 480. Ludmerer includes a good discussion of the racism in eugenics on pp. 25-33.
60. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York: Holt, 1911), p. 222. Ludmerer discusses eugenicists who were not extreme racists in Genetics and American Society (above, n. 2), pp. 27-28.
61. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York: Holt, 1911), p. 222. Ludmerer discusses eugenicists who were not extreme racists in Genetics and American Society (above, n. 2), pp. 27-28.
62. E. Carleton MacDowell, "Charles Benedict Davenport," Bios, 17 (1946), 37.
63. C. B. Davenport, "Euthenics and Eugenics," Pop. Sci. Monthly, 78 (1911), 16-20.
64. Charles B. Davenport to Edwin Grant Conklin, March 1, 1915, Conklin Collection, Personal Papers, Box 6, Davenport Folder, Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books & Special Collections, Princeton University Library. Published with permission of the Princeton University Library.
65. See the New York Times, November 9, 1913, and January 4, 1914.
66. William Morton Wheeler to Edwin Grant Conklin, May 20, 1914, Conklin Collection, Personal Papers, Box 23, Wheeler Folder, Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books & Special Collections, Princeton University Library. Published with permission of the Princeton University Library.
67. Conklin to Frederick Osborn, October 24, 1928, Conklin Collection, Personal Papers, Box 17, Osborn Folder, Manuscripts Division, Department of Rare Books & Special Collections, Princeton University Library. Published with permission of the Princeton University Library.
68. Wilhelm Johannsen, "The Genotype Conception of Heredity," Amer. Nat., 45 (1911), 129-159, on pp. 129-131. See also Frederick B. Churchill, "Wilhelm Johannsen and the Genotype Concept," J. Hist. Biol., 7 (1974), 5-30; Jane Maienschein, "Heredity/Development in the United States, circa 1900," Hist. Phil. Life Sci., 9 (1987), 79-93, on pp. 79-80; Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935" (above, n. 4), pp. 113-146.
69. Wilhelm Johannsen, "The Genotype Conception of Heredity," Amer. Nat., 45 (1911), 129-159, on pp. 129-131. See also Frederick B. Churchill, "Wilhelm Johannsen and the Genotype Concept," J. Hist. Biol., 7 (1974), 5-30; Jane Maienschein, "Heredity/Development in the United States, circa 1900," Hist. Phil. Life Sci., 9 (1987), 79-93, on pp. 79-80; Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935" (above, n. 4), pp. 113-146.
70. Wilhelm Johannsen, "The Genotype Conception of Heredity," Amer. Nat., 45 (1911), 129-159, on pp. 129-131. See also Frederick B. Churchill, "Wilhelm Johannsen and the Genotype Concept," J. Hist. Biol., 7 (1974), 5-30; Jane Maienschein, "Heredity/Development in the United States, circa 1900," Hist. Phil. Life Sci., 9 (1987), 79-93, on pp. 79-80; Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935" (above, n. 4), pp. 113-146.
71. Wilhelm Johannsen, "The Genotype Conception of Heredity," Amer. Nat., 45 (1911), 129-159, on pp. 129-131. See also Frederick B. Churchill, "Wilhelm Johannsen and the Genotype Concept," J. Hist. Biol., 7 (1974), 5-30; Jane Maienschein, "Heredity/Development in the United States, circa 1900," Hist. Phil. Life Sci., 9 (1987), 79-93, on pp. 79-80; Garland E. Allen, "T. H. Morgan and the Split Between Embryology and Genetics, 1910-1935" (above, n. 4), pp. 113-146.
72. The editorial change was announced in "Announcement," Amer. Breeders Mag., 4 (1913), 81-83; Roswell H. Johnson, Amer. J. Social., 20 (1914). This article is noted in the J. Hered., 5 (1914), 388. For more on hereditarian thought in American eugenics after 1915, see David A. Valone and Kathy J. Cooke, "Nature and Nurture in Eugenics Past and Present," in David Magnus and Alva Butcher, eds., The New Genetic Technology (Melbourne, Fla.: Krieger Press, forthcoming).
73. The editorial change was announced in "Announcement," Amer. Breeders Mag., 4 (1913), 81-83; Roswell H. Johnson, Amer. J. Social., 20 (1914). This article is noted in the J. Hered., 5 (1914), 388. For more on hereditarian thought in American eugenics after 1915, see David A. Valone and Kathy J. Cooke, "Nature and Nurture in Eugenics Past and Present," in David Magnus and Alva Butcher, eds., The New Genetic Technology (Melbourne, Fla.: Krieger Press, forthcoming).
74. The editorial change was announced in "Announcement," Amer. Breeders Mag., 4 (1913), 81-83; Roswell H. Johnson, Amer. J. Social., 20 (1914). This article is noted in the J. Hered., 5 (1914), 388. For more on hereditarian thought in American eugenics after 1915, see David A. Valone and Kathy J. Cooke, "Nature and Nurture in Eugenics Past and Present," in David Magnus and Alva Butcher, eds., The New Genetic Technology (Melbourne, Fla.: Krieger Press, forthcoming).
75. The editorial change was announced in "Announcement," Amer. Breeders Mag., 4 (1913), 81-83; Roswell H. Johnson, Amer. J. Social., 20 (1914). This article is noted in the J. Hered., 5 (1914), 388. For more on hereditarian thought in American eugenics after 1915, see David A. Valone and Kathy J. Cooke, "Nature and Nurture in Eugenics Past and Present," in David Magnus and Alva Butcher, eds., The New Genetic Technology (Melbourne, Fla.: Krieger Press, forthcoming).
76. Pauly, "Essay Review: The Eugenics Industry" (above, n. 3), p. 141.