War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Cre

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2014 7:29 pm

PART THREE: Newgenics

CHAPTER 18: From Ashes to Aftermath


On January 17, 1945, as the Russian army approached Auschwitz, Mengele went from office to office methodically gathering his research materials. "He came into my office without a word," recounted pathologist Martina Puzyna. "He took all my papers, put them into two boxes, and had them taken outside to a waiting car." Mengele and the documents fled first to Gross-Rosen concentration camp, and then into Czechoslovakia. There he joined up with Hans Kahler, a close friend, coauthor and one of Verschuer's twins researchers. The Russians liberated Auschwitz on January 27, at about 3 P.M., and Mengele's horrors were quickly discovered. International commissions listed him as a war criminal. But Mengele slipped through the Allied manhunt and eventually escaped to South America. [1]

Even as the Allies closed in, Verschuer still hoped he and Hitler's Reich would prevail in its war against the Jews. Just months before Mengele abandoned Auschwitz, Verschuer published part of a lecture proclaiming, "The present war is also called a war of races when one considers the fight with World Jewry .... The political demand of our time is the new total solution [Gesamtlosung] of the Jewish problem." By the beginning of 1945, the Reich was collapsing. On February 15,1945, amid the chaos of Berlin's last stand, Verschuer found two trucks with which to ship his lab equipment, library, and several boxes of records to his family home in Solz. [2]

Nazi eugenicists continued their cover-up, in progress since the Normandy invasion. On March 12, 1945, Hans Nachtsheim, assistant director at the Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics, wrote Verschuer in Solz. "A mass of documents have been left here which should be or have to be destroyed should the enemy ever come close to here .... We should not choose a moment ... too late to destroy them." [3] In the first days of May, the Reich was reduced to rubble and der Fiihrer had killed himself. [4] Nazism and its eugenics were defeated. But now its architects and adherents would reinvent its past.

In April of 1946, the military occupation newspaper in Berlin, Die Neue Zeitung, published an article on various doctors who had fled Germany, and followed it up on May 3 with specific accusations against Verschuer. In the article, Robert Havemann, a communist and chemist who had resisted the Nazis, expressed out loud what many knew. He openly accused Verschuer of using Mengele in Auschwitz to obtain blood samples and eyeballs from whole murdered families. [5]

A nervous Verschuer reacted at once. He sent a sworn statement to Otto Hahn, the occupation-appointed administrator of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes, insisting that he had always opposed racial concepts. "Even before 1933," averred Verschuer, "but also after, I took personal risks and attacked, as a scientist, in speeches and in writing, the race concept of the Nazis .... I argued against attributing values to races, I warned against the high estimation of the Nordic race, and I condemned the misuse of the results of anthropology and genetics to support a materialistic and racial point of view of life and history." [6]

He went on to concede his relationship with Mengele, referring to him only as "Dr. M.," and insisting it was totally innocent. Verschuer stated, "A post-doc of my former Frankfurt Institute, Dr. M., was sent against his will to the hospital of the concentration camp in Auschwitz. All who knew him learned from him how unhappy he was about this, and how he tried over and over again to be sent to the front, unfortunately without success. Of his work we learned that he tried to be a physician and help the sick.... [7]

"After I went to Berlin [from Frankfurt]," Verschuer continued, "I began research on the individual specificity of the serum proteins and the question of their heredity .... For these experiments I needed blood samples of people of different geographic background .... At that time my former post-doc Dr. M. visited me and offered to obtain such blood samples for me within the context of his medical activity in the camp Auschwitz. In this manner I received -- during this time, certainly not regularly -- a few parcels of 20-30 blood samples of 5-10 mls." [8]

Verschuer then asked Hahn to give him a character reference, and even drafted a statement for Hahn to sign: "Professor von Verschuer is an internationally known scientist who has kept away from all political activity .... Professor von Verschuer had nothing to do with the errors and misuses of the Nazis, by which his scientific field was particularly hit. He kept his distance from them and, whenever he was confronted by them, he criticized them courageously." Hahn would not sign such a document. [9]

So Verschuer sought support from his allies in American eugenics. Shortly after Havemann's expose, Verschuer wrote to Paul Popenoe in Los Angeles, hoping to reestablish cooperative ties. On July 25, Popenoe wrote back, "It was indeed a pleasure to hear from you again. I have been very anxious about my colleagues in Germany .... I suppose sterilization has been discontinued in Germany?" Popenoe offered tidbits about various American eugenic luminaries and then sent various eugenic publications. In a separate package, Popenoe sent some cocoa, coffee and other goodies. [10]

Verschuer wrote back, "Your very friendly letter of 7/25 gave me a great deal of pleasure and you have my heartfelt thanks for it. The letter builds another bridge between your and my scientific work; I hope that this bridge will never again collapse but rather make possible valuable mutual enrichment and stimulation." Seeking American bona fides, Verschuer tried to make sure his membership in the American Eugenics Society was still active. "In 1940, I was invited to become a member of the American Eugenics Society," Verschuer wrote. "Now that this calamitous war has ended, I hope that this membership can be continued. I would be grateful if you might make a gesture in this matter. In this context, I would like to mention that in recent months a former employee, a person devoid of character, has made extremely defamatory statements about me, which have also found their way into the American press. Therefore, it is possible that persons who do not know me better might have formed a wrong opinion of me. You will surely understand that it is important to me that any damage to my reputation be repaired and I would be very grateful for your kind help in doing so." [11]

Verschuer wrote again at the end of September 1946, requesting Popenoe's help. Because Verschuer was considered part of the Nazi medical murder apparatus, the Americans had halted his further work. "Since I wrote you," said Verschuer, "I have learned that the American military government does not intend to permit the continuation of my scientific work. This attitude can only be due to the spread of false information about me and my work. I have regularly sent you all of my scientific publications and you have known me for many years through correspondence. Therefore, may I ask for two things? 1. For a letter of recommendation from yourself and other American scientists who know me, stating that you know me as a serious scientific researcher and that you value my continued scientific work; 2. I ask you and other American geneticists and eugenicists who know me to undertake steps with the American military government in Germany to bring about the granting of permission for me to continue my life's work as a scientific researcher. It is my urgent wish that I be able to rebuild genetic and eugenic science from the ruins we stand upon in every area in Germany, a science that -- free of the misuse of past years -- may again attain international renown." [12]

Popenoe, who had also been corresponding with Lenz, was eager to be helpful, but uncomfortable standing up for an accused Nazi doctor. "I am distressed to hear that you may not be allowed to go ahead with your scientific work," Popenoe replied to Verschuer on November 7, 1946, "but it is hard for me to see how any of us over here could give any evidence that would be of value to you, even if we knew where to send it. Of course we could all testify that your scientific work before the war was objective and maintained very high standards. But if you have been 'denazified,' as I take to be the case from what you say, it was certainly not for that work, which is the only work I know about. None of us over here knows anything about what was going on in Germany from about 1939 onwards, but I suppose the action taken against you is due to your prominence in public life, as the successor of Eugen Fischer (who has been attacked bitterly in this country), etc. I could say nothing that would be pertinent, because I don't know anything about it. I am being perfectly frank with you, as you see .... But as it stands now, all I could say is: 'All his work that I saw before the war was of high quality,' and the authorities would presumably reply, 'That has nothing to do with it.''' [13]

Correspondence bounced back and forth between the two until Popenoe finally sent a brief letter of endorsement, limited to the prewar years. Verschuer then asked if he could be invited to join the faculty of an American university. "I have inquired from some leaders in American genetics," Popenoe replied, "and they all feel that it will be a long time before any university here is ready to offer a position to any German scientist who occupied an important position in Germany during the war years. As you perhaps know, our army brought over a number of physicists and other specialists, and their presence in this country has led to many protests and recriminations. I think it is out of the question, therefore, for you to look forward to any scientific activity here in the next few years -- much as I myself should like to have a visit from you." [14]

Throughout late 1947 and 1948, Verschuer continued corresponding with leading eugenicists and geneticists at American institutions, seeking to reestablish academic exchanges and professional standing. He submitted one of his older books for a new review by the American Eugenics Society. Popenoe promptly assured he would review it in a new eugenic publication called Family Life, and then bemoaned the loss of German eugenic publications. "It is sad to think," Popenoe wrote, "that the scientific journals, and even the publishing houses that produced them no longer exist!" Verschuer also began exchanges with scientists at the University of Michigan and the University of Minnesota. These were received with goodwill and even enthusiasm. When Nazi agitator C. M. Goethe of California received Verschuer's letter, he replied that he was "thrilled." [15]

While Verschuer was busy reestablishing his support in America, he was rehabilitating himself in occupied Germany as well. After making his accusations public, Havemann organized a committee of Kaiser Wilhelm Institute scientists to examine the evidence against Verschuer. They ruled that Verschuer indeed had engaged in despicable acts in concert with Mengele at Auschwitz, but their report was kept secret for fifteen years. In 1949, while the first report remained under lock and key, a second board of inquiry was urged to reexamine the issue. This second board unanimously ruled that he had committed no transgressions involving Auschwitz, and indeed that "Verschuer has all the qualities which qualify him to be a researcher and teacher of academic youth." Virtually comparing Verschuer to Christ being crucified, the esteemed panel of German scientists declared they could not sit in judgment of him as "Pharisees" (Pharisaerhaft). [16]

Soon, Verschuer once again became a respected scientist in Germany and around the world. In 1949, he became a corresponding member of the newly formed American Society of Human Genetics, organized by American eugenicists and geneticists. Hermann Joseph Muller of Texas, a Rockefeller fellow who had worked at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research during 1932, served as the first president of the American Society of Human Genetics. [17]

In the fall of 1950, the University of Munster offered Verschuer a position at its new Institute of Human Genetics, where he later became a dean. At about that time he helped found the Mainz Academy of Sciences and Literature, which later published his books, including one on cancer. In the early and mid-1950s, Verschuer became an honorary member of numerous prestigious societies, including the Italian Society of Genetics, the Anthropological Society of Vienna, and the Japanese Society for Human Genetics. [18]

A later president of the American Society of Human Genetics, Kurt Hirschhorn, remembered his own encounter with Verschuer in about 1958. An Austrian Jew, Hirschhorn had come to the United States as a refugee during the Hitler era. Hirschhorn became a genetic researcher and, while on a fellowship to Europe, he had visited Verschuer at the University of Munster. "Verschuer was partly responsible for the whole extermination," Hirschhorn related emphatically during a February 2003 interview. "He was the one that gave the Nazis the pseudo-genetic rationale to destroy the Jews and Gypsies. He was part of the organization [American Society of Human Genetics] in 1949 because in those days ... it was all covered up. No one really knew. But I'll never forget. I was sitting in his university office in Munster as a young man, and he asked a lot of personal questions about my background, and so forth, until he found out I was Jewish. I knew who he was by that time. I took a great deal of pleasure in telling him that I came to the United States from Austria, and when I turned eighteen, I enlisted in the army and went over there and fought the Nazis -- and went right through Munster. He was taken aback." [19]

In the 1960s, Frankfurt prosecutors were obliged by international pressure to continue their hunt for Nazis. The same prosecutors who investigated Mengele examined his relationship to Verschuer but concluded there was no connection between the two. Benno Muller-Hill, a German geneticist, later investigated Verschuer's activities. Muller-Hill reviewed Verschuer's many written defenses, including the one in which Verschuer claimed that while in Auschwitz, Mengele "tried to be a physician and help the sick." Writing in the journal History and Philosophy of Science, Muller- Hill described Verschuer's account as "Lies, lies, lies." [20]

Verschuer was never prosecuted. In 1969, he was killed in an automobile accident. But the legacy of his torturous medicine, twisted eugenics and conscious war crimes lives on.

***

As the ashes of Jews and Gypsies wafted into the air of Europe and were dumped into the Vistula River coursing through the heart of Europe, so their victimization flowed into the mainstream of modern medical literature. Medical literature evolves from decade to decade. As American eugenic pseudoscience thoroughly infused the scientific journals of the first three decades of the twentieth century, Nazi-era eugenics placed its unmistakable stamp on the medical literature of the twenties, thirties and forties.

The writings of Nazi doctors not only permeated the spectrum of German medical journals, they also appeared prominently in American medical literature. These writings included the results of war crime experimentation at concentration camps. Verschuer's own bibliographies, circa 1939, enumerated a long list of Nazi scientific discoveries, authored by him, his colleagues and assistants, including Mengele. Such scientific publication continued right through the last days of the Third Reich. The topics included everything from rheumatism, heart disease, eye pathology, blood studies, brain function, tuberculosis, and the gastric system to endless permutations of hereditary pathology. [21] Much of it was sham science. Some of it was astute. Both types found their way into the medical literature of the fifties and sixties. Hence, Nazi victimization contributed significantly to many of the modern medical advances of the postwar period.

For example, the Nazis at Dachau, using ice water tests, were the first to experimentally lower human body temperature to 79.7 degrees Fahrenheit -- this to discover the best means of reviving Luftwaffe pilots downed over the North Sea. Nazi scientists learned that the most effective method was rapid rewarming in hot water. Nuremberg testimony revealed that Dr. Sigmund Rascher, who oversaw these heinous hypothermia tests, prominently reported his breakthroughs at a 1942 medical symposium with a paper entitled "Medical Problems Arising from Sea and Winter." [22]

After the war, Rascher's conclusions were gleaned from Nazi reports and reluctantly adopted by British and American air-sea rescue services. A Nuremberg war crimes report on Nazi medicine summed up the extreme discomfort of Allied military doctors: "Dr. Rascher, although he wallowed in blood ... and in obscenity ... nevertheless appears to have settled the question of what to do for people in shock from exposure to cold .... The method of rapid and intensive rewarming in hot water ... should be immediately adopted as the treatment of choice by the Air-Sea Rescue Services of the United States Armed Forces." [23]

Rascher reported to Hubertus Strughold, director of the Luftwaffe Institute for Aviation Medicine. Strughold attended the Berlin medical conference that reviewed Rascher's revelations. A Nazi scientist wrote at the time that there were no "objections whatsoever to the experiments requested by the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe to be conducted at the Rascher experimental station in the Dachau concentration camp. If possible, Jews or prisoners held in quarantine are to be used." [24]

After the war, Strughold was smuggled into the United States under the infamous Operation Paperclip project, which offered Nazi scientists refuge and immunity in exchange for their scientific expertise. Once in the U.S., Strughold became the leader in American aviation medicine. His work was directly and indirectly responsible for numerous aeromedical advances, including the ability to walk effortlessly in a pressurized air cabin -- now taken for granted -- but which was also developed as a result of Dachau experiments. He was called "the father of U.S. Space Medicine," and Brooks Air Force Base in Texas named its Aeromedical Library in his honor. A celebratory mural picturing Strughold was commissioned by Ohio State University. When Jewish and Holocaust-survivor groups, led by the Anti-Defamation League, discovered the honors extended to Strughold, they objected. Ohio State University removed its mural in 1993. The U.S. Air Force changed its library's name in 1995. [25]

In 2003, the state of New Mexico still listed Strughold as a member of its International Space Hall of Fame. But on February 13, 2003, when this reporter asked about their honoree's Nazi connection, a startled museum official declared, "Ifhe was doing experiments at Dachau, it would give one pause why anyone would ever nominate him in the first place." Museum officials added they would immediately look into removing his name. [26]

Another case involved Nazi doctors Hallervorden and Spatz. In 1922, the two had successfully identified a rare and devastating brain disease caused by a genetic mutation. The disease came to be known as Hallervorden-Spatz Syndrome in their honor. During the Hitler era, while working at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, Hallervorden and Spatz furthered their research by utilizing hundreds of brains harvested from T-4 victims. Right through the 1960s, Hallervorden authored numerous influential scientific papers on the subject. For decades, the name Hallervorden-Spatz has been used by the leading medical institutions in the world, honoring the two Nazis who discovered the disorder. Thousands of articles and presentations have been made on the topic, using the name Hallervorden-Spatz. Medical investigators created an "International Registry of Patients with Hallervorden-Spatz Syndrome and Related Disorders." [27]

Leading family support groups involved with the disorder have also taken their organizational names from the two Nazi doctors. But the news about Hallervorden and Spatz's Nazi past recently became known to many in the field. In 1993, two doctors expressed the view of many in a letter to the editor of the journal Neurology. "It is also time to stop using the term, 'Hallervorden-Spatz disease' whose only purpose is to honor Hallervorden by using his name." Another journal, Lancet, expressed a similar view in 1996, describing the continued honorary use of the name "Hallervorden-Spatz" as "indefensible" because "both Hallervorden and Spatz were closely associated with the Nazi extermination policies." [28]

In January of 2003, the Hallervorden-Spatz Syndrome Association renamed itself the NBIA Disorders Association; the acronym was derived from "neurodegeneration with brain iron accumulation." Just after the announcement, the newly-renamed association's president, Patricia Wood, told this reporter that the name change was certainly due to the legacy of Nazi experiments attached to Hallervorden and Spatz. The association's website confirmed that the name change was driven by "concerns about the unethical activities of Dr. Hallervorden (and perhaps also Dr. Spatz) involving euthanasia of mentally ill patients during World War II." [29]

The National Institutes of Health also adopted the Hallervorden-Spatz appellation for its research into the disease. NIH convened a two-day workshop on the disorder in May of 2000. As of March 2003, the National Institutes of Health continues to maintain a Hallervorden-Spatz Disease Information web page. On February 13, 2003, an NIH spokesman said that the institute was becoming aware of the Hallervorden-Spatz Nazi legacy and monitoring name changes in the field. "It is unfortunate that the two people who have discovered and researched this disease have undergone political scrutiny," the spokesman said, "but I don't see any name change at this time." The spokesman stressed that the problem was mere "political scrutiny." The spokesman did confirm that the institute would adjust its website's search engine to permit the term "NBIA" to reach its Hallervorden-Spatz information sites. [30]

Nazi medical victims suffered torture to substantially advance Reich scientific knowledge and modern medicine. Then the murdered specimens were delivered to the likes of Verschuer and Hallervorden and their eugenic institutions. But then what? After the war, victims' remains were transferred to or maintained by some of Germany's leading medical research facilities. Hence the exterminated continued to provide organic service to German medicine. In 1989, the Max Planck Institute for Brain Research, the successor to Hallervorden's center, admitted that it still possessed thirty tissue samples in its files. That same year, tissue samples and skeletons were also found in universities in Tubingen and Heidelberg. In 1997, investigators confirmed that the University of Vienna's Institute of Neurobiology still housed four hundred Holocaust victims' brains. The University of Vienna had functioned as part of the Reich after Austria's union with Germany in 1938. Similar discoveries have been made elsewhere in former Nazi-occupied Europe. [31]

In many cases, local officials, acting nearly a half-century after the fact, have elected to cremate the remains respectfully and bury them in memorial cemeteries. At one such burial service, conducted by Eberhard-Karls University in Tubingen, Professor Emeritus of Neuropathology Jurgen Peiffer spoke solemnly. "We must remember," he eulogized, "that there is a dangerous possibility that we may bury our bad consciences together with these tissue remains, thereby avoiding the necessity of remembering the past .... I know that there are those who think we are acting out of faintheartedness and anxiety; some ask whether 'dust to dust' really applies to glass slides and whether this act is the appropriate answer?" He answered his own question when he read aloud the inscription on the tablet. [32]

Displaced, oppressed, maltreated,
Victims of despotism or blind justice,
They first found their rest here.
Science, which did not respect
Their rights and dignity during life,
Sought even to use their bodies after death.
Be this stone a reminder to the living. [33]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:02 pm

PART 1 OF 2

CHAPTER 19: American Legacy

America's retreat from eugenics was precipitated by the convergence of two forces: Hitler's ascent in Germany and the climactic exit of the pseudoscience's founding fathers from Cold Spring Harbor. But it was not a moment of truth that finally convinced the Carnegie Institution and the eugenic establishment to turn away from their quest for a superior Nordic race. Rather, the end was an inexorably slow process devoid of mea culpas, one that saw the major players withdraw only with great reluctance.

The real father of eugenics was of course Charles Benedict Davenport. Galton was merely the grandfather. It was Davenport who twisted Galton's stillborn Victorian vision into self-righteous social-biological action. Eugenics always risked veering completely out of control. It did in Nazi Germany.

During the twelve-year Hitler regime, Davenport never wavered in his scientific solidarity with Nazi race hygiene. Nor did he modify his view that the racially robust were entitled to rule the earth. But Germany's triumph in the thirties wielding his principles did not bring Davenport the personal fulfillment he craved. During all his years at the pinnacle of international eugenic science, Davenport remained the same sad, embittered, intellectually defensive man who had first embarked upon a biological crusade at the turn of the century. As one lifelong friend remembered, Davenport remained "a lone man, living a life of his own in the midst of others, feeling out of place in almost any crowd." Davenport could acquire international celebrity, but never personal happiness. [1]

Correction. Davenport did find personal joy in one thing: his children, especially his son Charlie, born January 8, 1911. Little Charlie unlocked the affectionate quality guarded deep within men like Davenport. Proudly, Davenport would call out through the neighborhood for Charlie to come back for dinner after a day's play. A family friend remembers the intense "pride and devotion" Davenport felt when it came to little Charlie. [2]

The same year Charlie was born, Davenport published his cornerstone volume, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, which explained the biological basis of the superior family. Even as millions were devastated by crippling diseases, such as tuberculosis and polio, Davenport's answer was to blame their ancestry, or more precisely, unsound protoplasm. "It is an incomplete statement," asserted Davenport's book, "that the tubercle bacillus is the cause of tuberculosis, or alcohol the cause of delerium tremens or syphilis the cause of paresis. Experience proves it .... In general, the causes of disease as given in the pathologies are not the real causes. They are due to inciting conditions acting on susceptible protoplasm. The real cause of death of any person is his inability to cope with the disease germ or other untoward conditions." Fatal epidemics did not kill, preached Davenport, only defective germ plasm. [3]

On the evening of September 5, 1916, Davenport came face to face with his own dogma. That night, young Charlie was stricken by polio. Death entered the Davenport household quickly; within hours of showing symptoms, Charlie was dead. The next day the boy was interred in the family plot of a Brooklyn cemetery. Davenport never recovered from the loss. A close associate recounted a broken man, a man absolutely "prostrated." After the funeral, both he and his wife retired to a sanitarium for several weeks. When he emerged, Davenport became even more cloistered and relentless in his work. [4]

For years, Davenport uncompromisingly continued to seek out the imperfect, the inferior, the weak and the susceptible, demanding their elimination. In 1934, at age sixty-eight, after a three-decade crusade, Davenport retired from the Carnegie Institution. Officials at the Washington office allocated a small room at the Eugenics Record Office to him, along with clerical help. On June 28, he delivered his final official address, "Reminiscences of Thirty Years." The next day, Davenport began the remainder of his joyless life. The letter he dictated to his secretary almost stoically informed the Carnegie Institution: "I am now getting settled in a corner of the south room, second floor, of the Eugenics Record Office, and am looking forward to a chance of uninterrupted research." [5]

Davenport of course continued to be active as the elder statesman of eugenics into the 1940s, even as the Nazis assumed international leadership and swept Davenport's principles into a brutal war. As late as 1943, Davenport was protesting, in Eugenical News, the widespread opposition to stern racial policies. But during his retirement years, Davenport mostly busied himself with continuous private investigations of mice, children, and other organisms. [6]

In January of 1944, Davenport became fixated on a killer whale that had beached itself off Long Island. He was determined to have its skull to exhibit at his new whaling museum at Cold Spring Harbor. Night after night, in a steam-filled but uninsulated shed, Davenport boiled the whale's head in a great cauldron. It was a slow process. The enormous orca was tough and resistant. Even as the weather became more and more brutal, Davenport would not give up. He fought the elements and the whale skull for two weeks, determined to beat them both. He became weaker and weaker. [7]

Colleagues remembered that one night Davenport appeared at an ERO staff meeting reeking of blubber. He sat off by himself, seventy-eight years old and still unshakable. Shortly thereafter, Davenport came down with a severe case of pneumonia. On February 18, 1944, Davenport died, not of old age, but of germs. [8]

***

The Carnegie Institution continued to back eugenics long after its executives became convinced it was a worthless nonscience based on shabby data, and years after they concluded that Harry Hamilton Laughlin himself was a sham.

Laughlin and eugenics in general had become the butt of jokes and the object of reprehension as far back as 1912, when the world learned that its proponents planned to sterilize millions in America and millions more in other nations. Scientists from other disciplines ridiculed the movement as well. Despite the widespread derision, eugenics persevered as a science under siege, battling back for years, fortified by its influential patrons, the power of prejudice and the big money of Carnegie. But the Carnegie Institution's patience began to erode as early as 1922, when Laughlin became a public font of racist ideology during the Congressional immigration restriction hearings. [9]

Carnegie president John C. Merriam continued to be embarrassed by Laughlin's immigration rantings throughout the 1920s. But he tolerated them for the greater agenda of the eugenics movement. However, Laughlin struck a particular nerve in the spring of 1928, while Merriam and a U.S. government official were touring Mexican archaeology sites. During the tour, Mexican newspapers splashed a story that Merriam's Carnegie Institution was proposing that Congress severely limit immigration of Mexicans into the United States. It was Laughlin who prompted the story. [10]

Merriam immediately instructed Davenport to muzzle Laughlin. "He [Merriam] feels especially that you ought not go further," Davenport wrote Laughlin, "... helping the [House] committee on a definition of who may be acceptable as immigrants to the United States from Spanish America. The Spanish Americans are very sensitive on this matter .... It will not do for the Carnegie Institution of Washington, or its officers, to take sides in this political question." Anticipating Laughlin's predictable argument, Davenport continued, "I know you regard it properly as more than a political question and as a eugenical question -- but it is in politics now, and that means that the institution has to preserve a neutrality." [11]

Yet Laughlin did nothing to restrict his vocal activities. By the end of 1928, Merriam convened an internal committee to review the value of the Eugenics Record Office. In early February of 1929, the committee inspected the Cold Spring Harbor facility and concluded that the accumulation of index cards, trait records and family trees amounted to little more than clutter. They "are of value only to the individual compiling them," the committee wrote, and even then "in most cases they decrease in importance in direct proportion to their age." Some of the files were almost two decades old, and all of them reflected nineteenth-century record-keeping habits now obsolete. The mass of records yielded much private information about individuals and their families, but little hard knowledge on heredity. [12]

Nonetheless, with Davenport and Laughlin lobbying to continue their work, the panel rejected any "radical move, such as relegating them [the files] to dead storage." Instead, Carnegie officials decided a closer affiliation with the Eugenics Research Association would help the ERO achieve some approximation of genuine science. Hence the Carnegie Institution would continue to operate the ERO under Carnegie's Department of Genetics. [13]

Genetics, however, was not the emphasis at Cold Spring Harbor. Laughlin and his ERO continued their race-based political agitation unabated. Moreover, once Hitler rose to power in 1933, Laughlin forged the ERO, the ERA and Eugenical News into a triumvirate of pro-Nazi agitation. But things changed when Davenport retired in June of 1934. Laughlin lost his greatest internal sponsor, and with Davenport out of power, Carnegie officials in Washington quickly began to move against Laughlin. They pointedly questioned his race science and indeed the whole concept of eugenics in a world where the genuine science of genetics was now emerging.

Carnegie officials first focused on Eugenical News, which had become a compendium of American raceology and Nazi propaganda. Although Eugenical News was published out of the Carnegie facilities at the ERO, by a Carnegie scientist, and functioned as the official voice of Carnegie's eugenic operations, the Carnegie Institution did not legally own or control Eugenical News. It was Laughlin's enterprise. Carnegie wanted an immediate change and made this clear to Laughlin. [14]

Laughlin became very protective. He had always chosen what would and would not run in Eugenical News, and he even authored much of the text. In a September 11, 1934, letter to Davenport's replacement, Albert F. Blakeslee, Laughlin rebuffed attempts to corral Eugenical News, defensively insisting, "In this formative period of making eugenics into a science, the ideals of the Eugenics Record Office, of the Eugenics Research Association, of the International Congresses and Exhibits of Eugenics, and of the Eugenical News are identical. I feel that the position of the Eugenical News as a scientific journal is quite unique, in that eugenics is a new science, and that the trend and rate of its development, and its ultimate character, will be influenced substantially by the Eugenical News." [15]

Laughlin made clear to Carnegie officials that they simply could not control Eugenical News, because it was legally the property of the Eugenics Research Association -- and Laughlin was the secretary of the ERA. To drive home his point, a Laughlin memo defiantly included typed-in excerpts from committee reports and letters to the printer, plus sample issues going back to 1916 -- all demonstrating the ERA's legal authority over Eugenical News. "I feel that the Institution should go into the matter thoroughly," insisted Laughlin, "and make a clean-cut and definite ruling concerning the relationship of the Carnegie Institution (represented by the Eugenics Record Office) to the Eugenical News." [16]

By now, Carnegie felt it was again time to formally revisit the worth of Laughlin and eugenics. A new advisory committee was assembled, spearheaded by archaeologist A.v. Kidder. He began assembling information on Laughlin's activities, and Laughlin was only too happy to cooperate, almost boastfully inundating Kidder with folder after folder of material. With Davenport in retirement, Laughlin undoubtedly felt he was heir to Cold Spring Harbor's throne. He sent Washington a passel of demands about revamping Cold Spring Harbor's administrative structure, renovations of its property and new budget requests for 1935. [17]

Kidder was not encouraging. He wrote back, "I think I ought to tell you that I feel quite certain that the administrative and financial changes which you advocate are extremely unlikely, in my opinion, to be carried into effect in 1935." Kidder was virtually besieged with Laughlin's written and printed submissions to support his requests for a sweeping expansion of the ERO. On November 1, 1934, Kidder acknowledged, "I am at present reviewing all the correspondence and notes in my possession relative to the whole Cold Spring Harbor situation and in the course of a few days I shall prepare a memorandum for Dr. Merriam." But within two days, Kidder conceded that he was overwhelmed. "I have read all the material you sent me with close attention," he wrote Laughlin. "I have also read all the Year Book reports of the Eugenics Record Office .... I am now trying to correlate all this information in what passes for my brain." [18]

On Sunday, June 16 and Monday, June 17, 1935, the advisory committee led by Kidder visited Cold Spring Harbor, touring both the ERO and the adjacent Carnegie Station for Experimental Evolution. Laughlin's residence, provided by the Carnegie Institution, was one of the buildings in the compound, and Mrs. Laughlin graciously prepared Sunday lunch and Monday dinner for the delegation. The men found her hospitality delightful, and Laughlin's presentations exhaustive. But after a thorough examination, the advisory committee concluded that the Eugenics Record Office was a worthless endeavor from top to bottom, yielding no real data, and that eugenics itself was not science but rather a social propaganda campaign with no discernible value to the science of either genetics or human heredity. [19]

Almost a million ERO records assembled on individuals and families were "unsatisfactory for the scientific study of human genetics," the advisory committee explained, "because so large a percentage of the questions concern ... traits, such as 'self-respect,' 'holding a grudge,' 'loyalty,' [and] 'sense of humor,' which can seldom truly be known to anyone outside an individual's close associates; and which will hardly ever be honestly recorded, even were they measurable, by an associate or by the individual concerned." [20]

While much ERO attention was devoted to meaningless personality traits, key physical traits were being recorded so sloppily by "untrained persons" and "casually interested individuals" that the advisory committee concluded this data was also "relatively worthless for genetic study." The bottom line: a million index cards, some 35,000 files, and innumerable other records merely occupied "a great amount of the small space available ... and, worst of all, they do not appear to us really to permit satisfactory use of the data." [21]

The advisory committee recommended that all genealogical and eugenic tracking activities cease, and that the cards be placed in storage until whatever bits of legitimate heredity data they contained could be properly extracted and analyzed using an IBM punch card system. A million index cards had accumulated during some two decades, but because of the project's starting date in 1910 and Laughlin's unscientific methodology, the data had never been analyzed by IBM's data processing system. This fact only solidified the advisory committee's conclusion that the Eugenics Record Office was engaged in mere biological gossip backed up by reams of worthless documents. The advisory committee doubted that the demographic muddle would "ever be of value," and added its hope that "never again ... should records be allowed to bank up to such an extent that they cannot be kept currently analyzed." [22]

The advisory committee vigorously urged that "The Eugenics Record Office should engage in no new undertaking; and that all current activities should be discontinued save for Dr. Laughlin's work in preparation of his final report upon the Race Horse investigation." Moreover, the advisory committee emphasized, "The Eugenics Record Office should devote its entire energies to pure research divorced from all forms of propaganda and the urging or sponsoring of programs for social reform or race betterment such as sterilization, birth-control, inculcation of race or national consciousness, restriction of immigration, etc. Hence it might be well for the personnel of the Office to discontinue connection with the Eugenical News." Committee members concluded, "Eugenics is by generally accepted definition and understanding not a science." They insisted that any further involvement with Cold Spring Harbor be devoid of the word eugenics and instead gravitate to the word genetics. [23]

Geneticist L. C. Dunn, a member of the advisory committee traveling in Europe at the time, added his opinion in a July 3, 1935, letter, openly copied to Laughlin. Dunn was part of a growing school of geneticists demanding a clean break between eugenics and genetics. "With genetics," advised Dunn, "its relations have always been close, although there have been distinct signs of cleavage in recent years, chiefly due to the feeling on the part of many geneticists that eugenical research was not always activated by purely disinterested scientific motives, but was influenced by social and political considerations tending to bring about too rapid application of incompletely proved theses. In the United States its [the eugenics movement's] relations with medicine have never been close, the applications having more often been made through sociology than through medicine, although the basic problems involved are biological and medical ones." [24]

Dunn wondered if it wasn't time to shut down Cold Spring Harbor altogether and move the operation to a university where such an operation could collaborate with other disciplines. "There would seem to me to be no peculiar advantages in the Cold Spring Harbor location." As it stood, '''Eugenics' has come to mean an effort to foster a program of social improvement rather than an effort to discover facts." In that regard, Dunn made a clear comparison to Nazi excesses. "I have just observed in Germany," he wrote, "some of the consequences of reversing the order as between program and discovery. The incomplete knowledge of today, much of it based on a theory of the state, which has been influenced by the racial, class and religious prejudices of the group in power, has been embalmed in law, and the avenues to improvement in the techniques of improving the population have been completely closed." [25]

Dunn's July 3 letter continued with even more pointed comparisons to Nazi Germany. "The genealogical record offices have become powerful agencies of the [German] state," he wrote, "and medical judgments even when possible, appear to be subservient to political purposes. Apart from the injustices in individual cases, and the loss of personal liberty, the solution of the whole eugenic problem by fiat eliminates any rational solution by free competition of ideas and evidence. Scientific progress in general seems to have a very dark future. Although much of this is due to the dictatorship, it seems to illustrate the dangers which all programs run which are not continually responsive to new knowledge, and should certainly strengthen the resolve which we generally have in the U.S. to keep all agencies which contribute to such questions as free as possible from commitment to fixed programs." [26]

Carnegie's advisory committee could not have been more clear: eugenics was a dangerous sham, the ERO was a worthless and expensive undertaking devoid of scientific value, and Laughlin was purely political. But as Hitler rose and the situation of the Jews in Europe worsened, and the plight of refugees seeking entry into the United 'States became ever more desperate, the Carnegie Institution elected to ignore its own findings about Cold Spring Harbor and continue its economic and political support for Laughlin and his enterprises. Shortly after Merriam reviewed the advisory committee's conclusions, the Reich passed the Nuremberg Laws in September of 1935. Those of Jewish ancestry were stripped of their civil rights. Laughlin, Eugenical News and the Cold Spring Harbor eugenics establishment propagandized that the laws were merely sound science. Eugenical News even gave senior Nazi leaders a platform to justify their decrees. The Carnegie Institution still took no action against its Cold Spring Harbor enterprise.

In 1936, the brutal Nazi concentration camps multiplied. Systematic Jewish pauperization accelerated. Jews continued fleeing Germany in terror, seeking entry anywhere. But American consulates refused them visas. In the face of the humanitarian crisis, Laughlin continued to advise the State Department and Congress to enforce stiff eugenic immigration barriers against Jews and other desperate refugees. The Carnegie Institution still took no action against its Cold Spring Harbor enterprise. [27]

In 1937, Nazi street violence escalated and Germany increasingly vowed to extend its master race to all of Europe -- and to completely cleanse the continent of Jews. Laughlin, Eugenical News and the eugenics establishment continued to agitate in support of the Reich's goals and methods, and even distributed the anti-Semitic Nazi film, Erbkrank. The Carnegie Institution still took no action against its Cold Spring Harbor enterprise. [28]

In 1938, as hundreds of thousands of new refugees appeared, an emergency intergovernmental conference was convened at Evian, France. It was fruitless. Germany then decreed that all Jewish property was to be registered, a prelude to comprehensive liquidation and seizure. In November, Kristallnacht shocked the world. Nazi agitation was now spreading into every country in Europe. Austria had been absorbed into the Reich. Hitler threatened to devour other neighboring countries as well. Laughlin, Eugenical News and the eugenics establishment still applauded the Hitler campaign. By the end of 1938, however, the Carnegie Institution realized it could not delay action much longer. [29]

On January 4, 1939, newly installed Carnegie president Vannevar Bush put Laughlin on notice that while his salary for the year was assured, Bush was not sure how much funding the ERO would receive -- if any. At the same time, Jews from across Europe continued to flee the Continent, many begging to enter America because no other nation would take them. In March of 1939, the Senate Immigration Committee asked Bush if Laughlin could appear for another round of testimony to support restrictive "remedial legislation." Bush permitted Laughlin to appear, and only asked him to limit his unsupportable scientific assertions. But Laughlin was not prohibited from again promoting eugenic and racial barriers as the best basis for immigration policy. Indeed, the Carnegie president reminded him, "One has to express opinions when he appears in this sort of inquiry, and I believe that yours will be found to be a conservative and well-founded estimate of the situation facing the Committee." Bush added that he had personally reviewed Laughlin's prior testimony and felt it was "certainly well handled and valuable." [30]

After testifying, Laughlin received a postcard at the Carnegie Institution in Washington from an irate citizen in Los Angeles. "As an American descendant of Americans for over 300 years, I'd like to learn what prompted you to supply [the Senate Immigration Committee] ... with so much material straight from Hitler's original edition of Mein Kampf." [31]

At about this time, Laughlin was also permitted to testify before the Special Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the New York State Chamber of Commerce. In May of 1939, Laughlin's report, Immigration and Conquest, was published under the imprimatur of the New York State Chamber of Commerce and "Harry H. Laughlin, Carnegie Institution of Washington." The 267-page document, filled with raceological tenets, claimed that America would soon suffer "conquest by settlement and reproduction" through an infestation of defective immigrants. As a prime illustration, Laughlin offered "The Parallel Case of the House Rat," in which he traced rodent infestation from Europe to the rats' ability "to travel in sailing ships." [32]

Laughlin then explained, in a section entitled "The Jew as an Immigrant Into the United States," that Jews were being afforded too large a quota altogether because they were being improperly considered by their nationality instead of as a distinct racial type. By Laughlin's calculations, no more than six thousand Jews per year ought to be able to enter the United States under the existing national quota system -- the system he helped organize a half-decade earlier -- but many more were coming in because they were classified as German or Russian or Polish instead of Jewish. He asked that Jews in the United States "assimilate" properly and prove their "loyalty to the American institutions" was "greater than their loyalty to Jews scattered through other nations." Immigration and Conquest's precepts were in many ways identical to Nazi principles. Laughlin and the ERO proudly sent a copy to Reich Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick, as well as to other leading Nazis, including Verschuer, Lenz, Ploetz and even Rudin at a special address care of a university in occupied Czechoslovakia. [33]

In late 1938, the Carnegie Institution finally disengaged from Eugenical News. The publication became a quarterly completely under the aegis of the American Eugenics Society, published out of AES offices in Manhattan, with a new editorial committee that did not include Laughlin or any other Carnegie scientist. The first issue of the reorganized publication was circulated in March of 1939. Shortly thereafter, the Carnegie Institution formalized Laughlin's retirement, effective at the end of the year. On September 1, 1939, the Nazis invaded Poland, igniting World War II. Highly publicized atrocities against Polish Jews began at once, shocking the world. Efforts by Laughlin in the final months of 1939 to find a new sponsor for the ERO were unsuccessful. On December 31, 1939, Laughlin officially retired. The Eugenics Record Office was permanently closed the same day. [34]

Laughlin and his wife immediately moved back to Kirksville, Missouri. The last years of his life were uneventful, and he died in Kirksville on January 26, 1943. Davenport eulogized him in Eugenical News as a great man whose views were opposed by those of "a different social philosophy which is founded more on sentiment and less on a thorough analysis of the facts." Davenport saluted his protege, predicting that within a generation Laughlin's work would be "widely appreciated" for what it really was: "preservation ... from the clash of opposing ideals and instincts found in the more diverse racial or geographical groups." [35]

Strangely enough, Laughlin, the staunch defender of strong germ plasm and warrior against the feebleminded and the hereditarily defective, left no children. The family kept it a secret, but the rumor was that Laughlin himself suffered from an inherited disease that made him subject to uncontrollable seizures. These seizures had occasionally occurred in front of his colleagues at the ERO. Laughlin's condition had been discovered in the 1920s upon his return from Europe. During one episode, Laughlin reportedly drove off the road near Cold Spring Harbor and almost ran into the water. An obstruction stopped his vehicle. Laughlin nearly died that night, and his wife reportedly never allowed him to drive a car again. [36]

Among his many crusades, Laughlin may best be remembered for his antagonism toward epileptics. He claimed that epilepsy was synonymous with feeblemindedness, and that people with epilepsy did not belong in society. He fought to keep such people out of America and demanded their sterilization and even their imprisonment in segregated camps. No wonder the family kept his condition a secret. Childless and frustrated, Harry Hamilton Laughlin reportedly suffered his genetic disease in silence and died under its grip. The disease: epilepsy. [37]

***

Once Laughlin retired on December 31, 1939, Carnegie began the immediate and systematic dismantling of the ERO, abandoning three decades of support for racial eugenics. Mail addressed to the ERO, and even letters specifically addressed to Laughlin or Davenport, were not forwarded to either man. Instead, a series of standard responses were typed up for clerical staff to utilize in replying to all correspondents. The message: work at the office had been suddenly discontinued and no questions could be answered. [38]

Personal correspondents were told to contact Laughlin or Davenport directly at their home addresses. But if a letter involved even the slightest reference to eugenics or the Cold Spring Harbor installation, it was answered with a vague customized form letter. For example, on February 19, 1940, the widow of Lucien Howe sent a handwritten personal note to Davenport lamenting the news that the ERO had been discontinued. An officer of the Carnegie Institution replied for him, writing back to the aging Mrs. Howe, "Your letter of the 19th to Dr. Davenport has been turned over to me for reply" and so on. [39]

When eugenic enthusiasts earnestly mailed in their family trees or genealogical trait records, or requested copies of their files or pertinent information from them, they were deftly answered with noncommittal form letters. When a Texas man offered family information, he received a curt note, "Doctor Laughlin has resigned, and for the time being at least, the Genetics Record Office is not in a position to file and index family records." The same type of reply was mailed out time and time again. The ERO had operated under the name "Eugenics Record Office" until 1939, when Carnegie officials insisted on a cosmetic name change to "Genetics Record Office." From 1939 on, Carnegie Officials consistently referred to the ERO as the "Genetics Record Office" or sometimes simply the "Record Office," avoiding any use of the word eugenics. [40]

Letters came in for years. Carnegie officials generally acted as though they had no access to Laughlin's files and therefore could not answer specific questions. But in fact Carnegie administrators kept the files close at hand and quietly checked them in some cases. For example, when Jane Betts in Wichita asked about record #51323 on February 29, 1944, a Carnegie official quickly plucked her record out of a million files and replied about its status. With few exceptions, however, questions addressed to the Eugenics Record Office were generally answered with no real information except that the office was closed and no data was available. [41]

After World War II, when the magnitude of Hitler's eugenicide became apparent, the Carnegie Institution decided to get rid of its records. It sold the ERO building at Cold Spring Harbor but retained the rest of the facilities. Officials destroyed many of Laughlin's years-old unpublished worksheets on horse racing and breeding (an adjunct to his investigations in human heredity), but finding recipients for the rest of the ERO's enormous and controversial collection was not easy. In May of 1947, a leading heredity clinic at the University of Michigan was offered the files but wondered whether Carnegie would provide a stipend to house the materials. Carnegie would not. So Carnegie kept searching for someone to take the files. [42]

In September of 1947, a Carnegie administrator overseeing the dismantled Cold Spring Harbor operation wrote to the Dight Institute, an independent eugenic research organization at the University of Minnesota. "If any institution is interested in the records of the Genetics Record Office, I am confident that arrangements could be made ... to transfer them." But, the note added, "there is very little chance that those funds [formerly used to run the ERO] would be transferred with the records." [43]

Dight director Sheldon Reed, an ardent eugenicist, replied, "It seems a great pity to me that the work must be abandoned." As for transferring the voluminous files to Dight, Reed posed a number of questions about the size and breadth of the collection and the cost of the transfer. Dight did not want to pay any of the moving expenses. As Dight officials pondered the usefulness of a collection they termed "colossal," Reed was frank with the Carnegie Institution. "I am sorry to take up your time with this business [the many logistical questions]," he wrote, "but it may be that you are even more interested in getting rid of records than I am in obtaining them." [44]

Eventually, Carnegie officials decided the best idea was to disperse the ERO records. In January of 1948, the Dight Institute agreed to house the ERO's extensive individual trait and family documents if Carnegie would defray the expected $1,000 shipping costs. Some six months later the Minnesota Historical Society agreed to take a half-ton of biographical jubilee books, family genealogical volumes and related materials. At the same time, the New York Public Library received a thousand ERO volumes of family genealogical books and local histories. Horse racing and stud breeding publications were handed over to the family that had originally sponsored the research. Carnegie donated Davenport's voluminous papers and Laughlin's ERO operational papers to the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia, while maintaining some documents at a Cold Spring Harbor archive and retaining some others in Washington. When the Dight Institute closed its doors in the 1990s, its ERO papers were also sent to the American Philosophical Society, which now holds the largest consolidated eugenic collection anywhere. [45]

The dispersal of the records of the Cold Spring Harbor enterprise did not end the flow of letters to the ERO. For decades, people continued to send requests for eugenic information, updates of their pedigrees, and proof of their family's biological worth. In 1952, a dozen years after the ERO's closure, Clifford Frazier, an attorney in Greensboro, North Carolina, wrote offering to "bring my family data heretofore furnished up to date." In 1953, James Brunn, a realtor in Kansas City, Missouri, wrote requesting information to help trace his lineage back to the Revolutionary War. In 1959, Minnie Williams of Harrison, Ohio, wrote to say that she had finally assembled as much information as she could about her family pedigree; she had been working at it for years. In 1966, Elsie Van Guilder addressed a letter to "American Breeders Association, Eugenics Section, Cold Spring Harbor" seeking to trace her family. In 1976, E. Taylor Campbell of St. Joseph, Missouri, explained that he had been working on his family tree for fifty-one years, and he still needed nine more forms. [46]

Indeed, eugenic enthusiasts continued remitting family traits and proffering inquiries for decades. Letters continued into the 1980s, forty years after the ERO was dismantled. They probably never stopped. In February of 2003, a North Carolina attorney told this reporter than he had just discovered old ERO forms from his father's day; the attorney said his daughter was working with them to advance the family genealogy. Laughlin's work was that en grained in America. It persevered -- not only in the mindsets of generations of Americans, but also in America's laws. [47]

Although the ERO stopped functioning in 1939, America's eugenic laws did not. Tens of thousands of Americans continued to be forcibly sterilized, institutionalized and legally prevented from marriage on the basis of racial and eugenic laws. During the 1940s, some 15,000 Americans were coercively sterilized, almost a third of them in California. In the fifties, about ten thousand were sterilized. In the sixties, thousands more were sterilized. All told, an estimated 70,000 were eugenically sterilized in the first seven decades of the twentieth century; the majority were women. California consistently outdistanced every other state. [48]

Victims, especially those who only discovered their sterilizations years after the fact, eventually began to initiate litigation. One such victim was Joseph Juhan, a Tennessee war veteran with little formal education but with a pointed message for the Carnegie Institution. In late 1976, he penned a letter filled with poorly formed characters and numerous misspellings, randomly employing parentheses for emphasis, that nevertheless poignantly asserted his legal rights. The letter was addressed to "Dr. Charles Davenport, Dept of Experimental Evolution" at Cold Spring Harbor.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:03 pm

PART 2 OF 2

Dear Sir: I write to "request" your help. In the year of "1954" while a patient at the (State Hospital), at Milledgeville, Ga, a visectomy or sterilization operation was performed upon me, by orders of a state (eugenics board). A mental (deficiency dygnoses was made of my case. At the time I was only 18 years old.

I was wondering as the (Carnegie Instutions Dep. of experimental evolution or (eugenics studies) have have been ingaged in the study of (state mental inistutions records of (certain mental deficiency cases, if to your "knowledge" there has been in (eugenic's studys connected with the (Carnegie Inistutions at the (Milledgeville State Hosp in the State of Ga, in 1954.

The purpose of this "inquirey" is to obtain records for the American Civil Liberty's Union, in order to present be for a (U.S. Court of Law the (circumstances of my case, in 1954, whereby a (State Hospital acting under orders of a (Eugenics) Board did cause a (vocectomy) or sterlization operation, upon me at the age of 18.

I feel this was (uncessary, in violation of the (Fundimental, or basic freedoms guaranteed under the (U.S, Contitution) as no (mental deficiency of a genetic nature has ever exzisted in my case.

Your help in this matter will be greately appriecated.

I am Sincerely
Joseph Juhan
c/o U.S., VA Hospital
Murfreesboro, Tenn 37130 [49]


A response came from Agnes Fisher, the Record Office's secretary.

Dear Mr. Juhan,

I am writing in reply to your letter addressed to Dr. Charles Davenport. (Dr. Davenport retired from the Carnegie Institution in 1934, and died in 1944.)

You inquired about the possibility that eugenic studies were made by the Carnegie Institution at the Milledgeville State Hospital in 1954.

The Eugenics Record Office, formerly connected with the Department of Genetics in Cold Spring Harbor, was closed in 1939 upon the retirement of its director, Dr. H.H. Laughlin. At that time all studies and activities carried on by the Record Office or its staff were discontinued. Therefore no such studies could have been made in 1954. [50]


The American Civil Liberties Union never filed a sterilization suit in Georgia. But a few years later, in 1980, the ACLU in Richmond did file a historic suit against the state of Virginia on behalf of the victims of the Lynchburg Training School where Carrie Buck was sterilized. The ACLU ultimately forced Virginia to confront its history. In May of 2002, the governor of Virginia formally apologized to victims living and dead for decades of eugenic sterilizations. The governors of California, Oregon, North Carolina and South Carolina have followed suit. [51]

Nonetheless many of the laws are still on the books. For example, North Carolina's eugenic sterilization law, although not used for years, remains in force and was even updated in 1973 and 1981. Chapter 35, Article 7 still allows for court ordered sterilization for moral as well as medical improvement. While most states stopped enforcing sterilization statutes in the sixties and seventies, the practice did not stop everywhere. Across the country, additional thousands of poor urban dwellers, Puerto Rican women and Native Americans on reservations continued to be sterilized -- not under state laws, but under special federal provisions. [52]

In the seventies, for example, a group of Indian Health Service physicians implemented an aggressive program of Native American sterilization. According to a U.S. General Accounting Office study, hospitals in just four cities sterilized 3,406 women and 142 men between 1972 and 1976. The women widely reported being threatened with the loss of welfare benefits or custody of their children unless they submitted to sterilization. A federal court ordered that all future Indian Health Service sterilizations employ the proper safeguards of legitimate therapeutic procedures, and that "individuals seeking sterilization be orally informed at the outset that no Federal benefits can be withdrawn because of failure to accept sterilization." During the same four-year period, one Oklahoma hospital alone sterilized nearly 8 percent of its fertile female patients. No one will ever know the full scope of Indian sterilization in the postwar period because medical records were either not kept or were incomplete. [53]

Eugenics left behind more than sterilization laws. Marriage prohibitions remained in force. For example, Walter Plecker's Racial Integrity Act and numerous similar state statutes endured long after the ERO and Plecker disappeared. These laws potentially affected millions in ways that society can never measure. In 1958, two Virginians, a black woman named Mildred Jeter and a white man named Richard Loving, were married in Washington, D.C., to avoid violating Plecker's law. Upon their return to Virginia, they were arrested and indicted by the Caroline County grand jury. The trial judge suspended their one-year jail sentence on the condition that they leave Virginia and not return together for twenty-five years. [54]

From their new residence across the river in Washington, D.C., the Lovings appealed the infringement of their civil rights. Appellate courts, one after another, affirmed Virginia's law and the couple's conviction. Finally, almost nine years later in 1967, the United States Supreme Court considered the case. [55]

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Earl Warren declared: "There can be no doubt that restricting the freedom to marry solely because of racial classifications violates the central meaning of the Equal Protection Clause .... The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Marriage is one of the 'basic civil rights of man,' fundamental to our very existence and survival. ... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these (Virginia] statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law.... These convictions must be reversed. It is so ordered." [56]

After the Lovings' victory in 1967, other states' racial integrity laws became unenforceable. In 2000, Alabama became the last state in the union to repeal its antimiscegenation statute. [57]

With the science stripped away, all that remained to justify eugenic legislation was bigotry. Late in the twentieth century, in an enlightened postwar era, the eugenic notions that gripped a nation and then a world were finally understood. It had all just been colossal academic hubris masquerading as erudition.

***

By the late 1920s, the Carnegie Institution had confirmed by its own investigations what many in the scientific world and society at large had long been saying: that the eugenic science it helped create was a fraud.58 Nevertheless, Carnegie allowed its Cold Spring Harbor enterprise to supply the specious information needed to validate Virginia's legal crusade to sterilize Carrie Buck. Relying on Laughlin's pseudoscience and his own prejudices, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes had established the law of the land. In 1927, Holmes' famous opinion decreed:

It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind .... Three generations of imbeciles are enough. [59]

With Holmes' decision in hand, Carnegie's Cold Spring Harbor enterprise had unleashed a national campaign to reinforce long dormant state laws, enact new ones and dramatically increase the number of sterilizations across America. Sterilizations multiplied, marriage restrictions were broadened. Hundreds of thousands were never born. Untold numbers never married. The intent had been to stop the reproduction of targeted non-Nordic groups and others considered unfit. It continued into the 1970s, probably even later. It was all said to be legal, based on science, sanctioned by the highest courts. But what was it really?

As early as December of 1942, the Nazi plan was obvious. In a highly-publicized warning simultaneously broadcast in more than twenty-three languages the world over, the Allies announced that the Nazis were exterminating five million Jews and murdering millions of other national peoples in a plan to perpetrate a master race. The Allies vowed to hold war crimes trials to punish the Nazis and all those who abetted them. [60] Ultimately, the trials would bring to justice more than just the executioners, but those who ordered them, financed them, inspired them, facilitated their crimes and gave them scientific and medical support. These war crimes trials would ultimately include bankers, industrialists, philosophers, a newspaper editor, a radio propagandist, and many doctors and scientists.

By 1943, humanity needed a new word for the Third Reich's collective atrocities. The enormity of Nazi butchery of whole peoples by physical extermination, cultural obliteration, biological deracination and negative eugenics defied all previous human language. Nothing like it on so sweeping a scale had ever occurred in history.

Raphael Lemkin, a Jewish refugee at Duke University, formerly a prosecutor from Warsaw and an expert on international law, was commissioned by human rights organizations to study the crime. After a few months fighting as a partisan, Lemkin had fled Poland for Sweden and ultimately settled in the United States. His new word describing the overall Nazi campaign in Europe sprang from the same Greek root Galton had used. Eugenics was the study of "well-born life." Lemkin's new word, contemplated by him since 1940, encompassed the systematic destruction of an entire group's life. His new word was genocide. [61]

On October 30, 1943, as Lemkin was finalizing his study, the Allies met in Moscow and issued a joint declaration reconfirming that there would be war crimes trials for Nazi perpetrators, to be conducted in both the victimized countries and in Germany. The Allies demanded that all such crimes cease during the final turbulent days of Europe's liberation. "Let those who have hitherto not imbrued their hands with innocent blood beware lest they join the ranks of the guilty, for most assuredly the three Allied powers will pursue them to the uttermost ends of the earth and will deliver them to their accusors in order that justice may be done." The declaration was signed by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Josef Stalin. [62]

Days later, on November 15,1943, Lemkin completed his study, Axis Rule in Occupied Europe, which was published a year later. In a chapter entitled "Genocide," Lemkin listed the several physical and administrative "techniques of genocide." Among the techniques was a section labeled "Biological." Lemkin later explained the principle: "The genocidal policy [of the Nazis] was far-sighted as well as immediate in its objectives. On the one hand an increase in the birth rate, legitimate or illegitimate, was encouraged within Germany and among Volksdeutsche in the occupied countries .... On the other hand, every means to decrease the birth rate among 'racial inferiors' was used. Millions of war prisoners and forced laborers from all the conquered countries of Europe were kept from contact with their wives. Poles in incorporated Poland met obstacles in trying to marry among themselves. Chronic undernourishment, deliberately created by the occupant, tended not only to discourage the birth rate but also to an increase in infant mortality. Coming generations in Europe were thus planned to be predominantly of German blood, capable of overwhelming all other races by sheer numbers." [63]

Axis Rule in Occupied Europe even quoted a relevant Hitler speech: "We are obliged to depopulate as part of our mission of preserving the German population. We shall have to develop a technique of depopulation. If you ask me what I mean by depopulation, I mean the removal of entire racial units. And that is what I intend to carry out .... Nature is cruel, therefore we, too, may be cruel. ... I have the right to remove millions of an inferior race that breeds like vermin! And by 'remove,' I don't necessarily mean destroy; I shall simply take the systematic measures to dam their great natural fertility .... There are many ways, systematical and comparatively painless, or at any rate bloodless, of causing undesirable races to die out." [64]

Some five months later, Lemkin's chapter on genocide was popularized in an article entitled "Genocide -- A Modern Crime," appearing in Free World, a new United Nations multilingual magazine. In Free World, Lemkin again cited "Biological" techniques as a means of genocide. By this time Lemkin had become an advisor to the Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Army, and military tribunal planners were working with him and his concepts as they prepared to bring Nazi war criminals to justice. [65]

Within a month of the publication of "Genocide -- A Modern Crime," the Third Reich fell. Lemkin's codified principles of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity became pivotal. In August of 1945, the victorious Allies met in London and chartered an international military tribunal to bring the highest-ranking Nazi war criminals to justice. The so-called Nuremberg Trials began just three months later. The dock was hardly limited to those Nazis who pulled triggers and ordered murders -- such as Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick and Governor-General of Poland Hans Frank -- but also included key propagandists and facilitators, such as newspaper editor Julius Streicher and radio director Hans Fritzche. At the same time, international justice groups continued to further define the prior acts of genocide in anticipation of more war crimes tribunals, these for individuals of lesser stature who were nonetheless instrumental in Nazi genocide. These additional trials would prosecute doctors, scientists and industrialists. Many of these tribunals would be conducted exclusively by the United States. [66]

On December 11, 1946, as the United States was readying its own prosecutions, the United Nations approved Resolution 96 (I), which embedded the concept of "genocide" into international law. It proclaimed: "Genocide is a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, as homicide is the denial of the right to live of individual human beings; such denial of the right of existence shocks the conscience of mankind, results in great losses to humanity in the form of cultural and other contributions represented by these human groups, and is contrary to moral law and the spirit and aims of the United Nations." [67]

Shortly thereafter, the articles of a forthcoming Treaty Against Genocide were formulated and later adopted through a succession of resolutions, conventions and treaties to become settled international law. The international convention enumerated crimes against humanity and crimes of genocide in five categories; the last two categories -- in subsections (d) and (e) -- squarely confronted eugenic policies: sterilization and the kidnapping of eugenically qualified children to be raised as Aryans. Article II stated: "In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group." [68]


Article III assigned equal guilt to those who were responsible for "direct and public incitement" to commit the crimes described as genocide, and those who in other ways become complicit. Article IV declared that the law could punish anyone in any country, "whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals." American prosecutors at the subsequent Nuremberg Trials took their cue from the treaty. [69]

In early July of 1947, the Allies indicted the leaders of the Reich's militarized eugenics umbrella organization, the SS Race and Settlement Office, which forcibly sterilized thousands, kidnapped Polish children with Nordic racial features, organized the Nordic breeding program known as Lebensborn, developed extensive genealogy files on millions and conducted eugenic examinations of prisoners before deciding if they should be saved or exterminated. For these activities, SS Race and Settlement Office leader General Otto Hofmann stood among those in the dock. [70]

The indictment clearly enumerated the various aspects of Nazi eugenics as genocide: "Kidnapping the children of foreign nationals in order to select for Germanization those who were considered of 'racial value.' ... Encouraging and compelling abortions on Eastern workers .... Preventing marriages and hampering reproduction of enemy nationals." [71]

A week after the indictment was served on the accused, the military occupation's semiofficial newspaper, Die Neue Zeitung, drove home the point to the German people, publishing extracts of the U.N. Treaty on Genocide. The newspaper announced: "On 10 June the Secretary's Office of the United Nations completed the first draft of an international convention for the punishment of government officials who attempted to exterminate racial, religious, national, or political groups .... Three distinct types of 'genocide' are listed." The paper then itemized actions that qualified as genocide, including "open mass murder" and housing people in conditions calculated to kill. Die Neue Zeitung explained that the other of the three most significant forms of genocide was "sterilization of large groups and forcible separation of families as 'biological genocide.'" The article itself was entered into the Nuremberg Trial record. [72]

During the long trial, which lasted almost a year, prosecutors outlined a lengthy bill of eugenic particulars, including the murder of those who did not pass eugenic tests. "The SS Race and Settlement Main Office (RuSHA) was responsible," prosecutors declared, "among other things, for racial examinations. These racial examinations were carried out by RuSHA leaders or their staff members, called racial examiners." Prosecutors charged that as part of the Reich's genocidal campaign, RuSHA was continually engaged in "classification of people of German descent." It added, "RuSHA, in carrying out racial investigations and examinations, took a leading part in the accomplishment of the [extermination] program. Since negative results of racial investigations and examinations led to the extermination or imprisonment in concentration camps of the individuals concerned, the Staff Main Office ... acted in close cooperation with the SS Reich Security Main Office [the chief SS agency overseeing physical extermination]. The Reich Security Main Office imposed capital punishment and imprisonment in concentration camps upon individuals designated by RuSHA." [73]

An entire portion of the prosecutors' case, "Section 4: Sterilization," presented documents and evidence concerning the mass sterilization of unfit individuals by Nazis throughout Europe during the Reich's twelve-year reign of terror. Leaving no doubt, prosecutors declared, "The fundamental purpose ... was to proclaim and safeguard the supposed superiority of 'Nordic' blood, and to exterminate and suppress all sources which might 'dilute' or 'taint' it. The underlying objective was to assure Nazi dominance over Germany and German domination over Europe in perpetuity." [74]

Eugenics was also pivotal to a gamut of other war crimes. Often before burning a town or murdering an entire community, Nazis identified and kidnapped the eugenically fit Nordic children so they could be raised in Aryan institutions. This was done, prosecutors stated, "in accordance with standards ... [of] Nazi racial and biological theories." What had occurred in Lidice, Czechoslovakia, was read into the record as an example. After Lidice was selected for obliteration, every adult man in the village was executed and most of the village's women were deported to Ravensbruck concentration camp. But the village's children were dispatched to Poland for a thorough "medical, eugenic, and racial examination carried out by the physicians of the health offices." Those deemed sufficiently Nordic were sent to live with Aryan families where they would undergo Germanization. Those deemed unfit were "deported." The prosecutor stated, "Here ends all traces of these 82 children of Lidice." [75]

"And so," prosecutors solemnly explained, "the final balance gives us these terrible facts: 192 men and 7 women shot; 196 women taken into concentration camps, of whom 43 died from torture and maltreatment; 105 children kidnapped .... The village was burned, buildings leveled, streets taken up and all other signs of habitation completely erased." To protest the utter eugenic extermination of Lidice, many small towns later adopted the name of the village. Hence the people are gone, but the memory of Lidice lives on. [76]

Count after count recited the fact that "racial value" following a eugenic analysis made all the difference between life and death, genocide and survival.77 Prosecutors sorted Germany's many eugenic atrocities into specific categories of war crimes. Point 15, entitled "Hampering Reproduction of Enemy Nationals," specified sterilization and marriage restriction: "To further weaken enemy nations, both restrictive and prohibitive measures were taken to discourage marriages and reproduction of enemy nationals. The ultimate aim and natural result of these measures was to impede procreation among nationals of Eastern countries." Point 18, entitled "Slave Labor," explained that through the racial examinations of RuSHA, "foreign nationals without any German ancestry were sent to Germany as slave labor," where they were worked to death. [78]

Point 21, "Persecution and Extermination of Jews," explained how genealogy offices were critical to Hitler's war against the Jews across Europe. "RuSHA also participated extensively in the persecution and extermination of Jews. The Genealogy Office (Ahnentafelamt) of RuSHA prepared and retained in its files the names of all Jewish families in the Reich and persons having any Jewish ancestry. This office also participated in preparing similar files in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Danzig, and France where it worked together with the SS Reich Security Main Office. These files were used for enforcing discriminatory measures against Jews and preparing transport lists of Jews to be taken from Germany and the occupied countries to the extermination camps in the East." [79]

On January 20, 1942, SS Race and Settlement Office leader Hofmann had attended the infamous Wannsee Conference, the planning session associated with the Final Solution. The Wannsee Protocol produced after the conference made the eugenic guidelines clear. Mixed Jews of the "first degree," that is, Jews with substantial German blood in their ancestry, could be exempted from "evacuation," the code word for extermination, but only if they were sterilized. The Wannsee Protocol recorded: "Hofmann is of the opinion that extensive use must be made of sterilization." The protocol also recorded that "[Persons of mixed blood] exempted from evacuation will be sterilized in order to obviate progeny and to settle the [mixed blood] problem for good. Sterilization is voluntary, but it is the condition for remaining in the Reich." [80]

Confronted by prosecutors at his trial with charges of eugenic extermination, Hofmann said little in his own defense, and openly admitted he was a Nazi eugenicist.

PROSECUTOR: When did you become chief of the Eugenics Office in RuSHA?

HOFMANN: At the beginning of 1939 I was appointed to this task ....

Q: What were your duties there?

A: The Eugenics Office was responsible for carrying out the betrothal and marriage order which Himmler had issued on 31 December 1931 to the SS.... The RuSHA leader had to look after the eugenics research offices of the SS, regiments, and, according to his qualifications and talents, he influenced cultural life within the areas of the main district. [81]


Hofmann could not understand why the United States thought his actions were crimes against humanity. He placed into evidence a special report on America produced by the Nazi Party's Race-Political Office years before on July 30, 1937. "The United States," asserted the report, "however, also provides an example for the racial legislation of the world in another respect. Although it is clearly established in the Declaration of Independence that everyone born in the United States is a citizen of the United States and so acquires all the rights which an American citizen can acquire, impassable lines are drawn between the individual races, especially in the Southern States. Thus in certain States Japanese are excluded from the ownership of land or real estate and they are prevented from cultivating arable land. Marriages between colored persons and whites are forbidden in no less than thirty of the Federal States. Marriages contracted in spite of this ban are declared invalid." Typical laws were recited from Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California and Florida. [82]

The special report added, "Since 1907, sterilization laws have been passed in twenty-nine States of the United States of America." [83]

Hofmann's document made one other point. It offered the following justification, originally translated from English into German and then back into English for the trial:

In a judgment of the [U.S.] Supreme Court ... it says, among other things:

"It is better for everybody if society, instead of waiting until it has to execute degenerate offspring or leave them to starve because of feeble-mindedness, can prevent obviously inferior individuals from propagating their kind." [84]


Hofmann was sentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment. [85]

For three -- perhaps four -- decades after the Treaty Against Genocide was adopted, the United States continued to sterilize targeted groups because of their eugenic or racial character, real or supposed; continued to prevent marriages because of their eugenic or racial character, real or supposed; and continued to hamper reproduction, interfere with procreation, and prevent births in targeted groups. After the Hitler regime, after the Nuremberg Trials, some twenty thousand Americans were eugenically sterilized by states and untold others by federal programs on Indian reservations and in U.S. territories such as Puerto Rico.

They said it was legal. They said it was science. What was it really?
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:24 pm

CHAPTER 20: Eugenics Becomes Genetics

After Hitler, eugenics did not disappear. It renamed itself. What had thrived loudly as eugenics for decades quietly took postwar refuge under the labels human genetics and genetic counseling.

The transition was slow and subtle and spanned decades. Some defected from American eugenics as early as the twenties, prompted by a genuine revulsion over a movement that had deteriorated from biological utopianism into a campaign to destroy entire groups. For others who defected in the thirties and early forties, it was the shock of how Adolf Hitler applied eugenics. For America's eugenic holdouts, it was only the fear of guilt by scientific association with genocide that reshaped their memories and guided their new direction. It took a Holocaust, a continent in cinders and a once great nation bombed and battled into submission to force the issue.

Originally, human genetics and eugenics were one and the same. At the turn of the twentieth century, American breeders of plants and animals had turned their hybridizing skills and social prejudices on their fellow man, trying to manage humanity the same way they managed crops and herds. The American Breeders Association created its Eugenics Committee in 1903. In 1904, the Carnegie Institution founded its eugenic installation at Cold Spring Harbor. [1] The word genetics did not exist at the time.

In England, meanwhile, research into Mendel's decades-old discovery of cellular "elements" had advanced and was sorely in need of a new dedicated field of study. By 1905, William Bateson, the man who several years earlier had promulgated the rediscovery of Mendel's theories, was now privately referring to the new science of heredity as "genetics," from the same Greek root Galton employed. Bateson publicly announced the new science during his inaugural address during the Royal Horticultural Society's Third International Conference on Hybridization in 1906. "The science itself is still nameless," declared Bateson. " ... I suggest for the consideration of this Congress the term Genetics, which sufficiently indicates that our labors are devoted to the elucidation of the phenomena of heredity and variation ... and [their] application to the practical problems of breeders, whether of animals or plants." When the conference proceedings were published, the society renamed the event the Third International Conference on Genetics. [2] Genetics was born.

Shortly thereafter, students of genetics began referring to the transmittable cellular elements as "genes." By 1912, Cambridge University received a sizeable endowment for genetic studies and in 1914 established the world's first chair in genetics. Mainstream European and American geneticists were primarily devoted to the study of hereditary mechanisms, probing the structure and interactions of enzymes, proteins and other cellular components. Plant and animal geneticists zealously explored the protoplasm of fruit flies, maize, sheep and other species, hoping to understand and manage the lower life-forms. They understood that man was a more complex animal that had both conquered, and was conquered by, his environment. In Europe, human studies of cellular mechanisms were undertaken, but slowly. Not so in America, where breeders distorted Mendelian principles into eugenics and then subsumed nascent human genetics. The two words were synonymous in the United States. [3]

In 1914, the American Breeders Association changed its name to the American Genetic Association, and its publication from American Breeders Magazine to Journal of Heredity. The organization and its publication functioned as a scientific jumble, combining the best efforts of good agronomy and zoology with tainted, ill-advised and racist social engineering. The Carnegie Institution ran the Eugenics Record Office under its Department of Genetics, with Davenport as its director. Many of the nation's leading geneticists, such as W.E. Castle and Raymond Pearl, were among the earliest dues-paying members of the Eugenics Research Association. Genetics and biology departments across America taught eugenics as part of their curriculums. In 1929, Eugenical News changed its subtitle once again, this time to "Current Record of Human Genetics and Race Hygiene." [4]

However, by the late twenties and early thirties many human geneticists who had joined the eugenic charge were defecting. L.C. Dunn exemplified this growing trend. In 1925, he had coauthored Principles of Genetics, asserting in typical eugenic rhetoric that "even under the most favorable surroundings there would still be a great many individuals who are always on the borderline of self-supporting existence and whose contribution to society is so small that the elimination of their stock would be beneficial." [5] But in 1935, two years after the rise of Hitler, Dunn formally suggested that the Carnegie Institution shut down its Cold Spring Harbor eugenic enterprise. "With genetics," Dunn told Carnegie officials, "its relations [with eugenics] have always been close, although there have been distinct signs of cleavage in recent years, chiefly due to the feeling on the part of many geneticists that eugenical research was not always activated by purely disinterested scientific motives, but was influenced by social and political considerations." Dunn later became an outspoken critic of both Nazi eugenics and the American movement. [6]

In 1937, Laurence Snyder, the incoming president of the Eugenics Research Association and chairman of its Committee on Human Heredity, became convinced it was time for a break with the past. In a lengthy report to Laughlin and the Carnegie Institution, Snyder's committee concluded that the end for organized eugenics was near. "The recent attacks upon orthodox eugenics," the committee declared, "and indeed upon the whole present social set-up ... emphasize more than ever the need for accurate facts and information on basic human genetics. These attacks, it may be stated in passing, come not from irresponsible nor untrained minds, but from some who have the authority of long and honorable scientific achievements behind them." [7]

Referring to the worries over a Europe in political turmoil and preparing for war, the committee report continued, "In these days when the social outlook of whole nations is undergoing far-reaching changes, any fact contributing to our knowledge of basic human welfare becomes of especial importance. The science of human genetics, judged by its past achievements and by what we may reasonably expect in its future developments, is more certainly basic to any well-formulated plan of human welfare." [8]

Unfortunately, noted Snyder, in America the concept of "human genetics" had itself become as tarnished as eugenics. "The interest of American geneticists in human genetics," the committee reported, "appears to have been waning of late, as evidenced by the almost complete absence of papers on human heredity at the various scientific meetings. This state of affairs in America, in contrast to the condition in some of the European countries, is to be deplored. It has come about, in the opinion of your committee, because of two main reasons. First, there has appeared from time-to-time a good deal of unscientific writing on the subject of eugenics. Since the terms 'eugenics' and 'human genetics' are in the minds of many persons synonymous, human genetics has suffered a loss of prestige as a result." [9]

In his June 1938 presidential address to the Eugenics Research Association, Snyder boldly laid the framework for a transition to genuine human genetics programs. In doing so, he first admitted that much of the vocabulary and theory of eugenics was little more than polysyllabic nonsense. "When the Mendelian laws were rediscovered," began Snyder, "and especially when the more modern complicated extensions of genetic theory became understood by research workers in the field of heredity, geneticists spoke a language largely unintelligible to the psychologist, the sociologist and the layman. At that time it was possible, by invoking a phraseology mysterious and somewhat awe-inspiring, to make generalizations regarding racial degeneration, the inheritance of personality, character, insanity and criminality, which could not be analyzed immediately by the sociologists and the psychologists because of their unfamiliarity with the 'rules of the game.''' [10]

Snyder knew he was speaking to a constituency of longtime ardent eugenicists, and proceeded cautiously. "This does not mean that the eugenicist must completely renounce a eugenic program," he stated. "It does mean, however, that the immediate and imperative need is for more facts about human inheritance, specifically, facts about socially significant traits and their possible genetic backgrounds." [11]

Nonetheless, the voices of reform were generally drowned out by raceology and eugenics from the entrenched ranks and longtime leaders, such as Davenport, Laughlin and Popenoe. Organized eugenics remained committed to the Nazi program through much of the Reich years. After the war, geneticists would claim they had no affinity with their Nazi counterparts. But that was not the case.

For example, in April 1942, amid worldwide charges of mass extermination, the American Genetic Association's Journal of Heredity published a long, flippant, almost cheery assessment of Nazi eugenics and genetics. American geneticist Tage U.H. Ellinger's article entitled "On the Breeding of Aryans and Other Genetic Problems of War-time Germany" recounted his exciting visit to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics. Institute officials granted him an insider's tour of the Reich's twins lab and other advanced genetic projects. [12] Ellinger's stunning article was an American geneticist speaking about Nazi genetics to fellow geneticists.

"I had an opportunity to meet some of my fellow geneticists," began Ellinger, "who seemed to be working undisturbed by the campaign and the 'mopping up' in Poland, and by the hectic preparations for the assaults on a great many peaceful countries such as Denmark, Norway, Holland, and Belgium. The following unpretentious notes, written for laymen, may perhaps interest some of their many American friends. [13]

"Quite a few of them were busy treating or rather mistreating the sex cells of animals and plants in order to produce new varieties. I was introduced to all kinds of extraordinary creatures produced in that way, mice without toes or with corkscrew tails, flies that violated the very definition of a fly by having four wings instead of two, funny-looking moths, and strange plants. Radiation, especially with X-rays, is the principal means of producing such new kinds, or rather monsters, of animals and plants." [14]

Kaiser Wilhelm Institute officials made Ellinger privy to their surreptitious surveillance methods and government procedures. In his article, Ellinger jocundly reported, "Twins have, of course, for a long time been a favorite material for the study of the relative importance of heredity and environment, of nature and nurture. It does, however, take a dictatorship to oblige some ten thousand pairs of twins, as well as triplets and even quadruplets, to report to a scientific institute at regular intervals for all kinds of recordings and tests." [15]

As for Jews, Ellinger told his fellow geneticists, "In itself, the problem is a fairly simple one when it is first understood that the deliberate eradication of the Jewish element in Germany has nothing whatever to do with religious persecution. It is entirely a large-scale breeding project, with the purpose of eliminating from that nation the hereditary attributes of the Semitic race. Whether this be desirable or not is a question that has nothing to do with science. It is a matter of policy and prejudice only. It is a problem similar to that [which] Americans have solved to their own satisfaction with regard to their colored population. The story of the cruel ways in which life has been made unbearable for millions of unfortunate German Jews belongs exclusively in the shameful realm of human brutality. But when the problem arises as to how the breeding project may be carried out most effectively, after the politicians have decided upon its desirability, biological science can assist even the Nazis." [16]

Ellinger elaborated on Nazi eugenic examinations. "It is a problem," he wrote, "of exactly the same nature as if you were asked to record the exact hereditary differences between a bird dog and a hound. It has nothing whatever to do with your personal preference for one or the other. It is a matter of common knowledge that anybody can immediately recognize many Jews by simply looking at them. In other words, the Jew has a number of characteristic bodily features not often combined in a non-Jew or 'Aryan.' In addition, he may display certain mental characteristics you would soon notice by personal association .... [17]

"An amazing amount of unbiased information has accumulated dealing, for instance, with such features as the position of the ears, the shape of the nostrils, etc. As a result, it is quite possible, by studying the bodily features of a person and his relatives, to state, with considerable likelihood of being right, whether this person has Jewish ancestors .... If it be decided by the Nazi politicians that persons with Jewish ancestors shall be prevented from mating with those who have not such ancestors, science can undoubtedly assist them in carrying out a reasonably correct labeling of every doubtful individual. The rest remains in the cruel hands of the S.S., the S.A., and the Gestapo." [18]

As for the fate of the Jews, Ellinger wrote, "What I saw in Germany often made me wonder whether the subtle idea behind the treatment of the Jews might be to discourage them from giving birth to children doomed to a life of horrors. If that were accomplished, the Jewish problem would solve itself in a generation, but it would have been a great deal more merciful to kill the unfortunates outright." Ellinger's article candidly admitted, "As things are run in Nazi Germany, it is obviously a matter almost of life and death whether you carry the label Aryan or Jew." [19]

Summing up, Ellinger attested that, "Genetics really seems to have an unlimited field of practical applications, but I am sure that the old priest Mendel would have had the shock of his life had he been told that seventy-five years after he planted his unpretentious peas in the monastery garden of Brunn, his new science would be called upon to 'grade up' the 'scrub' population of Greater Germany to new 'standards of Aryan perfection.''' [20]

A year later, in 1943, Eugenical News projected the future of eugenics. An article entitled "Eugenics After the War" cited Davenport's work at Carnegie's Department of Genetics. Davenport envisioned a new mankind of biological castes with master races in control and slave races serving them. He compared the coming world order to "colonies of bees and termites .... All the bees in a hive, including the queen, are full sisters and have been for uncounted generations. Each one is hatched with a set of instincts, which enables it, in machine-like fashion, to do the proper thing at the proper time for the existence of the colony. In human communities, also, the more uniform the instincts and ideals the less friction and the less need for government control with its vast system of law, law enforcement and punishment. [21]

"Contrariwise the more mixed the population from the standpoint of instincts and physical and mental capacity, the more badly does the machine work and the more need of constant repair and adjustment." Davenport added that additional worker strains might be imported to help serve America's coming biological order. "It is quite possible," wrote Davenport, "that some tens of thousands of 'Black fellows' [aborigines] from central Australia might be induced to come to this country." But he added that he hoped America would forgo any further opportunities for race-mixing. [22]

But by 1943, reformers were shouting down diehard Nazi supporters such as Davenport. In the same issue in which Davenport forecast a new biological order, other Eugenical News correspondents were condemning Hitler's eugenics, and negative eugenics in general. Following Davenport's remarks, another article entitled "Eugenics in 1952" prophesied various views of eugenics some nine years ahead. One writer urged new thinking on the subject, insisting, "The history of the Nazi movement in Germany proves ... [that] unless the new brain functions in an emotional climate of decent social mindedness, it is going to breed a race of madmen rather than of supermen." [23]

Another commentator insisted that any fascism in the United States a decade hence would fail because it "will be shown to belong to the discredited Nazi ideology." A third writer, obviously repulsed by the death and desolation in Nazi-occupied Europe, simply hoped for better times: "A new era is dawning .... Hatred, hostility, and homicide, so recently ended, gives way to love, understanding and growth." [24]

The next 1943 issue of Eugenical News published a scathing denunciation of Adolf Hitler for decimating Europe's families. "Hitler, who has torn children from the heart of the family and sent them to the four corners of the earth, without any identification; Hitler, who has torn brothers from sisters, husbands from wives, sons from mothers ... and planted them among strangers; Hitler, who by his plans attacked the sacred tie of marriage; Hitler, who believed he could do this and so establish his new order, now sees that it is just this eternal tradition and sanctity of marriage and the family that cannot break, and that will ultimately bring his end." [25]

Eugenical News had changed. Its readers had changed. For some the change was reluctant. For many others it was genuine. Within the smoke of Nazi eugenics, many saw a frightful image. Perhaps they saw themselves.

The transformation of eugenics into human genetics accelerated after the war. By 1944, the American Eugenics Society informed its membership that it now defined eugenics as "genetics plus control of physical and social environment." Meanwhile, Eugenical News was publicly debating whether eugenics would even exist after the war. The June 1945 edition, released just after the fall of Germany, admitted, "The question as to what the AES should do after the war is a difficult one. The times will not be very favorable." [26]

The September 1945 issue of Eugenical News decried the "Perversions of Eugenics," declaring, "Galton regarded eugenics as a means by which persons with valuable inborn qualities could make a larger contribution to posterity than persons less well endowed .... Galton's view has been perverted by German race superiority, by irresponsible and unimportant racial agitators in America, and by cranks with various plans for breeding a better race." The publication called for a revamped "eugenic policy which is socially acceptable." [27]

Months later, American Eugenics Society President Frederick Osborn prepared a crestfallen lead story for the September 1946 edition of Eugenical News. His confession-like epistle, "Eugenics and Modern Life: Retrospect and Prospect," admitted everything. "The ten years, 1930 to 1940 marked a major change in eugenic thinking," Osborn began. "Before 1930, eugenics had a racial and social class bias. This attitude on the part of eugenists was not based on any scientific foundation. It had developed naturally enough out of the class-conscious society of Galton's England, and out of the racial problems presented so vividly to the United States by the great immigration of the early part of the century. The ruling race and the ruling class seemed, to the members of the ruling race and class, to be evidently superior to the non-ruling races and classes .... " [28]

Without naming names, Osborn conceded, "A few of the older pioneers never accepted the change and eugenics lost some followers." He counseled, "Population, genetics, psychology, are the three sciences to which the eugenist must look for the factual material on which to build an acceptable philosophy of eugenics and to develop and defend practical eugenics proposals." But he cautioned, "We do not want to repeat in some new form the mistake of the earlier eugenists who declared for race and social class, and thereby set back the cause of eugenics for a generation." [29]

***

Beyond mere commentary and condemnations, the incremental effort to transform eugenics into human genetics forged an entire worldwide infrastructure. In 1938, for example, the Institute for Human Genetics opened in Copenhagen. It became a leader in genetic research under the leadership of the Danish biologist and geneticist Tage Kemp. Kemp, however, was actually a Rockefeller Foundation eugenicist. The Institute for Genetics was established by Rockefeller's social biology dollars. Moreover, the Rockefeller effort in Denmark would serve as a model for what it would do elsewhere in Europe.

Kemp's relationship with Rockefeller's eugenics program began in 1932, when Rockefeller officials granted Kemp a fellowship to travel to Cold Spring Harbor and study alongside Davenport and Laughlin. In his report to Rockefeller's Paris office, Kemp related, "To begin with, I endeavored to gain a thorough knowledge of the working methods of the Eugenics Record Office .... In connection with my studies at the Eugenics Record Office, I pursued study of the heredity of sporadic goiter, carrying out examinations amongst the population of Long Island and, in certain cases, also amongst the patients of the U.S. Veteran Hospital, Northport, L.I, and Kings Park State Hospital, L.I." During his U.S. tour, Kemp also attended the Third International Congress of Eugenics in New York City, and presented a paper on "A Study of the Causes of Prostitution, Especially Concerning Hereditary Factors." [30]

Kemp became a rising star at Rockefeller and was utilized as an advance man and confidential source for the foundation as it sought to create a eugenic infrastructure throughout Europe. On June 29, 1934, Daniel O'Brien, who ran Rockefeller's Paris office, notified Kemp, "It is a pleasure to inform you that, at the last meeting of our Committee, a special fellowship was granted to you in order to permit you to spend three months on visits to various European institutes of genetics." O'Brien's letter continued, "I should like to have your comments on individuals who might be helped by means of a fellowship of approximately one year .... It would be particularly helpful to receive your personal impressions of the able men you come into contact with .... It would of course be understood that any information you may give would be considered strictly confidential." [31]

Kemp's itinerary included Holland, England, France, Austria, Switzerland, Russia, Germany and several other nations. His extensive report to Rockefeller included a significant section on Germany, which included summaries on the leading race hygienists and their institutions. For example, in Munich he met with Rudin and reported: "On the whole, I am finding the work going on there rather important and serious, and it is supported by enormous means." Kemp then rated the leading scientists under Rudin, indicating which ones spoke English, and the nature of their projects. Bruno Schultz, for example, was "doing a great deal of statistical work concerning mental diseases of practical value for the sterilization law and the eugenical legislation in Germany." [32]

In Berlin, Kemp toured the Institute for Brain Research, which Rockefeller had built. Kemp was impressed, writing back to Rockefeller officials, "I learned all concerning the anatomical, physiological and clinical work going on at this immense, remarkable and rather complicated institution." He also spent time at the Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity and Eugenics, "which I am finding one of the best centers in the world for the study of normal and morbid inheritance by human beings." Kemp was also impressed with Verschuer, whom he described as "a keen National Socialist, completely honest, however, I feel, so one can rely upon his scientific results as being objective and real. He works especially with twin investigations and is doing this research very thoroughly and systematically." [33]

In Munich, Kemp also met with Theodor Mollison, Mengele's first advisor. He described Mollison as "a very fine and charming personality." Kemp reported, "He is especially working on the specificity of the proteins of various human races." [34]

Rockefeller continued granting Kemp funds for eugenic work, albeit always calling it "genetics." Indeed, just after his report about European genetics, discussions were launched to build the institute in Copenhagen, which Kemp would lead. Previously, Kemp's fledgling studies were confined to one or two small rooms at the University of Copenhagen. That would all change once the spacious new Institute of Human Genetics was erected. [35]

Although Kemp's new institute was packaged as genetics, its eugenic nature was never in doubt. For example, within Denmark, directors of two existing centers for the feebleminded, as well as other local eugenicists, hoped Rockefeller's new institute would bolster the "scientific foundation for eugenic sterilization." Indeed, at times the project was described in Rockefeller memorandums as the institute for "Human Genetics and Eugenics." Once plans became final, Rockefeller officials confirmed their plans had been developed "on the basis of his [Kemp's] experiences gathered in studies in 1932 and 1934 partly at Eugenics Record Office and Department of Genetics in Cold Spring Harbor, USA," as well as at leading eugenic centers in Uppsala, Austria and Munich. [36]

The University of Copenhagen and the local government planned to contribute land and financial support. But executives at the Rockefeller Foundation clearly understood, as their memos on the proposal reflected, "It will be impossible to have this plan realized at present without a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation." The foundation committed $90,000, and the new Institute for Human Genetics opened to much fanfare in 1938.After the war, the Bureau of Human Heredity, another Danish eugenic agency, transferred its operations to the institute and the personal direction of Kemp. [37]

Thus Rockefeller inaugurated another eugenic outpost in Europe. It was not Germany; it was Denmark. It was not eugenics; it was genetics.

***

While human genetics was becoming established in America, eugenics did not die out. It became quiet and careful. The American Eugenics Society inherited the residuum of the movement.

The AES assumed primacy in organized eugenics in the late thirties. It established a relationship with the Carnegie Institution just as the ERO was being dismantled. In 1939, Carnegie awarded the AES its first grant of $5,000 for genetic research. Additional grants in 1941 allowed the AES to help establish the Department of Medical Genetics at what became Wake Forest Medical School, the first such medical genetic chair in the United States. The Eugenics Research Association's vice president, William Allan, was chosen to lead the new department. Allan had previously studied eugenic defects of people in the Appalachians, and now he would head the new $50,000 project funded by Carnegie. Writing in Eugenical News, Allan urged county-based "Family Record Offices" in North Carolina to assist in identifying the unfit and screening marriages. Such record offices would integrate marriage records and birth and death registries with family information going back more than a century. The undertaking could be implemented easily, he stated, because, "We already have a small army of men, our County Health Officers." Allan himself was experienced in assembling family pedigrees. [38]

When Allan suddenly died two years later, fellow eugenicist C. Nash Herndon took over. Herndon advocated forced sterilization. Emulating the technique of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute, Herndon's Department of Medical Genetics provided what he called the "genetic work-ups and medical affidavits" for the county to sterilize dozens of it citizens. Blacks were mainly targeted. He described the campaign in a 1943 university report: "This project consists of a gradual, but systematic effort to eliminate certain genetically unfit strains from the local population. About thirty operations for sterilization have been performed." [39]

Writing in Eugenical News years after he joined the Wake Forest staff, Herndon also urged genetic counseling to encourage the fit to marry the fit. In addition, he called for educational efforts for the feebleminded to be reduced, declaring "It is of course an obvious waste of time to attempt to teach calculus to a moron." Under Herndon, Wake Forest Medical School became one of America's premier genetic research establishments. In late 2002, the Winston-Salem Journal published a five-part investigation of North Carolina's eugenics program and the university's involvement. The newspaper quoted the record of one woman who in 1945 pleaded with the eugenics board: "I don't want it. I don't approve of it, sir. I don't want a sterilize operation .... Let me go home, see if I get along all right. Have mercy on me and let me do that." A shocked Wake Forest Medical School announced an internal investigation to discover the extent of the school's connection to North Carolina's eugenics program. In February of 2003, some two months after the articles ran, a spokesman told this reporter that the university still did not understand the historical facts or context of eugenics, but was determined to be thorough in its investigation. [40]

The AES was making some progress launching human genetic programs like the one at Wake Forest, but when America went to war, the nation's priorities dramatically changed. By 1942, the AES had virtually disbanded. Its office closed, and its papers were shipped to the home of Eugenical News editor Maurice Bigelow. The publication continued during the war years, but circulation dwindled to just three hundred. [41]

After the war, it took Frederick Osborn to salvage the organization. He became president of the AES in 1946. Osborn was a former president of the Eugenics Research Association and the nephew of eugenic raceologist Henry Fairfield Osborn, who was cofounder of the AES and president of the Second International Congress of Eugenics. The younger Osborn was determined to continue the eugenics movement, but under the name of "genetics." Constantly introspective about eugenics' calamitous past, Osborn wondered why "the other organizations set up in this country under eminent sponsorship have long since disappeared .... Was it because ... some of the early eugenicists placed a false and distasteful emphasis on race and social class? ... Was it because of the emotional reaction to Hitler's excesses and his misuse of the word 'eugenics'? Or did it go deeper." [42] He concluded that the public was not ready to cope with eugenic ideals, especially in the absence of irrefutable science.

In 1947 the remnant board of directors unanimously agreed, "The time was not right for aggressive eugenic propaganda." Instead, the AES continued quietly soliciting financial grants from such organizations as the Dodge Foundation, the Rockefeller-funded Population Council, and the Draper Fund. The purpose: proliferate genetics as a legitimate study of human heredity. [43]

During the fifties, Osborn took extraordinary pains to never utter a provocative eugenic word. In a typical 1959 speech on genetics at Hunter College, Osborn was explicit, "We are not speaking here of any manipulation of the genes to produce a superior race. This would require a knowledge of human genetics we do not at present possess, and changes in our social mores which would be presently unacceptable." He merely insisted, "Medical genetics has recently become an accepted field of study; the larger medical schools are developing departments of human genetics and setting up heredity counseling clinics." [44]

At the same time, Osborn and his colleagues were searching for a new socially palatable definition of eugenics that would promote the same ideals under a new mantle. One Osborn cohort, Frank Lorimer, wrote Osborn, "Personally, I would redefine 'eugenics' to include concern with all conditions affecting the life prospects of new human beings at birth." He added the caveat, "This is a matter of strategy rather than ideology." [45]

The AES knew that reestablishing eugenics was an uphill battle. Osborn's draft address for the 1959 board of directors meeting outlined an ambitious campaign of behind-the-scenes genetic counseling, birth control, and university-based medical genetic programs. At the same time, Osborn conceded that the movement's history was too scurrilous to gain public support. "Lacking a scientific base," wrote Osborn, "the eugenics movement was taken over successfully by various special interests. The upper social classes assumed that they were genetically superior and that eugenics justified their continuing position. People who thought they belonged to a superior race assumed that the purpose of eugenics was to further their interests .... The worst in all these movements found their climax under Hitler who combined them for political motives. It is no wonder that for a long time afterwards eugenics had few followers among thoughtful people." But, he concluded, "With the close of World War II, genetics had made great advances and a real science of human genetics was coming into being .... Eugenics is at last taking a practical and effective form." [46] For Osborn, eugenics and genetics were still synonymous.

Osborn's warnings notwithstanding, some AES members were eager to resume their former propaganda campaigns against the unfit. "The Society is torn," one member wrote Osborn. "Is it to be a 'scientific' society or is it to be a 'missionary' or 'educational' society?" [47]

In 1961, geneticist Sheldon Reed wrote to an AES official, "It seems to me that there is considerable schizophrenic confusion as to whether eugenics exists or not." He wondered if perhaps "the society should disband." Reed added defiantly that the AES should cast off any guilt about the Holocaust. "My final point," Reed declared, "is concerned with the allocation of guilt for the murder of the Jews. Was this crime really abetted by the eugenics ideal? One should remember that the Jews and other minorities have been murdered for thousands of years and I suspect that motives have been similar on all occasions, namely robbery with murder as the method of choice in disposing of the dispossessed individuals .... I do not wish to make Charles Davenport my scapegoat for this, as seems to be the fashion these days. As far as I can see, the motives behind the liquidation of the Jews were not eugenic, not genocide ... but just plain homicidal robbery." [48]

But Osborn felt, "We have to take into account that Europeans under Hitler suffered almost a traumatic experience." He had already cautioned, "We must not put out anything that would upset the best of the scientists." On another occasion, he warned, "This question of how to make selection an effective force is the crux of any eugenics program. It is completely irrelevant to get involved in red herrings regarding 'breeding of supermen.'" To dampen his colleagues' ardor, Osborn constantly reminded AES members, "The purpose of eugenics is not to breed some ... superior being, but to provide conditions ... for each succeeding generation to be genetically better qualified do deal with its environment." [49] Such remarks were made even as the AES continued to promote the gradual development of a superior race, albeit under the guise of genetic counseling and human genetics and with the full participation of hard science.

Eschewing high-profile agitation, Osborn insisted that only quiet work with scientists could accomplish the goal. In a candid 1965 letter, he wrote, "I started hopefully on this course thirty-five years ago and some day would be glad to tell you all of the steps we took -- the work we did, the conferences we held, and the money we put into the then Eugenica News -- about $30,000 a year, to propagandize eugenics. It got us no where, probably because we did not have the backing of the scientific world." [50]

That same year, after numerous genetic counseling and human heredity programs had been established, Osborn was able to confidently write to Paul Popenoe, "The term medical genetics has taken the place of the term negative eugenics." Keeping a low profile had paid off. On April 12, 1965, Osborn wrote a colleague at Duke University somewhat triumphantly, "We have struggled for years to rid the word eugenics of all racial and social connotations and have finally been successful with most scientists, if not with the public." [51]

Indeed, by 1967, Osborn's society had become a behind-the-scenes advisor for other major foundations seeking to grant monies to genetic research. Even the National Institutes of Health sought their advice in parceling out major multiyear grants for what was called "demographic-genetics." By 1968, a pathologist at Dartmouth Medical School was asking the Carnegie Institution if he could access the ERO's trait records on New Englanders for his "medical genetics project." [52]

During the sixties, seventies and eighties, the racist old guard of eugenics and human genetics died out, bequeathing its science to a new and enlightened generation of men and women. Many entities changed their names. For example, the Human Betterment League of North Carolina changed its name to the Human Genetics League of North Carolina in 1984. In Britain there were name changes as well. The Annals of Eugenics became the Annals of Human Genetics and is now a distinguished and purely scientific publication. The University College of London's Galton Chair of Eugenics became the Chair of Genetics. The university's Galton Eugenics Laboratory became the Galton Laboratory of the Department of Genetics. The Eugenics Society changed its name to the Galton Institute. [53]

In 1954, Eugenical News changed its name to Eugenics Quarterly and was renamed again in 1969 to Social Biology. Later the AES renamed itself the Society for the Study of Social Biology. As of March 2003, both the organization and its publication are operating out of university professors' offices. Social Biology editors and the leaders of the society are aware of their society's history, but are as far from eugenic thought as anyone could be. The group is now researching genuine demographic and biological trends. Professor S. Jay Olshansky of the University of Illinois at Chicago and Social Biology's associate editor as of March 2003, denounced eugenics and his journal's legacy during an interview with this reporter. "You couldn't find anyone better to run this society," he insisted. "I carry a potentially lethal genetic disorder. Plus, I'm a Jew. I would be the exact target of any eugenics campaign. I hate what eugenics and the Nazis stood for." [54]

The American Genetic Association, formerly the American Breeders Association, also continues today. As of March 2003, it was headquartered out of a scientist's home office in Buckeystown, Maryland. In the 1950s, the American Genetic Association still listed its three main endeavors at the top of its letterhead: "Eugenics-Heredity-Breeding." As of 2003, most of the organization's early twentieth-century papers were in storage. As of early 2003, AGA leaders knew little of the association's past. But the group still publishes Journal of Heredity. Once a font of eugenic diatribe, it is now a completely different journal with a different and enlightened mission. Its editor as of March 2003, Stephen O'Brien, is a distinguished government geneticist who has been featured in documentaries for his efforts to help develop countermeasures to fight plague-like diseases. [55]

Planned Parenthood went on to promote intelligent birth control and family planning for people everywhere, regardless of race or ethnic background. It condemns its eugenic legacy and copes with the dark side of its founder, Margaret Sanger. Planned Parenthood exists in a community of other population-control groups, such as the Population Council and the Population Reference Bureau, many of which sprang from eugenics. [56]

Cold Spring Harbor stands today as the spiritual epicenter of human genetic progress. Following the war, it devoted itself to enlightened human genetics and became a destination for the best genetic scientists in the world. In the summer of 1948, a visionary young geneticist named James Watson studied there. He returned in 1953 to give the first public presentation on the DNA double helix, which he had codiscovered with Francis Crick. Watson became director of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in 1968, and president in 1994. In February of 2003, the lab hosted an international celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the discovery of the double helix. [57]

The world is now filled with dedicated genetic scientists devoted to helping improve all mankind. They fight against genetic diseases, help couples bear better children, investigate desperately-needed drugs, and work to unlock the secrets of heredity for the benefit of all people without regard to race or ethnicity. Every day, more eager scientists join their ranks, determined to make a contribution to mankind. Genetics has become a glitter word in the daily media. Most of the twenty-first century's genetic warriors are unschooled in the history of eugenics. Most are completely divorced from any wisp of eugenic thought.

Few if any are aware that in their noble battle against the mysteries and challenges of human heredity, they have inherited the spoils of the war against the weak.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:53 am

CHAPTER 21: Newgenics

What now? The short answer is nobody knows. The world will not discover the latest human genetic trends in books like this one, but rather in the morning paper and on the evening news. Almost as soon as any author's page is typed, genetic advances redefine the realities, the language and the timelines. By creep and by leap, the world will be alternately shocked and lulled -- and then shocked again -- to learn how rapidly humanity and nature are changing.

Today's headline is tomorrow's footnote. In 1978, Louise Brown became the world's first test-tube baby and a braver new world shuddered. Since then, in vitro fertilization has become common reproductive therapy. In 1997, Dolly the cloned Scottish sheep captured cover stories and stirred acrimonious debate across the world. Shortly after that, several cows were cloned in Japan, but the news merely flashed across CNN as a fleeting text report behind the comical headline "Udderly Amazing." In 1998, the Chinese government launched a program to clone its pandas. Shortly thereafter, Spanish authorities approved cloning of a bucardo, a recently extinct mountain goat. In 2000, Virginia scientists cloned five pigs. Entire menageries are in various stages of being cloned, from monkeys to mastodons to family pets. [1]

Human clones are next. In late 2001, when editors were discussing this book, the experts insisted we were decades away from the first human clone. As chapters were being submitted, the prediction of "decades" shortened to "years." By the end of 2002, those same experts were debating whether any of several competing scientists had already successfully created the first cloned babies. There is no shortage of willing donors or parents, nor rumors to supply the field. Legislation enacted in several countries cannot address the international dimensions of the where, who and how of impregnation, gestation and conception itself. [2]

Predictions and timelines are little more than well-intentioned self-delusion. However, this much is certain: a precocious new genetic age has arrived. This genetic age, morphing at high velocity, can barely be comprehended by a world that doesn't even speak the language of genetic engineering. Certainly, the latest developments continuously flood a spectrum of scientific journals and symposia, prominent and obscure. Yet few can keep up with the moral, legal and technological implications, especially since much of the information is so technical.

At the same time, the consequences of genetic advance are obscured by hype and conspiratorial clamors. Adding more fog, human genetics is now in many ways dominated by capital investment, and many revelations are subject to the eighteen-month initial secrecy of patent applications, the protracted strictures of Wall Street financing and the permanence of corporate nondisclosure agreements. Many areas of human science are now trade secrets. Twentieth-century corporate philanthropy has given way to twenty-first-century corporate profits. Information is often controlled by public relations officers and patent attorneys. It takes a profoundly trained professional eye and a clear mind to separate fact from fantasy and blessings from menaces.

No one should fear the benefits of human reengineering that can obliterate terrible diseases, such as cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs. The list is long and genetic researchers are constantly laboring toward the next breakthrough. Every such medical advance is a long overdue miracle. Society should welcome corrective genetic therapies and improvements that will enhance life and better mankind.

Yet humanity should also be wary of a world where people are once again defined and divided by their genetic identities. If that happens, science- based discrimination and the desire for a master race may resurrect. This time it would be different. In the twenty-first century it will not be race, religion or nationality, but economics that determines which among us will dominate and thrive. Globalization and market forces will replace racist ideology and group prejudice to fashion mankind's coming genetic class destiny. If there is a new war against the weak it will not be about color, but about money. National emblems would bow to corporate logos.

Newgenics may rise like a phoenix from the ashes of eugenics and continue along the same route blazed in the last century. If it does, few will be able to clearly track the implications because the social and scientific revolutions will develop globally and corporately at the speed of a digital signal. The process will manifest as gradual genetics-based economic disenfranchisement. First, newgenics will create an uninsurable, unemployable and unfinanceable genetic underclass.

The process has already started.

***

Like eugenics, newgenics would begin by establishing genetic identity, which is already becoming a factor in society, much like ethnic identity and credit identity. DNA identity databanks are rapidly proliferating. The largest group of databanks warehouse the genetic identities of criminals, suspects, arrestees and unidentified individuals whose DNA is found at crime scenes. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's Combined National DNA Index System (CODIS) was inaugurated in 1990 and has been steadily data basing DNA from criminal encounters. All fifty states have now passed laws creating state databanks that feed CODOS using the FBI's software. By March of 2003, these state databanks were just becoming operational, but legal reviewers have already pointed out the state-to-state inconsistencies in collection and dissemination standards, as well as storage protocols. The FBI's databank, which in March of 2003 maintained more than 1.5 million profiles, is growing by some 100,000 profiles a month, and the Department of Justice has asked the FBI to prepare for up to fifty million. [3]

England's rapidly expanding National DNA Database is expected to hold DNA "prints" on three million individuals by 2004. Canada's newly-created databank stored some 23,000 samples as of March 2003, and adds more than a thousand profiles a month. Canada is also pioneering total robotic management and retrieval. China is building extensive databanks, employing more than a hundred DNA laboratories to process the samples. By March of 2003, national DNA databases had become active in Austria, Holland, Germany, Australia and many other countries. Local DNA dragnets in Germany, England, Australia and the United States have been launched by police to snare offenders who would otherwise never be identified. Such dragnets, which typically ask every citizen of a certain profile or geographical area to provide a DNA sample, are becoming more common. [4]

Police DNA databanks are a powerful and needed tool to help thwart crime and terrorism. They have not only trapped many criminals, they have also prompted the release of many wrongfully arrested or convicted. A number of death row inmates and long-term convicts have been freed only because of DNA analysis of previously untested evidence. Moreover, help ful medical information on individuals is already being discerned from police DNA "fingerprints." For example, British police DNA specialists have concluded that one of the ten DNA markers they analyze for criminal identification also carries information about diabetes. Information about various types of cancer has been derived from DNA fingerprints as well. [5]

The network of DNA databases will soon be global. Interpol conducts a regular International DNA Users Conference to proliferate and link police DNA databank systems worldwide. Soon every nation from Argentina to Zambia, and every local jurisdiction in between, will be able to tap into the international genetic network. [6]

While police DNA databanks are a necessity, they carry twenty-first-century problems. Each country will develop its own rules and regulations about storage, handling and access. There is as yet no body with the authority to set global standards for collection, maintenance or dissemination of DNA data. Quickly, society has learned that crime fighting is no longer the only reason to collect and organize D A fingerprints. Identification itself is a compelling issue. Military organizations now record DNA fingerprints of their soldiers. America's Armed Forces Repository of Specimen Samples, located in a facility outside Washington, maintains hundreds of thousands of profiles. The tomb of the unknown soldier will soon be a thing of the past. [7]

States are discussing local genetic identification banks for ordinary citizens as well. Connecticut's Department of Social Services already operates a special Biometric ID Project that stores digital fingerprints of its welfare recipients to combat widespread interstate welfare fraud. The Connecticut program currently only records digital scans of traditional fingerprints, but the agency has publicly indicated that stored biometric data could also include retinal scans and facial imaging. [8] Eventually, each state will probably develop its own biometric methodology, which would almost certainly include genetic identification. Such systems would ultimately proliferate down to the county and municipal levels, creating a diverse interoperable national network.

The events of September 11 only accelerated fascination with genetic identification. The technique is now widely studied as a weapon in the war against global terrorism. Think tanks have discussed a wide range of biometric recognition systems and smart cards to secure our society. Biometric databanks -- to include DNA fingerprints -- have been proposed for airports, immigration bureaus, customs stations, passport offices and even university programs for foreign students. Such systems would be deployed worldwide and could be used at airline counters and visa offices in countries across the world.

Genetic identification has also become a consumer commodity. Paternity suits, cultural and family ancestry claims, inheritance disputes and the simple fear of losing loved ones in terrorist attacks or massive calamities have caused many to obtain their own DNA information and store it personally or in private repositories. Genetic counseling is commonly advised for many couples who may be troubled by hereditary diseases or conditions. Such genetic screens are imperative for those carrying dreaded inherited diseases, such as Huntington's chorea, sickle-cell anemia, Tay-Sachs or a history of breast cancer. Registries are being built. Private labs now market their genetic testing.9 The field is proliferating in a global community, employing the Internet to enable all citizens from any country to contribute to and access various labs in Australia, the United States and England.

Soon DNA fingerprints will become as common as the traditional fingerprints first discovered by Galton. [10] He suspected they might reveal much about an individual. But he probably never expected that within a century his term for the unique sworls on one's fingertips would expand into the name for genetic identification that would reveal the secrets of a person's biological past and future.

Eventually, genetic databases will go far beyond the identification of mere individuals. The science will create family genetic profiles for use in litigation, health and employment that may function as credit bureaus do today. The day is coming when such family information will be routinely sought in conjunction with employment, insurance and credit granting.

The Medical Information Bureau (MIB) is the American insurance industry's massive databank that dispenses coded medical information and certain lifestyle traits on the millions of individuals who have applied for health and medical insurance. More than sixteen million individual records are stored at any given time. Records are retired after seven years. In their constant battle against fraud, the MIB enables insurance companies to double- check the veracity of applications. Like a credit bureau, the MIB collects information its insurance company members report, and dispenses it to them when they inquire. Since the 1970s, the MIB has included two codes to signify hereditary conditions, this reporter has learned. One code is for hereditary cardiovascular conditions, and the other is a general code to designate "other family hereditary medical conditions," according to MIB officials. As of March 2003, neither hereditary code is sub coded for any specified condition such as epilepsy, congestive heart failure or clinical anxiety, officials said. Instead, the codes are designed to alert insurers to seek additional information from their applicants. [11]

In a group interview with the databank's counsel, marketing director and manager, MIB officials repeatedly insisted the two codes did not signify a genetic predisposition to a health problem, but instead merely "a family hereditary" trait. Family hereditary codes, once gathered, are reported whether or not an individual applicant has shown any symptoms. The family's medical history itself, not the individual's condition, is the determining factor. MIB officials also insisted they would never search out and link other family members based on hereditary conditions. [12]

No DNA repository -- police, medical or governmental -- is currently linking family members. To do so would create modern-day, genetically-stigmatized Jukes or Kallikaks. It would be the first giant step down the road of newgenics. The financial ramifications are extraordinary and the potential for targeted exclusion is manifest. If the world sees such exclusions, it will probably see them first and most dramatically in the insurance industry.

Insurance companies vigorously claim they do not seek ancestral or genetic information. This is not true. In fact, the international insurance field considers ancestral and genetic information its newest high priority. The industry is now grappling with the notion of underwriting not only the individual applicant, but his family history as well. Insurers increasingly consider genetic traits "pre-existing conditions" that should either be excluded or factored into premiums. A healthy individual may be without symptoms, or asymptomatic, but descend from a family with a history of a disease. In the industry's view, that individual presumably knows his family history; the insurance company doesn't. Insurers call this disparity "asymmetrical information," and it is hotly discussed at numerous industry symposiums and in professional papers. Governments and privacy groups worldwide want to prohibit the acquisition and use of genetic testing. Many in the insurance world, however, argue that their industry cannot survive without such information, and the resulting coverage restrictions, exclusions and denials that would protect company liquidity. [13]

A June 2000 American Academy of Actuaries industry-only monograph entitled "Genetic Information and Medical Expense," obtained by this reporter, cautiously addressed the question. In a section headed "Asymmetrical Information," the monograph asked: "Would a ban on the use of genetic information merely prohibit insurers from asking for genetic tests, or would they also be barred from obtaining test results already known to the applicant? While a more encompassing ban may remove applicants' fears of genetically based denial of coverage, the imbalance of information would leave insurers at a disadvantage." The section concluded, "... biased selection would have a direct impact on premium rates, ultimately raising the cost of insurance to everyone." [14]

In the next section, entitled "Pre-existing Conditions," the monograph argued, "Such a ban [on genetic testing] could have more severe consequences over time, as genetic technology advances." In a series of attached potential "market scenarios," the monograph speculated about individuals with healthy heredities subsidizing those destined to become ill. In one scenario, the monograph stated, "The ultimate character of the market depends on the relative number of these 'genetically blessed' individuals." [15]

A Spring 2002 American Academy of Actuaries briefing paper entitled "The Use Of Genetic Information In Disability Income And Long- Term Care Insurance," obtained by this reporter, suggests that the insurance industry could become insolvent without the benefits of predictive testing. In a section labeled "Adverse Selection," the briefing paper declared, "Insurers maintain that the view of the consumer advocates conflicts with the economic realities of the voluntary insurance market. Insurers are concerned that if they were prohibited from obtaining genetic information from the medical records of applicants, then those applicants would know more about their genetic predisposition than the insurance company (asymmetric information), and more substandard and uninsurable individuals would qualify for insurance. Premiums could not be adjusted adequately to cover the deterioration of the insured population because the higher prices would drive out the healthy. As the insured population disproportionately became weighted toward those who were predisposed to certain genetic defects, experience would worsen and premiums would increase. The increase in premiums would further reduce the number of healthy policy-holders and could eventually cause the insurers to become insolvent." [16]

Insurance discrimination based on genetics has already become the subject of an active debate in Great Britain. British insurers were widely employing predictive genetic testing by the late 1990s to underwrite life and medical insurance, and utilizing the results to increase premiums and deny coverage. The science of such testing is by no means authoritative or even reliable, but it allows insurers to justify higher prices and exclusions. Complaints of genetic discrimination have already become widespread. A third of those polled from genetic disorder support groups in Britain reported difficulties obtaining insurance, compared to just 5 percent from a general population survey. Similarly, a U.S. study cited by the American insurance publication Risk Management found that 22 percent of nearly one thousand individuals reported genetic discrimination. A British Medical Journal study paper asserted, "Our findings suggest that in less clear cut instances, where genes confer an increased susceptibility rather than 100% or zero probability, some people might be charged high premiums that cannot be justified on the actuarial risk they present." [17]

Nearly three-quarters of a group surveyed by Britain's Human Genetics Commission (HGC) objected to insurer access to genetic testing. One man who tested positive for Huntington's told of being denied insurance when his genetic profile became known; later, when he did obtain a policy, it was five times more expensive. One forty-one-year-old London woman recalled that after her genetic report showed a gene associated with breast cancer, she was unable to buy life insurance. In consequence, when she attempted to purchase a home in 1995, it was more costly. Chairman of the HGC Helena Kennedy said: "Most of us are nervous and confused about where technology might be leading, and the potential challenges to privacy and confidentiality. We know from our survey that people are worried that these developments might lead to discrimination or exploitation, and are skeptical of the law's ability to keep up with human genetics." [18]

A Code of Practice for genetic testing by British insurers was established in 1997, but in 2001, Norwich Union Insurance, among other firms, admitted it had been using unapproved genetic tests for breast and ovarian cancers, as well as Alzheimer's. British insurers began widely utilizing genetic tests after a leading geneticist consulting for the industry's trade association recommended the action, a Norwich Union executive explained. The widespread concern in England is generation-to-generation discrimination pivoting not on race, color or religion, but on genetic caste. "We are concerned, of course," warned Dr. Michael Wilks, of the British Medical Association's Medical Ethics Committee, "that the more we go down the road of precision testing for specific patients for specific insurance policies the more likely we are to create a group who simply will not be insurable." Wilks called such a group a genetic "underclass." A member of Parliament characterized Norwich Union's actions as an attempt to construct a "genetic ghetto." [19]

The British government ultimately imposed an industry-wide moratorium permitting the use of just one type of test. In the subsequent three-year period, out of 800,000 Norwich policies, only 150 involved genetic tests. But British insurance industry sources argue that unless widespread genetic testing and access is restored, the industry and the health service will be overrun with claims. [20]

Moreover, some insurers may also want genetic data so they can use the information to rescind insurance, claiming that an individual fraudulently or even inadvertently omitted ancestral information from an application -- even if the insurance claim is unrelated to the medical condition. Precedents abound for such retroactive invalidations, albeit based on family health history rather than genetic testing. In a 1990 Quebec case, a man was killed in a car crash. He carried the gene for a degenerative disease, a form of myotonic dystrophy, and knew his father had suffered from the malady but omitted the information from his 1987 application for a $30,000 policy. His widow was denied a policy payment when Industrial Alliance, one of Quebec's largest insurers, prevailed in court, claiming fraud by omission. An Industrial Alliance attorney told this reporter that the company was aware the man came from a region known for a great deal of consanguinity and where myotonic dystrophy is common. Hence, the company's postcrash investigation bore fruit. [21]

The Industrial Alliance attorney added that such policy invalidations, based on applicants' statements, are common in Canada. A company attorney explained that his firm had even invalidated one car crash death when they learned the applicant indicated he was not a smoker, and a postcrash investigation revealed the man had actually smoked within the previous year. "Even my mother was angry at me for that one," the company attorney admitted. "She said, 'What does cigarettes have to do with the car crash?'" But, explained the attorney, under Quebec law, within the first two years of a life insurance policy, any material omission, deliberate or accidental, can be investigated to invalidate a life insurance claim. Mter two years, Quebec insurance companies are allowed to invalidate a policy if they can prove a deliberate omission. [22]

The Quebec precedent, which is now spreading to other countries, means that if a person does not possess his genetic information -- even innocently -- he is being omissive. On the other hand, possessing it makes the data automatically disclosable to the company at the point of application. Insurers worldwide argue that if they cannot require testing, they should be permitted access to the genetic information individuals will increasingly feel obligated to gather. Either way, genetics will soon be an underwriting factor in everyone's personal insurance.

Information from America's MIB, and repositories like it, is often used by insurers to detect omissive statements, this as a basis for denying claims and invalidating policies. The MIB cites combating application fraud as its chief mission. Ironically, many applicants simply do not know their ancestors' health conditions. For example, many American Jews descended from Europe do not know the exact health conditions of ancestors killed in the Holocaust or Eastern Europe's pogroms. Many African-Americans know little of their ancestors reared in slavery or abject twentieth-century poverty. Our mobile society includes many single-parent families where little is known about ancestral health problems. The paucity of genetic information is all the more reason for insurers to press for genetic bureaus to emulate the medical and credit bureaus they currently employ.

A cross-referenced genetic information bureau would permit insurers and financial institutions to create the commercial "genetic underclass" envisioned by critics. Insurers deny that such databanks are in the offing or even desired. Many continue to argue that the insurance community is simply not interested in genetics.

Yet the worldwide insurance industry is indeed rushing to integrate advanced genetics into their everyday business. In England, an insurance industry program called the UK Forum for Genetics and Insurance regularly brings genetic scientists and insurance executives together. The debate is an international one because all insurance is global. All risk -- no matter how local -- is studied, shared and reinsured by worldwide layers of the insurance industry. The International Actuarial Association's 2002 colloquium in Cancun highlighted genetics as one of its four main agenda items. "Are we expecting trouble for the insurance industry from genetic information?" an IAA program memo pointedly asked. MIB's industry intelligence website, as of March 2003, featured a "Special Section: Genetics" offering an in-depth survey of genetics and insurance, including writings on genetic discrimination, "Balancing Interests in the Use of Personal Genetic Data," and one major reinsurer's article entitled "The Future Will Not Wait for Us." [23]

For decades, insurers, realtors and financial institutions engaged in lucrative racial, sexual and geographic discrimination and preferential treatment known as redlining and greenlining. The terms derive from the colored lines drawn on maps by insurers and realtors to select neighborhoods for discrimination or preference. Such practices are now outlawed in many countries. But for genelining, the laws in various countries are vague, insufficient or nonexistent. Entire extended families of undesirable insureds could be identified with the same subtlety and secrecy with which geographic and ethnic undesirable insureds were identified a few decades ago. Corporate newgenics, blind to the color of one's flag, skin or religious creed, would be driven only by profit.

While insurers and banks may create a genetic underclass in finance, employers may create a genetic underclass among workers. AI; early as the 1960s, Dow Chemical undertook long-term genetic screening in search of mutagenic effects arising from its workplace. A 1982 federal government survey of several hundred U.S. companies found that 1.6 percent admitted they were utilizing genetic testing, mainly for hazardous workplace monitoring and screening new hires. In 1997, an American Management Association survey reportedly indicated that 6-10 percent of employers polled had asked their employees to submit to voluntary genetic testing. By and large, such screening was conducted openly and was necessary to protect workers from hazardous employment environments. [24] The increase in employer testing since the Human Genome Project was completed in June 2000 can only be imagined. How each company will use its information is neither standardized nor regulated.

In 1994, investigators discovered that the University of California's Lawrence Berkeley Lab went further than simply monitoring the workplace. At the suggestion of the U.S. Department of Energy, which largely funds the lab, medical officers tested employees' blood and urine samples for syphilis, sickle-cell and pregnancy. African-Americans and Latinos were often repeatedly tested for syphilis. The one white employee repeatedly tested for syphilis was married to an African-American. Employees sued. When asked by U.S. News & World Report why only minorities were singled out for repeated syphilis testing, a Berkeley Lab medical officer reportedly replied: "Because that's where the prevalence of the disease is. How come only people over a certain age would get an EKG? See the logic?" The man reportedly later denied he had made the inflammatory statement to U.S. News & World Report. [25]

A landmark federal court ruling in 1998 in favor of the Berkeley Lab employees established the Constitutional right of citizens to their genetic privacy. The court's opinion declared, "One can think of few subject areas more personal and more likely to implicate privacy interests than that of one's health or genetic makeup." The lab settled for $2.2 million in 2000 and deleted the employee information from its computers. [26]

Burlington Santa Fe, one of North America's largest railroads, went a step further in an attempt to stem soaring carpal tunnel claims by employees. Its medical director had read two medical journal articles on carpal tunnel, including one that indicated a genetic predisposition for the syndrome. In March of 2000, Burlington launched a program of surreptitious genetic testing of thirty-five employees making claims for carpal tunnel to determine whether they possessed genetic predisposition. Tests on some twenty employees were actually completed. The intent was to help the company deny carpal tunnel claims. [27]

Burlington's medical director selected Athena Diagnostics, the nation's premier genetic testing laboratory, to analyze the tests. Athena annually performs some 70,000 doctor-referred genetic tests for conditions such as hearing loss, movement disorders, epilepsy, mental retardation and carpal tunnel, a lab source told this reporter. The lab did not understand the purpose of Burlington's testing, a lab source said. Once they learned it was not for therapeutic but insurance purposes, "we were dismayed," a senior Athena executive told this reporter. Burlington was sued on a Friday afternoon in February 2001. Senior executives spent a frantic weekend reviewing the charges and settled by Monday with a $2.2 million payout to employees. Athena soon implemented safeguards such as requiring a signed patient authorization. But according to a company source, Athena still accepts genetic test requests from any licensed physician -- whether on behalf of an individual, insurance company or attorney -- and from any licensed lab in the U.S. or overseas. [28]

In the late nineties, government officials in Hong Kong refused to hire two men and fired a third after learning that each had a schizophrenic parent. The men had variously worked as a fireman, an ambulance worker and a customs officer. At first, the men were not told why the actions were taken. Government officials claimed the men were not fit for work because their parentage suggested a 10 percent chance they would also become schizophrenic. In fact, the officials had misread a genetic textbook; in reality there was only a 4 percent chance the employees would develop schizophrenia at their ages, compared to 1 percent for the general population. The three men sued. The judge stated that the "genetic liability to develop the disease their parent suffers from does not present a real risk to safety at either place of employment" and awarded the three $2.8 million in damages. [29] There was no genetic test involved in these three cases, just a review of the employees' written personnel files. But the incident again illustrates the danger of genetic information being misinterpreted and abused by local officials and corporate executives who have the power to discriminate.

***

Are national genetic databanks of all citizens coming? Sir Alec Jeffreys, the founder of DNA fingerprinting, originally believed that DNA fingerprints should be limited to criminals. But late in 2002, he changed his mind and declared that every person's profile should be added to the databank. Former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani has urged that a DNA fingerprint be recorded for every American at birth. [30] That day is coming.

In 1998, Iceland created the world's first national DNA database of its citizens. Almost all of its 275,000 citizens trace their lineages to the original Nordic Vikings of a prior millennium. In a unique arrangement, Iceland's national genetic code was sold to the genetic research and pharmacogenetic industries through an entity called deCODE Genetics. Less than 8 percent of Iceland's population opted out of the voluntary program, hence deCODE possesses virtually a complete national genetic and hereditary portrait ofIceland. Scientists at deCODE are currently utilizing the information in their study of a range of debilitating conditions, including respiratory and muscular diseases. Safeguards have been built into the program to conceal individuals' names. But at least one Icelander has sued the government to have her father's genetic history removed. As of March 2003, the case is still winding its way through Icelandic courts. Iceland's national genomic information will be made available to a wide variety of scientific, commercial and governmental entities in an Internet-based system that employs massive data storage drives codenamed "Shark." [31]

One main company manages and controls Iceland's genetic data. That company is already positioned to become the worldwide manager and disseminator of all genomic information globally. In anticipation of that day, the company currently operates genomic offices in California, New York, Zurich, Haifa, New Delhi and Tokyo. The name of the company is IBM. Its Iceland project operates under a division known as "Life Services -- Nordic." [32]

Estonia became the second nation to databank its entire population. In 2001, Estonia created the Estonia Genome Project to capture the genetic profiles of its 1.4 million citizens. A biotechnology industry article cited by the government's website explains, "Unlike remote Iceland, Estonia has long been a European stomping ground, ruled by a succession of Russian, Swedish, German, and Danish invaders who left their genetic heritage. Estonia's ethnic mix thus could be a major draw for pharmaceutical companies that want to find disease genes common to most Europeans." [33]

The tiny Polynesian nation of Tonga sold the information on its unique gene pool to Autogen, an Australian genetic research firm, in 2000. Tonga's 170 islands host a group of some 108,000 natives isolated for more than three millennia. Autogen was quoted as explaining its interest in Tonga's population: "The less mixture of inter-racial marriage, the more likely you are to be able to determine a particular gene that may be responsible for a particular disease, whether it's breast cancer or whether it's kidney disease." [34]

After reevaluation the arrangement between Tonga and Autogen was cancelled. Autogen instead focused on a Tasmanian genetic repository. "Tasmania is one of only a few populations in the world where up to seven-generation family pedigrees are available," the company announced. "This makes it an ideal location to study the genetics of complex diseases such as obesity and diabetes." [35]

In England, the UK Biobank recently opened as a repository for the medical information and genetic data of a half million volunteers. More commercial initiatives are underway to secure national genetic information around the world using ethnic, national, racial and even religious parameters. The pharmaceutical companies, governmental agencies and research foundations that operate these databanks will interconnect them globally. The devoted men and women laboring on these national projects are joining research hands to create new disease-fighting drugs, unlock the mysteries of hereditary disease and improve the quality of human life. In the process, prodigious masses of individual genetic information are being gathered. This data can be exchanged and retrieved at the speed of light from a computer and even downloaded to a cell phone. [36]

Lawmakers worldwide recognize both the great potential to mankind and the profound dangers. In America, the Genetic Anti-Discrimination Bill, which would prohibit genetic testing in group insurance and employment, has been percolating in Congress in various forms for years. In previous anti-discrimination laws, Congress has sought to remedy entrenched injustice. But in this case one of the bill's sponsors, U.S. Representative Louise Slaughter of New York, described the proposed legislation as "prophylactic," since Congress can hardly imagine what genetic misuses are in store. As of March 2003 the bill was stalled. [37]

Other countries are also grappling with protective legislation. As of March 2003, Finland and Sweden have been debating legislation for years. Denmark, however, has already banned insurance companies from utilizing genetic information. Employers in Austria are prohibited from utilizing employee genetic data obtained from any source. French bioethics legislation prohibits access by employers and insurance companies. [38]

But in reality, there are so many uses for genetic information -- proper and improper, obtainable from so many globalized sources, in so many for mats, employing such diverse and fast-moving technical and scientific jargon -- that drafting genuine protective legislation is frustrating to lawmakers and genetic privacy groups alike. Is a paper notation of a history of heart disease in a family the same as a genetic predisposition? Is a cholesterol test genetic? Is bloodwork genetic testing? Is information imported from one country governed by another country's laws? Japanese employers utilize genetic labs in America; whose safeguards on access, dissemination and use govern? What if the origin and destination is cyberspace? If an individual knows certain genetic information, why shouldn't he disclose it to insurance companies and employers like any other required medical information?

The problem is growing exponentially. "We need to stop genetic discrimination before it becomes widespread," Representative Louise Slaughter told this reporter. "The U.S. Congress has been debating my legislation for over seven years. Genetic discrimination is already occurring. If we can't pass a ban on these practices today, what are we going to do as the science becomes more complex? It is crucial that we, as a nation, state unequivocally that genetic discrimination is wrong and will not be tolerated." [39] Like-minded legislators and advocates in many countries echo those words.

***

Prominent voices in the genetic technology field believe that mankind is destined for a genetic divide that will yield a superior race or species to exercise dominion over an inferior subset of humanity. They speak of "self-directed evolution" in which genetic technology is harnessed to immeasurably correct humanity -- and then immeasurably enhance it. Correction is already underway. So much is possible: genetic therapies, embryo screening in cases of inherited disease and even modification of the genes responsible for adverse behaviors, such as aggression and gambling addiction. Even more exotic technologies will permit healthier babies and stronger, more capable individuals in ways society never dreamed of before the Human Genome Project was completed. These improvements are coming this decade. Some are available now.

But correction will not be cheap. Only the affluent who can today afford personalized elective health care will be able to afford expensive genetic correction. Hence, economic class is destined to be associated with genetic improvement. If the genetically "corrected" and endowed are favored for employment, insurance, credit and the other benefits of society, then that will only increase their advantages. But over whom will these advantages be gained? Those who worry about "genelining," "genetic ghettos" and a "genetic underclass" see a sharp societal gulf looming ahead to rival the current inequities of the health care and judicial systems. The vogue term designer babies itself connotes wealth.

The term designer babies is by and large just emblematic of the idea that genetic technology can do more than merely correct the frail aspects of human existence. It can redress nature's essential randomness. Purely elective changes are in the offing. The industry argues over the details, but many assure that within our decade, depending upon the family and the circumstances, height, weight and even eye color will become elective. Gender selection has been a fact of birth for years with a success rate of up to 91 percent for those who use it. [40]

It goes further -- much further. A deaf lesbian couple in the Washington, D.C., area sought sperm from a deaf man determined to produce a deaf baby because they felt better equipped to parent such a child. A child was indeed born and the couple rejoiced when an audiology test showed that the baby was deaf. A dwarf couple reportedly wants to design a dwarf child. A Texas couple reportedly wants to engineer a baby who will grow up to be a large football player. One West Coast sperm bank caters exclusively to Americans who desire Scandinavian sperm from select and screened Nordics. [41]

All of us want to improve the quality of our children's futures. But now the options for purely cosmetic improvements are endless. A commercialized, globalized genetic industry will find a way and a jurisdiction. It will be an international challenge to successfully regulate such genetic tampering and the permutations possible because few can keep up with the moment-to- moment technology.

It goes much further than designer babies. Mass social engineering is still being advocated by eminent voices in the genetics community. Celebrated geneticist James Watson, codiscoverer of the double helix and president of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, told a British film crew in 2003, "If you are really stupid, I would call that a disease. The lower 10 per cent who really have difficulty, even in elementary school, what's the cause of it? A lot of people would like to say, 'Well, poverty, things like that.' It probably isn't. So I'd like to get rid of that, to help the lower 10 per cent." [42] For the first half of the twentieth century, Cold Spring Harbor focused on the "submerged tenth"; apparently, the passion has not completely dissipated.

Following in the footsteps of Galton, who once amused himself by plotting the geographic distribution of pretty women in England, Watson also told the film crew, "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great." Watson gave no indication of what the standard for beauty would be. [43]

Some who speak of human cloning speak of mass replication of a perfected species. That is nothing less than a return to the campaign to create a master race -- but now aided by computers, digital communications and a globalized commercial infrastructure to accelerate the process. Some of America's leading thinkers on genetic evolution believe that within a few hundred years, the world will indeed be divided into the "genetically endowed" -- or "GenRich" as some call them -- and those who will serve them, almost like the worker bees Davenport envisioned. [44] Advocates of the genetic divide encourage it as a matter of personal choice, and argue that the same man who purchases eyeglasses, tutors his child or seeks medical attention to conquer his biological limitations is destined to take the next step and achieve genetic superiority. This is not the philosophy as much as the raison d'etre of newgenics.

It will transform the human species as we know it. Transgenic creatures -- created from two or more species -- are now commonplace. Genomic engineers have implanted a human embryo in a cow. In British Columbia, fish hatcheries have engineered an oversized salmon dubbed "Frankenfish" that is more profitable to raise. Geneticists have inserted the jellyfish's gene for luminescence into rhesus monkey DNA, creating a monkey that glows in the dark; the creature was named ANDi for "inserted DNA" in reverse. No one can successfully legislate or regulate experimentation on monkeys. In the suburbs of Washington, D.C., J. Craig Venter, one of the scientists who led the efforts to map the human genome, has announced plans to create a new form of bacterial life to aid in hydrogen energy production. [45]

Bioethicists are of little help in this hurtling new world. The still emerging field of bioethics includes self-ordained experts who grant interviews to television talk shows and newspapers even as they consult as scientific advisors to the very corporations under question. The do's and don'ts of genetic tinkering are being revised almost daily as the technology breeds an ever-evolving crop of moral, legal and social challenges that virtually redefine life itself.

It will take a global consensus to legislate against genetic abuse because no single country's law can by itself anticipate the evolving inter-collaborative nature of global genomics. Only one precept can prevent the dream of twentieth-century eugenics from finding fulfillment in twenty-first-century genetic engineering: no matter how far or how fast the science develops, nothing should be done anywhere by anyone to exclude, infringe, repress or harm an individual based on his or her genetic makeup. Only then can humankind be assured that there will be no new war against the weak.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:55 am

PART 1 OF 7

Notes

CHAPTER ONE


1. See Jill Durance and William Shamblin, ed., Appalachian Ways (Washington D.C.: The Appalachian Regional Commission, 1976), pp. 8-9, 18-19, 24, 32, 79-80. Also see Carolyn and Jack Reeder, Shenandoah Heritage: The Story of the People Before the Park (Washington D.C.: The Potomac Appalachian Trail Club, 1978).

2. "Welfare Cause For Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 April 1980.

3. "Welfare Cause For Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 April 1980.

4. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics, p. 257-258; see Bleecker Van Wagenen, chairman, Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population (ABA), p. 4; also see Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics, rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan Company, 1935), p. 396-397 as compared to Frederick Osborn, Preface to Eugenics (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1940) p. 14; also see J. David Smith, Minds Made Feeble: The Myth and Legacy of the Kallikaks (Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corporation, 1985) p. 21-36, 83-114.

5. The Lynchburg Story, dir. Stephen Trombley, prod. Bruce Eadie, Worldview Pictures, 1993, videocassette. Poe v. Lynchburg Training School and Hospital, 518 F. Supp. 789 (W.D. Va. 1981).

6. "Welfare Cause For Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 April 1980.

7. "Welfare Cause For Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 6 April 1980.

8. "Patient 'Assembly Line' Recalled By Sterilized Man," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 24 February 1980.

9. "Patient 'Assembly Line' Recalled By Sterilized Man," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 24 February 1980.

10. "Patient 'Assembly Line' Recalled By Sterilized Man," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 24 February 1980.

11. "Patient 'Assembly Line' Recalled By Sterilized Man," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 24 February 1980.

12. "Patient 'Assembly Line' Recalled By Sterilized Man," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 24 February 1980.

13. The Lynchburg Story.

14. The Lynchburg Story.

15. The Lynchburg Story.

16. The Lynchburg Story.

17. See Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926) p. xxix-xxxi, p. 306-308.

18. "Delegates Urge Wider Practice of Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 16 January 1934.

19. International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg Military Tribunal, Green Book, Volume V, p. 159. See International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg Military Tribunal, Green Book, Volume IV, p. 609-617, 1121-1127, 1158-1159. See United Nations Resolution 95 (I), "Affirmation of the Principles of International Law Recognized by the Charter of the Nurnberg Tribunal." United Nations Archives. See United Nations Resolution 96 (I), "The Crime of Genocide." United Nations Archives. See Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide," at http://www.unhchr.ch.

CHAPTER TWO

I. Code of Hammurabi, trans. L. W. King, item #48 at http://www.wsu.edu.

2. See Henry Hazlitt, The Conquest of Poverty (New Rochelle, NY: Arlington House, 1973), Chapter 6.

3. Deuteronomy 15: 11 NIV Study Bible.

4. Luke 7: 22; Matthew 10: 6-8, 11: 4. Matthew 5: 5.

5. Catholic Encyclopedia, x.v., "Hospital."

6. Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, s.v., "Orphan (In the Early Church)." English Heritage, "Hospitals," at http://www.eng-h.gov.uk.

7. E. M. Leonard, The Early History of English Poor Relief (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1900; London: Frank Cass & Co., 1965) pp. 3- 5. Encyclopedia Judaica, s.v., "Black Death."

8. Leonard, pp. 16-17.

9. Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967, s.v., "Henry VIII." Paul Slack, The English Poor Law 1531- 1782, (London: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1990), pp. 16-17.

10. See John Bohstedt, Riots and Community Politics in England and Wales 1790-1810 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1983).

11. Slack, p. 17. Hazlitt, Chapter 7. Leonard, pp. 10-11.

12. Slack, pp. 18, 25. Hazlitt, Chapter 7.

13. Charles L. Brace, "Pauperism," North American Review 120 (1875) as cited by Elof Axel Carlson, The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), p. 76. Carlson, p. 77. Hazlitt, Chapter 7.

14. James Greenwood, The Seven Curses of London (London: S. Rivers and Co., 1869) Chapter XXIII.

15.Thomas R. Malthus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, as selected by Donald Winch (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) pp. 19, 100-101, 221.

16. Charles Darwin, The Origin of the Species (New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1881), chapter 3. Herbert Spencer, Social Statics, (New York: Robert Schalkenback Foundation, reprint, 1970), pp. 58-60, 289-290, 339-340.

17. Darwin, The Origin of the Species, Chapter 3.

18. See Robert C. Bannister, Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo-American Social Thought (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1979), p. xii. See Carlson, pp. 124. See Daniel Kevles, In The Name of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985), pp.20-21.

19. Genesis 30: 38-42. Matthew 7: 18-19.

20. Herbert Spencer, The Principles of Biology (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1884) Vol. I, p. 183.

21. V. Kruta and V. Orel, "Johann Gregor Mendel," Dictionary of Scientific Biography, (New York: Scribner's, 1970-1980), Vol. IX, p. 277-283, as cited by Kevles, p. 41. Vitezslav Orel, Gregor Mendel: The First Geneticist (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996) p. 169.

22. Charles Darwin, The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication (London: John Murray, 1868; reprint, New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1883), vol. 2, p. 370.

23. Francis Galton, Memories of my Life, (London: Methuen & Co., 1908), pp. 46-47, 58. Kevles, p.5.

24. Letter, Francis Galton to Samuel Galton, 5 December 1838 and Letter, Francis Galton to Samuel Galton 10 November 1838, as cited by Kevles, p. 303, footnote 10. Copperplate prepared for Biometrika, circa 1888, at http://www.mugu.com.

25. Karl Pearson, The Life, Letters, and Labours of Francis Galton (Cambridge: Cambridge at the University Press, 1930), Vol. I, p. 232. Galton, Memories of my Life, p. 3 15.

26. Pearson, Vol. II, p. 340.

27. Galton, Memories of my Life, pp. 232, 325.

28. Francis Galton, Finger Prints (New York: Da Capo Press, 1965), p. iv.

29. Francis Galton, Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry Into Its Laws And Consequences Second Edition (London: Macmillan & Co., 1892; reprint, London: Watts & Co., 1950), p. 1. "Sir Francis Galton F.R.S. 1822-1911," at http://www.mugu.com.

30. Galton, Hereditary Genius, p. I. Francis Galton, Restrictions in Marriage (American Journal of Sociology, 1906), p. 50.

31. Pearson, Vol. I, p. 32.

32. Pearson, Vol. IIIA, p. 348.

33. Personal scrap of paper: Galton Papers 138/1, UCL. Francis Galton, Inquiries Into Human Faculty And Its Development (London: JM Dent & Co., 1883), p.17.

34. Personal scrap of paper.

35. Francis Galton, Natural Inheritance (London: Macmillan & Co., 1889), pp. 72-79. Francis Galton, "On The Anthropometric Laboratory at the Late International Health Exhibition," Journal of the Anthropological Institute, 1884: pp. 205-206.

36. August Weismann, Essays Upon Heredity and Kindred Biological Problems (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1889), pp. 190-191.

37. Galton, Natural Inheritance (London: Macmillan, 1889), pp. 2, 192-197. Francis Galton, "Regression Towards Mediocrity in Hereditary Stature," Journal of the Anthropological Institute (1885), p. 261. See Francis Galton, "A Diagram of Heredity," Nature (1898).

38. Galton, H, Hereditary Genius, p. xviii.

39. Galton, Hereditary Genius, p. xx.

40. Francis Galton, "Index To Achievements of Near Kinsfolk of Some Of The Fellows Of The Royal Society" (Unrevised proof, 1904 papers), p. 1: UCL.

41. Pearson, vol. IIIA, p. 349.

42. Francis Galton, "Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims," The American Journal of Sociology Vol. X, No. 1 (July 1904).

43. "Notes On The Early Days Of The 'Eugenics Education Society, ''' p. 1: Wellcome Library SA/EUG/B11.

CHAPTER THREE

1. Gary B. Nash, Red, White, and Block: The Peoples of Early America (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974), pp. 168-169, 186. See Library of Congress, Images of African- American Slavery and Freedom, at http://www.loc.gov.

2. Daniel J. Kevles, In The Nome of Eugenics, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), p. 21. Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1963), pp. 37-38.

3. Michael W. Perry, ed., The Pivot of Civilization: In Historical Perspective (Seattle, WA: Inkling Books, 2001), p. 31.

4. Israel Zangwill, "The Melting Pot: Drama in Four Acts" (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1909; reprint, 1919), pp. 215-216.

5. U.S. Department of Commerce, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, (Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1976).

6. See Paula Mitchell Marks, In a Barren Land: American Indian Dispossession and Survival (New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1998). See Carey McWilliams, North From Mexico: The Spanish-Speaking People of the United States, (New York: Greenwood Press, 1968), pp. 51, 112-113. See Dr. David Pilgrim, "Jim Crow: Museum of Racist Memorabilia" at http://www.ferris.edu. See Immigration and Naturalization Service, Chinese Exclusion Act of May 6, 1882 (22 Statutes-at-Large 58) at http://www.ins.usdoj.gov. See Immigration and Naturalization Service, Act of April 29, 1902 (32 Staatutes-at-Large 176) at http://www.ins.usdoj.gov.

7. Edward Alsworth Ross, "The Value Rank of the American People," The Independent, pp. 57, 1063.

8. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States, 1889-1918 (New York: NAACP, 1919; reprint, New York: Negro Universities Press, 1969) pp. 7, 30-31, 45, 51, 58, 70.

9. Dr. Cecil E. Greek, Lecture Notes, The Positive School: Biological and Psychological Factors at http://www.criminology.fsu.edu.

10. Author's interview with Robin Walsh, Local History Librarian with SUNY Ulster, 13 November 2002. See Alf Evers, Woodstock: History of an American Town, (Woodstock, New York: The Overlook Press, 1987).

11. Richard L. Dugdale, The Jukes (New York: Putnam, 1910), pp. 1-15. "Bad Seed or Bad Science?" New York Times, 8 February 2003. See Oscar C. McCulloch, "The Tribe of Ishmael: A Study In Social Degradation," Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Correction (Boston: George H. Ellis, 1888), p. 154. See Norbert Vogel, "Die Gippe Delta," Ziel und Weg, vol. 7 (1937), No. 4. pp. 85-88. See Dr. Daniel R. Brower, "Medical Aspects of Crime," Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 32 (1899), p. 1283.

12. Dugdale, pp. 62, 65-66, 72. Richard L. Dugdale, "Origin of Crime in Society," The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 48, Issue 288 (October 1881), p. 462.

13. Edward S. Morse, "Natural Selection and Crime," Popular Science Monthly, Vol. 41 (1892), pp. 433-446, as cited by Elof Alex Carlson, The Unfit (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Press, 2001), p. 171.

14. Diane B. Paul, Controlling Human Heredity (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International, Inc., 1995), p. 44. Carlson, p. 172. McCulloch, pp. 154-155. The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th Ed., s.v. "Jackson Whites."

15. McCulloch, pp. 154-155.

16.Vitezslav Orel, Gregor Mendel: The First Geneticist (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996) pp. 2, 256-257.

17. Orel, pp. 99, 102, 104-105, 120-121.

18. Orel, pp. 270-271. Carlson, p. 137.

19. Orel, pp. 283-288, 291. Caleb Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism at the Eugenics Congress," British Journal of Inebriety, October 1912, p. 6.

20. Letter, Francis Galton to William Bateson, 8 September 1904: Galton Papers, University College London 245/3. Letter, Francis Galton to William Bateson, 12 June, 1904: Galton Papers, University College London 245/3.

21. Karl Pearson and Ethel M. Edlerton, A Second Study of the Influence of Alcoholism on the Physique and Ability of the Offspring (London: Dulau and Co., 1910) pp. 39-40.

22. Galton to Bateson, 8 September 1904. Francis Galton, Index To Achievements of Near Kinsfolk (Unrevised proof, 1904), p. iii: Galton Papers, University College London 245/3.

23. Francis Galton, Restrictions in Marriage (American Journal of Sociology, 1906), p. 3. Francis Galton, Memories of My Life (London: Methuen & Co., 1908), p. 310.

24. Galton, Restrictions in Marriage, pp. 7, 12-13.

25. Galton, Memories, 322. "Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims," The American Journal of Sociology Vol. X, No. 1.

26. John Franklin Bobbitt, "Practical Eugenics," The Pedagogical Seminary vol. XVI (1909), p. 388.

27. Bobbitt, p. 385, 387, 391.

28. Bobbitt, p. 388. Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936), p. 167.

29. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926), p. 165. Grant, p. 65.

30. Stoddard, pp. 165-166, 167.

31. Grant, pp. 19-20, 188-212.

32. Grant, pp. 29, 60-64.

33. Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin No. 10A: The Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), p. 16.

34. Grant, p. 18.

35. Biography of Andrew Carnegie at http://www.carnegie.org. Eugenics Record Office, "Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenic Record Office" (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor), p. 3.

36. Eugenics Record Office, "Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenic Record Office," pp. 5-6, 12.

37. See Bleecker Van Wagenen, Chairman, Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population, ABA. See Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A.

38. E. Carlton MacDowell, "Charles Benedict Davenport, 1866-1944: A Study of Conflicting Influences," BIOS vol. XVII No. 1, pp. 4, 8.

39. MacDowell, p. 5.

40. MacDowell, pp. 4-7.

41. MacDowell, pp. 4-5.

42. MacDowell, p. 5.

43. MacDowell, pp. 8, 10.

44. MacDowell, p. 12. Carnegie Institution of Washington Administrative Files, Biography of Charles Davenport, pp. 1-2.

45. MacDowell, pp. 19, 27. See also autographed photograph, c. 1928 in March 1944 Eugenical News.

46. MacDowell, pp. 8, 14, 33. Kevles, p. 52.

47. Letter, George Macon to Charles B. Davenport, 24 June 1899: APS. Letter, C.H. Walters to Charles B. Davenport, 24 May, 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, American Net & Twine Co. to Charles B. Davenport, 27 July 1899: APS B-D27. Letter, American Net & Twine Co. to Charles B. Davenport, 1 August, 1899: APS B-D27. Letter, University of Minnesota to Charles B. Davenport, 1 September, 1898: APS B-D27.

48. Letter, Walter Rankiss to Charles B. Davenport, 6 June 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, Rudolph Hering to Charles B. Davenport, 28 March, 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, Katherine Hobach to Franklin Hooper, 16 April, 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, C.O. Townsend to Charles B. Davenport, 2 April, 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, Dudley Greene to Charles B. Davenport, 11 May, 1898: APS B-D27. Letter, C.O. Townsend to Charles B. Davenport, 14 June, 1898: APS.

49. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 6 April, 1897: APS: B-D27 Galton, Sir Francis. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 5 May, 1897: APS: B-D27 Galton, Sir Francis.

50. Francis Janet Hassencahl, "Harry H. Laughlin, "Expert Eugenics Agent" for the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization" (Ph. D. diss., Case Western Reserve University, 1970), p. 53. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 20 October, 1899: APS: B-D27 Galton, Sir Francis. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 19 November, 1903: APS: B-D27 Galton, Sir Francis.

51. See State Laws Limiting Marriage Selection, Eugenics Record Office (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1913), pp. 31-36. Also see Charles B. Davenport, Race Crossing in Jamaica, (Washington: Carnegie Institute of Washington, 1929). Charles B. Davenport, "Heredity and Race Eugenics," p. 10: APS: B- 027.

52. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York: Arno Press & The New York Times, 1972), pp. 213, 214, 218.

53. Stoddard, p. 165.

54. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Professor V. L. Kellogg, 30 October 1912: APS: B-D27- Kellogg, Professor V.L.

55. Margaret Sanger, Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography, (New York: W. W: Norton & Company, 1938; reprinted by Dover Publications, Inc., 1971) p. 374.

56. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Franklin Hooper, 21 April 1902: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3.

57. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to the Trustees of the Carnegie Institution, 5 May 1902: APS B- 027 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3.

58. Charles B. Davenport, "A Summary of Progress in Experimental Evolution," p. 5: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #2. Letter, Franklin Hooper to Charles B. Davenport, 23 May 1902: APS B- 027 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3.

59. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Henry Osborn, 30 May 1902: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3. Letter, Henry Osborn to Charles B. Davenport, 25 July 1902: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3. Letter, Franklin Hooper to Charles Wolcott, 24 July 1902: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3.

60. Davenport to Osborn, 30 May 1902.

61. Osborn to Davenport, 25 July, 1902. Davenport, "A Summary of Progress," pp. 4-5.

62. MacDowell, pp. 19-21. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 28 September 1902: APS: B-D27 Galton, Sir Francis. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Trustees of the Carnegie Institution, S March 1903: APS BD27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #3.

63. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to John S. Billings, 3 May 1903: APS B-D27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #1. Davenport, "A Summary of Progress," pp. 13- 14.

64. Letter, Charles Davenport to Madison Grant, 3 May 1920: APS B-D27 Grant, Madison #3. See Stoddard, pp. xxix-xxxi, 306-308.

65. Davenport to Billings, 3 May 1903.

66. Davenport to Billings, 3 May 1903.

67. Davenport to Billings, 3May 1903. MacDowell, p. 19.

68. W. M. Hays, The American Breeders Association to its Parent, The Association of American Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations, Greetings (circa 1910): Truman. American Breeders' Association, "Minutes," First Annual Meeting, 1903, p. 1-2: APS.

69. John H. Noyes, Essay on Scientific Propagation, (Oneida, NY: Oneida Community, 1872), section 2, section 15.

70. Author's interview with National Weather Service, 1 October 2002. American Breeders' Association, "Minutes of First Annual Meeting, St. Louis, Missouri," p. 4: ABA. American Breeders' Association, "Constitution and By-Laws of the American Breeders' Association": ABA. American Breeders' Association, "Committees and Their Specific Duties," Annual Report, American Breeders' Association, vol. II (1906), p. 11.

71. Charles B. Davenport, secretary, "Report of Committee on Eugenics," American Breeders Association (Washington D.C.: American Breeders Association, 1911) vol. VI, pp. 92, 93, 94.

72. Willet M. Hays, "Constructive Eugenics," The American Breeders Magazine, Vol. III, No. 1 (1912).

73. MacDowell, p. 24. Letter, John Billings to Charles Walcott, 23 December 1903: APS BD27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #1. Biography of Andrew Sledd, President of the University of Florida at http://www.president.ufl.edu. History of Northwestern University Library at http://www.library.northwestern.edu.

74. Billings to Walcott 23 December, 1903. Letter, Charles Davenport to John Billings, 6 February 1904: APS BD27 Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence #2.

75. Billings to Walcott 23 December, 1903. Biography of John Shaw Billings at http://www.arlingtoncemetery. com.

CHAPTER FOUR

1. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to John S. Billings, 6 February 1904: APS: Cold Spring Harbor Beginnings Correspondence # I. E. Carleton MacDowell, "Charles Benedict Davenport, 1866-1944. A Study of Conflicting Influences," BIOS vol. XVII, No. 1, p. 24.

2. MacDowell, p. 24. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), pp. 2-3: CSH: CIW Administrative Files: Dept. of Genetics-Biological Laboratory Plans for Unified Operation.

3. Announcement of Station, p. 4.

4. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Francis Galton, 27 October 1905: APS. Letter, Francis Galton to Charles B. Davenport, 21 November 1905: APS: BD27- Galton, Sir Francis.

5. Charles B. Davenport, "Annual Reports of the Station for Experimental Evolution," Carnegie Institution Year Book, (1908) No. 7, p. 90. MacDowell, p. 26.

6. Charles B. Davenport, secretary, "Report of Committee on Eugenics," American Breeders' Association Annual Report (1911) vol. VI, pp. 92- 94. See also Bleecker Van Wagenen, chairman, Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population: ABA.

7. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 15 April 1909: APS B: D27- Alexander Graham Bell #4. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 14 May 1909 APS B: D27 - Alexander Graham Bell #4. Davenport, "Annual Reports of the Station for Experimental Evolution," p. 87.

8. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1911; reprint, New York: Arno Press Inc., 1972), p. 260. Harry Laughlin, secretary, Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), p. 16.

9. McDowell, pp. 25-26.

10. Davenport, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics, p. 271. Davenport, "Report of Committee on Eugenics," pp. 91, 92.

11. Davenport, "Report of Committee on Eugenics" (1906), pp. 92-93.

12. McDowell, p. 29.

13. Maury Klein, The Life and Legend of E.H. Harriman, (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000), p. 118, 152, 182- 183, 184, 218-219, 357. Letter, William Loeb to C. Hart Merriam, 28 May 1907: APS.

14. Klein, pp. 6, 440-441.

15. "Death of Mrs. Rumsey," Eugenical News, vol. XIX (1934), p. 106. McDowell, p. 29. Klein, p. 299.

16. Klein, p. 8. McDowell, p. 29.

17. McDowell, p. 29.

18. Eugenics Record Office, Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York by Mrs. E.H. Harriman to the Carnegie Institution of Washington and of its Acceptance by the Institution (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1918), pp. 19, 21: CSH.

19. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 23 May 1910: APS B: D27 Harriman, Mrs. E #1.

20. Davenport to Harriman, 23 May 1910.

21. See Davenport to Harriman, 23 May 1910.

22. Davenport to Harriman, 23 May 1910. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 10 October, 1910: APS B: D27 APS B: D27 Harriman, Mrs. E #1.

23. Davenport to Harriman, 23 May 1910.

24. Davenport to Harriman, 23 May 1910.

25. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 20 July, 1920: APS B: D27 APS B: D27 Harriman, Mrs. E #1.

26. See O.M. Means, Kirksville, Missouri: Its Business and its Beauties as seen through the Camera (Journal Print Co, 1900) p. 1-2, 16; see Wallin Directory Company, Kirksville City Directory, (Quincy, Illinois: Hoffman Printing Co., 1899), p. 1.

27. P. O. Selby, History of the First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) of Kirksville, Missouri (1964): Truman E-1-1:10. P. O. Selby, One Hundred Twenty-Three Biographies of Deceased Faculty Members (Northeast Missouri State Teachers College, 1963), pp. 47-48.

28. Selby, History of the First Christian. Interviews with Mrs. Harold McClure, as cited by Frances Janet Hassencahl, "Harry H. Laughlin, 'Expert Eugenics Agent' for the House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, 1921 to 1931." (Ph. D. diss., Case Western Reserve University, 1970), pp. 45-46. Mark H. Laughlin, A Reverie: or One Day in a Woman's Life (Honolulu, HI, n.d.), p. 18-19: Truman E- 1-1:10

29. Laughlin, A Reverie: or One Day in a Woman's Life. Charles B. Davenport, "Harry Hamilton Laughlin 1880-1943," Eugenical News Vol. XXVIII (1943), p. 43. Hassencahl, pp. 42-43. Private Papers of Mrs. George Laughlin as cited by Hassencahl, pp. 45. Interview with Mrs. McClure, as cited by Hassencahl, p. 45.

30. Laughlin papers as cited by Hassencahl, pp. 49-50.

31. Interview with Mark Laughlin, cited by Hassencahl, pp. 50-51.

32. Harry H. Laughlin, unpublished manuscript, "World Government: The Structure and Functioning of a Feasible Civil Government of the Earth": Truman B-5-1:10. Harry H. Laughlin, unpublished manuscript, "Chapter II: Text: The Proposed World Constitution": Truman B-5-2B:7. Harry H. Laughlin, unpublished manuscript, " The Principles of Nation- Rating": Truman B-5-1:6. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to H.G. Wells, 19 February 1921: Truman B-5-4B:12.

33. Letter, Hamilton Fish Armstrong to Harry H. Laughlin, 11 June 1941: Truman C-4-5 9. Letter, Embajada De Colombia to Harry H. Laughlin: 4 June 1941, Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, H.R. Waddell to Harry H. Laughlin, 24 June 1941: Truman C-4-5: 9. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Ida J. Dacus, 29 May 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, William Allan to Harry H. Laughlin, 26 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, Mrs. Anthony Conrad Eiser to Harry H. Laughlin, 30 July 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, Andres Pastoriza to Harry H. Laughlin, 5 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, Paul Popenoe to Harry H. Laughlin, 9 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, Verna B. Grimm to Harry H. Laughlin, 9 June 1941: Truman C-4- 5: 9. Letter, G. Burke to Harry H. Laughlin, 10 June 1941: Truman C-4-5: 9. Letter, W. E. Rendell to Harry H. Laughlin, 5 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:7. Letter, Francisco Castillo Najera to Harry H. Laughlin, 6 June, 1941: Truman C-4-5:7. Letter, Luis Fernandez to Harry H. Laughlin, 10 June 1941: Truman C- 4- 5:7. Letter, Arturo Lares to Harry H. Laughlin, 4 June 1941: Truman C-4-5: 7. Letter, Secretary to Mr. Fosdick to Harry H. Laughlin, 12 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, S. Shepard Jones to Harry H. Laughlin, 12 June 1941: Truman C-4-5:9. Letter, Henry Allen Moe to Harry H. Laughlin, 20 September 1932: Truman C-2-2:11; see also "Conquest by Immigration (Sent to the following)": Truman C-4-3:1.

34. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Madison Grant, 16 January 1928: Truman C-2-5:11. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Dr. Domingo F. Ramos, 23 September 1927: Truman C-2-5:11. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Madison Grant, 26 January 1928: Truman C-2-5: 11. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 7 April 1928: Truman C-2-5:11. Letter, G.L.B. to Mr. Carr, 19 January 1928: State Department 59.250.22.33.7 box 6484. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, 23 March 1928: State Department 59.250.22.11.2 box 5502. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to President Calvin Coolidge, 28 December 1927: State Department 59.250.22.33.7 box 6484. Letter, Husband to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, 7 April 1928: State Department 59.250.22.11.2 box 5502. Letter, Carr to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, 13 April 1928: State Department 59.250.22.11.2 box 5502. Letter, Carr to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, 12 April 1928: State Department 59.250.22.11.2 box 5502. Letter, Carr to Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg, 18 April 1928: State Department 59.250.22.11.2 box 5502. Letter, W.H. Williams to Harry H. Laughlin, 8 June 1921: Truman E-2-5: 5. Letter, Acting Secretary of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace to Harry H. Laughlin, 28 October 1919: Truman E-2-5:18.

35. Laughlin papers, cited by Hassencahl, p. 50.

36. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 17 May 1907: CSH Laughlin Correspondence. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 30 May, 1907: CSH Laughlin Correspondence.

37. Hassencahl, p. 54.

38. Davenport to Harriman, 20 July 1910. Davenport to Harriman, 10 October 1910.

39. Davenport to Harriman, 10 October 1910.

40. Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin No. 10B: The Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), p. 145: CSH. Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin No. 10A: The Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), pp. 46-47, 58: CSH.

41. Davenport to Harriman, 20 July, 1910. Harry H. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office," American Breeders Magazine, No. 2, vol. II (1911).

42. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office."

43. Report on the Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the ERO, by Laughlin, ABA reprint No. 2 Vol. II, 1911 pp. 1-2.

44. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office."

45. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office." Carnegie Institution of Washington, Year Book No. 10 (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1912), p. 80. See The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., s.v. "Huntington's disease."

46. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office." Eugenics Record Office, Report for Six Months Ending March 31, 1911, CSH, p. 1. Historical Overview: Development of Public Responsibility for the Mentally Ill in Massachusetts (article on-line: accessed 19 September 2002); available from http://www.1856.org. See Charles B. Davenport and David Weeks, A First Study of Inheritance in Epilepsy: Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 4 (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 1911), p. 5: CSH.

47. Davenport and Weeks, p. 2. Eugenics Records Office, "Method for Studying the Hereditary History of Patients as used at the New Jersey State Village for Epileptics, New Jersey State Village for Epileptics Schedules and Forms," circa 1911, p. 6: APS ERO Series 1.

48. "Method for Studying the Hereditary History of Patients as used at the New Jersey State Village for Epileptics," pp. 2, 8.

49. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics, pp. 257-258. See Van Wagenen, p. 4. Also see Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics, rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan Company, 1935) pp. 396-397 as compared to Frederick Osborn, Preface to Eugenics (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1940) p. 14. Also see J. David Smith, Minds Made Feeble: The Myth and Legacy of the Kallikaks (Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems Corporation, 1985) pp. 21-36, 83-114.

50. Davenport and Weeks, pp. 2, 19, 29-30. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Mrs. E. H. Harriman, 18 December 1911: APS B: D27 - Harriman, Mrs. E.H. #3.

51. Davenport and Weeks, pp. 9-10.

52. Davenport and Weeks, p. 1.

53. Davenport and Weeks, p. 30.

54. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office," pp. 109-110.

55. Laughlin, "Report On The Organization and the First Eight Months' Work of the Eugenics Record Office," p. 110. Also see Albert Edward Wiggam and Stephen S. Visher, "Needed: Faculty Family Allowances," Eugenics, Vol. III, No. 12 (December 1930), pp. 445-446. Also see discussion, "The Faculty Birth Rate: Should It Be Increased?," Eugenics, Vol. III, No. 12 (December 1930), pp. 458-460.

56. Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, pp. 3, 21. Letter, David Starr Jordan to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 22 July, 1910: APS B: D 27 -Harriman, Mrs. E. #1. Origins of Cold Spring Harbor. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 9 March 1915: APS B: D27 Alexander Graham Bell #7. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Dr. William H. Welch, 1 March 1915: APS B: D27 Alexander Graham Bell #7. "A County Survey," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916), p. 24.

57. Van Wagenen, p. 2. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, p.5.

58. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 5, 6, 12, 17. Dr. Lucien Howe, "Presidential Address of the Eugenics Research Association: The Control of Law of Hereditary Blindness," Eugenical News, July 1928, p. 6. See Letter from Lucien Howe to Dr. Best, 4 October 192 7: APS Series V.

59. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 7, 8.

60. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 15-16. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics, p. 221.

61. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, p. 15. Van Wagenen, p. 5.

62. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, p. 15. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics, pp. 221-222.

63. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, p. 15.

64. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 8, 9.

65. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10B, p. 74, 75. Also see Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement, (Washington, D.C.: Dialog Press, 1999) pp. 4, 26.

66. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10B, pp. 74, 75.

67. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 45-47, 53-56. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics, p. 259. Van Wagenen, p. 7. Also see The Human Betterment Foundation, Human Sterilization (Pasadena: The Human Betterment Foundation, 1929). Also see Popenoe, pp. 150- 151. Also see E.S. Gosney and Paul Popenoe, Sterilization for Human Betterment (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1929), pp. xv, 21, 31.

68. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 45-46, 55.

69. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, pp. 6, 13. Van Wagenen, p. 20. Karl Pearson and Ethel Elderton, A Second Study of the Influence of Parental Alcoholism on the Physique and Ability of the Offspring (London: Dulau and Co. Limited, 1910), pp. 39-40.

70. Van Wagenen, p. 13.

71. Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, p. 9.

CHAPTER FIVE

1. Martin W. Barr, Mental Defectives (Philadelphia: Blakiston, 1904; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1973), p. 195-6. Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1963), p. 48.

2. "Obituary: Dr. Harry C. Sharp: A Medical Leader," The New York Times, 1 November 1940. ElofAxel Carlson, The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), pp, 207, 208, 224. Dr. A. J. Ochsner, "Surgical Treatment of Habitual Criminals," Journal of the American Medical Association vol. XXXIII (1899), p. 867 -868.

3. Dr. Harry C. Sharp, "The Severing of the Vasa Deferentia and its Relation to the Neuropsychopathic Constitution," New York Medical Journal, 8 March 1902, p. 413; Dr. Daniel R. Brower, "Medical Aspects of Crime," Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. XXXII (1899), pp. 1282-1287.

4. Sharp, p. 413. Carlson, p. 214.

5. Sharp, p. 412.

6. Sharp, pp. 413-414.

7. "An Act for the Relief of the Poor," 30 January 1824: Indiana Historical Society. Also see Oscar C. McCulloch, "The Tribe of Ishmael: A Study In Social Degradation," Proceedings of the National Conference of Charities and Correction (Boston: George H. Ellis, 1888), pp. 154-159.

8. McCulloch, pp. 154, 159.

9. McCulloch, pp. 154, 157-159. Carlson, p. 174.

10. Carlson, pp. 185-186, 188, 190.

11. Thurman B. Rice, "A Chapter In The Early History of Eugenics in Indiana," selected by Paul Popenoe, Eugenical News vol. XXXIII No 1-2 (March-June 1948), pp. 24-25.

12. Carlson, pp. 210-211. Rice, p. 27.

13. Carlson, pp. 218-219. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Chicago: Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922), p. 35.

14. Laughlin, p. 36.

15. Carlson, p. 2 11.

16. Laughlin, p. 15.

17. Bleecker Van Wagenen, chairman, Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population, p. 18: ABA.

18. Laughlin, pp. 40-41.

19. Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin No. 10A: The Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), fold-out on "Sterilization Bills Introduced Into Legislatures, But Which Were Defeated or Have Not Yet Become Laws.": CSH.

20. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, pp. 6, 8. Laughlin, Bulletin, 10A, fold-out on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913."

21. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization: 1926, p. 10. Laughlin, Bulletin 10A, fold-out on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913."

22. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, pp. 8-9, 21. Laughlin, Bulletin 10A, foldout on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913." Laughlin, Bulletin No. 10A, fold-out on "Sterilization Bills Introduced Into Legislatures, But Which Were Defeated or Have Not Yet Become Laws."

23. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, pp. 23-24. Laughlin, Bulletin 10A, foldout on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913." William A. DeGregorio, The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents: Third Edition, (New York: Wing Books, 1991), pp. 416-417, 424- 425. Entry number 64927, The Columbia World of Quotations, 1996 (New York: Bartelby.com, 2001).

24. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States, pp. 25-26. Laughlin, Bulletin 10A, foldout on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913," fold-out continuation.

25. Laughlin, Bulletin 10A, fold-out on "Analysis of Existing Sterilization Laws, 1913," fold-out continuation. Van Wagenen, p. 15. Carlson, pp. 216, 226.

26. Van Wagenen, p. 18.

27. Van Wagenen, p. 18.

28. Van Wagenen, p. 18.

29. "Notes on the Early Days of the 'Eugenics Education Society'," unpublished manuscript, p. 11, 13: SA/EUG/B11 Wellcome Library.

30. Overview of Galton's life, at http://www.mugu.com. Daniel J. Kevles, In The Name of Eugenics, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), pp. 63-64. Leonard Darwin citation in Michael W. Perry, ed., Eugenics and Other Evils (Seattle, WA: Inkling Books, 2000), p. 23. C.W. Saleeby citation in Perry, p. 36. See "The International Eugenics Congress, An Event of Great Importance in the History of Evolution, Has Taken Place," Journal of the American Medical Association vol. LIX, No. 7, p. 555. See Dr. Caleb W. Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism at the Eugenics Congress," British Journal of Inebriety, October 1912, pp. 1, 2-3, 5- 6. See Dr. Caleb W. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill," July 23 1912. See Charles B. Davenport, "A Discussion of the Methods and Results of Dr. Heron's Critique," Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 11: Reply to the Criticism of Recent American Work by Dr. Heron of the Galton Laboratory (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Record Office, 1914), pp. 23-24. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), pp. 4: APS: Davenport Beginnings of Cold Spring Harbor. The Eugenics Education Society, "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. 11: Report of Proceedings of the First International Eugenical Congress (Kingsway, W.C., Eugenics Education Society, 1913), p. 1, 3, 5, 6-13.

31. "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II, p. 5. Jon Alfred Mjoen, "Harmonic and Disharmonic Racecrossing," Eugenics in Race and State, Vol. II: Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress of Eugenics, (Baltimore: Wilkins and Wilkins, 1923), pp. 58-60.

32. "London Letter," Journal of the American Medical Association vol. LIX (1912), p. 555. "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II, p. 2. Letter, Winston Churchill to unknown recipient, 27 May 1910: PRO- HO 144/1085/193548/1. Letter, William Borland to the Department of State, 25 March, 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1E1. Letter, Huntington Wilson, Acting Secretary of State, to William Borland: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1E1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Lord Weardale, 28 February 1911: NA: 59/250/22/14/4-5656 Doc. No. 592.7B1/4.

33. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Mr. Alfred Mitchell Innes, Charge d'affairs of Great Britain, 3 July 19/2: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/2. Letter, Henry L. Stimson to Philander Chase Knox, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1.

34. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Governor Phillip L. Goldsborough, 20 June 19/2: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. 0.54O.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Governor Woodrow Wilson, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Governor Walter R. Stubbs, 20 June 1912: A: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/l. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Governor James B. McCreary, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. L.S. Rowe, President, American Academy of Political and Social Science, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Professor H.W. Farnam, President, American Economic Association, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. 0.540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. W. W. Keen, President, American Philosophical Society, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3- 5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. Reuben Peterson, President, American Gynecological Society, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. W. N. Bullard, President, American Neurological Association, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. W. Leslie Carr, President, American Pediatric Society, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. John B. Murphy, President, American Medical Association, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. Charles E. Bessey, President, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Dr. John H. Finley, President, American Social Science Association, 20 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Philander Chase Knox to Professor C. E. Seashore, President, American Psychological Association, 20 June 1912: A: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1.

35. Letter, Ira Remsen, President, National Academy of Sciences, to Philander Chase Knox, 24 June 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1. Letter, Henry L. Stimson to Philander C. Knox, 8 July 8 1912: NA: 59/250/22/10/3-5459 Doc. No. 540.1A1/1.

36. Joseph Frazier Wall, Andrew Carnegie (New York: Oxford University Press, 1970), pp. 644- 645.

37. "The International Eugenics Congress." Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism at the Eugenics Congress," p. 6. Also see Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill."

38. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill."

39. Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism," p. 6.

40. "The International Eugenics Congress."

41. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1911; reprint, New York: Arno Press Inc., 1972), p. 241.

42. Davenport, p. 67. "How Heredity Builds Our Lives," Eugenical News, Vol. XXVII (1942), p.53.

43. Davenport, pp. 216, 219.

44. Davenport, p. 222.

45. Davenport, p. 1; also see Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Professor V.L. Kellogg, 30 October 1912: APS B: D27 Kellogg, Vernon #3. Davenport, pp. 80-82.

46. Davenport, pp. 255-259.

47. "College Courses in Genetics and Eugenics," Eugenical News vol. 1 (1916), pp. 26-27.

48. Carnegie Institution of Washington, "ERO Schedule: Inquiry Into the Nature of Instruction Offered By Schools and Colleges in Eugenics (Not Sex-Hygiene) and Human Heredity": APS: ERO documents, Series X. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Professor Irving Fisher, 8 February 1916: APS: BD27- Fisher #1.

49. Hamilton Cravens, The Triumph of Evolution: The Heredity-Environment Controversy, 1900- 1941, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988), p. 53.

50. George William Hunter, A Civic Biology: Presented in Problems (New York: American Book Company, 1914), p. 263, as cited in Steven Selden, Inheriting Shame (New York: Teachers College Press, 1999), p. 71. Selden, p. 61-69.

51. See Francis Galton, Inquiries Into Human Faculty And Its Development (London: JM Dent & Co, 1883), pp. 19-20. See Francis Galton, "On the Anthropometric Laboratory at the late International Health Exhibition," Journal of the Anthropological Institute, pp. 205-206, 214-218. James Cattell, "Mental Tests and Measurements," Mind (1890), pp. 378-380.

52. Theta H. Wolf, Alfred Binet (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1973), pp. 21, 29, 71, 141, 162-165, 172, 177, 179-182, 183-185, 191, 201, 202, 207.

53 The Vineland Training School, "The Vineland Training School-History," at http://www.vineland.org. Charles B. Davenport and David F. Weeks, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 4: A First Study of Inheritance in Epilepsy (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenic Record Office), pp. 4-5.

54. Henry H. Goddard, The Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble-Mindedness (Vineland, New Jersey: 1913, ) pp. vii, 101-110, 116-117.

55. Goddard, pp. 18, 29-30, 103.

56. Goddard, p. 53. Author's interview with James H. Wallace, Jr., director of Photographic Services at the Smithsonian Institution.

57. Goddard, p. 16.

58. Goddard, p. 84.

59. Goddard, p. 109.

60. Goddard, pp. 105-106, 118.

61. Wolf, p. 195. Author's interview with Merriam- Webster Corporation.

62. Letter, Henry H. Goddard to Charles B. Davenport, 25 July 1912, APS B: D27 Davenport - Goddard, Henry H. #4.

63. Henry H. Goddard, "Mental Tests and the Immigrant," The Journal of Delinquency, vol. II, No. 5 (September 1917), pp. 243-244. Goddard, The Kallikaks, p. 79.

64. Goddard, "Mental Tests and the Immigrant," pp. 249, 266-267.

65. "Mental Differences," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), pp. 51-52. "News and Notes," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), p. 52.

66. "Measuring Mentality," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), p. 59. "The Municipal Psychopathic Clinic," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), p. 55.

67. "Negro Efficiency," Eugenical News, vol. 1, (1916), p.79.

68. Arthur H. Estabrook, "National Conference of Charities and Corrections," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), pp. 42-43.

69. "The Binet Test in Court," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), p. 55.

70. "Record Blank for Point Scale," Eugenical News, vol. 1 (1916), p. 56. "Autobiography of Robert Means Yerkes," in Carl Murchison, ed., History of Psychology in Autobiography (Worcester, MA: Clark University Press, 1930), pp. 381-407. "Officers and Committee List of the Eugenics Research Association, January 1927": Truman: ERA Membership Records.

71. Daniel J. Kevles, "Testing the Army's Intelligence: Psychologists and the Military in World War I," The Journal of American History, Vol. 55, Issue 3 (Dec., 1968), p. 567-568, 571, 573. Robert M. Yerkes and Clarence S. Yoakum, Army Mental Tests, (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1926), p. 2.

72. Carl C Brigham, A Study of American Intelligence (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1923), p. xxii. Examination Alpha, Test 8: Information- cited in Brigham, p. 29 and Diane B. Paul, Controlling Human Heredity (Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1995), p. 66. See United States Historical Census Data Browser at fisher.lib.virginia.edu/census/; Internet, for details on rural population.

73. Brigham, p. 29 and Paul, p. 66.

74. Brigham, pp. 48, 50.

75. Brigham, p. xxii. Raymond E. Fancher, The Intelligence Men: Makers of the IQ Controversy (New York: W W. Norton & Company, 1985), pp. 139, 140.

76. Robert M. Yerkes, Memoirs of the National Academy of Science, (Washington D.C: National Academy of Science, 1921), p. 790-791. Brigham, p. 152.

77. Fancher, pp. 102-103, 140. Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., s.v. "Mental Retardation."

78. "News and Notes," Eugenical News, Vol. II (1917), p. 24.

79. Eugenics Research Association, Active Membership Accession List (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1922): Truman, ERA Membership Records. Brigham, pp. v-vii, xvii-xviii.

80. Brigham, pp. 174, 178, 180.

81. Brigham, p. 192.

82. Brigham, pp. 182, 210.

83. Nicholas Lemann, The Big Test: The Secret History of the American Meritocracy, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1999), p. 30-32.

84. See National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Thirty Years of Lynching in the United States, 1889-1918 (New York: NAACP, 1919; reprint, New York: Negro Universities Press, 1969) pp. 45, 70.

85. Kevles, "Testing the Army's Intelligence: Psychologists and the Military in World War I," pp. 576-577, 578.

86. Walter Lippmann, "The Mental Age of Americans," New Republic 32, No. 415 (November 15, 1922). Walter Lippmann, "The Mental Age of Americans," New Republic 32 No. 417 (November 29, 1922). Lewis M. Terman, "The Great Conspiracy or the Impulse Imperious of Intelligence Testers, Psychoanalyzed and Exposed by Mr. Lippmann," New Republic 33 (December 27, 1922). Also see Ezekiel Cheever, School Issues (Baltimore: Warwick & York, Inc., 1924).

87. Henry H. Goddard, "Feeblemindedness: A Question of Definition," Journal of Psycho- Asthenics, vol. 33 (1928), p. 224.

88. Goddard, "Feeblemindedness: A Question of Definition," pp. 223, 224.

89. Carl C. Brigham, "Intelligence Tests of Immigrant Groups," Psychological Review, Vol. 37 (1929), p. 165.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:58 am

PART 2 OF 7

CHAPTER SIX

1. The Race Betterment Foundation, Proceedings of the First National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, MI: The Race Betterment Foundation, 1914), p. xi. Kellogg Company, "Kellogg's Company History" at http://www.thekelloggcompany.co.uk. "Race Betterment Foundation and the Eugenics Registry, " Organized Eugenics, (New Haven, CT: American Eugenics Society), 1931, p. 51. Also see "Brief Notes Made at Conference Held in Sacramento at the Request of the State Board of Control to Consider the Problem of Feeblemindedness, Insanity, and Epilepsy in Relation to Crime, Poverty and Inefficiency," unpublished manuscript, p. 5: California State Archives, Berkeley PO 72/227C: Box 5.

2. Proceedings, First National Conference on Race Betterment, pp. 431, 433, 447. Diane B. Paul, Controlling Human Heredity (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International, 1995), p. 9.

3. Charles B. Davenport, "The Importance to the State of Eugenic Investigation," Proceedings, First National Conference p. 452.

4. Harry H. Laughlin, "Calculations on the Working Out of a Proposed Program of Sterilization," Proceedings, First National Conference on Race Betterment, p. 478.

5. Laughlin, p. 484, 490.

6. Professor Irving Fisher, "A Reply," Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, MI: The Race Betterment Foundation, 1915), p. 68.

7. Eugenics Record Office, First Meeting of the Board of Scientific Directors, unpublished manuscript, circa December 1912: APS BD27 - Harriman, Mrs. E. H. #1. Johns Hopkins University, Chronology of the Life of William Henry Welch at http://www.medicalarchives.jhmi.edu.

8. First Meeting of the Board of Scientific Directors.

9. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 27 December 1912: Truman C-2- 3: 3.

10. Eugenics Research Association, Officers and Committee List of the Eugenics Research Association - January 1927 (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1927): Truman, ERA Membership Records. Eugenics Research Association, Active Membership Accession List (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1922): Truman, ERA Membership Records.

11. Active Membership Accession List. Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, "The Detection of a Case of Simulation of Insanity By Means of Association Tests," Journal of Abnormal Psychology Vol. VI (1911), p. 19.

12. Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936), pp. 50-51, 86, 89. Eugenics Record Office, Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York by Mrs. E.H. Harriman to the Carnegie Institution of Washington and of its Acceptance by the Institution (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1918), p. 33: CSH. Officers and Committee List of the Eugenics Research Association- January 1927.

13. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926), pp. 258, 259-260. Active Membership Accession List.

14. Active Membership Accession List.

15. Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, "The Mental Efficiency in Epileptics," Epilepsia Vol. 3 (Dec 1912), p. 504. Katzen-Ellenbogen, "The Detection of a Case of Simulation of Insanity By Means of Association Tests." Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, "A Critical Essay on Mental Tests in Their Relation to Epilepsy," Epilepsia Vol. 4 (1913), p. 130. American Men of Science (1914): NA: RG496/Box 457.

16. NA: RG496/Box 457. "Record of Marriage": NA: RG496/Box 457. Letter, Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen to 7708 WCG, circa 13 April 1948: NA: RG496/ box 457. "Extract Copy: Review And Recommendations: NA: RG496/Box 457.

17. See "Photo of Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen" at http://www.ushmm.org. "A Critical Essay on Mental Tests." Arrest photo of Katzen-Ellenbogen: NA: RG496/Box 457. "Testimony of Karl Hemrick Victor Berthold": NA: RG496/Box 457.

18. "Review of WC Section, Military Affairs Branch." Active Membership Accession List.

19. Letter, Olga Heide-Pilat to General Handy, 7 August 1951: NA: RG496/Box 457. See Testimony of Katzen-Ellenbogen: NA: RG4961290/59/14/1-5/Box434.

20. Sworn statement of Walter Hummelsheim: NA: RG496/290/59/14/1-5/Box 444.

21. Timeline of Rockefeller Foundation History at http://www.rockfound.org.

22. Letter, John D. Rockefeller Jr. to Charles B. Davenport, 27 January 1912: APS: B: D27 Davenport - J.D. Rockefeller. Letter, John D. Rockefeller Jr. to Charles B. Davenport, 27 March 1912: APS: B: D27 Davenport - J.D. Rockefeller. Letter, John D. Rockefeller Jr. to Charles B. Davenport, 2 April 1912: APS: B: D27 Davenport - J.D. Rockefeller. Letter, John D. Rockefeller Jr. to Charles B. Davenport, 8 May 1912: APS: B: D27 Davenport - J.D. Rockefeller. Timeline of Rockefeller Foundation History; see Biography of John D. Rockefeller Jr. at http://www.brown.edu.

23. Biography of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. Rockefeller to Davenport, 27 January 1912. Rockefeller to Davenport, 27 March 1912. Rockefeller to Davenport, 2 April 1912. Rockefeller to Davenport, 8 May 1912.

24. First Meeting of the Board of Scientific Directors.

25. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Dr. William H. Welch, 1 March 1915: APS B: D27- Harriman, Mrs. E.H. #5. Also see Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Alexander Graham Bell, 5 March 5 1915: APS B: D27 - Alexander Graham Bell #7.

26. Davenport to Welch, 1 March 1915.

27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Alexander Graham Bell, 20 March 1915: APS B: D27 - Alexander Graham Bell #7.

28. See Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 13 February 1915: APS B: D27- Harriman, Mrs. E.H. #4. "Conference on the Feebleminded at the Home of Mrs. E.H. Harriman," meeting agenda with notations: APS B: D27 - Harriman, Mrs. E.H. #4.

29. Letter, Robert W. Hebberd to Mrs. E.H. Harriman, 28 October 1913: APS B: D27- Harriman, Mrs. E.H. #3.

30. "A County Survey," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916) p. 24.

31. Memorandum on Immigration enclosed with letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 6 January 1921: APS B: D27 - Grant, Madison #3.

32. National Committee on Prisons and Prison Labor, The National Committee on Prisons and Prison Labor - Its Origin, Purpose and Present Activities (New York: National Committee on Prisons and Prison Labor, 1915) pp. 2-3, 4, 5: APS B: D27 Davenport - Nat'l Committee on Prisons & Prison Labor. "Field Work in a Police Department," Eugenical News, Vol. II (1917) p. 21. "Field Workers Appointed," Eugenical News, Vol. II (1917), p. 80.

33. "New York State Commission on the Mentally Deficient," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916) pp. 6- 7. Letter, Davenport to Harriman, 13 February 1915. "Wanted," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916) p.48.

34. "Hospital Development Commission," Eugenical News Vol. 2 (1917), p. 59.

35. "News and Notes," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917), p. 24. "Field Workers' Returns," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916), p. 3. "Field Workers' Returns," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916), p. 9. "News and Notes," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916), p. 18. "Work of a Field Worker," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917), p. 46.

36. Letter, A.G. Smith to C.L. Goodrich, 14 November 1912: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, C.L. Goodrich to A.G. Smith, 25 November 1912: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, D.A. Brodie to Charles B. Davenport, 26 November 1912: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to D.A. Brodie, 29 November 1912: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2.

37. Brodie to Davenport, 26 November 1912. Davenport to Brodie, 29 November 1912.

38. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to George W. Knorr, 3 January 1913: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to George W. Knorr, 8 January 1913: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to R. Dee. Ward, 8 January 1913: APS B: D27- ABA Committee on Eugenics #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to George W. Knorr, 10 January 1913: APS B: D27 - ABA Committee on Eugenics #2.

39. James Wilson, "Presidential Address: Ninth Annual Meeting," The American Breeders' Magazine: A Journal of Genetics and Eugenics Vol. IV(1913), pp. 53, 55, 57.

40. "Foreword," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916) p. I. Truman Library, "Harry H. Laughlin Biography," at http://www.library.truman.edu. Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, p. 33.

41. "Personals," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 12. "Accessions to Archives," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 12. "Voice Inheritance," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 19. "Our Visitors," Eugenical News Vol. I (1916) pp. 32-33. "The New Immigration Law," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 22. "Eugenic Legislation," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 29. "Personals," Eugenical News Vol. II (1917) p. 7I.

42. Letter, Theodore Roosevelt to Charles B. Davenport, 3 January 1913: APS B: D27 Davenport- Roosevelt, Theodore. What I Think About Eugenics (n.p., n.d.), Bancroft Library. Dr. Albert Edward Wiggam, as quoted by Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of an Idea in America (Dallas: Southern Methodist University Press, 1963), p. 403 as cited in Christopher Cerf and Victor Navasky, The Experts Speak (New York: Villard Press, 1984), p. 30.

43. Dr. David Heron, "A Criticism of Recent American Work," p. 5, as cited by Charles B. Davenport, "A Discussion of the Methods and Results of Dr. Heron's Critique," Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 11: Reply to the Criticism of Recent American Work by Dr. Heron of the Galton Laboratory (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Record Office, 1914), p. 3.

44. Heron, pp. 4, 62, as cited by Dr. A. J. Rosanoff, "Mendelism and Neuropathic Heredity: A Reply to Some of Dr. David Heron's Criticisms of Recent American Work," Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 1, pp. 27, 28: CSH.

45. Heron, p. 67, as cited by Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 1. Heron, p. 30, as cited by David F. Weeks, "Extract from Letter to C.B. Davenport From Dr. David F. Weeks, Superintendent of the New Jersey State Village for Epileptics at Skillman," Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 11 , p. 25.

46. See Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 11.

47. Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 1, pp. 4-5, 9. Weeks, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 1, p. 25. Rosanoff, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 1, p. 35, 36.

48. Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 11, p. 24. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to V.L. Kellogg, 30 October 1912: APS- BD27 Kellogg, Vernon #3.

49. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Alexander Graham Bell, 25 September 1915: APS B: D27 Alexander Graham Bell #7. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 30 September 1915: APS B: D27 Alexander Graham Bell #7.

50. "Where To Begin," The San Francisco Daily News, 14 October 1915.

51. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Thomas D. Eliot, 1 November 1915: APS B: D27.

52. Davenport to Eliot, 1 November 1915.

53. Letter, Irving Fisher to Charles B. Davenport, 18 February 1916: APS B: D27 Davenport- Irving Fisher #3.

54. Fisher to Davenport, 18 February 1916.

55. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Irving Fisher, 25 February 1916: APS B: D27 Davenport- Irving Fisher #3.

56. Draft of letter, Charles B. Davenport to Alexander Graham Bell, n.d.: CSH.

57. Record of telephone call, Alexander Graham Bell to Cold Spring Harbor, 8 April 1916: APS B: D27 Davenport - Bell.

58. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 20 April 1916: APS B: D27 Davenport-Bell.

59. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 18 November 1916: APS B: D27 Davenport- Bell. Letter, Alexander Graham Bell to Charles B. Davenport, 5 January 1917: APS B: D27 Davenport - Bell.

60. Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, pp. 21, 24, 25, 28.

61. "Temperament of the Negro," Eugenical News Vol. IV (1919) p. 43.

62. "Thalassophilia," Eugenical News Vol. V (1920) p.26.

63. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity In Relation To Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1911; reprint, New York: Arno Press Inc., 1972), p. 6.

64. Eugenics Record Office, Record of Family Traits No. 40688: MS. COLL. No. 77, ERO, APS Series I. Eugenics Record Office, Record of Family Traits No. A: 0772-I: MS. COLL. No. 0772, ERO, APS Series 1.

65. Record of Family Traits No. 40688.

66. Eugenics Record Office, Family Tree A: 0-3a: MS. COLL. No. 77, ERO, APS Series I, A: 01 #6, 1921-1930.

67. Charles B. Davenport and Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 13: How To Make A Eugenical Family Study (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1915) p. 25: CSH.

68. Charts and Measurements: MS. COLL. No. 77, ERO, APS Series I, A: 01 #4 Development, 1922-1923. Letter, Brett Ratner to Charles B. Davenport, 15 June 1922: APS Series I, A: 01 #4 Development, 1922-1923.

69. Mrs. Anna Wendt Finlayson, Eugenical Record Office Bulletin No. 15: The Dack Family, A Study in Hereditary Lack of Emotional Control (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenical Record Office, 1916) p. 11. Henry H. Goddard, The Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feeble- Mindedness (Vineland, New Jersey: 1913), p. x. Eugenics Survey of Vermont," Farm No. 47, Family Name Irving, Mark, "Jamaica Emigrants Questionnaire Interviews: Vermont PRA-15.

70. Davenport and Laughlin, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 13, pp. 4, 28.

71. US Const, Preamble.

72. J. David Smith and K. Ray Nelson, The Sterilization of Carrie Buck (Far Hills, NJ: New Horizon Press, 1989) pp. 14, 30.

73. Departments of the Central State Hospital for Epileptic and Feeble-Minded at Petersburg, Virginia, "Official Interrogatories and Papers of Commitment": Emma Buck files, Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

74. Smith, pp. 15-16. "Official Interrogatories and Papers of Commitment."

75. Smith, pp. 1-3, 5-6, 18.

76. "They Told Me I Had To Have An Operation," Charlottesville (VA) Daily Progress, 26 February 1980. Author's Interview with former Central Virginia Training Center Superintendent K. Ray Nelson, 14 November 2002.

77. Smith, pp.17-18.

78. Paul A. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization in Virginia: Aubrey Strode and the Case of Buck v. Bell," (Ph. D. diss, University of Virginia, 1982), pp. 177, 179, 180. "Order of Commitment of Carrie E. Buck," Carrie Buck vs. Dr. J.H. Bell, 143 Va. 310 pp. 22, 25: Supreme Court of Virginia as cited by Lombardo.

79. A.S. Priddy, Biennial Report of the State Epileptic Colony (Lynchburg, VA: State Epileptic Colony, 1923), as cited by Smith, p. 32.

80. Priddy as cited by Smith, p. 32.

81. Priddy as cited by Smith, p. 33.

82. Unnamed Patient Hearing transcript, as cited in The Lynchburg Story, Dir. Stephen Trombley, Prod. Bruce Eadie. Videocassette. Worldview Pictures, 1993. Poe v. Lynchburg Training School and Hospital, 518 F. Supp. 789 (W.D. Va. 1981).

83. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 120. "Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed at the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, November 24, 1917," as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p.120.

84. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization " pp. 120- 121. "Writ of Habeas Corpus," as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p.120.

85. "Deposition of Willie Mallory, December 11, 1917" as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 122.

86. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 124, 126-127.

87. Author's transcription, Letter, George Mallory to A.S. Priddy, 5 November 1917, Virginia State Archive File Drawer #383, Item #2711; also see Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 127-128; also see Paul A. Lombardo, "Three Generations, No Imbeciles: New Light on Buck v. Bell," New York University Law Review, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 42-43.

88. Letter, A. S. Priddy to George Mallory, 13 November 1917 in "Grounds of Defense, Willie T. Mallory v.. A.S. Priddy," February 16, 1918 (Virginia State Archive File Drawers #383, Item #2711) as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 128-129. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 124- 125. W.I. Prichard, "History - Lynchburg Training School and Hospital," Mental Health in Virginia, Summer, 1960, as cited in Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 129-130.

89. Letter, James DeJarnette to John Dickson, 24 October 1947 (Strode Papers, folder 3014A), as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 132. Celebration of Dr. J. S. DeJarnette's Fiftieth Anniversary of Continuous Service at the western State Hospital, July 21, 1939 (DeJarnette Papers, Western State Hospital, Staunton, Virginia) as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 132.

90. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Chicago: Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922) pp. v, 6-50, 446-461. Also see Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 10B: II. The Legal, Legislative, And Administrative Aspects of Sterilization (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Record Office, 1914) pp.120-131.

91. Letter, A.S. Priddy to Harry H. Laughlin, 14 October 1924: Carrie Buck File, Central Virginia Training Center Archives. Harry H. Laughlin, "Review of the Legal Procedure and Litigation Under the Virginia Sterilization Statute, Which Led to the Decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, Upholding the Statute, "The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization (Washington, DC: Eugenic Record Office of the Carnegie Institute of Washington, 1930), p. 10.

92. Letter, A.S. Priddy to Caroline Wilhelm, 14 March 1924: Carrie Buck File, Central Virginia Training Center Archives. The Lynchburg Story. Letter, Caroline Wilhelm to A.S. Priddy, 5 May 1924: Carrie Buck File, Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

93. Buck v. Bell, pp. 10, 12. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 183.

94. Strode to Don Preston Peters, 19 July 1939 (Strode Papers, box 30) as cited by Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," p. 183.

95. Priddy to Laughlin, 14 October 1924. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 80, 184. Smith, p. 82. Lombardo, "Three Generations," pp. 39, 55. North British and Mercantile Insurance Company, "Fire Insurance Inspection Report, Dee-Whitehead Building": Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

96. Letter, Caroline Wilhelm to A.S. Priddy, 15 October 1924: Carrie Buck File, Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

97. Letter, A.S. Priddy to J.S. DeJarnette, 1 November 1924: Carrie Buck File, Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

98. Priddy to DeJarnette, 1 November 1924.

99. Buck v. Bell, p. 67.

100. Buck v. Bell, p. 67.

101. Harry H. Laughlin, "Analysis of the Hereditary Nature of Carrie Buck," The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization, pp. 16-17. Priddy to Laughlin, 14 October 1924.

102. Laughlin, "Analysis of the Hereditary Nature of Carrie Buck," pp. 16-17.

103. Laughlin, "Analysis of the Hereditary Nature of Carrie Buck," p. 16.

104. Laughlin, "Analysis of the Hereditary Nature of Carrie Buck," p. 17.

105. Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 208- 210.

106. Harry H. Laughlin, "Opinion of judge Bennett T. Gordon of the Circuit Court of Amherst County, Virginia," The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization, pp. 19-21. Smith, pp. 174-175; Lombardo, "Eugenic Sterilization," pp. 210-212.

107. Harry H. Laughlin, "Opinion of Judge Jesse F. West of the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia, at Staunton," The Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization, pp. 30- 37.

108. State Colony for Epileptics and Feeble-Minded, "Minutes: December 7, 1925,": Central Virginia Training Center Archives.

109. Liva Baker, The Justice From Beacon Hill: The Life and Times of Oliver Wendell Holmes (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1991), p. 3.

110. Baker, pp. 3, 15. Catherine Drinker Bowen, Yankee From Olympus: Justice Holmes and His Family (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1945), p. 62.

111. David H. Burton, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr: (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1980), p. 13.

112. Burton, pp. 28-29. "Overview of 'The Harvard Regiment,'" at http://www.harvardregiment.org. "Information on The Battle of Antietam," at http://www.nps.gov. Baker, pp. 97-98.

113. Baker, p.151.

114. Baker, pp. 144, 165-166.

115. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., The Common Law (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1881; reprint, 1923), p. 1.

116. Baker, pp. 253, 264, 267, 330.

117. U.S. Supreme Court, Members of the Supreme Court of the United States. Author's correspondence with Jacques Semmelman, Esq., 14 November 2002 and Lexis-Nexis search by Semmelman, 14 November 2002.

118. Bowen, pp. 372-373, 446. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., "Dissent, Abrams v. US 250 U.S. 616, 624 (1919), The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, ed. Max Lerner (Garden City, Halcyon House, 1943), p. 312. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. "Dissent, U.S. v. Schwimmer 279 U.S. 644, 653 (1928), "The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, pp. 327-328. Oliver Wendell Holmes," For the Court, Schenck vs. U.S. 249 U.S. 47 (1919), "The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, p. 296.

119. Baker, p. 3.

120. Bowen, p. 187. Holmes, Common Law, p. 340.

121. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., "Natural Law," The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, p. 395.

122. Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., "The Soldier's Faith," The Mind and Faith of Justice Holmes, pp. 18, 20.

123. Letter from Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to Dean Wigmore, 19 November 1915, as cited by Mark DeWolfe Howe, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: The Shaping Years 1841-1870 (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1957), p. 25.

124. Letter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to Sir Frederick Pollock, 1 February 1920, Holmes- Pollock Letters: The Correspondence of Mr. Justice Holmes and Sir Frederick Pollock 1874-1932, ed. Mark DeWolfe Howe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1942), Vol. II, p. 36.

125. Felix Frankfurter, foreword to Holmes-Laski Letters Abridged, ed. by Mark DeWolfe Howe (Clinton, MA: Atheneum, 1963), Vol. I, p. xvi. Letter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to Harold J. Laski, 14 June 1922, Holmes-Laski Letters, Vol. I, p. 330.

126. Letter, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. to Harold J. Laski, 5 August 1926, Holmes-Laski Letters, ed. Mark DeWolfe Howe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953), Vol. II., p. 862.

127. Holmes to Laski, 21 May 1927, Holmes-Laski Letters, p. 946.

128. Members of the Supreme Court of the United States. "The People's Attorney," at library.brandeis. edu. See William E. Hellerstein, "Review of The Forgotten Memoir of John Knox," at http://www.law.uchicago.edu. See Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., s.v. "McReynolds, James Clark."

129. Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

130. Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

131. Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

132. Buck v. Bell 274 U.S. 200 (1927).

133. Smith, pp. 16, 179. Lombardo, "Three Generations, No Imbeciles," p. 61.

134. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization: 1926; Historical, Legal, and Statistical Review of Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (New Haven, CT: The American Eugenics Society, 1926), p. 60.

135. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization: 1926, pp. 21- 22, 60. Abraham Myerson et. al., Eugenical Sterilization: A Reorientation of the problem (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1936), p. 10.

136. Human Betterment Foundation, Legal Status of Eugenical Sterilization (ca. 1940), Truman D- 4-2: 11.

137. Legal Statuss of Eugenical Sterilization.

138. E. Carleton MacDowell, "Charles Benedict Davenport, 1866-1944. A Study of Conflicting Influences," BIOS Vol. XVII, No. 1, p. 30.

CHAPTER SEVEN

1. See US Const, Amend XIX. Margaret Sanger: An Autobiography (W.W. Norton & Company, 1938; New York: Dover Publications, 1971), p. 13.

2. Ellen Chesler, Women of Valor (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992), p. 68.

3. Sanger, pp. 86-89, 213-215. Also see Chesler, p. 62. Also see Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization (New York: Brentano's, 1922), p. 29. See Doris Weatherford, American Women's History, (New York: Prentice Hall General Reference, 1994), pp. 182-183.

4. Sanger, An Autobiography, pp. 90-92. Also see Chesler, p. 63.

5. Sanger, An Autobiography, p. 92.

6. Sanger, An Autobiography, pp. 92-93, 107-108, 190, 192-209, 292-294. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 12, 16, 26-27, 272-273. Margaret Sanger, "Address," read at the Thirtieth Annual Meeting luncheon of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, New York City, 25 October 1950, p. 1: Wellcome Institute, Box 112. David M. Kennedy, Birth Control in America: The Career of Margaret Sanger, (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1970), pp. 256-257.

7. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 14, 18-21 190- 192, 194. Sanger, An Autobiography, p. 308. See also Sanger, An Autobiography, pp. 301-304.

8. See Planned Parenthood Foundation of America, "Our Founder: Margaret Sanger" at http://www.plannedparenthood.org.

9. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 101-102. See Julian Huxley, "Towards A Higher Civilization," Birth Control Review (December, 1930), p. 344. "Editorial," Birth Control Review (March, 1928), p. 73.

10. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 101. Huxley, p. 344.

11. Sanger, An Autobiography, pp. 376-377. Margaret Sanger, "A Plan for Peace," Birth Control Review, April 1932, pp. 107-108. Margaret Sanger, excerpt from "Racial Betterment," The Selected Papers of Margaret Sanger: Volume 1: The Woman Rebel, 1900-1928, edited by Esther Katz (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2003), p. 446.

12. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 104, 108-109, 113-117, 120-121, 123.

13. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 109, 112, 116. Margaret Sanger, "Is Race Suicide Probable?" Collier's, August 15, 1925, p. 25 as selected by Michael W. Perry, ed., The Pivot of Civilization: In Historical Perspective (Seattle, WA: Inkling Books, 2001), p. 176.

14. Katz, pp. 333-334. Chesler, pp, 343-344. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "Notes on Sources," The National Committee on Federal Legislation for Birth Control 1929-1937 at http://www.nyu.edu. Henry Pratt Fairchild, The Melting-Pot Mistake (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company: 1926), pp. 109-112.

15. See Roswell H. Johnson, "The Eugenic Aspects of Population Theory," Birth Control Review, September 1930, pp. 256-258. See Eleanor Dwight Jones, "Practical Race Betterment," Birth Control Review, July 1928, pp. 203-204. See American Medicine, "Intelligent or Unintelligent Birth Control?" Birth Control Review, May 1919, p. 12. See Sanger, "Address," p. 3. See Perry, p. 176.

16. Victoria C. Woodhull, "The Rapid Multiplication of the Unfit," as selected by Perry, p. 31.

17. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 8 I.

18. Sanger, An Autobiography, p. 11.

19. Sanger, An Autobiography, p. 29.

20. Sanger, An Autobiography, pp. 107-108.

21. Stephen S. Wise, "The Synagogue and Birth Control," Birth Control Review, October 1926, pp. 301-302. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "ABCL Staff, Officers, and Board Members for 1921-1928," The American Birth Control League 1921-1939 at http://www.nyu.edu.

22. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 189.

23. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 105.

24. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 108.

25. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 116-117.

26. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 115.

27. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 123.

28. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 112.

29. Margaret Sanger, Woman and the New Race (New York: Brentano's, 1920), Chapter 6.

30. H. G. Wells, introduction to Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. xvi.

3I. "Intelligent or Unintelligent Birth Control?" Also see Sanger, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 4.

32. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 104.

33. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 101-102.

34. Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 277, 282. Also see "Principles and Aims of the American Birth Control League," pamphlet: California State Archives.

35. Sanger, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 3.

36. Sanger, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 3.

37. Letter, Isabelle Keating to Margaret Sanger, 4 January 1932: Margaret Sanger Papers Project. Letter, Margaret Sanger to Isabelle Keating, 15 January 1932: Margaret Sanger Papers Project.

38. John C. Duvall, "The Purpose of Eugenics," Birth Control Review, December 1924, p. 344: California State Archives.

39. Sanger, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 7.

40. Sanger, Woman and the New Race, Chapter 5.

41. Perry, p. 176.

42. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926), pp. 303-304.

43. Stoddard, pp. 259-260, 306.

44. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, The American Birth Control League 1921-1939. Letter, Margaret Sanger to Henry F. Osborn, 6 October 1921: APS B: D27 Davenport - Sanger, Margaret. See The American Birth Control League 1921-1939. "Tentative Program," program of the Sixth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference: Truman E-2-1: 1.

45. Eugenics Research Association, Officers and Committee List of the Eugenics Research Association- January 1927 (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1927): Truman, ERA Membership Records. Professor Irving Fisher, "A Reply," Official Proceedings of the Second National Conference on Race Betterment (Battle Creek, MI: The Race Betterment Foundation, 1915).

46. Letter, Sanger to Osborn, 6 October 1921. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Irving Fisher, 26 March 1925: Truman E-1-1: 1.

47. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "Staff Members, Officers, Board Members, Chairman and Committee Members," The National Committee on Federal Legislation for Birth Control 1929-1937 at http://www.nyu.edu. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "BCFA Staff, Officers, Board and Committee Members," The Birth Control Federation of America 1939-1942 at http://www.nyu.edu. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "Organization of Council," The Birth Control Council of America 1937 at http://www.nyu.edu. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, "BCCRB Staff, Officers, Council Members, and Board Members," The Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau 1928-1939 at http://www.nyu.edu. Margaret Sanger Papers Project, faxed list of letters between Margaret Sanger and Henry Pratt Fairchild.

48. Fairchild, pp. 150, 261.

49. The National Committee on Federal Legislation for Birth Control 1929-1937. The Birth Control Federation of America 1939-1942. The Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau 1928-1939. American Birth Control League, "World Population Conference," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 133. Faxed list of letters between Margaret Sanger and Henry Pratt Fairchild.

50. "Tentative Program."

5I. Roswell H. Johnson, "Population Control by Immigration," Birth Control Review, February 1932, p. 57. "A Plan for Peace," pp. 107-108. Katz, p. 446.

52. See Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, pp. 101-102.

53. See Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, p. 104. See Margaret Sanger, "An Answer to Mr. Roosevelt," Birth Control Review, December 1917, as reprinted in Perry, pp. 156-157.

54. "Eugenics vs. Birth Control," Eugenical News, Vol. II (1917), p. 73.

55. Letter, Margaret Sanger to Henry F. Osborn, 6 October 1921: APS B: D27 Davenport-Sanger, Margaret. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Margaret Sanger, 21 October 1921: APS B: D27 Davenport - Sanger, Margaret.

56. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Margaret Sanger, 13 February 1925: APS B: D27 Davenport - Sanger, Margaret.

57. Letter, Margaret Sanger to Harry H. Laughlin, 13 March 1925: Truman E-1-1:1. "Tentative Program." Letter, Margaret Sanger to Harry H. Laughlin, 24 March 1925: Truman E-1-1:1. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Margaret Sanger, 26 March 1925: Truman E-1-1:1.

58. Margaret Sanger, "Editorial," The Birth Control Review Vol. IX, No. 6 (June, 1925), p. 163. See Letter, Paul Popenoe to Madison Grant, 14 April 1928: APS B: D27 Grant, Madison #5. Also see "Birth Control and Eugenics," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 58.

59. "Editorial." "Birth Control and Eugenics." See Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics, rev. ed. (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1935). Also see "Birth Control and Eugenics" p. 58.

60. "Editorial," pp. 163-164.

6I. "Tenth Annual Meeting of the Executive Committee of the Eugenics Research Association," Eugenical News Vol. VII (1922), p. 89.

62. Letter, Leon F. Whitney to Charles B. Davenport, 3 April 1928: APS B: D27 Davenport - Leon Whitney #1. "Tentative Program." The Notional Committee on Federal Legislation for Birth Control 1929-1937. The Birth Control Federation of America 1939-1942. The Birth Control Council of America. The Birth Control Clinical Research Bureau 1928-1939. Also see Chesler, p. 217.

63. Reverend Albert P. Van Dusen, "Birth Control as Viewed by a Sociologist," Birth Control Review, May 1924, p. 133.

64. Duvall, p. 345.

65. Duvall, p. 345. Van Dusen, p. 134.

66. Whitney to Davenport, 3 April l928.

67. Popenoe to Grant, 14 April 1928.

68. Popenoe to Grant, 14 April 1928.

69. Letter, Madison Grant to Leon F. Whitney, 15 April 1928: APS B: D27 - Grant, Madison #5. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 21 April 1928: APS B: D27 - Grant, Madison #5.

70. Davenport to Grant, 21 April 1928. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Leon F. Whitney, 5 April 1928: APS B: D27 Davenport - Leon Whitney #1.

71. Davenport to Whitney, 5 April 1928.

72. Davenport to Whitney, 5 April 1928.

73. Letter, Henry Pratt Fairchild to Dr. Harry F. Perkins, 9 February 1933: VT PRA-21. See State of Vermont Department of Buildings and General Services, "Content and Historical Significance of Records," The Papers of the Eugenics Survey of Vermont at http://www.bgs.state.vt.us.

74. Letter, Henry Pratt Fairchild to Dr. Harry F. Perkins, 8 March 1933: VT PRA-2 I.

75. Fairchild to Perkins, 8 March 1933.

76. Letter, Paul Popenoe to Dr. Harry F. Perkins, 16 May 1933: VT PRA-21.

77. Popenoe to Perkins, 16 May 1933.

78. Letter, George Reid Andrews to Members of the Board of Directors, 22 May 1936: VT PRA- 21. Letter, Willystine Goodsell to Dr. Harry F. Perkins, 7 June 1936: VT PRA-21.

79. Sanger, "Address," p. 1, 3

80. Sanger, "Address," pp. 3, 4-5.

81. Sanger, "Address," p. 5.

82. Sanger, "Address," pp. 5-6.

83. Sanger, "Address," p. 1. Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc., Books on Planned Parenthood and Related Subjects, circa 1950: Wellcome Institute, Box 112.

84. Letter, Margaret Sanger to Dr. C.P. Blacker, 5 May 1953: Wellcome Institute Box 112.

CHAPTER EIGHT

1. "Death of Dr. Lucien Howe," Eugenical News, Vol. XIV(1929), p. 16. FrankW. Newell, The American Ophthalmological Society 1864-1989: A Continuation of Wheeler's First Hundred Years (Rochester, Minnesota: American Ophthalmological Society, 1989), pp. 154-155. "The Howe Laboratory of Ophthalmology," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926), P 144.

2. "Death of Dr. Lucien Howe." Eugenics Research Association, Officers and Committee List of the Eugenics Research Association- January 1927 (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1927): Truman, ERA Membership Records. "Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration of the Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," Eugenical News, vol. XI (1924), p. 21. See "Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1923), p. 5.

3. Francis Galton, "Eugenics; Its Definition, Scope and Aims," Nature, Vol. 70 No. 1804 (1904), p. 82. Charles B. Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 9: State Laws Limiting Marriage Selection Examined in the Light of Eugenics (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1913), pp. 43-66.

4. Robert Reid Rentoul, Race Culture: Or, Race Suicide? (London: The Walter Scott Publishing Co., Ltd., 1906), pp.I33-141.

5. Davenport, p. 1. Dr. W.C. Rucker, "More 'Eugenic Laws '" The Journal of Heredity, Vol. VI, No. 5 (May, 1915), pp. 219, 226.

6. Letter, Edward M. Van Cleve of The New York Institute for the Education of the Blind to Lucien Howe, 18 February 1918: APS 77 ERO Series V. Letter, Dr. Harry Best to Lucien Howe, 26 February 1918: APS 77 ERO Series V. Eugenics Record Office, "Cost for the Blind," memorandum, circa 1920: APS 77 ERO Series V. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 13 November 1920: APS 77 ERO Series 1.

7. Lucien Howe, "The Relation of Hereditary Eye Defects to Genetics and Eugenics," The Journal of Heredity, Vol. X, No. 8 (November 1919), p. 318. "Abstracts of Papers," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926), p. 114. "The Blind: Follow-Up Census Survey," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 43.

8. Letter, The New Era Printing Company to Harry H. Laughlin, 12 December 1918: APS 77 ERP Series V. "The Blind," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 42. "Study of Hereditary Blindness," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), pp. 42-43. "The Blind: Follow-Up Census Survey," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 43. "Science of Hereditary Blindness," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 43. "Prevention of Inherited Blindness," Eugenical News, Vol. III (1918), p. 64. Letter, Howard J. Banker to Professor George Arps, 6 January 1921: APS 77 ERO Ser. X, HHL Box#3 - Hereditary Blindness Law Research Materials (1921-1928).

9. Eugenics Record Office, Schedule for Recording First-Hand Pedigree-Data on Hereditary Eye Defect and Blindness, 1921: APS 77 Series V.

10. Schedule for Recording First-Hand Pedigree-Data. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 30 March 1920: APS 77 Series I: PDR & Correspondence. Eugenics Record Office, List of School, Etc, For the Blind to Which Questionnaire And Schedule Have Been Sent, circa 1920: APS 77 Series X: Harry H. Laughlin Box #2 - Hereditary Blindness Corresp #2 1918-1927,

11. Schedule for Recording First-Hand Pedigree-Data. Letter, Laughlin to Howe, 30 March 1920. See annotated List of Fellows of the American Medical Association registered in the Section on Ophthalmology, 1919: APS 77 ERO Series X.

12. Letter, Banker to Arps, 6 January 1921.

13. Howe, "Relation of Hereditary Eye Defects to Genetics and Eugenics," p. 381. Author's notes on inquiries to Howe Laboratory, American Ophthalmology Society, the National Society for the Prevention of Blindness, the National Eye Institute of the National Institutes of Health, and the Retinitis Pigmentosa Society. Laughlin to Howe, 13 November 1920.

14, Howe, "Relation of Hereditary Eye Defects to Genetics and Eugenics," p. 381.

15. Howe, "Relation of Hereditary Eye Defects to Genetics and Eugenics," pp. 381, 382.

16. Letter, Banker to Arps, 6 January 1921.

17. Letter, Banker to Arps, 6 January 192!.

18. Eugenics Record Office, "Copy - List of Geneticists," circa 1921: APS 77 Series V.

19. Letter, Raymond Pearl to Howard J. Banker, 11 January 1921: APS 77 Series I.

20. Eugenics Record Office, "List of Fellows of the American Medical Association Registered in the Section on Ophthalmology, 1919," circa 1921: APS 77 Series V.

21. To Amend the Domestic Relations Law, In Relation to Prevention of Hereditary Blindness, New York (1921), Bill 1597: APS 77 Series X, HHL Box #3, Hereditary Blindness Research Materials (1921-1928).

22. American Medical Association, "Hereditary Eye Defects and Blindness Central Committee," (n.p., circa March 1921): APS 77 ERO Series X.

23. Letter, O.E. Koegel to Dr. Lucien Howe, 7 September 1921: APS 77 Series X. Letter, Leonard W. H. Gibbs to Dr. Lucien Howe, 15 September 1921: APS 77 Series X, Letter, Dr. Hermann M. Biggs to Dr. Lucien Howe, 16 September 1921: APS 77 Series X. Letter, H.S. Birkett to Dr. Lucien Howe, 16 September 1921: APS 77 Series X. Letter, Frank H. Lattin to Dr, Lucien Howe, circa September 1921: APS 77 Series X. Also see Letter, Dr. Lucien Howe to Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 12 July 1921: APS 77 Series X.

24. Letter, Koegel to Howe, 7 September 1921. Letter, Gibbs to Howe, 15 September 1921. Letter, Biggs to Howe, 16 September 1921. Letter, Birkett to Howe, 16 September 1921. Letter, Lattin to Howe, circa September 1921. Author's notes on APS ERO files.

25. Letter, Lucien Howe to Harry H. Laughlin, 12 January 1922: APS 77 Series 1.

26. Howe to Laughlin, 12 January 1922.

27. Letter, Lucien Howe to Harry H. Laughlin, 22 July 1922: APS 77 Series 1.

28. Howe to Laughlin, 22 July 1922.

29. Howe to Laughlin, 22 July 1922.

30. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 7 August 1922: APS 77 Series 1.Letter, Lucien Howe to Harry H. Laughlin, 28 August 1922: APS 77 Series 1.

3I. Letter, Howe to Laughlin, 28 August 1922,

32. Letter, Lucien Howe to Charles B. Davenport and Harry H. Laughlin, 10 February 1923: APS 77 Series 1. "Memorandum on the Institutional Cost of the Blind and the Economic Cost of the Blind in the Population at Large", enclosure to Howe to Davenport and Laughlin, 10 February 1923: APS 77 Series 1.

33. Howe to Davenport and Laughlin, 10 February 1923.

34. J. P. Chamberlain, "Current Legislation: Eugenics and Limitations of Marriage," American Bar Association Journal, 1923, pp. 429- 430.

35. To Amend the Domestic Relations Law, In Relation to Prevention of Hereditary Blindness, New York (1926), Bill 605: APS 77 Series X, Harry H. Laughlin Box #3, Hereditary Blindness Research Materials (1921-1928). Letter, Lucien Howe to Dr. Best, 4 October 1927: APS 77 Series V. Also see Letter, Edward G. Seibert to Lucien Howe, 15 July 1927: APS 77 Series V.

36. Bill 605. "Abstracts of Papers," p. 114. Consumer Price Index Calculator at http://www.jsc.nasa.gov. "Memorandum on the General Principle of Bonding Applicants for Marriage License Against the Production of Offspring Who Would Become Public Charges", memo, ca. 1928: Truman E-1-2: 8.

37. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 30 March 1921: APS 77 Series 1. "Memorandum," p 3.

38. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 4 May 1922: APS 77 Series I. Letter, Lucien Howe to Harry H. Laughlin, 14 April 1922: APS ERO Series X: Hereditary Blindness Corresp.

39. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 30 December 1922: APS 77 Series I: PDR & Correspondence.

40. Bill 605. "Abstracts of Papers," p. 114.

41. "Memorandum," pp 2, 4.

42. Laughlin to Howe, 30 March 1921.

43. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 5 December 1922: APS 77 Series: I. Laughlin to Howe, 30 December 1922.

44. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lucien Howe, 9 March 1925: APS 77 Series I: PDR & Correspondence.

45. "Eugenical Responsibility," Eugenical News, Vol. XVI (1931), pp. 45, 46.

46. "Eugenical Responsibility," p. 46.

47. "Eugenical Responsibility," pp. 46-47.

48. "Eugenical Responsibility," p. 47.

49. "Death of Dr. Lucien Howe." Newell, p. 155.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:58 am

PART 3 OF 7

CHAPTER NINE

1. Harry H. Laughlin, "Population Schedule for the Census of 1920," Journal of Heredity, Vol. X, No. 5 (May 1919), p. 208.

2. U.S. Department of Commerce, Statistical Directory of Stare Institutions for the Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Classes (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1919), p. 5.

3. See U.S. Department of Commerce, "Report on the Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Classes," as referenced by University of Wisconsin, "Study Report," DPLS Catalog of Holdings at http://www.wisc.edu. See Documents Service Center, "Decennial Census Information: 1880 Census - Detailed Holdings," at http://www.columbia.edu. Harry H. Laughlin, "The Socially Inadequate: How Shall We Designate and Sort Them'" The American Journal of Sociology Vol. XXVII No. 1 (July 1921) reprinted in Harry Laughlin Reprints (Washington, DC: Carnegie Institute of Washington, n.d.), pp. 54, 55-56, 68.

4. Laughlin, "Socially Inadequate," p.68. Letter, Joseph A. Hill to Harry H. Laughlin, 2 January 1918: Truman 0-4-5: 5.

5. Laughlin, "Socially Inadequate," pp. 57, 62, 67- 68. Hill to Laughlin, 2 January 1918.

6. Hill to Laughlin, 2 January 1918. See Harry H. Laughlin, Statistical Directory of State Institutions for the Defective, Dependent, and Delinquent Classes (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1919). Laughlin, "Socially Inadequate," pp. 54, 57-67, 68.

7. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Samuel L. Rogers, 20 December 1918: Truman C-4-2: 6. Letter, Samuel L. Rogers to Harry H. Laughlin, 23 December 1918: Truman C-4-2: 6. See letter, Harry H. Laughlin to William M. Steuart, 22 May 1929: Truman E-2-2: 8. Also see letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Irving Fisher, 23 February 1928: Truman D-2-3: 22.

8. Laughlin, "Population Schedule," pp. 208-209. Eugenic Research Association, "Meeting of the Executive Committee of the Eugenics Research Association Tuesday, Feb. 18, 1919," Truman ERA Minutes Vol. 2 (n.p., 1919), p. 2. See IPUMS-USA, "1910 Sampling Procedures," at http://www.iputTIs.umn.edu.

9. Laughlin, "Population Schedule," p. 209. Hill to Laughlin, 2 January 1918.

10. See letter, Julia C. Lathrop to Elizabeth B. Muncey, 17 February 1916: APS Series I A:015- T. See "The Federal Census Schedule," Eugenical News Vol. V (1920), pp. 36-37. See "Eugenical Significance of Individual Records," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), pp. 8-9. See "A Needed Amendment of the Census Bill: 1929," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), pp. 53-55. See letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Lewis W. Douglas, 11 April 1929: Truman C-4-6: 17. See letter, Harry H. Laughlin to William M. Steuart, 12 April 1929: Truman E-2-2: 8. See letter, Harry H. Laughlin to William M. Steuart, 22 May 1929: Truman E-2-2: 8. See "Present Status of the Proposed 'Race-Descent' Item in the Census Population Schedule," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), pp. 138-139.

11. Harry H. Laughlin, Classification Standards to be Followed in Preparing Data for the Schedule "Racial and Diagnostic Records of Inmates of State Institutions," (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1922), p. 4: Truman C-4-6: 16. J. David Smith, The Eugenic Assault on America: Scenes in Red, White, and Black (Fairfax, VA: George Mason University Press, 1993), p. 60.

12. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Editor, Survey Graphic, 13 March 1925: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1925.7284A.

13. Loyd Thompson and Winfield Scott Downs, ed., Who's Who in American Medicine 1925 (New York: Who's Who Publications, Inc., 1925), s.v. "Plecker, Walter Ashby." Smith, p. 60. See Joan Charles, Elizabeth City County, Virginia 1800-1859, (Bowie, MD: Heritage Books, Inc., n.d.). See Blanche Adams Chapman, Wills and Administration of Elizabeth City County, Virginia 1688-1800 (1980, n.p.). See author's notes on established sources of Elizabeth City County genealogical records.

14. Smith, p. 60. Walter A. Plecker, "The 1930 U.S. Census," n.p., n.d.: Truman D-4-3:12. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 24 November 1928: Truman D-4- 3:12.

15. Smith, pp. 60-61. Richard B. Sherman, "'The Last Stand': The Fight for Racial Integrity in Virginia in the 1920's," The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 54 Issue 1 (February, 1988), p. 78.

16. Bureau of Vital Statistics, Eugenics in Relation to the New Family and the Law on Racial Integrity, (Richmond: Supt. Public Printing, 1924), p. 26.

17. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Madison Grant, 13 January 1928: Truman D-4-3:12. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 17 November 1930: Truman D-4-3:12.

18. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 25 February 1928: Truman D-4-3:12.

19. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Undertakers of Virginia, July 1921: Library of Virginia - Richmond. See Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry Davis, 4 October 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924 #2.

20. Plecker to Grant, 13 January 1928.

21. Plecker to Grant, 13 January 1928.

22. Charles B. Davenport, Eugenics Record Office Bulletin No. 9: State Laws Limiting Marriage Selection Examined in the Light of Eugenics (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1913), pp. 43-66. Walter A. Plecker, Virginia's Vanished Race, (n.p.: July 1947): UVA Library Broadside 1947, Virginia's Vanished Race W.A. Plecker. Arthur Estabrook and Ivan E. McDougle, Mongrel Virginians: The Win Tribe, (Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1926), p. 145

23. "Racial Integrity," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 18 February 1924. Sherman, p. 81. Philip Reilly, "The Virginia Racial Integrity Act Revisited: The Plecker-Laughlin Correspondence: 1928- 1930," American Journal of Medical Genetics Vol. 16 (1983), p. 486. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 19 March 1930: Truman D-4-3:12.

24. Smith, pp. 16-17. Sherman, pp. 73-74.

25. The Marcus Garvey and UNIA Papers Project, UCLA "American Series Introduction: Volume VI: September 1924-December 1927) at http://www.isop.ucla.edu. "Nuclei," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 8. "White America," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 3.

26. John Powell, A Breach in the Dike: An Analysis of the Sorrells Case Showing the Danger to Racial Integrity from Intermarriage of Whites with So- Called Indians (Richmond, n.d.), p. 3 as cited by Sherman, p. 81. Sherman, p. 79.

27. Smith, p. 59. Sherman, p. 77. Virginia Department of Health, "The New Virginia Law to Preserve Racial Integrity," Virginia Health Bulletin, Vol. XVI Extra No. 2 (March 1924), p. 4.

28. John Powell and E.S. Cox, "Is White America to Become a Negroid Nation?" Richmond Times-Dispatch, 22 July 1923. "Editorial: Racial Integrity," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 22 July 1923-

29. "Powell Asks Law Guarding Racial Purity," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 13 February 1924.

30. "Racial Integrity," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 18 February 1924.

31. Sherman, pp. 77-78. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Reverend Wendell White, 10 May 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924 #1. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924.

32. "Against Miscegenation," Eugenical News, Vol. IX (1924), p. 48. Virginia Department of Health, "The New Virginia Law to Preserve Racial Integrity." Smith, p. 20.

33. Virginia Department of Health, "Instructions to Local Registrars and Other Agents In Administration of the Law," Virginia Health Bulletin, Vol. XVI Extra No. 1 (March 1924), pp. 1, 2, attached sample record card.

34. "The New Virginia Law to Preserve Racial Integrity," pp. 1, 2, 4.

35. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924.

36. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Mrs. Robert H. Cheatham and Mrs. Mary Gildon, 30 April 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924#1.

37. Plecker to Cheatham and Gildon, 30 April 1924.

38. Plecker to Cheatham and Gildon, 30 April 1924.

39. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to W. H. Clark, 29 July 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924 #1.

40. Plecker to Clark, 29 July 1924.

41. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Pal S. Beverly, 12 October 1929: Truman D-4-3:12.

42. Plecker to Beverly, 12 October 1929.

43. Plecker to Beverly, 12 October 1929.

44. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Mascott Hamilton, 10 October 1930: Truman D-4-3:12.

45. Plecker to Hamilton, 10 October 1930.

46. Plecker to Hamilton, 10 October 1930.

47. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Mrs. Frank C. Clark, 1 May 1930: Truman D-4-3:12.

48. Plecker to Mrs. Frank C. Clark, 1 May 1930.

49. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 24 May 1929: Truman D-4-3:12.

50. Smith, pp. 66-67.

51. Plecker to Laughlin, 24 November 1928.

52. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Dr. H. V. Fitzgerald, County School Board, 11 July 1940: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1940 #4. Plecker to Laughlin, 17 November 1930. Smith, p. 67.

53. Plecker to Fitzgerald, 11 July 1940.

54. Smith, pp. 93-94.

55. Bureau of Vital Statistics, State Board of Health, The New Family and Race Improvement, (Richmond, VA: Bureau of Vital Statistics, 1925), p. 3. "Report of the Bureau of Vital Statistics State Board of Health to the Governor of Virginia," Virginia Health Bulletin Vol. XIX, No. 1, (January 1927), pp. 9-10.

56. Eugenics in Relation to the New Family, pp. 6-7.

57. Walter A. Plecker, "Virginia's Effort to Preserve Racial Integrity," A Decade of Progress in Eugenics: Scientific Papers of the Third International Congress of Eugenics (Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1934), p. 105. "The Twenty Second Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association: Virginia's Methods of Research in Racial Integrity," Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 25. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 12 December 1928: Truman D-4-3:12. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Walter A. Plecker, 18 May 1929: Truman D-4-3:12. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Walter A. Plecker, 17 March 1930: Truman D-4-3:12. Plecker to Laughlin, 19 March 1930. Walter A. Plecker, "Race Mixture and the Next Census," Eugenics Vol. II No. 3 (March 1929), p. 1.

58. Walter A. PIecker, "Virginia's Attempt to Adjust the Color Problem," Journal of American Public Health (1925), pp. 111, 114.

59. Plecker, "The 1930 U.S. Census."

60. Letter, John Powell to George H. Roberts, 28 February 1925: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1925. Plecker to White, 10 May 1924.

61. Powell to Roberts, 28 February 1925.

62. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924. Plecker to Laughlin, 12 December 1928. Plecker to White, 10 May 1924.

63. Plecker to Laughlin, 24 May 1929. See letter, Walter A. Plecker to Harry H. Laughlin, 26 June 1928: Truman D-4-3:12. See Wisconsin (1929), Bill 409 S: Truman D-4-3:12. See chart attached to letter, Walter A. Plecker to Madison Grant, 18 June 1931: Truman D-4-3:12 as compared to Davenport pp. 43-66. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Walter A. Plecker, 22 November 1928: Truman D-4-3:12. Laughlin to Plecker, 18 May 1929.

64. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to A. H. Crismond, 21 August 1940: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1940 #4.

65. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Luke M. Smith, 3 September 1940: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1940 #4. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Samuel L. Adams, 11 December 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924 #2. Eugenics in Relation to the New Family, p. 22.

66. Stuart E. Brown, Jr., Lorraine F. Myers and Eileen M. Chappel, Pocahontas' Descendants (Baltimore, MD: The Pocahontas Foundation, 1985), pp. iii, 347, 409, 410, 421, 426, 442.

67. See University of Wisconsin, "Help Files- Genealogical Research Using U.S. Census Data," at http://www.uwm.edu. See U.S. Department of Commerce, "1860 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu as compared to U.S. Department of Commerce, "1870 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu as compared to U.S. Department of Commerce, "1880 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu as compared to U.S. Department of Commerce, "1890 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu as compared to U.S. Department of Commerce, "1900 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu as compared to U.S. Department of Commerce, "1910 Census: Instructions to the Marshals" at http://www.ipums.umn.edu. See "The Most Prolific People in the United States," Eugenical News Vol. XXIII (1938), pp. 29-31. See "American Indians Made Citizens," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 73. See Library of Congress, "Today in History," at memory.loc.gov.

68. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924. Department of Commerce, "U.S. Census Estimate of Indians in Virginia, Vol. III, 1920 Population," n.d.: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1921. See Plecker to Adams, 11 December 1924.

69. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924.

70. Reclaiming our Heritage, prod. Sharon Bryant, Virginia Foundation for the Humanities, 1997, videocassette. Estabrook and McDougle, p. 145.

71. Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924. "Abstracts of Papers at 1934 ERA Meeting," Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 25.

72. Plecker to W. H. Clark, 29 July 1924.

73. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to A. P. Bohannon, 3 May 1938: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1938 #4.

74. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to R. S. Major, 28 August 1942: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1942 #4.

75. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to William E. Bradby, 2 February 1942: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1942 #4.

76. Estabrook and McDougle, p. 15. See Plecker to Davis, 4 October 1924.

77. "Mongrel Virginians," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 70. The Wilkins & Wilkins Company, "Mongrel Virginians," (Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, circa 1926): Truman E-2-2. Estabrook and McDougle, pp. 3, 8. See Estabrook and McDougle, pp. 13, 177.

78. Estabrook and McDougle, pp. 13, 14.

79. Estabrook and McDougle, pp. 199-200.

80. Estabrook and McDougle, p. 201.

81. Estabrook and McDougle, p. 202.

82. Smith, pp. 86, 87. "Mongrel Virginians," Eugenical News, p. 70.

83. Smith, pp. 95, 96. "Petition For Mandamus," Sorrell sv. A. T. Shields, Clerk (1924): UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924 #2.

84. Smith, p. 98.

85. "Petition For Mandamus." Letter, Leon H. Bazile to John Powell, 26 November 1924: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1924#2.

86. Letter, Bazile to Powell, 26 November 1924. Smith, p. 75. Sherman, pp. 81, 85.

87. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to the Virginia Department of Health, 27 May 1946: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1944-46. Letter, Walter A. Plecker to Dr. I.C. Riggin, 27 May 1946: UVA Library 7284A Powell Papers, Box 56, Folder 1944-46. See Plecker, Virginia's Vanished Race.

CHAPTER TEN

1. Letter, John e. Merriam to Charles B. Davenport, 20 June 1923: CIW Genetics: Eugenics Record Office Misc. Correspondence 2 of 2. See Fourth Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration of the American Eugenics Society, memorandum, circa July 1929: Truman C-4-4:6.

2. US Department of Commerce, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, (Washington DC: US Department of Commerce, 1976).

3. US Department of Commerce.

4. The National Park Service, "Statue of Liberty: Museum Exhibits," at http://www.nps.gov. Emma Lazarus, "The New Colossus."

5. Margo J. Anderson, The American Census (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988), pp. 132, 133. Paul Burnett, "The Red Scare," at http://www.law.umkc.edu.

6. Anderson, pp. 134, 139.

7. Anti-Defamation League, "Extremism in America: Ku Klux Klan," at http://www.adl.org. Burnett. John Higham, Strangers in the Land (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1955), pp 264-265. William M. Tuttle, Jr., Race Riot: Chicago in the Red Summer of 1919 (New York, NY: Atheneum, 1970), pp 16-20, 22-23. Anderson, p. 133.

8. Robert DeC. Ward, "Our Immigration Laws From the Viewpoint of National Eugenics," National Geographic, January 1912: Truman C- 4-2:7. Letter, Irving Fisher to Charles B. Davenport, 2 March 1912: APS BD27 Fisher #7. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Irving Fisher, 4 March 1912: APS BD27 Fisher #7.

9. Biographical Directory of the U. S. Congress, s. v. Albert Johnson at bioguide.congress.gov. City of Hiawatha Home Page at http://www.cityofhiawatha. org. City of Atchison Visitor Information at http://www.atchisonkansas.ner.

10. "Course Outline of Eugenics," 1933, p. 14: Truman E-2-2:17. Harry H. Laughlin, "A Bill," n.p., circa 1917: Truman C-2-4: 5. Letter, Prescott F. Hall to Charles B. Davenport, 1 October 1920: APS B: D 27.

11. Prescott F. Hall, "Immigration Restrictions and World Eugenics," Journal of Heredity Vol. X, No. 3 (March, 1919), p. 126.

12. Letters, Albert Johnson to Madison Grant, 19 March 1924 and Madison Grant to Albert Johnson, 12 December 1923 as cited by Hassencahl, p. 209. Letter, Madison Grant to Charles B. Davenport, 24 January 1921: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Letter, Madison Grant to John C. Merriam, 26 November 1924: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 17 March 1921: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Letter, Madison Grant to Charles B. Davenport, 29 January 1921: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, n November 1920: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 6 January 1921: APS B: D 27 - Grant, Madison #4. Martha Ragsdale, "The National Origins Plan of Immigration Restriction," (Nashville: Vanderbilt University) unpublished manuscript, p. 140: PRA#18.

13. See Harry H. Laughlin, Biological Aspects of Immigration: CSHL: Harry H. Laughlin Reprints.

14. Laughlin, pp. 4-5, 6, 13, 18.

15. Laughlin, pp. 3, 4, 21.

16. Laughlin, pp. 4, 5.

17. Laughlin, pp. 23-26.

18. Memorandum, Harry H. Laughlin to John C. Merriam, 17 October 1922: Truman C-4-5:6. "Sample of Schedule used in the Melting Pot Survey," attachment to Harry H. Laughlin, "Definite Proposal for a New and More Thorough Study of Crime Among Aliens and the Descendants of Recent Immigrants in American Criminalistic Institutions," circa 1921: CA-5:10. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Albert Johnson, 30 December 1924: Truman C- 2-4:5.

19. "Immigration Limits for the Year Ending July 1, 1922," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921). Robert DeCourcey Ward, "Immigration and the Three Per Cent Restrictive Law," Journal of Heredity Vol. XII No. 7 (August-September 1921), pp. 319-325. "First Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration of the Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," memorandum, circa 1924: Truman C-4-4:3. Harry H. Laughlin, "Scientific Investigations by the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the House of Representatives: Abstract of Studies Made for the Committee," memorandum, circa May 1922: Truman C-2-4:5.

20. Harry H. Laughlin, Classification Standards to be Followed in Preparing Data for the Schedule "Racial and Diagnostic Records of Inmates of State Institutions," (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1922), pp. 4, 7: Truman C-4-6:16. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Albert Johnson, circa 1922: Truman C-2-4:5.

21. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," memorandum, circa 1924, p. 3: C-2-3:3. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Year Ending September 1st, 1923," Memorandum circa 1923: Truman C-2-5:15. House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 67th Cong., #3d sess., 21 November 1922, p. 734.

22. House Committee, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 21 November 1922, pp. 756, 760.

23. House Committee, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 21 November 1922, pp. 725, 752, 759.

24. "Biological Research in Immigration," memorandum, circa 1920: Truman C-2-4:5. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Frank Babbott, 18 February 1922: Truman C-4-3:5. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Frank Babbott, 9 July 1925: Truman C-4-3:5. Davenport to Grant, 17 March 1921. Harry H. Laughlin, Immigration and Conquest: A Report of The Special Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York (n.p., 1939), p. 8.

25. "First Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration of the Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," draft copy, circa 1924: Truman C-4-4: 3. "Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," memorandum, circa 1924: APS 576.06 AM3 AES-Eugenics Committee of USA Documents.

26. "First Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration," p. 2.

27. "First Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration," pp. 2, 3, 4.

28. "Annual Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association," Eugenical News Vol. VIII (1923), p. 53. Eugenics Research Association, Active Membership Accession List (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1922): Truman, ERA Membership Records. US Department of Labor, "Portraits: James J. Davis," at http://www.dol.gov.Merriam to Davenport, 20 June 1923.

29. Merriam to Davenport, 20 June 1923.

30. Merriam to Davenport, 20 June 1923. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 26 November 1923: Truman C-2-6:17.

31. Merriam to Davenport, 20 June 1923.

32. Memorandum, Charles B. Davenport to Harry H. Laughlin, 26 June 1923: Truman C-4-3:9.

33. Certificate of appointment: Mark Laughlin Collection as cited by Hassencahl, p. 191. See Harry H. Laughlin, "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Year Ending September 1st, 1923."

34. Laughlin to Johnson, circa 1922, p. 9.

35. "Personals," Eugenical News Vol. VIII (1923), p. 94. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Dr. Albert Govaerts, 17 March 1923: Truman C-4-6: 19. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 1 October 1923: Truman D-2-6:17.

36. Laughlin to Davenport, 1 October 1923. Letter, Harry. H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 22 November 1923: Truman C-2-6:17. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924." Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Judge Harry Olson, 12 October 1923: Truman D-2-3:6.

37. Laughlin to Olson, 12 October 1923.

38. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," p. 2. "Dr. Albert Govaerts of Belgium," Eugenical News Vol. VII (1922), p. 64. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923.

39. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," p. 3. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923.

40. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," p. 2. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923.

41. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," pp. 2, 3. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923. Laughlin to Davenport, 1 October 1923.

42. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923.

43. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923. Harry H. Laughlin, "Interdepartmental Authority," memorandum circa December 1923: Truman D-4-3:13.

44. Laughlin, "Interdepartmental Authority."

45. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," pp. 1, 6. Laughlin to Davenport, 1 October 1923.

46. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Year Ending September 1st, 1923." Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923.

47. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Harry H. Laughlin, 21 December 1923: Truman C-2- 6:17.

48. Laughlin to Davenport, 26 November 1923.

49. Laughlin to Davenport, 22 November 1923.

50. Davenport to Laughlin, 21 December 1923.

51. "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," p. 1. "Report of the Committee on Selective Immigration of the Eugenics Committee of the United States of America," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), pp. 21-24.

52. "Secretary Davis on Immigration," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 37.

53. House Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 68th Cong., 1st sess., 8 March 1924, pp. 1279, 1281, 1283, 1294, 1295.

54. House Committee, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 8 March 1924, pp. 1311, 1322, 1323, 1340.

55. House Committee, Statement of Dr. Harry H. Laughlin, 8 March 1924, p. 1300.

56. "Memorandum and Outline of Tentative Working Agreement Between the Carnegie Institution of Washington and the State Department of the Federal Government in Reference to Collaboration in the Collection of First-Hand Data on Immigration at its Sources," memorandum, circa June 1924: Truman C-4-3:9. Letter, W. M. Gilbert to Harry H. Laughlin, 11 September 1924: Truman C-4-3:9.

57. "Memorandum and Outline of Tentative Working Agreement Between the Carnegie Institution of Washington and the State Department." "Report of Harry H. Laughlin for the Ten Months September 1, 1923-June 30, 1924," p. 4. "The Several Filterings of the Immigrant Stream Directed Toward the United States," attachment to Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Albert Johnson, 30 December 1924: Truman C-2-4:5.

58. "Memorandum and Outline of Tentative Working Agreement Between the Carnegie Institution of Washington and the State Department" p. 3. See Ezekiel Cheever, School Issues (Baltimore: Warwick & York, Inc., 1924): CIW Genetics: Eugenics Record Office Misc. Correspondence 2 of 2.

59. See Cheever.

60. Cheever, pp 28-29.

61. Cheever, p 38.

62. Cheever, pp 41, 42-43.

63. Cheever, p 44.

64. Cheever, p 19.

65. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Lewellys F. Barker, 18 April 1924: CIW Genetics: Eugenics Record Office Misc. Correspondence 2 of 2. Letter, Robert Dee. Ward to Harry H. Laughlin, 20 March 1924: Truman C-4-1: 8. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Robert Dee. Ward, 1 April 1924: Truman C-4-1:8

66. Davenport to Barker, 18 April 1924.

67. US Department of Justice, "Immigration Act of May 26, 1924 (43 Statutes-at-Large 153)," at http://www.ins.usdoj.gov. Ragsdale, p. 17. Anderson, p.146.

68. Anderson, pp. 147, 149. Ragsdale, p. 42.

69. Alfred P. Schultz, Race or Mongrel (Boston: L.C. Page and Company, 1908) as cited by Ragsdale, p. 11.

70. Ragsdale, p. 35.

71. See Ragsdale, p. 41. Ragsdale, pp. 41-42.

72. Ragsdale, p. 42.

73. Ragsdale, p. 43.

74. Ragsdale, pp. 41, 45, 46, 48, 49. Fourth Report of Committee on Selective Immigration, p. 6.

75. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Frank L. Babbott, 31 January 1927: Truman C-4-3: 5.

76. Anderson, p. 149. "Immigration Act of May 26, 1924," pp. 422-423. See Fourth Report of Committee on Selective Immigration.

77. Robert Dee. Ward, "Higher Mental and Physical Standards for Immigrants", reprinted from The Scientific Monthly, Vol. IX (1924) p 539: Truman C-4-1:8. See Fourth Report of Committee on Selective Immigration, pp. 20, 28-30. Draft copy, "Immigration Service," (n.d), p. 2: Truman C-2-4:5.

78. US Department of Justice, "Immigration and Nationality Act of June 27, 1952 (INA) (66 Statutes-at-Large 163)," at http://www.ins.usdoj.gov. US Department of Justice, "Immigration and Nationality Act" at http://www.ins.usdoj.gov.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

1. See Robert Reid Rentoul, Race Culture; Or Race Suicide? (London: The Walter Scott Publishing Co., Ltd., 1906), pp. 4-5, 19-22. See Richard A. Soloway, Demography and Degeneration: Eugenics and the Declining Birthrate in Twentieth-Century Britain, (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1990), pp. 2-4.

2. Pauline M.H. Mazumdar, Eugenics, Human Genetics and Human Failings (London: Routledge, 1992), pp. 72-80, 89, 125, 143. Arthur H. Estabrook and Charles B. Davenport, The Nam Family: A Study in Cacogenics (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Press, 1912), p. 1. "The Eugenics Record Office," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916), p. 2. Charles B. Davenport, "First Report of Station for Experimental Evolution Under Department of Experimental Biology," Carnegie Institution of Washington Year Book No. 3 1904 (Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), pp. 22, 23, 33-34. American Breeders' Association, "Minutes of First Annual Meeting: St. Louis, Missouri: December 29th and 30th, 1903" memorandum circa 1904, pp. 1-3. Francis Galton, Memories of my Life, (London: Methuen & Co., 1908), pp. 310, 320-321. See Francis Galton, "Eugenics; Its Definitions, Scope and Aims": University College London, Galton Papers, 138/9.

3. Rentoul, pp. 164, 165. Author's interview with Indiana State Library, 9 December 2002. Rentoul, p. i, xiv.

4. Francis Galton, "Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope and Aims," (paper read at a Meeting of the Sociological Society, 16 May 1904): UCL Galton Papers 138/9. Rentoul, p.I64. Also see "An Easy Way of Sterilizing Degenerates," The British Medical Journal, 13 August 1904, pp. 346-347.

5. Rentoul, pp. i, 17-22, 24-25, 109-110, 133-142.

6. Rentoul, pp. 10, 44, 101, 155.

7. Rentoul, p. 133.

8. Rentoul, pp. 31-32.

9. Lady Georgina Chambers, "Notes on the Early Days of the 'Eugenics Education Society,''' pp 2, 3: Wellcome SA/EUG/B-11. Mazumdar, pp. 24, 25, 27, 29, 30. Letter, Leonard Darwin to David Starr Jordan, 1 January 1914: Hoover Institution Archives, Horder, Box 60, Folder 52. Also see Phyllis Grosskurth, Havelock Ellis, A Biography (London: Allen Lane, 1980), p. 412n.

10. Rentoul, p. 169. Letter, C.S. Tromp to R. Chalmers, 14 September 1906: PRO HO 45/10341/139871. "The Isle of Lundy," at http://www.lundy.org.uk.

11. Francis Galton, Restrictions in Marriage (American Journal of Sociology, 1906), p. 3. Francis Galton, Memories of My Life (London: Methuen & Co., 1908), p. 310. Major Leonard Darwin, "First Steps Towards Eugenic Reform," Eugenics Review, Vol. 4 (ca. April 1912), pp 34-35 as selected in G. K. Chesterton, Eugenics and Other Evils, edited by and including additional articles selected by Michael W. Perry (Seattle, WA: Inkling Press, 2000), pp 144-145.

12. "Eugenical Sterilization in England," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), pp. 134-135. Letter, Hugh MacEwen to Sir George Newman, 12 August 1930: PRO MH791291. Letter, A. Neville to A.S. Moshinsky, 20 February 1937: PRO MH791291.

13. Soloway, pp. 74-75.

14. "Notes on the Early Days," p. 33.

15. "Notes on the Early Days," pp. 3, 6-7. "A Large Family" and "A Decadent Family", Admissions forms for Sandlebridge Boarding Special School: UCL, Galton Papers, 138/8. "Notes on the Early Days of the 'Eugenics Education Society,''' pp. 4, 9. Dr. Caleb W. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill," July 23 1912.

16. Letter, Sybil Gotto to Francis Galton, 11 December 1909: UCL, Galton Papers, 24017. "Eugenics: Prof. Karl Pearson on its Methods," The Standard, 3 January 1910. See "Notes on the Early Days," p. 32.

17. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), p. 4: APS: Davenport Beginnings of Cold Spring Harbor. The Eugenics Education Society, "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II: Report of Proceedings of the First International Eugenical Congress (Kingsway, W.C.: Eugenics Education Society, 1913), pp. 3, 5, 6-13.

18. "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II, p. 2.

19. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill."

20. Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism," p. 6. Richard Allen Soloway, Birth Control and the Population Question in England, 1877-1930 (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1982), p. 17. Rentoul, p. i. "Notes on the Early Days," pp. 4, 9.

2I. "The International Eugenics Congress." Saleeby, "The Discussion of Alcoholism at the Eugenics Congress," p. 6. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill."

22. Grotto to Galton, 11 December 1909.

23. Michael Warren, A Chronology of State Medicine, Public Health, Welfare and Related Services in Britain: 1066-1999.

24. Mazumdar, pp. 22-23. Daniel J. Kevles, In The Name of Eugenics, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), p. 98.

25. Lord Riddell, "Sterilization of the Unfit: A Paper for the Medico-Legal Society," memorandum, circa February 1929, p. 17: PRO MH 58/103.

26. Mazumdar, pp. 23-24. Kevles, p. 98.

27. "Editorial Notes", Eugenics Review Vol. 2 (October 1910), pp. 163-164. Letter, Winston Churchill to unknown recipient, 27 May 1910: PRO HO 144/1085/193548/1.

28. Darwin, "First Steps Towards Eugenic Reform."

29. Darwin, "First Steps Towards Eugenic Reform." Riddell, p. 17.

30. Caleb Saleeby, The Progress of Eugenics (London: Cassell, 1914), p. 181, as selected by Perry, p. 133.

31. Darwin, "First Steps Towards Eugenic Reform." "The Mental Deficiency Act, 1913," Eugenics Review Vol. 5 (Apr. 1913-Jan. 1914), p. 290, as selected by Perry, p. 148.

32. Saleeby, "The House of Life."

33. Darwin, "First Steps Towards Eugenic Reform."

34. Saleeby, "The House of Life."

35. Saleeby, "The House of Life."

36. "Mental Deficiency Bill," Eugenics Review Vol. 4 (circa January 1913), p. 420, as selected by Perry, p. 146. R. Langdon-Down, "The Mental Deficiency Bill," Eugenics Review Vol. 5 (circa April 1913-January 1914), pp. 166-167, as selected by Perry, p. 147.

37. "The Mental Deficiency Act, 1913," p. 148. Eugenics Society, "The Sterilization of Mental Defectives," draft of leaflet, circa 1929: PRO MH 58/104A.

38. Saleeby, The Progress of Eugenics, pp. 188-189, as selected by Perry, p. 134.

39. "The Mental Deficiency Act, 1913," p. 290, as selected by Perry, p. 148. "The Mental Deficiency Act," Eugenics Review Vol. 9 (April 1917-January 1918), p. 263 as cited by Perry, pp. 148-149.

40. See Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Chicago: Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922).

41. Galton, Memories of my Life, pp. 293-294, 320- 321. "Galton Laboratory for National Eugenics and the Biometric Laboratory, "Organized Eugenics, (New Haven, CT: American Eugenics Society), 1931, p. 37. Soloway, Demography and Degeneration, p. 163. C. P. Blacker, Eugenics: Galton and After (Westport, CT: Hyperion Press, Inc.), p. 237. Mazumdar, pp. 82, 85.

42. Letter, Francis Benedict to Karl Pearson, 20 November 1920: UCL, Pearson Papers, 653/2. Letter, Francis Benedict to Karl Pearson, 13 December 1920: UCL, Pearson Papers, 653/2.

43. Mazumdar, pp. 77, 85-87, 289, 328.

44. Mazumdar, p. 72. Report of the Committee appointed to consider the Eugenic Aspect of Poor Law Reform, "Section I: The Eugenic Principle in Poor Law Administration," Eugenic Review Vol. 2 (1910-1911) pp. 167-177 as cited by Mazumdar, p. 72. Eugenics Education Society, Third Annual Report (1911), p. 18 as cited by Mazumdar, pp. 71-72.

45. Mazumdar, pp. 71-72, 133-135, 205-207. MacNicol, p 429.

46. Mazumdar, pp. 72, 73. "Metropolitan Relieving Officers' Association: Eugenics and the Poor Law," The Poor-Law Officer's Journal 26 September 1913 p. 1217. "Life and Scenes in London # 1: 'Bethnal Green,'" The Nineteenth Century (June 1924) as cited by Casebook: Jack The Ripper at http://www.casebook.org.

47. "Metropolitan Relieving Officers' Association: Eugenics and the Poor Law."

48. Mazumdar, pp. 109-121, 124, 125. See "Rothamsted," at nolimits.nmw.ac.uk.

49. Mazumdar, pp. 125, 126, 137, 142, 294.

50. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Harry Olson, 12 October 1923: Truman D-2-3: 6. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 22 November 1923: Truman C-2-6:17.

51. Laughlin to Olson, 12 October 1923.

52. Generally see David Starr Jordan, War and the Breed: The Relation of War to the Downfall of Nations (1915).

53. Jordan.

54. Jordan. Eugenics Review, Vol. 6, No. 3 (October 1914), pp. 197-198 as cited by Soloway, p. 141.

55. Letter, Cora Hodson to Elton Mayo, 27 June 1927: Eugenics Society Paper C210, as cited by Mazumdar, pp. 127-128.

56. Mazumdar, p. 133.

57. Mazumdar, p. 137. Letter, Cora Hodson to Sir Walter Moley Fletcher, 15 September 1927: PRO FDI/1734.

58. "Population studies in Edinburgh," Eugenics Review Vol. 18 (1926-27), pp. 227-230 as cited by Mazumdar p. 137.

59. Letter, Cora Hodson to Sir Walter Moley Fletcher, 15 September 1927. Letter, Cora Hodson to Miss C.H. Paterson, 8 February 1926: Wellcome Box 112. Mazumdar, pp. 133- 137, 142. See Daniel Kevles, In The Name of Eugenics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1985), pp. 100-101. See John MacNicol, "The Voluntary Sterilization Campaign in Britain, 1918- 39," The Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 2., No. 3 (1992), p. 429.

60. Caleb Saleeby, "Two Decades of Eugenics," The Sociological Review 16 (July 1924), pp. 251-253 as cited by Perry, p. 135. "History and Survey of the Eugenics Movement, Committee on the," Organized Eugenics, p. 17.

61. Letter, Cora Hodson to Irving Fisher, 17 June 1925: Truman C-2-5:6. Letter, Field Secretary to Cora Hodson, 29 June 1925: Truman C-2-5:6.

62. Letter, Cora Hodson to S. Wayne Evans, 9 June 1931: Wellcome SAEUG/E-l.

63. Letter, Paul M. Kinsie to Harry H. Laughlin, 28 March 1928: Truman C-2-5: 6.

64. Eugenics Education Society, "Minutes of Proceedings at A Meeting held at The Rooms of the Royal Society, Burlington House, London, W. on Tuesday, January 29th, 1924": Truman D_5-2:13. Harry H. Laughlin, "Eugenics in America," Eugenics Review April 1925.

65. Laughlin, "Eugenics in America."

66. Cora Hodson, "Draft of Letter to 'The Times.'"

67. "Segregation versus Sterilization," Eugenical News vol. X (1925), pp. 2-3.

68. C. P. Blacker, Eugenics: Galton and After (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press 1952 reprinted by Westport, CT: Hyperion Press, Inc., 1987), p. 203. "The Sterilization of Mental Defectives."

69. Mazumdar, pp. 197, 198. MacNicol pp 428, 429.

70. Ministry of Health, "Existing Position in U.K.": PRO MH 58/104A.

71. Letter, Ellen Askwith to Neville Chamberlain, 16 February 1929: PRO MH 58/103. Letter, Sir Bernard Mallet to Neville Chamberlain, 18 February 1929: PRO MH 58/10398826.

72. Letter, Frederick. J. Willis to Leonard Darwin, 8 July 1927: PRO MH 51/547. Frederick J. Willis, "Sterilization Bill," draft attached to letter, 8 July 1927: PRO MH 51/547. Bernard Mallet, "Draft of Sterilization Bill," circa 1929: PRO MH 51/547.

73. Letter, Lord Riddell to Neville Chamberlain, 27 April 1929: PRO MH 58/103. Riddell, pp. 1, 9, 17, 20.

74. Riddell, p. 21.

75. Mazumdar, p. 204. "Committee for Legalizing Eugenic Sterilization," circa 1929, pp. 16, 28- 29: PRO MH 58/103 98826.

76. The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th ed., s.v. "Great Britain." Riddell, pp. 9, 10, 11.

77. Soloway, Demography and Degeneration, pp. 163, 381 footnote 3. C.P. Blacker, "Eugenics In Prospect and Retrospect," The Galton Lecture, 1945 (Hamish Hamilton Medical Books, n.d.), p.18.

78. Letter, Cora Hodson to Ernst Rudin, 24 July 1930: Eugenic Society Papers C300 as cited by Mazumdar, p. 205. Ernst Rudin, "Psychiatrische Indikation zur Sterilisierung," Das kommende Geschlecht 5 (1929), pp. 1-19: Eugenics Society Papers C300 as cited by Mazumdar p. 206. Mazumdar pp 205, 309 footnote 21.

79. Letter, Cora Hodson to S. Wayne Evans, 11 June 1930: Wellcome SA/EUG/E-1.

80. Letter, Cora Hodson to Charles B. Davenport, 15 February 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1. See Letter, Cora Hodson to Charles B. Davenport, 25 March 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1. See Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 31 March 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1. See Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 13 May 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1. See Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 13 June 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1.

81. Hodson to Davenport, 25 March 1930. Davenport to Hodson, 31 March 1930. Letter, Cora Hodson to Sir Walter Moley Fletcher, 10 April 1930: APS B: D 27 - IFEO 1930 #1.

82. Davenport to Hodson, 13 May 1930.

83. Davenport to Hodson, 13 June 1930. "1930 Meeting of International Federation of Eugenic Organization: Programme and Time Table": Truman C-2-4:3.

84. Eric Donaldson, "Operations on Mentally Deficient Patients in the Poor Law Hospital," pp. 1, 4: PRO MH 79/291.

85. Donaldson, p. 2.

86. Donaldson, p. 3.

87. Donaldson, pp. 2-3.

88. Donaldson, pp. 2, 3, 4. Letter, Eric Donaldson to Hugh MacEwen, 9 August 1930: PRO MH 79/291. MacEwen to Newman, 12 August 1930.

89. Donaldson, p. 1. Letter, Laurence Brock to R. H. H. Keenlyside, 1 August 1930: PRO MH 79/291.

90. Letter, Lionel L. Westrope to the Ministry of Health, 14 October 1930: PRO MH 79/291. "Ambulance Notes," L.N.E.R. Magazine Vol. 29 No. 5 (May, 1939).

91. MacNicol, pp. 431, 432. Mazumdar, pp. 211, 212. See Casti Connubii: Encyclical of Pope Pius Xl on Christian Marriages.

92. Casti Connubii, section 68.

93. Casti Connubii, section 70.

94. Casti Connubii, sections 63, 64. Exodus 20: 13 NIV Study Bible.

95. Eugenics Society, Sterilization of Mental Defectives, n.p., n.d.: Wellcome SA/EUG/N-32. "Should the Unfit be Sterilized?" newspaper clipping, n.p., n.d.: Wellcome SA/EUG/N-33. Committee for Legalizing Sterilization, p. 16.

96. MacNicol, pp. 429, 435. Eugenics Society, Annual Report 1931-32, n.p., circa 1932, p. 6: Wellcome SA/EUG/A-24.

97. MacNicol, p 429. Mazumdar pp. 211, 212.

98. Letter, Eugenics Society to Michael Pease, 17 August 1931: Wellcome Box 112. "Committee for Legalising Sterilization", pp. 15-17. Mazumdar, p. 206.

99. Letter, British Embassy to Sir John Simon, 17 November 1938: Wellcome Box 112. Brock Committee,"Summary of Principal Recommendation," p. 1: PRO MH 51/210. Mazumdar, p. 203. Brock Committee, "Section 86: The Problem of the Carrier": PRO MH 51/210.

100. Mazumdar, pp. 210-211.

101. Blacker, pp 303-304. "Population and Its Control," Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 100. "Publication of the State Law: Part I: Given out in Berlin - 25th July 1933, No. 86" circa 1933: Wellcome Library Box 112.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:01 am

PART 4 OF 7

CHAPTER TWELVE

1. Harry Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin #10A: Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population: I. The Scope of the Committee's Work (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), pp. 1, 9.

2. See Problems in Eugenics Vol. II: Report of Proceedings of the First International Eugenical Congress (Kingsway, W.C.: Eugenics Education Society, 1913). Caleb W. Saleeby, "The House of Life: The Mental Deficiency Bill," 22 July 1912. See Laughlin, Bulletin #10A. See Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin #10B: Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population: II. The Legal, Legislative and Administrative Aspects of Sterilization (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914).

3. The Eugenics Education Society, "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II: Report of Proceedings of the First International Eugenical Congress (Kingsway, W.C.: Eugenics Education Society, 1913), p. 3. "History of the International Organisation of Eugenics," memorandum circa November 1923, pp. 1-12: Truman C-2-1:2.

4. "History of the International Organisation of Eugenics," p. 3.

5. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 10 October 1919: APS B:D27 - Grant, Madison # 1. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Madison Grant, 2 April 1920: APS B:D27 - Grant, Madison #3. Letter, Madison Grant to Charles B. Davenport, 7 April 1920: APS B:D27 - Grant, Madison #3. Letter, Madison Grant to Charles B. Davenport, 13 April 1920: APS B:D27 - Grant, Madison #3. Letter, Alvey A. Adee to Charles B. Davenport, 5 February 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/2620. Letter, C.C. Kimble to Envoy Extraordinary & Minister Plenipotentiary of the United States of America, 17 March 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. Letter, Charles S. Hartman to Sr. Dr. Dn. N. Clemente Ponce, 7 June 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459.

6. Grant to Davenport, 13 April 1920. Davenport to Grant, 2 April 1920. Lothrop Stoddard, The Rising Tide of Color (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1926), p. i. "Second Eugenics Congress," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921) p. 65. American Museum of Natural History, "Timeline" at http://www.amnh.org. Second International Congress of Eugenics, Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Company, 1923), p. i. Harry H. Laughlin, The Second International Exhibition of Eugenics (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Co., 1923), p. 13.

7. Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers, p. ii. "Second Eugenics Congress," p. 64. Laughlin, The Second International Exhibition of Eugenics, p. 16. Herny Fairfield Osborn, "Address of Welcome," Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers, pp. 1, 3.

8. Osborn, p. 2.

9. Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers, pp. iii-v.

10. Letter, Hermann Lundborg to Charles B. Davenport, 29 August 1921: APS B:D27. Also See Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Hermann Lundborg, 24 October 1921: APS B:D27. Also See Letter, Hermann Lundborg to Charles B. Davenport, 28 November 1921: APS B:D27.

11. Charles B. Davenport, "Research in Eugenics, " Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers, p. 20.

12. Laughlin, The Second International Exhibition of Eugenics, pp. 13, 33, 36, 152-153. "II. International Congress of Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. VI (1921), p. 28. Princeton University, "Dodge-Osborn Hall," at etc.princeton.edu.

13. Arthur H. Estabrook, "The Second International Eugenics Congress," speech given to the Indiana Academy of Science, 2 December 1921: Truman E-2-4:9.

14. "Resolution Passed by the Executive Session of the Second International Congress, September 27, 1921," memorandum, n.d.: Wellcome SA/EUG/E11. "The International Eugenics Commission," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921), p. 67. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Dr. Erwin Baur, 30 March 1923: APS B:D27 Davenport & Erwin Baur. See "Meeting of International Commission at Lund - 1923" article, n.p., n.d.: Truman C-4-6:19.

15. "International Commission of Eugenics," Eugenical News Vol. VII (1922) p. 117. "History of the International Organisation of Eugenics, " pp. 5-6, 7.

16. "Personals," Eugenical News Vol. VIII (1923), p. 94. Letter, John C. Merriam to Charles B. Davenport, 20 June 1923: CIW Genetics: Eugenics Record Office Misc. 2 of 2. "Minutes of the Meetings of the International Commission of Eugenics Held in the Rooms of the Medical Faculty of the University of Lund: Saturday, September 1st and Monday, September 3rd, 1923," memorandum: Truman C-2-1:2.

17. "History of the International Organisation of Eugenics, " pp. 9, 12. "Report of Sub- Committee on Ultimate Program to be Developed by the Eugenics Society of the United States of America," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 73. "Eugenics in India," Eugenical News Vol. VII (1922), p. 2. "Eugenics in Japan," Eugenical News Vol. VII (1922), p. 104.

18. "Meeting of International Commission at Lund - 1923, " n.p. n.d. article: Truman C-4-6:19. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Dr. Erwin Baur, 30 March 1923: APS B:D27 - Davenport & Erwin Baur. Letter, Leonard Darwin to Herman Lundborg, 21 November 1925: APS B:D27. Dr. Timothy Holian, "The German Hyperinflation of 192 3: A Seventy-Fifth Anniversary Retrospective, " at http://www.mwsc.edu. "Resolution Passed by the Executive Session of the Second International Eugenics Congress," p.3.

19. "The International Commission of Eugenics, " minutes of 14 July 1925 meeting: Truman C-2- 5:6. See "Eugenics in the University of Padua," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 164. See "Eugenical Sterilization in Denmark," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 178. See "The International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 100. See "Immigration to Norway," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 139.

20. "The International Commission of Eugenics."

21. "Memorandum of the Objects of the International Federation of the Eugenics Organizations," circa September 1928: APS B:D27 - IFEO 1928 #2.

22. "Seventh Meeting of the International Commission of Eugenics," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 117. "International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 153. "Memorandum of the Objects of the International Federation of the Eugenics Organizations."

23. Bent Sigurd Hansen, "Something Rotten in the State of Denmark: Eugenics and the Ascent of the Welfare State," in Eugenics and the Welfare State, edited by Gunnar Broberg and Nils Roll- Hansen (East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 1996), pp. 44, 51. See Nils Roll-Hansen, "Conclusion: Scandinavian Eugenics in the International Context," in Broberg and Roll-Hansen, p. 268. See William H. Schneider, "The Eugenics Movement in France, 1890-1940," in The Wellborn Science, edited by Mark B. Adams (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990), pp. 80-83. "Pan's Plans," Eugenical News, Vol. IX (1924), p. 80.

24. "Belgium Society of Eugenics," Eugenical News Vol. V (1920), p. 63. "Revue D'Eugenique," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921), p. 43. "Societe Beige D'Eugenique," Eugenical News Vol. V (1920), p. 54.

25. "Revue D'Eugenique," p. 43. "Societe Belge D'Eugenique, " p. 54. "Belgium Society of Eugenics," p. 63. "Foreign Notes," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921), p. 72.

26. "Belgian Eugenics Society," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 14. "Dr. Albert Govaerts of Belgium, " Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 64. "The New Belgian Eugenics Office," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 92. "National Office of Eugenics in Belgium," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 120. "The Hereditary Factor in the Etiology of Tuberculosis," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 32.

27. "Prenuptial Examinations in Belgium, Luxemburg and Germany," Eugenical News, Vol. XII (1927), p. 114. "The New Belgian Eugenics Office," p. 92. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Dr. Albert Govaerts, 18 July 1923: Truman C-4-6: 19. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 22 November 1923: Truman C-2-6:14. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Charles B. Davenport, 26 November 1923: Truman C-2-6:17.

28. Angus McLaren, Our Own Master Race: Eugenics in Canada, 1885-1945 (Toronto, Ontario: McClelland & Stewart, Inc.), pp. 43, 47, 107, 181 f74. National Council of Women, 13th Report (Toronto, Ontario: Johnstone, 1907), pp. 56, 58 as cited by McLaren, p. 38. R. W. Bruce Smith, "Mental Sanitation," Canada Lancet, Vol. 41 (1907-1908), p. 976 as cited by McLaren, p. 42. F. McKevley Bell, "Social Maladies," Queen's Quarterly Vol. 16 (1908-09), p. 52 as cited by McLaren, p. 52.

29. McLaren, pp. 42, 125, 159-160. See Brian L. Ross, "An Unusual Defeat: The Manitoba Controversy over Eugenical Sterilization in 1933," unpublished paper, Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, University of Toronto, 1981, as cited by McLaren, p. 196 f8. "Eugenical Sterilization in Canada," Eugenical News, Vol. XIII (1928), p. 47. Timothy J. Christian, "The Mentally Ill and Human Rights in Alberta," unpublished University of Alberta paper, n.d., pp. 13-20, 25-29 as cited by McLaren p. 100.

30. Terry L. Chapman, "The Early Eugenics Movement in Western Canada," Alberta History Vol. 25 (1977), pp. 9-17 as cited by McLaren, pp. 90-91. Statutes of the Province of British Columbia, 1933, "An Act Respecting Sexual Sterilization," ch. 59, 7 April 1933 as cited by McLaren, p. 91. M. Stewart, "Some Aspects of Eugenical Sterilization in British Columbia with Special Reference to Patients Sterilized from Essondale Provincial Hospital since 1935," Provincial Archives of British Columbia, Provincial Secretary, Mental Health Services, GR 542, box 14, "Sterilization" as cited by McLaren, p. 160.

31. See "Dr. A. Forel's Views," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926). Veronique Monier, "Narratives of National Identity: Sexuality, Race, and the Swiss 'Dream of Order,''' paper presented at the European Consortium for Political Research Annual Joint Sessions, Workshop: The Political Uses of Narrative, at Mannheim 26-31 March 1999, pp. 11, 13. "The Julius Klaus Fund," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 36.

32. Mottier, p. 11. "The Julius Klaus Fund," p. 36. "Accessions to Archives of the Eugenics Record Office, January, 1924," Eugenical News, Vol. IX (1924), p. 19. "Julius Klaus-Stifrung," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), pp. 139-140. "Meeting of International Commission," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 116.

33. Mottier, pp. 14, 15, 16. "Dr. A. Forel's Views," p. 134. "Sterilization in Switzerland," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926), p. 91. "New Sterilization Statutes," Eugenical News, Vol. XIV (1929), p. 63. Robert N. Proctor, Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), p. 97.

34. "Eugenics in Denmark," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), pp. 6. Hansen, pp. 9, 19. "Eugenics in Denmark," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), p. 81, "Danish-Sterilization Law," Eugenical News, Vol. XIV (1929), pp, 122-124. "Eugenical Registration in Denmark," Eugenical News, Vol. XV (1930), p. 100. Hilda von Hellmer Wullen, "Eugenics in Other Lands " Journal of Heredity Vol. XXVIII No. 8 (August 1937), p. 274. Letter, Cora Hodson to Soren Hansen, 28 June 1928: APS B:D27.

35. "Eugenical Sterilization in Denmark," Eugenical News Vol. XXII (1927), p. 178. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Harry Olson, 15 November 1927: Truman D-2-2:16. "Danish-Sterilization Law, " p. 122.

36. Rockefeller Foundation, "University of Copenhagen - Institute of Human Genetics," June 1939 Appraisal, pp. 3, 5: RF RG 1.2 Ser 713 Box 2 Folder 15. Letter, Tage Kemp to the Rockefeller Foundation, 17 November 1932: RF RG 1.2 Ser 713 Box 2 Folder 15.

37. "University of Copenhagen - Institute of Human Genetics," p. 1.

38. "Race Hygiene in Scandinavia," Eugenical News, Vol. IV (1919), p. 88. Osborn, p. 1. See "Photograph of Jon Alfred Mjoen in Library," at http://www.amphilsoc.org. "Part 1: The American Eugenics Society, Inc.: B. Early History and Development," Organized Eugenics, January 1931, p. 3.

39. "Race Hygiene in Scandinavia," Eugenical News, Vol. IV (1919), p. 88. "Der Nordske Race," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 2. "Personal Notes," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 113. "Notes and News," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 88. "Eugenical Activities in the Different Countries: V: Eugenics in Norway," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), pp. 55-57. "Immigration to Norway," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926), p. 139. "American Lecture Tour of Dr. Mjoen." Eugenical News, Vol. XII (1927), p, 24, "Galton Society," Eugenical News, Vol. XII (1927), p. 54. "Dr. Mjoen's Lectures," Eugenical News, Vol. XII (1927), pp. 139-140. See "Photograph of Jon Alfred Mjoen and Leon Whitney," at http://www.amphilsoc.org. Klaus Hansen, "The Norwegian Sterilization Law of 1934 and its Practical Results," Eugenical News, Vol. XXI (1936), p. 129. Nils Roll-Hansen, "Norwegian Eugenics: Sterilization as Social Reform," in Broberg and Roll-Hansen, pp. 176, 178,

40. "Race-Biology in Sweden," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 121. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 2 June 1923: APS B:D27. Letter, Herman Lundborg to Charles B. Davenport, 9 February 1926: APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 1 March 1926: APS B:D27. Letter, Herman Lundborg to Charles B. Davenport, 24 April 1926:APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 1 October 1928:APS B:D27. Gunnar Broberg and Mattias Tyden, "Eugenics in Sweden: Efficient Care," in Broberg and Roll-Hansen, pp. 102-103, 109-110. Kungl. Maj:t, Lag om sterilisering av vissa sinnessjuka, sinnessloa eller andra som lida av rubbad sjasverksamhet, Svensk forfattningssamling no. 1934/171 [Sterilization Act of 1934] (Stockholm: PA Norstedt & Sonners forlag, 1934) as cited by Broberg and Tyden, p, 103. Kungl. Maj:t, Lag om sterilisering, Svensk forfattningssamling no. 1941/282 [Sterilization Act of 1941] (Stockholm: PA. Norstedt & Sonners forlag, 1941), as cited by Broberg and Tyden, p. 108. Sveriges Offentliga Statistik: Allman halso- och sjukvard [Annual Reports on Health Published by the Swedish Central Bureau of Statistics] (Stockholm: Statistiska centralbyran, 1935-1976) as cited by Broberg and Tyden, pp. 108-109.

41. "Sterilization Law in Finland," Eugenical News, Vol. XXIII (1938), p. 47. "Race-Hygiene in Roumania," Eugenical News, Vol. XI (1926), p. 136. "The Italian Society of Genetics and Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), p. 13. "Eugenical Activities in the Different Countries," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), pp. 49-51. "Eugenical Efforts in Hungary," Eugenical News, Vol. XVI (1931), pp. 172-173. "Vienna Society of Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. X (1925), p. 152. van Hellmer Wullen, p. 271. "International Congress of Genetics" Rockefeller Foundation memorandum, 4 June 1931: RF RG 1.1 Ser 100 Box 40 Folder 365. "University of Copenhagen - Prof. Thomsen" Rockefeller Foundation memorandum, 28 September 1934: RF RG 1.1 Ser 713 Box 2 Folder 15. Radiogram to Gregg, 13 Mat 1932: RF RG 1.1 Ser 717 Box 10 Folder 63. Paul Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism 1870- 1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), p. 468.

42. A Decade of Progress in Eugenics: Scientific Papers of the Third International Congress of Eugenics (Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1934), p. i. See Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics, rev. ed. (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1935). See Charles B. Davenport, Heredity in Relation to Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1911: Reprint, New York: Arno Press & The New York Times, 1972). See E.S. Gosney and Paul Popenoe, Sterilization for Human Betterment (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1929). See Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization: 1926: Historical, Legal, and Statistical Review of Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Lancaster, PA: Lancaster Press, 1926). See Harry H. Laughlin, Immigration and Conquest (New York: The Special Committee on Immigration and Naturalization of the Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York, 1939). See "Forward," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916), p. 1. "College Courses in Genetics and Eugenics," Eugenical News vol. 1 (1916), pp. 26-27.

43. D. V. Glass, "Population Policies and Their Objectives," Eugenical News, Vol. XXVII (1942), p. 8. Schneider, pp. 78, 79. "Actual Aspect of the Problem of Eugenical Sterilization in France," Eugenical News, Vol. XXI (1936), p. 105. Historical Sample of the Netherlands, "Sources- Population Registers, " at http://www.iisg.nl. Nancy Leys Stepan, "The Hour of Eugenics": Race, Gender, and Nation in Latin America (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991), p. 126. von Hellmer Wullen, p. 274. "Sterilization Law in Finland," p. 47.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

1. Bleecker Van Wagenen, Chairman, Preliminary Report of the Committee of the Eugenic Section of the American Breeder's Association to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means for Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the Human Population, p. 5: ABA.

2. "The Richardson Lethal Chamber (patented) for the Painless Extinction of Lower Animal Life," undated pamphlet: UCD Special Collections.

3. Robert W. Chambers, The King in Yellow (F. Tennyson Neely, 1895), p. 9. Arnold White, Efficiency and Empire (London: Methuen and Co., 1901), pp.116-117 as cited by Dan Stone, Breeding Superman: Nietzsche, Race and Eugenics in Edwardian and Interwar Britain (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2002), p. 125.

4. H.G. Wells, A Modern Utopia New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1905), p. 129 as cited by Michael W. Perry, editor, The Pivot of Civilization: In Historical Perspective (Seattle: Inkling Books, 2001), p. 36. Eden Paul, "Eugenics, Birth-Control, and Socialism" in Population and Birth Control, edited by Eden and Cedar Paul (New York: Critic and Guide, 1917), pp. 144-146 as cited by Perry, p. 108.

5. Robert Reid Rentoul, Race Culture; or, Race Suicide? (London: The Walter Scott Publishing Company, Ltd., 1906), pp. 178, 179.

6. Article, Daily Express, 4 March 1910 as cited by Stone, p. 127. Stone, p. 128.

7. C.W Wilson as quoted in article, Birmingham Post, 4 February 1910, as cited by Stone, p. 127. Arnold White, The Views of 'Vanoc': An Englishman's Outlook (London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trubner, and Co., 1910), pp. 282-283 as cited by Stone, p. 126.

8. A.F. Tredgold, "Eugenics and the Future Progress of Man," Eugenics Review Vol. III (1911), p. 100 as cited by Stone, p. 126. Caleb Saleeby, The Methods of Race Regeneration (London: Cassell & Co., 1911), pp. 46-47, as cited by Stone, p. 126. Proceedings of the First National Conference on Race Betterment, (Race Betterment Foundation, 1914), p. 477.

9. Martin A. Elks, "The 'Lethal Chamber': Further Evidence for the Euthanasia Option," Mental Retardation, Vol. 31 No. 4 (August 1993), p. 203. A. F. Tredgold, A Textbook of Mental Deficiency (Amentia), 2d ed. (New York: William Wood, 1915), p. 455 as cited by Elks, p. 203. A. F. Tredgold, A Textbook of Mental Deficiency (Amentia), 6th ed. (New York: William Wood, 1937), pp. 517-518 as cited by Elks, p. 203. A. F. Tredgold, A Textbook of Mental Deficiency (Amentia), 7th ed. (New York: William Wood, 1977), p. 491 as cited by Elks, pp. 203-204.

10. W. Duncan McKim, Heredity and Human Progress (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1900), pp. 120, 168 as cited by Mark H. Haller, Eugenics: Hereditarian Attitudes in American Thought (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1963), p. 42. McKim, pp. 192-193, as cited by Russell Hollander, "Euthanasia and Mental Retardation: Suggesting the Unthinkable," Mental Retardation Vol. 27 No. 2 (April 1989), p. 58.

11. A. Johnson, "Report of Committee on Colonies for Segregation of Defectives," Proceedings of the National Conference on Charities and Corrections 1903 (Fred J. Heer, 1903), p. 249 as cited by Hollander, pp. 58-59. E.R. Johnstone, "President's Address," Journal of Psycho-Asthenics, Vol. 8 (1904), pp. 65-70 as cited by Hollander, pp. 55, 58. Haller, p. 207 f. 5.

12. Milroy, "Discussion and Minutes," Journal of Psycho-Asthenics, Vol. 10 (1906), p. 224 as cited by Hollander, p. 58. Rentoul, p. 178.

13. E.B. Sherlock, The Feeble-minded: A Guide to Study and Practice (New York: Macmillan, 1911), p. 267 as cited by Elks, p. 202.

14. Henry H. Goddard, The Kallikak Family: A Study in the Heredity of Feebie-Mindedness (Vineland, New Jersey: 1913), pp. 101, 105, 106-108.

15. Harry H. Laughlin, secretary, Bulletin No. 10A: The Report of the Committee to Study and to Report on the Best Practical Means of Cutting Off the Defective Germ-Plasm in the American Population (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1914), pp. 46, 55: CSH.

16. William J. Robinson, Eugenics, Marriage, and Birth Control (New York: The Critic and Guide Company, 1917), p. 74. Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization (New York: Brentano's, 1922), pp. 100-101.

17. Proceedings of the First National Conference on Race Betterment, (Race Betterment Foundation, 1914), pp. 502, 503.

18. Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics (New York: Macmillan, 1918), p. 184.

19. Eugenics Record Office, Official Record of the Gift of the Eugenics Record Office, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York by Mrs. E.H. Harriman to the Carnegie Institution of Washington and of its Acceptance by the Institution (Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Eugenics Record Office, 1918), p. 33: CSH. "American Eugenical Society, Inc.: B. Early History and Development," Organized Eugenics, January 1931, pp. 3-4, 7. Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936), p. 49.

20. Martin S. Pernick, The Black Stork: Eugenics and the Death of "Defective" Babies in American Medicine and Motion Pictures Since 1915 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 3-4. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden," The Chicago Daily Tribune, 20 November 1915.

21. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden."

22. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden."

23. Pernick, pp. 9, 10. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden." Chicago Tribune, 20 December 1915, p. 7 as cited by Pernick, p. 41. Chicago American, 3 December 1915, p. 6 as cited by Pernick, p. 41.

24. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden."

25. Pernick, p. 5. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden. "

26. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden."

27. "Jury Clears, Yet Condemns Dr. Haiselden." New York Times, 18 November 1915 as cited by Pernick, pp. 7-8. New York Times, 24 December 1915 as cited by Pernick, pp. 7-8. Chicago Herald, 23 December 1915, as cited by Pernick, pp.7-8.

28. "Baby Dies; Physician Upheld," Chicago Daily Tribune, 18 November 1915 as cited by Pernick, figure 3. "Was the Doctor Right? Some Independent Opinions," The Independent, 3 January 1916.

29. Chicago Tribune, 20 December 1915, p. 7 as cited by Pernick, p. 41. Chicago American, 3 December 1915, p. 6 as cited by Pernick, p. 41.

30. Pernick, pp. 4, 5, 87. Chicago Herald, 24 July 1917, p. 14 as cited by Pernick, p. 87. New York Times, 13 November 1917, p. 12 as cited by Pernick, p. 87.

3I. "Was the Doctor Right?"

32. Chicago American, 23 November, 1915 through 30 December, 1915, as cited by Pernick, p. 4. Chicago Herald, 27 July, 1916 as cited by Pemick, p. 10. Harry J. Haiselden, "Regarding the Meter Baby of Chicago," Medical Review of Reviews, 23 (Oct 1917), p. 697 as quoted in author's interview with Martin Pernick, 22 December 2002.

33. See Neal Black, Animal Health: A Century of Progress, Chapter 4. See BBC, "Cattle TB Threatens Farmers," 27 June 2002.

34. State of Illinois Board of Administration, Volume II: Biennial Reports of the State Charitable Institutions: October 1, 1914 to September 30, 1916 (State of Illinois, 1917), p. 695. "Superintendent Leonard's Report to Board of Administration, " Institution Quarterly Vol. 7 (1916), pp.117-118.

35. Elks, p. 201. "Regarding the Meter Baby of Chicago," and Chicago Examiner, 25 July 1917, p. 6 as quoted in author's interview with Martin Pernick, 22 December 2002.

36. "The Report of Judge Scully's Committee of Three Woman," Institution Quarterly, Vol. 7 (1916), p. 113. "Superintendent Leonard's Report to Board of Administration," p. 117.

37. Biennial Reports of the State Charitable Institutions: October 1, 1914 to September 30, 1916, pp. 678, 682, 686. Patrick Almond Curtis, "Eugenic Reformers, Cultural Perceptions of Dependent Populations, and the Care of the Feebleminded in Illinois: 1909-1920," (Ph. D. diss., University of Illinois at Chicago, 1983), p. 89. See Paul Popenoe and Roswell Hill Johnson, Applied Eugenics rev. ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1935), pp. 90, 92-93, 94. Eugenics, Genetics and the Family: Volume I: Scientific Papers of the Second International Congress, (Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins Co., 1923), pp. 178-181. "Dr. Albert Govaerts of Belgium," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 64.

38. Charles B. Davenport, Heredity in Relation To Eugenics (New York: Henry Holt & Company, 1911; reprint, New York: Arno Press Inc., 1972), pp. 164-165. Popenoe and Johnson, 1918 as cited by Elks, p. 205.

39. Charles Henderson, "The Relation of Philanthropy to Social Order and Progress," National Conference of Charities and Corrections: Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Session (Cincinnati: May, 1899), p. 4 as cited by Curtis, pp. 53, 55. "Propagation of the Unfit," Institution Quarterly, 1 (May 1910), p. 35 as cited by Curtis, pp. 68-69.

40. Charles B. Davenport, "Presidential Address," A Decade of Progress in Eugenics: Scientific Papers of the Third International Congress of Eugenics (Baltimore: The Williams & Wilkins Company, 1934), p. 21.

41. Chicago American, 24 November 1915, p. 2 as cited by Pernick, p. 84.

42. Illinois Department of Human Services, A Brief History of the Lincoln Developmental Center, p. 1. Biennial Reports of the State Charitable Institutions: October 1, 1914 to September 30, 1916, pp. 679, 681, 686. Also see K. Charlie Lakin, "Demographic Studies of Residential Facilities for the Mentally Retarded: A Historical Review of Methodologies & Findings," University of Minnesota Department of Psychoeducational Studies.

43. Harrison L. Harley, "Observations on the Operation of the Illinois Commitment Law for the Feeble-Minded," Institution Quarterly Vol. 8 (1917), p. 97.

44. Biennial Reports of the State Charitable 1nstitutions: October 1, 1914 to September 30, 1916, pp. 682, 686, 687. See Harley, p. 97.

45. Biennial Reports of the State Charitable Institutions: October, 1914 to September 30, 1916, pp. 677, 678, 679, 683. Martin W. Barr, Mental Defectives: Their History, Treatment and Training (Philadelphia: P. Blakiston's Son & Co., 1904 reprint New York: Arno Press, 1973), pp. 195-196. "The Municipal Psychopathic Clinic," Eugenical News, Vol. I (1916), p. 55. Harry H. Laughlin, Eugenical Sterilization in the United States (Chicago: Psychopathic Laboratory of the Municipal Court of Chicago, 1922), p. i. "Tenth Annual Business Meeting of the Eugenics Research Association, Cold Spring Harbor, June 10, 1922," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 91. Tredgold, 2d ed., p. 455 as cited by Elks, p. 203.

46. Curtis, pp. 78, 80-81, 148.

47. Testimony of Dr. David Braddock, Boudreau v. Ryan, Northern District of Illinois 00 C 5392 (2001). See K. Charlie Lakin, "Demographic Studies of Residential Facilities for the Mentally Retarded," Developmental Disabilities Project on Residential Services and Community Adjustment Project Report No. 3 (University of Minnesota Department of Psycho educational Studies), circa 1979, pp. 88, 89.

48. Pernick, pp. 144, 151. The Black Stork, dir. Leopold and Theodore Wharton, 1917 as cited by Pernick, Figures 11, 16, 17, 22.

49. Advertisement, "The Black Stork," Chicago Herald, 1 April 1917, p. 7 as cited by Pernick, Figure 7. Advertisement, "The Black Stork," Motography, 14 April 1917, p. 2 as cited by Pernick, Figure 5. Exhibitor's Trade Review, 14 February 1917, p. 850 as cited by Pernick, p. 88.

50. Pernick, pp. 157-158.

51. War Department, "General Orders, No. 62." Nevada State Library and Archives, "An Outline of Capital Punishment in Nevada," at dmla.clan.lib.nv.us. Florida Corrections Commission, "Execution Methods Used by States: Executions in the U.S. - A Brief History," at http://www.fcc.state.fl.us. Popenoe and Johnson 1918, p. 184. Popenoe and Johnson, rev. ed., p. 135. Davenport, p. 63.

52. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), pp. 2-3: CSH: CIW Administrative Files: Dept. of Genetics- Biological Laboratory Plans for Unified Operation. RAC 1.1/717/10/64 as cited by Paul J. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy: Rockefeller Funding of Biomedical Sciences in Germany 1920-1940," in Nicolass A. Rupke, ed., Science, Politics and the Public Good: Essays in Honor of Margaret Gowing (New York: Macmillan Press, 1988), p. 132. RAC 1.1/717/20/187 as cited by Weindling, p. 132.

53. "A Biological Court: Treating the Cause," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 92.

54. See William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960), pp. 29-31. See Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, trans. Ralph Manheim, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1943), pp. 394-397, 400-405. Paul J. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870- 1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 308-310.

55. Elof Axel Carlson, The Unfit: A History of a Bad idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), p. 323. Benno Muller-Hill, Murderous Science, G R. Fraser, trans. (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: 1998), p. 121. Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer, Fritz Lenz, Human Heredity, trans. Eden and Cedar Paul (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1931), pp. 442, 590, 593, 594.

56. Autobiography of Leon F Whitney, unpublished manuscript circa 1973, p. 205: APS Manuscript Collection.

57. Grant, p. 49.

58. Whitney, p. 204, 205.

59. Whitney, p. 205.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

1. Gustav Boeters, "Die Unfruchtbarmachung der geistig Minderwertigen," Zwickauer Tageblatt Sonderabdruck (Special Edition), n.d.: Bundesarchiv Berlin, R86, Akte 2374, Blatt 5. Gustav Boeters, "Die Unfruchtbarmachung der geistig Minderwertigen," Wissenschaftliche Beilage der Leipziger Lehrerzeitung, Nr. 28 (August 1924): Bundesarchiv Berlin, R86, Akte 2374, Blatt. 214. Robert N. Proctor, Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), pp. 98, 360. Paul J. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 389-393, 450, 471, 526.

2. Weindling, p. 69.

3. Weindling, pp. 75, 76. Fritz Lenz, "Eugenics in Germany," Paul Popenoe, trans., Journal of Heredity Vol. XV No. 5 (May, 1924), pp. 223, 224.

4. "The Richardson Lethal Chamber (patented) for the Painless Extinction of Lower Animal Life," undated pamphlet: UCD Special Collections. Weindling, pp. 69, 77, 123. Lenz, p. 223. Proctor, p. 15.

5. Proctor, pp. 14-16. Letter, Alfred Ploetz to G. Hauptmann, 2 April 1897 as cited by Weindling, p. 127. Letter, Alfred Ploetz to G. Hauptmann, 11 May 1901 as cited by Weindling, p. 128. Letter, Alfred Ploetz to Ernst Rudin as cited by Weindling, p. 128. Weindling, p. 129.

6. Proctor, pp. 17, 20-21. Weindling, pp. 141- 142, Lenz, p. 225. "Eugenicists in Germany in 1946," Eugenical News Vol. XXXI (1946), p. 21.

7. Weindling, p. 394. Elof Axel Carlson, The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), pp. 323-324. Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 1986), p. 46.

8. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1905), p. 4: CSH: CIW Administrative Files: Dept. of Genetics- Biological Laboratory Plans for Unified Operation. Letter, Dr. H. Iltis to Charles B. Davenport, 11 October, 1907:APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 15 August 1908:APS B:D27 Fischer. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 9 November 1908: APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 12 January 1909: APS B:D27 Fischer. Letter, Eugen Fischer to Charles B. Davenport, 22 December 1908: APS B:D27.

9. Announcement of Station for Experimental Evolution, p. 4. Davenport to Fischer, 15 August 1908. Weindling, pp. 143, 237. Benno Muller- Hill, Murderous Science, G. R. Fraser, trans. (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press: 1998), pp. 123, 228 f. 167. See Charles B. Davenport, Race Crossing In Jamaica, (Washington: Carnegie Institute of Washington, 1929). See State Laws Limiting Marriage Selection, Eugenics Record Office (Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor, 1913), pp. 31-36. See Charles B. Davenport, "Heredity and Race Eugenics," p. 10:APS: B-D27.

10. Lady Georgina Chambers, "Notes on the Early Days of the 'Eugenics Education Society,'" p. 11: Wellcome SA/EUG/B-11.

11. Weindling, pp. 141-147.

12. Weindling, pp.145, 151.

13. Lenz, pp. 225-226. Weindling, pp. 152-153.

14.The Eugenics Education Society, "Programme," Problems in Eugenics Vol. II: Report of Proceedings of the First International Eugenical Congress (Kingsway, W.C.: Eugenics Education Society, 1913), pp. 2, 3. "History of the International Organisation of Eugenics," memorandum circa November 1923, pp. 1-12: Truman C-2-1:2. Weindling, pp. 152-153.

15. See Geza von Hoffmann, Die Rassenhygiene in den Vereinigten Staaten von Nordamerika (Munich: J.F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1913).

16. Von Hoffmann, p. 14. Lenz, p. 226.

17. Letter, Geza von Hoffmann to Harry H. Laughlin, 27 December 1913: Truman D-5-4:7. Letter, Geza von Hoffmann to Harry H. Laughlin: 26 May 1914: Truman D-5-4:7

18. Letter, Hoffmann to Laughlin, 27 December 1913. Letter, Hoffmann to Laughlin, 26 May 1914.

19. "German Progress in Genetics," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 6 (June 1914), p. 243. Dr. von Stradonitz, "Bismarck's Heredity," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 6 (June 1914), p. 254. Alfred Ploetz, "The First and Last Child," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 6 (June 1914), p. 268. "International Genetics Conference," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 7 (July 1914), p. 300. C. Fruwirth, "New Publications: Handbuch der landwirtschaftlichen Pflanzenzuchtung," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 7 (July 1914), p. 304. Eugen Fischer, "Racial Hybridization," Journal of Heredity Vol. V No. 10 (October 1914), pp. 465-467.

20. KCET/Los Angeles, The British Broadcasting Corporation, and The Imperial War Museum of London, "Interactive Timeline," The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century at http://www.pbs.org. Lenz, p. 226. Weindling, p. 314. See Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936). See letter, Erwin Baur to Charles B. Davenport, 24 November 1920: APS B:D27 - Davenport & Baur. See Deborah E. Lipstadt, Beyond Belief (New York: The Free Press, 1986), pp. 8-9.

21. "Babies- More, Fewer or None," Eugenical News, Vol. II (19l 7), p. 3I.

22. "Interactive Timeline," The Great War and the Shaping of the 20th Century. William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960), pp. 52-57.

23. Harry H. Laughlin, "National Eugenics in Germany," Eugenics Review, January 1921, reprinted in Harry Laughlin Reprints (Washington, DC: Carnegie Institute of Washington, n.d.). "Eugenical Research Association," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 44. "Eugenics Research Association - Eighth Annual Meeting," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), p. 52. "National Eugenics in Germany," Eugenical News, Vol. V (1920), pp. 55-56.

24. Letter, Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Erwin Baur, 16 December 1920: APS B:D27 - Baur, Erwin. "Notes and News," Eugenical News, Vol. VI (1921), p. 8. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 20 May 1921: APS B:D27 - Fischer. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Agnes Bluhm, 30 August 1921:APS B:D27 - Bluhm, Agnes.

25. Shirer, p. 51. U.S. Holocaust Museum, "Blacks During the Holocaust," at http://www.ushmm.org. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, trans. Ralph Manheim, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1943), Volume I, Chapter XI, p. 325.

26. Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Erwin Baur, 30 March 1923: APS B:D27 - Baur, Erwin. "Hygiene Congress Abandoned," Eugenical News Vol. VI (1921), p. 32.

27. Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 24 October 1921: APS B:D27. "Minutes of the Meetings of the International Commission of Eugenics," memorandum circa 1923: Truman C-2-1:2. Davenport to Bluhm, 30 August 1921. See letter, Agnes Bluhm to Charles B. Davenport, 17 October 1921: APS RD27 - Bluhm, Agnes. See letter, Agnes Bluhm to Charles B. Davenport, 24 November 1921: APS B:D27 - Bluhm, Agnes. See letter, Richard Crane to Charles Evans Hughes, 7 September 1921: A 59/250/22/10/3/5459. See letter, Alvey A. Adee to C. C. Little, 21 September 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. See letter, American Minister in Nicaragua to Charles Evans Hughes, 13 June 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. See letter, Benjamin Jefferson to Don Mariano Zelaya B., 12 April 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. See letter, Mariano Zalaya B. to Benjamin Jefferson, 15 April 1921:NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. See letter, C.C. Little to the Envoy Extraordinary & Minister Plenipotentiary of the United State of America, 17 March 1921:NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. Letter, Charles Hartman to Sr. Dr. Dn. N. Clemente Ponce, 7 June 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459. Letter, Walker Smith to Charles Evans Hughes, 29 June 1921: NA 59/250/22/10/3/5459.

28. Shirer, p. 61. French Diplomatic Archives, "Chronology: 1918-1939: Inter-War Period," at http://www.france.diplomatie.fr. Missouri Western College, "The German Hyperinflation of 1923: A Seventy-Fifth Anniversary Retrospective," at http://www.mwsc.edu.

29. Davenport to Baur, 30 March 1923. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 17 December 1925: APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Cora Hodson to Charles B. Davenport, 26 November 1925: APS B:D27 - Davenport: international Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Cora Hodson to Charles B. Davenport, 30 December 1925: APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 21 November 1925: APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Herman Lundborg to Leonard Darwin, 8 December 1925:APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 22 January 1926: APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs. See letter, Charles B. Davenport to Herman Lundborg, 21 November 1925: APS B:D27 - Davenport: International Federation of Eugenic Orgs.

30. Davenport to Baur, 30 March 1923.

31. Letter, Fritz Lenz to Charles Davenport, 8 August 1923: APS B:D27 - Lenz, F.

32. Adam Smith [George J.W. Goodman] Paper Money (New York: Summit Books, 1981), pp. 57-62. Robert L. Hetzel, "German Monetary History in the First Half of the Twentieth Century," Economic Quarterly Vol. 88/1 (Winter 2002).

33. Shirer, pp. 68-79. Ian Kershaw, Hitler: 1889- 1936: Hubris (New York: W W. Norton & Company, 1998), p. 240. Muller-Hill, p. 121.

34. Shirer, p. 84. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter XI, pp. 302-327. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter XIV, pp. 654-655.

35. Lifton, p. 31. See Annette Horn, review of Aenne Baeumer-Schleinkofer, Nazi Biology and Schools, at web.uct.ac.za. See University of California, Berkeley Campus, "Biography of Ernst Haeckel (1934-1919)," at http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu.

36. Kershaw, pp. 240, 241-242. Elof Axel Carlson, The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2001), p. 323. Muller-Hill, pp. 8, 120. Weindling, pp. 330, 397.

37. Letter, Erwin Baur to Charles B. Davenport, 24 November 1920: APS B:D27 - Davenport & Baur.

38. Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920.

39. Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920.

40. Baur to Davenport, 24 November 1920. See Harvard University, "Blakeslee, Albert Francis, 1874-1954. Papers of Albert F. Blakeslee, 1912- 1960: A Guide" at oasis.Harvard.edu.

41. Davenport to Baur, 30 March 1923.

42. Lifton, p. 23. Lenz to Davenport, 8 August 1923.

43. Lenz to Davenport, 8 August 1923.

44. Fritz Lenz, Menschichle Auslese und Rassenhygiene, vol. II of Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer, and Fritz Lenz, Grundriss der menschlichen Erblichkeitslehre und Rassenhygiene (Munich: J.F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1923), p. 147 as cited by Lifton, p. 23.

45. See APS B:D27 - Fisher # 1. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #2. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #3. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #4. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #5. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #6.

46. Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer, and Fritz Lenz, Menschliche Erblichkeitslehre, vol I. of Baur, Fischer, and Lenz, pp. 299-305. Lenz, Menschliche Auslese und Rassenhygiene, pp. 233-237.

47. Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer and Fritz Lenz, Human Heredity, 3rd Ed., trans. Eden & Cedar Paul (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1931), pp. 202, 204-206, 208, 311, 390 f. 2, 429 f. 2, 429 f. 3, 628-629, 638, 666-671, 680-681. Lenz, Menschliche Auslese und Rassenhygiene, p. 126.

48. Davenport to Baur, 30 March 1923. "Human Genetics and Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 47. "Human Selection," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), pp. 96-97. "Heredity and Eugenics: A Review," The Journal of Heredity, Vol. XIV; No. 7 (October 1923), p. 336. "Human Genetics and Eugenics, " Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), p. 47. "Human Selection," Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923), pp. 96-97. "A Compendium of Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. VII (1922), p. 97.

49. Proctor, pp. 26-27, 203, 344 f. 57, 344 f3 59. Weindling, p. 314. See Madison Grant, Der Untergang der grossen Rasse: Die Rossen als Grundlage der Geschichte Europas (Berlin: J. F. Lehmanns Verlag, 1925). See Von Hoffmann.

50. Weindling, p. 311. Carlson, pp. 323. Muller- Hill, p. 121. Gary D. Stark, Entrepreneurs of Ideology (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1981), pp. 170, 279.

51. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter X., p. 255.

52. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter II, pp. 403-404.

53. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter II, p. 402. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter II, pp. 404-405.

54. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter XI, p. 285.

55. Grant, p. 16.

56. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter II, pp. 388-389, 390.

57. Grant, p. 17.

58. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter XI, p. 286.

59. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter III, pp. 439-440.

60. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter II, p. 29. Hitler, Volume II, Chapter III, pp. 439-440. Hitler, Volume I, Chapter XI, p. 286.

61. Otto Wagener, Hitler: Memoirs of a Confidant, trans. Henry Ashby Turner (Yale University Press, 1987), pp. 145-146.

62. Richard Breiting, Secret Conversations with Hitler; edit. Edouard Calic, trans. Richard Barry, (New York: The John Day Company, 1968), p. 81.

63. Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, trans. Hitler's Table Talk: 1941-1944: His Private Conversations, (New York City: Enigma Books, 2000), pp. 670, 675.

64. Lifton, pp. 46-48. Hitler, Volume II Chapter xv, p. 679.

65. Shirer, pp. 3-5, 170-184. "Delegates Urge Wider Practice of Sterilization," Richmond Times-Dispatch, 16 January 1934.

66. Autobiography of Leon F. Whitney, unpublished manuscript circa 1973, p. 205: APS Manuscript Collection.

67. See APS B:D27 - Davenport - Ernst Rudin. See APS B:D27 - Davenport - Baur, Erwin. See APS B:D27 - Fisher # 1. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #2. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #3. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #4. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #5. See APS B:D27 - Fisher #6. See Universitatsarchiv Munster- Nachlass Verschuer, Nr. 4.

68. Zentralarchiv der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, Potsdam: Reichsinnenministerium l0160, Film 23063 as cited by Muller-Hill, p. 34. See Proctor, p. 106. Stephen Trombley, The Right to Reproduce: A History of Coercive Sterilization (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1988), p. 117.

69. Human Betterment Foundation, "Report to the Board of Directors of the Human Betterment Foundation for the Year Ending February 12, 1936.": Bailey/Howe Library: Perkins Papers.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to

Postby admin » Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:02 am

PART 5 OF 7

CHAPTER FIFTEEN

1. See Notes on the Second Conference," n.p., 27 September 1929: APS B:D27 - Davenport- Gini, Corrado #2. See "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News, Vol. XIV (1929), pp. 153-157.

2. "Notes on the Second Conference."

3. "Notes on the Second Conference." "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," pp. 154, 156.

4. "Notes on the Second Conference." "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," p. 156.

5. "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," p. 155.

6. "Notes on the Second Conference." "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," pp. 156, 157.

7. See Eugenical News, Vol. VIII (1923).

8. "Eugenical Notes," Eugenical News Vol. VIII (1923), p. 22. "Archiv Fur Rassen Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 51. "Notes and News," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 64. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 31. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 88. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- Und Gesellschafts- Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 152. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 9. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 41. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 92. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 134. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- V. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 31. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 64. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 91. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 180. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- U. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), p. 32. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), p. 72. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), p. 104. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), p. 162. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), p. 32. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), p. 48. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), p. 88. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), p. 126. "Archiv Fur Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical NtrdJSVol.XV (1930), p. 16. "Archiv Fur Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XV (1930), p. 88. "Archiv Fur Rassen-u. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol.XV (1930), p. 132. "Archiv Fur Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XVI (1931), p. 184. "Archiv Fur Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XVII (1932), p. 30.

9. Fritz Lenz, "Eugenics in Germany," trans. Paul Popenoe, Journal of Heredity Vol. XV No.5 (May, 1924), pp. 223-231. "Race Hygiene," Eugenical News, Vol. IX (1924), p. 86.

10. "Berlin (From Our Regular Correspondent)," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 82, No. 21 (May 1924), pp. 1709, 1710.

11. "Are the Gifted Families in America Maintaining Themselves?" Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), pp. 2-4.

12. "Anthropology Iconography," Eugenical News Vol. XI (1926), p. 144. Paul). Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 310-311.

13. "Current Periodicals," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 64.

14. "Races of Central Europe," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 34. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- Und Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 152. "Archiv F. Rassen-v. Gesellschafts-Biologie," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 180. "Noses and Ears," Eugenical News Vol. XIV (1929), p. 55.

15. Nobel Museum, "The Foundation of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Medical Research," at http://www.nobel.se. Nobel Museum, "The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1918" at http://www.nobel.se. Nobel Museum, "The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 1936" at http://www.nobel.se. Nobel Museum, "The Nobel Prize in Physics 1918" at http://www.nobel.se. Nobel Museum, "The Nobel Prize in Physics 1921" at http://www.nobel.se. Memorandum, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 27 October 1928: APS B:D27 - IFEO 1928 #2.

16. Matthias M. Weber, "Psychiatric Research and Science Policy in Germany. The History of the Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fur Psychiatrie (German Institute for Psychiatric Research) in Munich from 1917 to 1945," History of Psychiatry xi (2000), p. 239. See Paul J. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy: Rockefeller Funding of Biomedical Sciences in Germany 1920-1940," in Nicolaas A. Rupke, ed., Science, Politics and the Public Good: Essays in Honor of Margaret Gowing (New York: Macmillan Press, 1988), p. 131.

17. Angus Rae, "Osler Vindicated: The Ghost of Flexner Laid to Rest," Canadian Medical Association Journal 164 (13) 26 Hune 2001, p. 1860. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy: Rockefeller Funding of Biomedical Sciences in Germany 1920-1940," p. 121. See Flexner, Abraham Medical Education in Europe: A Report o the Carnegie Foundation (1912). See Nancy Rockefeller, "The Flexner Report in Context," at http://www.library.ucsf.edu.

18. See Abraham Flexner, Prostitution in Europe (New York: The Century Company, 1914). Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy: Rockefeller Funding of Biomedical Sciences in Germany 1920-1940," pp. 121, 123. Kristie Macrakis, Surviving the Swastika: Scientific Research in Nazi Germany (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), pp. 18-22. Paul J. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), pp. 324-325.

19. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," pp. 123, 124-125, 127, 128. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945, p. 335.

20. Rockefeller Archives, "History," Vol. 15, p. 3794 as cited by Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," pp. 124-125, 127.

21. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," pp. 126-127. Letter, Fritz Haber to Friedrich Schmidt-Ott, 6 March 1923: BAB R 73, Akte 217 (Notgemeinschaft der deutschen Wissenschaft - now: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft). Letter from E. Uhlenbruch to Friedrich Schmidt-Ott, 22 March 1923: BAB R 73, Akte 217 (Notgemeinschaft der deutschen Wissenschaft-now: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft).

22. "VII. Bericht uber die Deutsche Forschungsanstalt fur Psychiatrie (Kaiser- Wilhelm-Institut) in Munchen zur Stiftungsratssitzung am 5. Februar 1927," Zeitschrift fur die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, p. 344: BAB R 1501, Akte 126 789, Blatt 148-150. Author's communication with Paul Weindling, 23 January 2003.

23. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870- 1945, p. 336. Weber, pp. 250, 251. Robert N. Proctor, Racial Hygiene: Medicine Under the Nazis (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1988), p. 112.

24. Matthais M. Weber, Ernst Rudin: Eine Kritische Biographie (Berlin: J. Springer-Verlag, 1993). Proctor, p. 17. Also see Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945, pp. 72, 150, 185-186.

25. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870- 1945, pp. 384, 385.

26. "The German Genetic Association," Journal of Heredity, Vol. XIII No. 5 (May 1922), p. 200. "Notes and News," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 56. "Heredity of Insanity," Eugenical News Vol. IX (1924), p. 83. "The Genealogical Section of the Psychiatric Institute of Munich, " Eugenical News Vol. X (1925), p. 118. "Berlin (From Our Regular Correspondent) " Journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 94 No. 3 (Dec. 1929), p. 201.

27. "Meeting of International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News Vol. XIII (1928), pp. 129, 131. "Membership and Organization of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News Vol. XV (1930), p. 168. "The International Federation of Eugenics Organizations," Eugenical News Vol. XVIII (1933), p. 16.

28. "Fifth International Congress of Genetics," Eugenical News Vol. XII (1927), p. 152.

29. "Fifth International Congress of Genetics," p. 152. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870- 1945, p. 435.

30. "Fifth International Congress of Genetics," p. 150, 152. Fifth International Congress, "Program," p. 4: APS B:D27 - International Congress of Genetics 5th and 6th William E. Seildeman, "Science and Inhumanity: The Kaiser-Wilhelm/Max Planck Society," if Not Now an e-journal Vol. 2 (Winter 2000), at http://www.soec.at. Invitation to Charles B. Davenport from Fifth International Congress of Genetics: APS B:D27 - International Congress of Genetics 5th and 6th. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945, p. 436.

31. Fifth International Congress of Genetics," pp. 150, 152. Fifth International Congress, "Program," pp. 9-11, 22-23.

32. "Fifth International Congress of Genetics," pp. 150, 152. "Program," pp. 12-19. Fifth International Congress of Genetics, "List of the Papers Announced at the Congress," n.p., n.d., pp. 7-13: APS B:D27 - International Congress of Genetics 5th and 6th Invitation to Charles B. Davenport from Fifth International Congress of Genetics.

33. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 5 October 1926:APS B:D27 - Fischer. "Fifth International Congress of Genetics," p. 152. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Hermann Muckermann, 6 October 1928: APS B:D27 - Davenport - Muckermann, Dr. H. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 3 October, 1928 and attached letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer: APS B:D27 - IFEO 1928 #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 4 December 1928: APS B:D27 - Fischer.

34. Hans-Walter Schmuhl, Hirnforschung und Krankenmord, Das Kaiser-Wilhelm-Institut fur Hirnforschung 1937-1945, (Berlin: 2000). "Cecile and Oskar Vogt: On the Occasion of her 75th and his 80th Birthday," Neurology Vol. No. 3 (May-June 1951), pp. 183, 184. Max Delbruck Center for Molecular Medicine, "History" at http://www.mdc-berlin.de. Tage Kemp, "To The Rockefeller Foundation: Report of visits to various Institutes, Laboratories etc. for Human Genetics in Europe." (July-October 1934), pp. 59-60: RF 1.2/713/2/16. Letter, Norma S. Thompson to Adolf von Harnack, 24 May 1929: RF 1.1 717 10 64. Letter, George H. Beal to Adolf von Harnack, 4 June 1929: RF 1.1 717 10 64. Review of recommendation on the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, 22 May 1929: RF 1.1 717 10 64. Review of appropriations to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Brain Research, 9 May 1932: RF 1.1 717 10 64.

35. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Wickliffe Draper, 23 February 1926: APS B:D27 - Davenport - W P. Draper # 1. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Wickliffe Draper, 15 March 1926: APS B:D 27 - WP. Draper #1.

36. Davenport to Draper, 23 February 1926. Davenport to Draper, 15 March 1926. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 18 March 1926: APS B:D27 - Davenport: Int'l Fed of Eugenic Orgs.

37. Charles B. Davenport and Morris Steggerda, Race Crossing in Jamaica (Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1929), pp. 3, 4, 9.

38. See Edwin Black, IBM and the Holocaust (New York: Crown Publishers, 2001), Chapter II.

39. Generally see Black, especially Chapters II, III, IV and V.

40. Hermann Kruger, "Das Hollerith-Lochkarten- Verfahren im Fursorgewesen," Hollerith Nachrichten 47 (March 1935), pp. 615, 618. "Secret Report: PW Intelligence Bulletin No. 2/57," April 25, 1945, p. 1: CSDIC. Davenport and Steggerda, p. 4. See Black, Chapter II. See "Report of the Advisory Committee on the Eugenics Record Office," circa 1935: Truman C-2-2:2.

41. "List of data for Columns of Hollerith Cards, " memorandum circa 1926: APS B:D27 - Davenport - Draper Fund for Race Crossing #2. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Morris Steggerda, 8 April 1927: APS B:D27 - April #3 Davenport - Steggerda.

42. Generally see Black, especially Chapters IV, V, VII and VIII.

43. See Davenport and Steggerda. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 17 February 1927: APS B:D27 - Fischer. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Cora Hodson, 23 February 1927: APS B:D27 -Davenport: Int'l Federation of Eugenic Orgs. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Hermann Lundborg, 17 May 1928: APS B:D27.

44. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Henry L. Bolley, 14 November 1928: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Bennet Allen, 14 November 1928: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Trevor Kincaid, 14November 1928: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to W.E. Bryan, 14 November 1928: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, J.P. Anderson to Charles B. Davenport, 20 March 1929: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, Raymond Bellamy to Charles B. Davenport, 17 January 1928: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing.

45. Letter, Bellamy to Davenport, 17 January 1928. Letter, W.E. Bryan to Charles B. Davenport, 10 January 1929:APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, J.5. Blitch to Charles B. Davenport, 10 January 1929: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, B.M. Allen to Charles B. Davenport, 5 December 1929: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing. Letter, Henry Bolley to Charles B. Davenport, 21 November 1928: APS B:D27 - Committee on Race Crossing.

46. "Form Letter" circa February 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to E.A. Arce, 28 February 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3.

47. Letter, Halfdan Bryn to Charles B. Davenport, 4 April 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Halfdan Bryn, 19 April 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, V. Bunak to Charles B. Davenport, 20 March 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to V. Bunak, 18 April 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, G. Arnold to Charles B. Davenport, 4 April 1929:APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to G. Arnold, 10 May 1929:APS RD27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, A. de Assis to Charles B. Davenport, 28 March 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Davidson Black to Charles B. Davenport, 1 April 1927: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, H.J. V. Bijlmer to Charles B. Davenport, 24 April 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to H.J. V. Bijlmer, 27 June 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to F. W. Caine, 8 July 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, E. Lucas Bridges to Charles B. Davenport, 15 May 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to E. Lucas Bridges, 9 July 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, H. Beroot to Charles B. Davenport, 9 March 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3.

48. Letter, Prescott Childs to Charles B. Davenport, 30 April 1929: APS B:D27 -IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, C.C. Hanson to Charles B. Davenport, 8 May 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles H. Albrecht, 14 May 1929: APS RD27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Harry E. Carlson to Charles B. Davenport, 29 May 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to the American Consul in Magallanes, Chile: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3. Letter, Lewis V. Boyle to Charles B. Davenport, 2 May 1929: APS B:D27 - IFEO Committee on Race Crossing #3.

49. Letter, Eugen Fischer to Charles B. Davenport, 19 July 1929: APS B:D27 - Fischer. "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," p. 156.

50. "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," p. 154.

51. "The Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," pp. 155, 157.

52. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 2 December 1929: APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Alfred Ploetz, 1 October 1932: APS B:D27 - Ploetz, Alfred.

53. Letter, Eugen Fischer to Charles B. Davenport, 22 December 1929: APS B:D27. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 3 February 1930. Charles B. Davenport and Eugen Fischer, "Studies on Human Race Crossings," memorandum circa 1930: APS B:D27.

54. Letter, F. Schmidt-Ott to Edmund E. Day, 20 September 1929: RF 1.1 717 20 187.

55. Schmidt-Ott to Day, 20 September 1929.

56. "Progress Report: Grant to Notgemeinschaft for Anthropological Studies of the Population of Germany," 10 June 1933: RF 1.1 717 20 187. "Action RF 29137- Anthropological Investigation of the German People," memorandum of 2 October 1933: RF 1.1 717 20 187. Letter, Norma S. Thompson to Dr. F. Schmidt- Ott, 14 November 1929: RF 1.1 717 20 187. Letter, Edmund E. Day to Dr. F. Schmidt-Ott, 27 November 1929: RF 1.1 717 20 187. Letter, George J. Beal to R. Letort, 6 December 1929: RF 1.1 717 20 187. Letter, R. Letort to George J. Beal, 6 January 1930: RF 1.1 717 20 187. Letter, Dr. F. Schmidt-Ott to Edmund E. Day, 5 September 1929: RF 1.1 717 20 187.

57. "Archiv Fur Rassen-u. Gesellschafts Biologie," Eugenical News, Vol. XV (1930), p. 152. "Jews in West Africa," Eugenical News, Vol. XV (1930), pp. 142-143. "Books on Human Heredity," Eugenical News, Vol. XV (1930), p. 143. Gary D. Stark, Entrepreneurs of Ideology (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1981), p. 223. "Ninth Meeting of the International Federation of Eugenic Organizations," Eugenical News, Vol. XV (1930), p.162.

58. Ernst Rudin, "Hereditary Transmission of Mental Diseases," Eugeuical News Vol. XV (1930), pp. 171-174.

59. "Hereditary Transmission of Mental Diseases," pp. 172, 174.

60. Memorandum from D.P. O'Brien to Alan Gregg, 10 November 1933: RF 1.1 717 946.

61. "Memo for Officer's Action: Forschungsanstalt fur Psychiatric," memorandum circa December 1933: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, Thomas B. Appleget to Benson Y. Landis, 23 February 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Memorandum, D.P. O'Brien to Alan Gregg, 27 November 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. "University of Copenhagen - Institute of Human Genetics," memorandum, June 1939: RF 1.1 Ser 713A Box 2 Folder 15. Letter, Tage Kemp to The Rockefeller Foundation, 17 November 1932: RF 1.2 Ser 713 Box 2 Folder 15.

62. "From HAS' diary: June 4, 1931," inter-office correspondence: RF 1.1 Ser 100 Box 40 Folder 365.

63. Erwin Baur, Eugen Fischer and Fritz Lenz, Human Heredity, 3rd Ed., trans. Eden & Cedar Paul (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1931), pp. 677, 680, 681.

64. "Heredity and Eugenics," Eugenical News Vol. XVI (1931), pp. 220-221.

65. See Kershaw, pp. 336-337.

66. "Hitler and Race Pride," Eugenical News Vol. XVII (1932), pp. 60-61.

67. Radiogram to Alan Gregg, 13 May 1932: RF 1.1 Ser 7171 Box 10 Folder 63. Gerald Jonas, The Circuit Riders (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1989), p. 111.

68. "Eugenics in the service of public welfare: Report of the proceedings of a committee convened by the Prussian State Health Council on 2 July 1932," Veroffentlichungen aus dem Gebiete der Medizinalverwaltung Vol. XXXVIII, part 5, p. 98 as cited by Muller-Hill, p. 30. R.B. Goldschmidt, Im Wandel das Bleibeude: Mein Lebensweg (Hamburg and Berlin, 1963), p. 264 as cited by Muller-Hill, p. 30.

69. A Decade of Progress in Eugenics: Scientific Papers of the Third International Congress of Eugenics (Baltimore: The Williams and Wilkins Company, 1934), pp. i, xi, 17. Letter, Charles B. Davenport to Eugen Fischer, 28 January 1932: APS B:D27.

70. K. Holler, "The Nordic Movement in Germany," Eugenical News Vol. XVII (1932), pp. 117, 119,

71. Edwin Black, The Transfer Agreement (Washington: Dialog Press, 1999), p. 3. William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1960), p. 173. See Shirer, pp. 159, 172.

72. Black, The Transfer Agreement, p. 3. Shirer, pp. 4-5,

73. The Newseum, "Holocaust: The Untold Story," at http://www.newseum.org. Generally see Deborah E. Lipstadt, Beyond Belief (New York: The Free Press, 1986). Generally see Black, The Transfer Agreement.

74. Shirer, pp. 196, 430.

75. Black, The Transfer Agreement, pp. 177-185. See "German Sterilization Progress," Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 38. See "Sterilization in Germany," Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 13. See "Applied Eugenics in Germany," Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 100.

76. Raul Hilberg, The Destruction of the European Jews (New York: Harper Colophon Books, 1961), p. 45. Shirer, pp. 201-202, 221-224. "Jewish Refugees from Germany," Eugenical News Vol. XIX (1934), p. 44. Yad Vashem: The Holocaust Martyr's and Heroes' Remembrance Authority, "March 22: Dachau camp established," Chronology of the Holocaust 1933-1936 at http://www.yad-vashem.org.il. Also see Black, The Transfer Agreement, pp. 177-179.

77. "Eugenical Sterilization In Germany," Eugenical News Vol. XVIII (1933), pp. 91-93. Weber, p. 251.

78. "Eugenical Sterilization In Germany," p. 91. "Human Sterilization in Germany and the United States," Journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 102 No. 18, p. 1501.

79. "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 103 No. 13 (August 1935), p. 1051. Proctor, p. 103.

80. C.P. Blacker, "Eugenics in Germany," 8 August 1933, pp. 4, 5: Wellcome Box 112.

81. "The New Format," Eugenical News Vol. XVII (1932), p. 16. "Eugenical Sterilization In Germany," pp. 89, 91-93.

82. "Eugenical Sterilization In Germany," p. 90.

83. "Eugenical Sterilization In Germany," p. 90.

84. Ernst Rudin, "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need," Birth Control Review April 1933, pp. 102, 103-104.

85. "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 101 No. 11 (Sept. 9, 1933), pp. 866-867.

86. "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 100 No. 23 (June 10, 1933), p. 1877.

87. "Race-Culture in Germany," Eugenical News Vol. XVIII (1933), p. 111.

88. Haushaltsplan der Kaiser Wilhelm Instituts fur Anthropologie, (1933): R 36, Akte 1366 Deutscher Gemeindetag. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945, p. 3 15. Proctor, p. 40

89. Letter, H. J. Muller to Robert A. Lambert, 7 June 1933: RF RG 1.1 Ser 717 Box 10 Folder 64.

90. Muller to Lambert, 7 June 1933.

91. Muller to Lambert, 7 June 1933.

92. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," p. 132.

93. W.W. Peter, "Germany's Sterilization Program," American Journal of Public Health, No. 3 Vol. 24 (March 1934)

94. "German Children Face Sterilization," New York Times, 5 January 1934: Truman C-2-7:3. "Berlin: From our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association Vol. 103 No. 13 (Sept 1935), p. 1051. Proctor p. 106.

95. "The Eleventh Federation Meeting," Eugenical News Vol. XIX (1934), p. 107. Lipstadt, pp. 13- 15.

96. "Nazis Insist Reich Be 'Race-Minded,''' New York Times, 7 January 1934: Truman C-2-7:3. "Question of Admitting German Refugees Under Bond Studied by Labor Department," New York Times, 20 January 1934:Truman C-2- 7:3. "Catholics Exempt on Sterilization," New York Times, 31 December 1933: Truman C-2- 7:2. "German Children Face Sterilization." "Jewish Immigrants Aided," undated article: Truman C-2-7:3. "11,060 Loans Made to Jews on Farms," New York Times, undated: Truman C-2-7:3.

97. "Nazis Insist Reich Be 'Race-Minded.''' Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Madison Grant, 13 January 1934: Truman D-2-5:5.

98. Wilhelm Frick, "German Population and Race Politics," Eugenical News Vol. XIX (1934), pp. 33-38. "A French View," Eugenical News Vol. XIX (1934), p. 39. "Eugenics in Germany," Eugenical News Vol. XIX (1934), pp. 40-41. "Jewish Refugees from Germany," p. 44.

99. "Notes," Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 60.

100. Carl Hammesfahr, "The Mother of Nations," in "Eugenical Propaganda in Germany," Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 45.

101. Masthead, Eugenical News, Vol. XVIII (1933), p. 14. Masthead, Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 16. Masthead, Eugenical News, Vol. XX (1935), p. 98.

102. "A Letter from Dr. Ploetz," Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 129. "Jewish Physicians in Berlin," Eugenical News, Vol. XIX (1934), p. 126.

103. Letter, Thomas B. Appleget to George K. Strode, 23 February 1938: R 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, Bruce Bliven to the Rockefeller Foundation, 20 December 1933: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, Benson Y. Landis to the Rockefeller Foundation, 20 February 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, Walther Spielmeyer to D.P. O'Brien, 4 November 1933: RF 1,1 717 9 46.

104. Letter, Thomas B. Appleget to Bruce Bliven, 10 January 1934: RF 1.1. 717 9 56. Letter, Thomas B. Appleget to Bruce Bliven, 31 January 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56.

105. Landis to the Rockefeller Foundation, 20 February 1934.

106. Landis to the Rockefeller Foundation, 20 February 1934. Letter, Thomas B. Appleget to Raymond Fosdick, 7 February 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56.

107. Appleget to Strode, 23 February 1934. Memorandum, 13 March 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, George K. Strode to Thomas B. Appleget, 6 March 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56.

108. Memorandum from D.P. O'Brien to Alan Gregg, 12 December 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Memorandum from D.P. O'Brien to Alan Gregg, 27 November 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56. Letter, Walther Spielmeyer to Alan Gregg, 22 October 1934: RF 1.1 717 9 56.

109. Memorandum, 28 August 1934: RF 1.l 717 13 123. Weindling, ''From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," p. 133.

110. "Archiv Fuer Rassen- Und Gesellschatfs- Biologie," Eugenical News, Vol. XXI (1926), p. 184. Kristie Macrakis, Surviving the Swastika, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), p. 114.

111. J. W. Schotte, "To L.H. La Motte: Confidential Report on Our Dealings with War Ministries of Europe," circa spring 1940, p. 1: NA RG 60. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, Chapter VIII.

112. Memorandum, W.D. Jones to Thomas J. Watson, 10 January 1934: IBM Files. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, pp. 81-84.

113. Denkschrift zur Einweihung der neuen Arbeitsstatte der Deutschen Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft m.b.H in Berlin-Lichterfelde, January 8 1934, pp. 39-40: USHMM Library. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, p. 82.

114. Denkschrift zur Einweihung der neuen Arbeitsstatte der Deutschen Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft m.b.H in Berlin-Lichterfelde, January 8 1934, pp. 39-40. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, p. 82.

115. Memorandum, Jones to Watson, 10 January 1934. Letter, Thomas J. Watson to Willy Heidinger, 26 February 1934: IBM Files. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, pp. 85-86.

116. Edgar Schultze, "Die verfeinerte Auswertung statistischer Zusammenhange mit Hilfe des Hollerith-Lochkartenverfahrens," Hollerith Nachrichten 40 (August 1934), pp. 505-517. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, p. 92.

117. Hermann Kruger, "Das Hollerith-Lochkarten- Verfahren im Fuhrsorgewesen," Hollerith Nachrichten 47 (March 1935), pp. 615, 618. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, pp. 94-95. Hollerith Nachrichten 45 (January 1935), p. 588. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, p. 95.

118. Friedrich Zahn, "Fortbildung der deutschen Bevolkerungsstatistik durch erbbiologische Bestandsaufnahmen," Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv 27 (1937/38), pp. 194-195. Also see Black, IBM and the Holocaust, p. 96.

119. Hilberg, pp. 46-47.

120. Black, IBM and the Holocaust, pp. 109-111.

121. Hilberg, pp. 46, 48.

122. Generally see Black, IBM and the Holocaust.

123. "Reich Adopts Swastika As Nation's Flag; Hitler's Reply To 'Insult ''' New York Times 16 September 1935.

124. Harry H. Laughlin, "Jewish Studies: Outline of a Plan for the Determination of Jewish Racial Quota-Fulfillments Among Both Institutional and College Jews in the United States," memorandum circa 1924: Truman C-2-4:5.

125. Stefan Kuhl, Die Internationale der Rassisten: Aufstieg und Niedergang der internationalen Bewegung fur Eugenik und Raffenhygiene im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert (Frankfurt/Main: Campus, 1997), p. 138. Letter, Dr. E. Rodenwaldt to Carl Schneider, 11 December 1935: B-1523/5 UH.

126. Letter, Carl Schneider to Dr. Gampp, 10 June 1936: B-1523/6 Universitatarchiv Heidelberg. Letter, Carl Schneider to Harry H. Laughlin, 16 May 1936: Truman E-1-3:8. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Carl Schneider, 11 August 1936: Truman E-1-3:8.

127. Proctor, pp. 188-191. Lifton, pp. 64-66, 71- 75.

128. Shirer, pp. 322-357, 428-455. Eugen Kogon, Theory and Practice of Hell (New York: Berkley Books, 1980), pp. 48-49. Lipstadt, pp. 121-125, 143.

129. Letter, Waldemar Kaempffert to Eugenical News, 15 October 1935: Truman D-2-3:5. Letter, J. H. Landman to Harry H. Laughlin, 13 September 1935: Truman D-2-3:5. Letter, Walter Landauer to Charles B. Davenport, 29 February 1935.

130. See "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 106 (Nov 1936), p. 1582. See "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 113 No. 24 (Nov 1939), p. 2163. See "Berlin: From Our Regular Correspondent," Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 112 No. 19 (April 1939), p. 1981.

131. Seeley G. Mudd Manuscript Library, "The Raymond Blaine Fosdick Papers," at libweb.princeton.edu. Weindling, "From Philanthropy to International Science Policy," pp. 133, 134, 135. Macrakis, p. 114. Letter, Hans Bauer to Kaiser Wilhelm-Institut Fur Biologie, 18 August 1935: BOA I. Abt., Rep 1A, Nr. 1052/6 (Foreign and International Affairs). Letter, Fritz von Wettstein to the Generalverwaltung der Kaiser Wilhelm- Gesellschaftzur Forderung der Wissenschaften, 10 June 1936: BDA I. Abt., Rep 1A, Nr. 1054/2 (Foreign and International Affairs). Letter, G. Gottschewski to Herr Reichs-und Preussischen Minister fur Wissenschaft, Erziehung und Volksbildung: BDA I. Abt., Rep 1A, Nr. 1054/2 (Foreign and International Affairs). Fritz von Wettstein, "An das Reichsministerium fur Wissenschaft, Erziehung und Volksbildung," 27 July 1938: BDA I.Abt., Rep 1A, Nr. 1061/3 (Foreign and International Affairs).

132. Letter, Raymond Fosdick to Selskar M. Gunn, 6 June 1939: RF 1.1 717 16 150.

133. "U.S. Eugenist Hails Nazi Racial Policy" New York Times, 29 August 1935: Truman D-2-3:5. See Letter, Kaempffert to Eugenical News, 15 October 1935. See Letter, Landman to Laughlin, 13 September 1935.

134. "U.S. Eugenist Hails Nazi Racial Policy." "The German Racial Policy," Eugenical News Vol. XXI (1936), p. 25.

135. C.M. Goethe, "Patriotism and Racial Standards," Eugenical News Vol. XXI (1936), pp. 65-66.

136. Marie E. Kopp, "Sterilization" in American Eugenics: Being the Proceedings at the Annual Meeting and Round Table Conferences of the American Eugenics Society (New York) 7 May 1936, pp. 56, 57, 61, 64. Kopp, "The German Program of Marriage Promotion through State Loan," Eugenical News Vol. XXI (1936), pp. 121-129.

137. Kopp, "Sterilization," p. 65.

138. Harry H. Laughlin, "Eugenics In Germany: Motion Picture Showing How Germany is Presenting and Attacking Her Problems in Applied Eugenics," Eugenical News, Vol. XXII- (1937), pp. 65-66. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Wickliffe Draper, 9 December 1938: Truman D-2-3:14. Letter, Harry H. Laughlin to Wickliffe Draper, 15 March 1937:Truman D- 2-3: 14. Zeil und Weg Vol. 7 (1937), No. 14, p. 361. See Martin S. Pernick, The Black Stork: Eugenics and the Death of "Defective" Babies in American Medicine and Motion Pictures Since 1915 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 164-166.

139. Laughlin, p. 66. Pernick, p. 165. 140. Shirer, pp. 430-434. Martin Gilbert, The Holocaust (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1985), pp. 69-70. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870-1945, pp. 502- 503. Generally see Proctor. Generally see Lifton.

141. Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism, 1870- 1945, p. 515. Proctor, pp. 112-114. Zentralarchiv der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, Potsdam: Reichsinnenministerium 10160, Film 23063 as cited by Muller-Hill, p. 34.

142. Muller-Hill, pp. 137-139, 164. Tage U.H. Ellinger, "On the Breeding of Aryans," Journal of Heredity Vol. XXXIII (April 1942), p. 141. Mary Mills, "Propaganda and Children during the Hitler Years," at http://www.nizkor.org. Pernick, p. 165. Proctor, pp. 196-197.

143. Muller-Hill, p. 13.

144. Henry Friedlander, The Origins of Nazi Genocide (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of Carolina Press, 1995) pp. 21-22, 81.

145. Stephen Trombley, The Right to Reproduce: A History of Coercive Sterilization (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1988), p. 116. Nancy L. Gallagher, Breeding Better Vermonters (Hanover, NH: University of New England Press, 1999), p. 140.

146. Lifton, pp. 62-79. Proctor, pp. 188-194. Muller-Hill, p. 15.

147. Lothrop Stoddard, Into the Darkness (Newport Beach, CA: Noontide Press, 2000), p. 187.

148. Stoddard, pp. 187-188.

149. Stoddard, p. 189.

150. Stoddard, p. 201, 205.

151. Stoddard, p. xi, 192, 196.

152. Lifton, p. 31.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN

1. Brig. Gen. Eric F. Wood, "Inspection of German Concentration Camp for Political Prisoners Located at Buchenwald on the North Edge of Weimar," report of 16 April 1945: PRO FP 371 151185. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., Case No. 000-50-9, p. 4220: NA RG 496/451. Direct examination of Rous, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 1626.

2. Direct examination of Horn, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., pp. 896-897, 1624- 1626, 1627, 1639, 1640, 1642. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 4366. Testimony of Karl Hemrick Victor Berthold, 17 January 1947, p. 16:NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #444. Physical measurements of defendants: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #442. Wood, p. 2. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4216-4217.

3. Eugen Kogon, The Theory and Practice of Hell (New York: Berkley Books, 1980), p. 210. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4224-4225, 4243-4245, 4261-4262, 4291. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4344, 4383. Testimony of Berthold, pp. 16-17. Statement of Walter Hummelsheim, p. 2: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #444

4. Direct examination of Rous, pp. 1625-1627. Cross-examination of Rous, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., pp. 1640-1643. See Wood, p. 2.

5. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4241, 4295, 4300. Re-direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 4386. Wood, p. 2. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4366. See photograph of Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen: NA RG 496/290/59114/1-5 Box #434. Direct examination of Siebeneichler, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., pp. 2320-2321. Direct examination of Challe, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., pp. 438-439. Statement of Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 440 1. Memorandum, Leon Alexander to A.H. Rosenfeld, Jr., 28January 1947: NA RG 496/290/59114/1-5 Box #444. Statement, Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen to the 7708 War Crime Group, 13 April 1948: NA RG 496/457. "Buchenwald Doctor Lists Atrocities," Stan and Stripes, 15 May 1947: NA RG 496/290/59114/1-5 Box 445.

6. Ben A. Smith, "Review of the War Crimes Section, Military Affairs Branch, Judge Advocate Division, Headquarters, European Command, ATO 403, U.S. Army," Report of 31 July 1950, pp. 1, 2, 6: NA RG 496/290/59/14/5- 7 Box #457. "The Guilty," Life Magazine, 25 August 1947. Sentences, Us. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 5713. Letter, "Owner of a copy of Bourgemeister Madonna" to Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, 31 August 1947:NA RG 496/457. Letter, Evelyn Kranz to "Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen," 15 August 1947: NA RG 496/457. Letter, Olga Pilar to the High Military Court at Dachau, 20 September 1947: NA RG 496/457. Letter, Mieczyslaw Lurczynski to Board of Review, 20 April 1948: NA RG 496/457. Signed testimonial of A. Simonart, 15 March 1950:NA RG 496/457. Letter, W. R. Graham to Board of Review, 5 April 1950: NA RG 496/457.

7. Eugenics Research Association, Active Membership Accession List (Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Eugenics Research Association, 1922): Truman, ERA Membership Records. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4198- 4199.

8. American Men of Science. (New York: Bowker, 1910 edition), s.v. "KatzenEllenbogen." Letter, Graham to Board of Review, 5 April 1950. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, "Record of Marriage," 30 March 1939: NA RG 496/457. Direct testimony of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4193-4194. The Jewish Encyclopedia, s.v. "Katzenellenbogen."

9. H. Hoefle, "Medical Report on Katzenellenbogen, Edwin," 30 January 1950, p. 2: NA RG 496/457. American Men of Science. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4194-4197. "Record of Marriage." Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, "Edward Peter Pierce: A Memorial," at http://www.massreports.com. Sworn deposition of "Dr. Edwin Marie Katzen- Ellenbogen": NA RG 496/290/59114/1-5 Box #435.

10. Direct testimony of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4197-4199. Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, "The Detection of a Case of Simulation of Insanity By Means of Association Tests," Journal of Abnormal Psychology Vol. VI (1911), p. 19. See Massachusetts Department of Correction, "People Executed by Electrocution in Massachusetts," at http://www.state.ma.us.

11. Direct testimony of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4198-4199. "A Critical Essay on Mental Tests in Their Relation to Epilepsy," Epilepsia Vol. 4 (1913), pp. 130, 140. Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen, "The Mental Efficiency in Epileptics," Epilepsia Vol. 3 (Dec 1912), p. 504.

12. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4198-4199.

13. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4199, 4200. Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, "A Critical Essay on Mental Tests in Their Relation to Epilepsy," p. 130. Active Membership Accession List.

14. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4200. Letter, Pilat to the High American Military Court, 20 September 1947. Letter, Olga Heide-Pilat to General Handy, 7 August 1951: NA RG 496/457. Letter, "Edwin Katzen Ellenbogen" to the Prison Director of Landsberg, 7 January 1950: NA RG 496/457. Letter, "Owner of the Bourgemeister Madonna" to Katzen-Ellenbogen, 31 August 1947: NA RG 496/457.

15. Letter, "Owner of a copy of Bourgemeister Madonna" to Katzen-Ellenbogen, 31 August 1947. Letter, Krantz to "Katzenellenbogen, " 15 August 1947.

16. Letter, Pilat to "The High American Military Court," 20 September 1947. Deposition of Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, 13 April 1948, p. 3. Letter, Olga Pilat to the Chief Commander of EUCOM, 5 June 1951:NA RG 496/457. Affadavit, Axel and Jan Helge Heide, 20 February 1950:NA RG 496/457.

17. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4200.

18. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4200, 4201-4202.

19. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4203-4205.

20. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4204, 4205.

21. David A. Hackett, ed. and trans., The Buchenwald Report (Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1995), pp. 112-115.

22. Kogon, pp. 155, 157, 172. Opening statement of the prosecution, United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al. at http://www.ess.uwe.ac.uk. Testimony of M. Dubost, "The Trial of German Major War Criminals, Forty-Fifth Day: Tuesday 29th January 1946," at http://www.nizkor.org. The Buchenwald Report, p. 79. Buchenwald Camp: The Report of a Parliamentary Delegation, April 1945, p. 6: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #440. Kogon, p. 172.

23. "Statement by a Jewish-Christian Prisoner, " p. 5: PRO FO 371/21757. Buchenwald Camp: The Report of a Parliamentary Delegation, p. 6. "Buchenwald Atrocities," at http://www.scrapbookpages. com. The Buchenwald Report, pp. 238-239. See Johannes Tuchel, Die Inspektion der Konzentrations-Lager: Das System des Terrors: 1938-1945, p. 100.

24. The Buchenwald Report, p. 113. Wood, pp. 2, 3, 4. Buchenwald Camp: The Report of a Parliamentary Delegation, p. 6. "George Vanier: Canadian diplomat reports his experience," 27 April 1945 at http://www.nizkor.org. "The Trial of German Major War Criminals, Forty-Fifth Day: Tuesday 29th January 1946." Cross-examination of Biermann, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 549. Cross-examination of Wilhelm, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 4447. Memorandum to Commanding General, Third U.S. Army, 25 May 1945 at http://www.nizkor.org. Direct examination of Sitte, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., pp. 365- 366.

25. Nuremberg Military Tribunal Volume V; p. 973.

26. Buchenwald Camp: The Report of a Parliamentary Delegation, p. 7.

27. PW Intelligence Bulletin No. 2/20 December 1944 at http://www.lib.uconn.edu/DoddCenter. Deposition of Isaak Egon Oschshorn, 5 September 1945 at http://www.lib.uconn.edu/DoddCenter. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4206. Deposition of Erich Kather, 9 May 1947: A RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #435. Direct examination of Horn, pp. 905-906. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4284, 4294-4296. Direct examination of Siebeneichler, pp. 2318-2319. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4371. Photograph of Katzen-Ellenbogen.

28. Direct examination of Horn, pp. 898-899. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4207-4210, 4214, 423 7-4238, 4244. Affidavit of August Bender, 3 April 1948: NA RG 496/457. Affidavit of August Bender, 20 February 1950: NA RG 496/290/59/14/5-7 Box # 457.

29. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4209, 4214, 4241, 4244, 4245. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4371, 4386. Direct examination of Siebenichler, p. 2320. Statement of Hummelsheim, p. 2. Direct examination of Horn, p. 912. Testimony of Berthold, p.17.

30. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4238-4239.

31. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4238-4239.

32. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4240-4241. The Buchenwald Report, p. 42.

33. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4239.

34. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4225, 4226, 4273-4275. Statement of Hummelsheim, p. 2. Direct examination of Horn, pp. 897 -898, 907-911. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4355. Smith, p. 2. Recross examination of Kogon, US. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 946.

35. Cross-examination of Kogon, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 939. Redirect examination of Horn, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 915.

36. Direct examination of Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen, p. 4223.

37. Direct examination of Challe, p. 438. Cross- examination of Challe, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 439.

38. Smith, p. 3.

39. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4361-4632.

40. Jens-Christian Wagner, Das KZ Mittelbau-Dora (Wallstein Verlag, 2001) p. 53. United States Holocaust Museum, "Dora-Mittelbau," at http://www.ushmm.org. The Buchenwald Report, pp. 219-220.

41. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4340-4341, 4342-4343.

42. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4343.

43. Statement of Hummelsheim, p. 2. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4278-4281.

44. Kogon, pp. ix, x. Opening statement of the prosecution, United States of America v. Karl Brandt et al. Re-direct examination of Kogon, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 948. Generally see Eugen Kogon et. al., Terror undd Gewaltkriminalitat: Herausforderung fur den Rechtsstaat: Diskussionsprotokoll Reihe Hessen-forum. Generally see Eugen Kogon, Die Stunde der Ingenieure: technolog. Intelligenz u. Politik.

45. Direct testimony of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4232, 4300. Kogon, The Theory and Practice of Hell, pp. 229-230. "Extracts from the Affidavit of Waldemar Hoven 24 October 1946, Concerning the Killing of Inmates by Phenol and Other Means," at http://www.mazal.org. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4344-4345, 4352. Re-direct of Katzen-Ellebogen, p. 4387. Statement of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4397.

46. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4245. Cross-examination of Katzen- Ellenbogen, pp. 4344-4345, 4352. The Buchenwald, pp. 225, 319-320.

47. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4352.

48. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4352-4353.

49. Robert Jay Lifton, The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 1986), p. 362. Author's communication with Dr. Harry Stein.

50. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4228, 4243-4244. Author's interview with Dr. Harry Stein, 20 January 2003.

51. Letter, Andre Simonart to Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen, 2 May 1948: NA RG 496/457. Letter, Andre Simonart to Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen, 18 May 1947: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #434. Affidavit of August Bender, 20 February 1950. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4214. Direct examination of Siebeneichler, pp. 2323-2324. Statement of Edwin Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4401. List of exhibits for Katzen-Ellenbogen trial: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #439. Direct examination of Horn, p. 900.

52. Direct examination of Sitte, p. 363. Author's interview with Dr. Harry Stein. "RuSHA Case: Introduction," at http://www.mazal.org. Direction examination of Horn, p. 897. See "A. Forced Germanization of Enemy Nationals," at http://www.mazal.org.

53. Direct examination of Horn, p. 897.

54. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4271.

55. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4328.

56. Direct examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4302.

57. Redirect of Kogon, p. 943.

58. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4349.

59. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4373.

60. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4373-4374.

61. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4393-4394.

62. Cross-examination of Katzen-Ellenbogen, p. 4400.

63. Statement of Katzen-Ellenbogen, pp. 4400- 4401.

64. Smith, p. 1. "The Guilty."

65. Opening statement of the prosecution, U.S. v. Josias Prince Zu Waldeck et. al., p. 43. "Review and Recommendations of the Deputy Judge Advocate for War Crimes," p. 60: NA RG 496/290/59/14/1-5 Box #433.

66. Smith, pp. 1-2.

67. "Appraisal of Petition for Clemency," 25 March 1953: NA RG 496/457. Smith, pp. 2, 3. Statement, Katzen-Ellenbogen to the 7708 War Crime Group. Letter, "Edwin K. Ellenbogen" to the Two Representatives of the Inspector General's Office, 1 November 1949: NA RG 496/457. Letter, "Edwin K. Ellenbogen" to General Thomas T. Handy, 18 February 1950: NA RG 496/457. Letter, "E. K. Ellenbogen" to General Thomas T. Handy, 2 April 1950: NA RG 496/290/59/H/5-7 Box #457. Letter, "Edwin Katzen Ellenbogen" to the Prison Director, 7 January 1950: NA RG 496/457. Letter, "Edwin Katzen Ellenbogen," to Commander-in-Chief, United States Army, Europe, 10 March 1953: NA RG 495/457. Internal Route Slip, Subject Edwin Katzen- Ellenbogen, 25 March 1953: TARG 496/457.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 27544
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

PreviousNext

Return to Mumia Abu-Jamal

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest