edited by Cora B.S. Hodson, Secty.; Alexander M. Carr-Saunders, Vice-Pres, Pres.; Eldon Moore; Ward Cutler; E.W. MacBride, Vice-Pres.; Maurice Newfield; Richard Titmuss; Dr. Blacker; Cedric Carter; Kathleen Hodson
by The Eugenics Society
Vols. 1 to 60; 1909 to 1968
Editors and Editorial Policy
In its early years the REVIEW was, as has been mentioned, produced by an "executive person" under the direction of the President. These persons are nameless and the word editor does not appear in the REVIEW or in Annual Reports or Minutes until May 1920, when it is minuted that Mr. A. M. Carr-Saunders had agreed to take over the editorial work for one issue "experimentally". Up to this time most of it had, in fact, been done by Mrs. C. B. S. Hodson, then Secretary of the Society, although contributions were to be sent to the Honorary Secretary. Cora Hodson died in 1953 and an obituary notice appeared in Volume 45, pages 78-9.
Carr-Saunders's resignation is noted six months after his appointment, but he was evidently persuaded to reconsider this decision, for it is again minuted (7th November 1922) that he brought up the matter of his resignation "saying he thought it would be wise to have someone resident in London and suggesting that a small honorarium, say £50, might help some young scientist". In the event, he continued his editorial duties until 1927.
Alexander Carr-Saunders, who joined the Society in 1912, was one of the men with an international reputation who have given a great deal of their time and energy to the Eugenics Society. He was elected to the Council in 1920, he was a Vice-President from 1936-39 and 1945-48 and was President of the Society from 1949 to 1953. He gave the Galton Lecture in 1935-Eugenics in the Light of Population Trends-which was among those reprinted in the first number of the REVIEW'S final volume (69, 46), and he was awarded the Galton Medal in 1946. He said with a smile, when Chairman of a Galton Lecture during his Presidency, that his Life Fellowship of the Eugenics Society, taken out when he was a young man, was one of the best bargains he had ever made. His death is recorded in the March 1967 issue of the REVIEW (59, 4) where appreciations from Dr. C. P. Blacker, Mr. D. Caradog Jones and Lady Simey are printed.
It was, apparently, not the policy of the Society to name the editor of its publication in the REVIEW itself and Carr-Saunders's name is not given therein. It was not until April 1928 (20, 1) after Eldon Moore had been appointed, that with the new format the name of the editor for the Society was printed in each issue.
Eldon Moore, who had for some years given considerable help in the production of the REVIEW, was appointed editor in October 1927 under an Honorary Officers Committee. He was to work in collaboration with Ward Cutler (one of the Honorary Secretaries) who was appointed liaison officer between the Committee and the Editor, who would only attend meetings by invitation. The Editor's salary was to be £100 per annum to produce a volume with 320-350 pages. It was suggested that an editorial secretary should be appointed at £75 per annum; this was not agreed to, and the Society's secretary was instructed to arrange for one of the permanent staff to carry out work for the Editor. This Honorary Officers Committee met for the first time in June 1928 when Ward Cutler said that he had read the whole of the REVIEW material in MS and suggested that this arrangement should be adhered to, instead of sending a certain number of MSS to different members of the Committee; the offer was gratefully accepted. In 1929 the Editor was empowered to print all correspondence submitted for publication which he considered to be "relevant and not libellous".
In April 1929 it is minuted that Eldon Moore had left London to take up an appointment as Chief Officer of the Imperial Bureau of Animal Genetics in Edinburgh, and Ward Cutler undertook to give more time to supervising the production of the REVIEW. He stated at this meeting that the position regarding the REVIEW was quite satisfactory, particularly in connection with increased publicity. In July of that year he undertook to take personal charge of the office for one day a week at a fee of 30s.
What might be called the Great Editorial Controversy blew up, in 1930, in the face of the then President, Sir Bernard Mallet who, as Registrar General, had in 1911 been the first to introduce calculating machines for work on the Census. This long-drawn-out argument, which was not resolved until late in the following year, involved Professor E. W. MacBride, who was then a Vice-President and, as we have seen, had had a finger in the REVIEW pie since 1919. He objected violently to the (rather curious) editorial policy of sending certain book reviews to authors for approval thus inviting them to write rejoinders to critical notices which would be printed immediately following the review itself; Mr. Ward Cutler claimed his right to do this. MacBride's slashing review of de Beer's Embryology and Evolution and the author's reply take up more than three pages of Volume 22 (pp. 71-4) and the reviewer counter-claimed his right to a further rejoinder. This "breach of every decent literary convention" had, according to Professor MacBride, already been adopted by a previous editor and a Council resolution had been passed condemning it.
In spite of Sir Bernard Mallet's tact and fairmindedness, a long series of vitriolic letters from Professor MacBride-and apparently acrimonious argument as well-culminated in his exclusion from another newly formed editorial committee on the grounds that it would be impossible for the Editor to work with a Committee member who was so inimical to himself and his policies. The inevitable outcome was MacBride's resignation from the Council and finally from the Society.
His letters reveal him as Past Master of the Home Truth: the last Galton Lecture he had attended had been "a torrent of wearisome platitudes". (Its subject-matter had been chosen in the teeth of his advice.) His two distinguished guests had "declined to take it seriously" (but they had already been inveigled into proposing and seconding the vote of thanks). Lady Askwith had told him that "the Eugenics Society 'cut very little ice', an American expression I was surprised to hear from Lady Askwith".-It was the Americanism and not the comment that shocked. A certain person is utterly condemned as "no gentleman"-another is "an outsider"; the REVIEW editor is a "mere journalist of the Daily Mail type"-doubtless the opinion of one of the 'top people' among newspaper readers. The impression will grow that the Eugenics Society has fallen into the hands of cranks and that therefore serious biologists must shun it. Added to which all those who do not see eye to eye with him are forever offering him snubs and insults.
Professor MacBride in a Memorandum on the subject of THE EUGENICS REVIEW (8th November 1930), in which he states that "formal Mendelism is scientific Calvinism", advocates that the Society should have, as Editor-in-Chief "a man who has received a thorough biological training including under the term biology the medical sciences" and an Assistant Editor "confined to the technicalities of journalism, his functions rigidly limited to proof-reading, advertisements, printing, etc.". An ideal arrangement, but utterly impractical in view of the Society's financial position.
Every effort was made by the Honorary Officers to dissuade him from resigning from the Society. His resignation is recorded with regret in the Annual Report for 1930-31, where it is stated that "it would be difficult to exaggerate the debt which the Eugenics Society owes to Professor MacBride", a tribute which may have been intentionally ambiguous.
Such was the storm that made Sir Bernard Mallet wish that he had never accepted the Presidency and sent Major Leonard Darwin to bed for twenty-four hours with a headache. Let Mr. B. S. Bramwell, then Honorary Treasurer, have the last word: "The subject of eugenics seems fertile in raising rows".
The incomplete file of correspondence between members of the Council covering these years throws a curious sidelight on what might almost be called the formative years of the Society, although it was by now twenty years old. Birth-controller strove against anti-birthcontroller; Mendelists and Lamarckists were at daggers drawn; the subject of eugenic sterilization was a battlefield. Luckily Neo-Malthusianism does not seem to have raised its ugly head at this time. Professor MacBride had presided over the Eugenics Section of the International Neo-Malthusian Conference at the Kingsway Hall in 1922.
Eldon Moore had, in July 1930, been appointed full-time Editor and shortly afterwards Ward Cutler reluctantly resigned from his role as liaison officer. (In a letter to Mallet, Leonard Darwin had written "it would be a disaster if Cutler left us".) Eldon Moore resigned his position in Edinburgh to give more time to developing the REVIEW, a development "naturally conditioned by the funds placed at his disposal for publicity". However, in the Annual Report for 1931-32 it is recorded that, in order to help the Society over a period of financial difficulty, Mr. Moore had resigned his post as paid editor and had undertaken to edit the REVIEW in an honorary capacity. He was elected a Fellow of the Society and appointed Honorary Editor with an expense allowance of £200 per annum. At the meeting of the Executive Committee at which this was agreed, Lady Chambers and Mrs. Grant Duff had dissociated themselves, as they believed this step would be detrimental to the Eugenics Society, but the Council was confident that it was voicing the opinion of Fellows and Members of the Society in recording its keen appreciation of the efficient way in which Mr. Moore had managed the REVIEW.
In May 1933 Eldon Moore resigned his position as Honorary Editor. The Annual Report for 1933-34 records that "The thanks of the Council are due to him for his loyal and painstaking services to the Society".
In an appreciation printed in the first issue of the REVIEW under its new Editor (25, 143) the writer praises Moore's fluent yet scholarly manner and his light touch, which so many scientists lack, combined with an exactness in which journalists tend to be deficient, and commends the freshness and vitality of his work; his abilities as an administrator and organizer were of no mean order. Eugenics was an absorbing interest in his life and he had given a large number of lectures for the Society. He had been the Secretary of the British section of the International Union for the Scientific Investigation of Population Problems and a member of the Commission (on differential fertility, fecundity and sterility) of the Union. The writer of this appreciation is aware that his words have something of the flavour of an obituary notice and it is good to know that they were printed when Moore was still a young man. He died, aged 53, in November 1954 (46, 202). He had been a free-lance journalist writing under many names, edited A Bibliography of Differential Fertility (1933) and wrote Heredity, Mainly Human (1934). In an appreciation, Dr. J. A. Fraser Roberts (47, 15) writes of his "transformation of the REVIEW", his enthusiasm, and the warmth and friendliness of his personality.
The first number to appear under the editorship of Maurice Newfield was that for October 1933. He had been Assistant Editor of the British Medical Journal and had helped Sir Humphry Rolleston in editing the British Encyclopaedia of Medical Practice; as Michael Fielding he had written Parenthood, Design or Accident? which was first published in 1928 and ran to several editions. The differences of opinion in the Council at that time included the subject of birth control and Newfield had to contend with doubt in some quarters as to the suitability of his appointment, but to quote again from Dr. Blacker: "During the fifteen years of his editorship his touch was unfaltering; not once did he take a false step".
When Maurice Newfield became severely ill Richard Titmuss came to the rescue and the Council in the Annual Report records its thanks for his able editing of the January and April 1942 numbers. For the same reason Dr. Blacker and I worked together to produce the October 1947 and January 1948 issues.
October 1948 saw the completion of Newfield's fifteen years with the REVIEW and the Council expressed its appreciation of his capable and tactful editorship over this period. Maurice Newfield died in August 1949. A symposium of appreciation of his personality and of his services to eugenics and to the Eugenics Society appeared in the REVIEW for October 1949 (41, 103) and was separately produced. Lord Horder headed the twenty-two contributors; those with no very definite links with the Eugenics Society included S. Vere Pearson, Robert Graves, Michael Heseltine, Oliver Simon, Andrew Morland, Josep Trueta, Raymond Swing, Abraham Stone, Ernest Raymond and A. L. Bacharach.
Dr. Blacker and I produced the next few issues until Cedric Carter took up office as Editor with the July 1950 number. He at that time held a research post at the Hospital for Sick Children, Great Ormond Street. His appointment ceased with the April 1952 issue, when he succeeded Dr. Blacker as General Secretary of the Society. I had worked with Maurice Newfield since 1935, was appointed Editor with the June 1952 issue and continued to be responsible for the production of the REVIEW until the end of 1967.
-- The Eugenics Review 1909-1968, by Kathleen Hodson
Vols. 1 to 60; 1909 to 1968
Vol. 60
1968
v.60(3): 141–187
1968 Sep
v.60(4): 189–288
1968 Dec
Vol. 59
1967
v.59(1): 1–72
1967 Mar
v.59(2): 73–148
1967 Jun
v.59(3): 149–218
1967 Sep
v.59(4): 219–300
1967 Dec
Vol. 58
1966
v.58(1): 1–56
1966 Mar
v.58(2): 57–116
1966 Jun
v.58(3): 117–172
1966 Sep
v.58(4): 173–240
1966 Dec
Vols. 56 to 57;
1965
v.56(4): 181–234
1965 Jan
v.57(1): 1–48
1965 Mar
v.57(2): 49–98
1965 Jun
v.57(3): 99–154
1965 Sep
v.57(4): 155–209
1965 Dec
Vols. 55 to 56;
1964
v.55(4): 189–255
1964 Jan
v.56(1): 1–57
1964 Apr
v.56(2): 61–124
1964 Jul
v.56(3): 125–179
1964 Oct
Vols. 54 to 55;
1963
v.54(4): 185–232
1963 Jan
v.55(1): 1–56
1963 Apr
v.55(2): 65–130
1963 Jul
v.55(3): 133–183
1963 Oct
Vols. 53 to 54;
1962
v.53(4): 185–237
1962 Jan
v.54(1): 1–52
1962 Apr
v.54(2): 57–108
1962 Jul
v.54(3): 113–179
1962 Oct
Vols. 52 to 53;
1961
v.52(4): 189–251
1961 Jan
v.53(1): 1–65
1961 Apr
v.53(2): 69–122
1961 Jul
v.53(3): 129–181
1961 Oct
Vols. 51 to 52;
1960
v.51(4): 201–243
1960 Jan
v.52(1): 1–61
1960 Apr
v.52(2): 65–128
1960 Jul
v.52(3): 129–185
1960 Oct
Vols. 50 to 51;
1959
v.50(4): 217–279
1959 Jan
v.51(1): 1–63
1959 Apr
v.51(2): 65–134
1959 Jul
v.51(3): 137–198
1959 Oct
Vols. 49 to 50;
1958
v.49(4): 163–212
1958 Jan
v.50(1): 3–81
1958 Apr
v.50(2): 85–151
1958 Jul
v.50(3): 153–214
1958 Oct
Vols. 48 to 49;
1957
v.48(4): 183–252
1957 Jan
v.49(1): 3–48
1957 Apr
v.49(2): 59–96
1957 Jul
v.49(3): 107–150
1957 Oct
Vols. 47 to 48;
1956
v.47(4): 207–267
1956 Jan
v.48(1): 3–63
1956 Apr
v.48(2): 67–121
1956 Jul
v.48(3): 127–178
1956 Oct
Vols. 46 to 47;
1955
v.46(4): 191–264
1955 Jan
v.47(1): 3–67
1955 Apr
v.47(2): 71–135
1955 Jul
v.47(3): 139–202
1955 Oct
Vols. 45 to 46;
1954
v.45(4): 203–268
1954 Jan
v.46(1): 3–67
1954 Apr
v.46(2): 71–134
1954 Jul
v.46(3): 139–183
1954 Oct
Vols. 44 to 45;
1953
v.44(4): 187–246
1953 Jan
v.45(1): 3–68
1953 Apr
v.45(2): 71–119
1953 Jul
v.45(3): 131–192
1953 Oct
Vols. 43 to 44;
1952
v.43(4): 167–203
1952 Jan
v.44(1): 3–59
1952 Apr
v.44(2): 63–115
1952 Jul
v.44(3): 119–183
1952 Oct
Vols. 42 to 43;
1951
v.42(4): 183–237
1951 Jan
v.43(1): 3–64
1951 Apr
v.43(2): 71–110
1951 Jul
v.43(3): 119–164
1951 Oct
Vols. 41 to 42;
1950
v.41(4): 159–206
1950 Jan
v.42(1): 3–59
1950 Apr
v.42(2): 67–112
1950 Jul
v.42(3): 119–179
1950 Oct
Vols. 40 to 41;
1949
v.40(4): 175–231
1949 Jan
v.41(1): 3–58
1949 Apr
v.41(2): 63–98
1949 Jul
v.41(3): 102–155
1949 Oct
Vols. 39 to 40;
1948
v.39(4): 131–179
1948 Jan
v.40(1): 3–52
1948 Apr
v.40(2): 55–112
1948 Jul
v.40(3): 119–169
1948 Oct
Vols. 38 to 39;
1947
v.38(4): 163–204
1947 Jan
v.39(1): 3–38
1947 Apr
v.39(2): 42–79
1947 Jul
v.39(3): 83–128
1947 Oct
Vols. 37 to 38;
1946
v.37(4): 143–188
1946 Jan
v.38(1): 2–60
1946 Apr
v.38(2): 63–106
1946 Jul
v.38(3): 111–158
1946 Oct
Vols. 36 to 37;
1945
v.36(4): 111–137
1945 Jan
v.37(1): 3–36
1945 Apr
v.37(2): 39–84
1945 Jul
v.37(3): 87–140
1945 Oct
Vol. 36
1944
v.36(1): 3–44
1944 Apr
v.36(2): 47–76
1944 Jul
v.36(3): 79–106
1944 Oct
Vols. 34 to 35;
1943
v.34(4): 109–142
1943 Jan
v.35(1): 3–28
1943 Apr
v.35(2): 31–48
1943 Jul
v.35(3-4): 51–96
1943 Oct
Vols. 33 to 34;
1942
v.33(4): 99–138
1942 Jan
v.34(1): 3–44
1942 Apr
v.34(2): 47–77
1942 Jul
v.34(3): 81–105
1942 Oct
Vols. 32 to 33;
1941
v.32(4): 111–146
1941 Jan
v.33(1): 3–34
1941 Apr
v.33(2): 39–59
1941 Jul
v.33(3): 63–95
1941 Oct
Vols. 31 to 32;
1940
v.31(4): 199–234
1940 Jan
v.32(1): 3–38
1940 Apr
v.32(2): 43–70
1940 Jul
v.32(3): 75–105
1940 Oct
Vols. 30 to 31;
1939
v.30(4): 231–311
1939 Jan
v.31(1): 3–77
1939 Apr
v.31(2): 83–147
1939 Jul
v.31(3): 151–195
1939 Oct
Vols. 29 to 30;
1938
v.29(4): 231–296
1938 Jan
v.30(1): 3–78
1938 Apr
v.30(2): 83–156
1938 Jul
v.30(3): 163–227
1938 Oct
Vols. 28 to 29;
1937
v.28(4): 255–345
1937 Jan
v.29(1): 3–82
1937 Apr
v.29(2): 91–155
1937 Jul
v.29(3): 163–225
1937 Oct
Vols. 27 to 28;
1936
v.27(4): 270–352
1936 Jan
v.28(1): 3–88
1936 Apr
v.28(2): 95–165
1936 Jul
v.28(3): 175–247
1936 Oct
Vols. 26 to 27;
1935
v.26(4): 251–312
1935 Jan
v.27(1): 3–77
1935 Apr
v.27(2): 85–173
1935 Jul
v.27(3): 181–260
1935 Oct
Vols. 25 to 26;
1934
v.25(4): 215–289
1934 Jan
v.26(1): 3–91
1934 Apr
v.26(2): 99–167
1934 Jul
v.26(3): 175–243
1934 Oct
Vols. 24 to 25;
1933
v.24(4): 267–347
1933 Jan
v.25(1): 3–64
1933 Apr
v.25(2): 75–135
1933 Jul
v.25(3): 143–209
1933 Oct
Vols. 23 to 24;
1932
v.23(4): 295–382
1932 Jan
v.24(1): 3–73
1932 Apr
v.24(2): 83–165
1932 Jul
v.24(3): 171–261
1932 Oct
Vols. 22 to 23;
1931
v.22(4): 235–326
1931 Jan
v.23(1): 3–95
1931 Apr
v.23(2): 103–191
1931 Jul
v.23(3): 199–288
1931 Oct
Vols. 21 to 22;
1930
v.21(4): 247–324
1930 Jan
v.22(1): 3–84
1930 Apr
v.22(2): 87–158
1930 Jul
v.22(3): 167–227
1930 Oct
Vols. 20 to 21;
1929
v.20(4): 233–305
1929 Jan
v.21(1): 3–66
1929 Apr
v.21(2): 83–161
1929 Jul
v.21(3): 167–239
1929 Oct
Vols. 19 to 20;
1928
v.19(4): 267–345
1928 Jan
v.20(1): 1–72
1928 Apr
v.20(2): 75–144
1928 Jul
v.20(3): 153–224
1928 Oct
Vols. 18 to 19;
1927
v.18(4): 285–375
1927 Jan
v.19(1): 1–60
1927 Apr
v.19(2): 103–143
1927 Jul
v.19(3): 181–258
1927 Oct
Vols. 17 to 18;
1926
v.17(4): 233–332
1926 Jan
v.18(1): 1–55
1926 Apr
v.18(2): 91–181
1926 Jul
v.18(3): 189–257
1926 Oct
Vols. 16 to 17;
1925
v.16(4): 259–320
1925 Jan
v.17(1): 1–51
1925 Apr
v.17(2): 73–124
1925 Jul
v.17(3): 141–222
1925 Oct
Vols. 15 to 16;
1924
v.15(4): 545–641
1924 Jan
v.16(1): 1–73
1924 Apr
v.16(2): 93–171
1924 Jul
v.16(3): 177–239
1924 Oct
Vols. 14 to 15;
1923
v.14(4): 225–300
1923 Jan
v.15(1): 305–375
1923 Apr
v.15(2): 383–453
1923 Jul
v.15(3): 459–532
1923 Oct
Vols. 13 to 14;
1922
v.13(4): 499–559
1922 Jan
v.14(1): 1–60
1922 Apr
v.14(2): 71–135
1922 Jul
v.14(3): 149–214
1922 Oct
Vols. 12 to 13;
1921
v.12(4): 257–318
1921 Jan
v.13(1): 325–375
1921 Apr
v.13(2): 381–424
1921 Jul
v.13(3): 439–494
1921 Oct
Vols. 11 to 12;
1920
v.11(4): 175–248
1920 Jan
v.12(1): 1–73
1920 Apr
v.12(2): 81–130
1920 Jul
v.12(3): 147–251
1920 Oct
Vols. 10 to 11;
1919
v.10(4): 195–239
1919 Jan
v.11(1): 1–50
1919 Apr
v.11(2): 53–109
1919 Jul
v.11(3): 113–157
1919 Oct
Vols. 9 to 10;
1918
v.9(4): 277–355
1918 Jan
v.10(1): 1–54
1918 Apr
v.10(2): 63–114
1918 Jul
v.10(3): 133–176
1918 Oct
Vols. 8 to 9;
1917
v.8(4): 297–373
1917 Jan
v.9(1): 1–70
1917 Apr
v.9(2): 95–155
1917 Jul
v.9(3): 183–259
1917 Oct
Vols. 7 to 8;
1916
v.7(4): 229–303
1916 Jan
v.8(1): 1–75
1916 Apr
v.8(2): 93–176
1916 Jul
v.8(3): 189–276
1916 Oct
Vols. 6 to 7;
1915
v.6(4): 271–327
1915 Jan
v.7(1): 1–68
1915 Apr
v.7(2): 91–140
1915 Jul
v.7(3): 163–214
1915 Oct
Vols. 5 to 6;
1914
v.5(4): 295–373
1914 Jan
v.6(1): 1–72
1914 Apr
v.6(2): 97–174
1914 Jul
v.6(3): 195–252
1914 Oct
Vols. 4 to 5;
1913
v.4(4): 331–412
1913 Jan
v.5(1): 1–79
1913 Apr
v.5(2): 93–179
1913 Jul
v.5(3): 197–282
1913 Oct
Vols. 3 to 4;
1912
v.3(4): 287–365
1912 Jan
v.4(1): 1–106
1912 Apr
v.4(2): 117–212
1912 Jul
v.4(3): 223–320
1912 Oct
Vols. 2 to 3;
1911
v.2(4): 253–329
1911 Jan
v.3(1): 1–71
1911
v.3(2): 83–182
1911 Jul
v.3(3): 187–278
1911 Oct
Vols. 1 to 2;
1910
v.1(4): 221–295
1910 Jan
v.2(1): 1–87
1910
v.2(2): 89–154
1910 Jul
v.2(3): 161–250
1910 Nov
Vol. 1
1909
v.1(1): 1–63
1909 Apr
v.1(2): 65–137
1909 Jul
v.1(3): 141–216
1909 Oct