Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1912-06-11

~ 11tAoA VI AAAC sEAiAA
I have read with much interest
the Rev. Adolph Roeder's letter In
your issue of May %. eulogizing the
exhibition Of charts at the Women's
Christian Temperance Union recently
held in the Oranges.
Before the Rev. Mr.. Roeder decides
that much If not most Of the de-
tendency, Of the mental degeneration,
of the moral delinquency creeps down
the aisles of inheritance from orig
inal soil that was soaked and stepped
with alcohol' I would suggest that
he now procure, read and digest the
report issued last year by the Francis
Cation laboratory for national euge-
MICS. London, England.
1t has hitherto been taken for
granted by anti-alcoholists and others
concerned in what Is commonly called
Temperance reform that habitual
indulgence in alcohol must always
have an evil effect upon the second
generation; that the children of the
heavy drinker are peculiarly subject
to mental and bodily infirmities, and
that in the rae for life they inevi-
tably start out with a heavy handi-
CAP.
For the first time a careful and
systematic investigation was conduct
ed last year by Miss Ethel M. Elder
ton. Cation research scholar in the
University of London, with the as
sistancc of Professor Karl Pearson,
and nor than 5000 children were
examined. of whom about one-half
were the offspring of drunken
parents. The question whether such
children are more subject than others
to become alcoholics is o touched
upon in the report, though 1t is
limited that there will be a further
report on this point, but as far as
bodily and mental weaknesses go
there is nothing to show that the
popular views have any foundation
in fact. =
In a word. the results of the in
quiry indicate that the children of
alcoholics show no appreciable infe-
riority to the children of sober par
ents in physical development, INTEL
lectual force or n perception.
The mean weight and height of the
children of alcoholics were found to
be somewhat greater than those of
sober parents. but it is pointed out
that, with due corrections for age,
height and weight of the latter
proved to be, in fact. slightly greater.
The general health of the alcoholic
group seemed to be a little better
that of the non-alcohoIic. Tu-
berculosis and epilepsy were less fire.
quent, and there were fewer delicate
children. This is surprising at first
glance, and quite contrary to COM
mon opinion, but 1t Is explained that
the higher death rate of the children
of alcoholic parents probably leaves
the filter to survive, the stronger
of the community have
probably the greater capacity and
taste for alcohol, and that epilepsy
and tuberculosis combined with al
coholism may be incompatible with
long life and large families. 1t is,
therefore, unsafe to ga more than
this at the most, that alcoholism in
the parent has no notable effect on
tee health of the child.
1t has been alleged that 40 per cent.
of idiots and imbeciles W their
condition to alcoholism in one or
both of the parents, yet the investi-
cation of Miss Elderton and Profess
sor Pearson tend rather to show
that alcoholism is not a source of
mental defect in offspring. If there
be any relation between parental
alcoholism and filial intelligence 1t
is so slight that no sign of it can be
found In the material here classi-
fed.
Moreover, no relation between de-
fects of vision and parental alcohol
was established by the ~investi-
errors of refraction and other
visual defects being indeed rather
more common among the children of
sober parents. AS to the diseases of
the eye and lids they were found to
be equally frequent in both classes.
The report is fulsome with charts, all
OF which have been carefully worked
out and which are an invaluable aid
to students of socio-economic condi-
lions.
In sum, the investigators failed to
establish any relation whatever be.
tween the drinking habits of parents
and the intelligence, physique ano
health of the children.
OF course, the Rev. Mr.. Roeder may
deny to Miss Elderton and Professor
Pearson a supreme place in the ranks
OF sociologists. To such a denial I
should be forced to use the retort
courteous, and say that l never heard
of the galaxy of authorities who fur
nished the material for the charts for
which he asks attention. Let it be
said in passing that Miss Elderton
and Professor Pearson are thorough
students in their respective spheres,
who know and have reason to know
what they are talking about"
Just now social workers are dream
ing of a superman about whom
Nietzsche sighed and hoped for. DR..
David Starr Jordan, president of Lee
land Stanford University. says that
II Luther Burbank, the plant wizard,
had the entire population Of a city to
work on he could by eugenics bring
about a superman-that is, a human
beng VINO Al inteiiigcnL, energy al,u
stature would tower far above the
average human of today. This is not
desirable" says DR.. Jordan, ana most
persons will be disposed to agree
with him.
Professor Scott Nearing, of the Uni
versity of Pennsylvania, a specialist
In sociology, has recently come. out
with a formula for a superman. TIC
produce the superman here is the
recipe offered by Professor Nearing
Take one-third eugenics, one-third
social adjustment and one-third edu-
cation; mix thoroughly and keep unit
needed. That eugenics comes first
should he eynectad Socinlnpists re-.