[8] Sociological Papers, 1905, p. 59.
[9] Whilst allowing due weight to Mr. Wells' opinion, we may also note that of Charles Darwin who, referring to his own phrase, natural selection, says, “But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate.” (Origin of Species, popular edition, p. 76.)
[10] Collected Essays, vol. i. p. 493. A valuable controversy but poor sport. Thinker versus politician is scarcely a match.
[11] This is discussed at length in the writer's paper, “The Obstacles to Eugenics,” read before the Sociological Society, March 8, 1909.
[12] Spencer introduced the non-moral word evolution in 1857, in order to avoid the moral connotation of the word progress, which he had formerly employed.
[13] In his recent work, The Origin of Vertebrates, Dr. W. H. Gaskell, F.R.S., has adduced much evidence in support of this thesis. He says, “The law of progress is this: The race is not to the swift nor to the strong, but to the wise.” And again; “As for the individual, so for the nation; as for the nation, so for the race; the law of evolution teaches that in all cases brain-power wins. Throughout, from the dawn of animal life up to the present day, the evidence given in this book suggests that the same law has always held. In all cases, upward progress is associated with the development of the central nervous system. The law for the whole animal kingdom is the same as for the individual. ‘Success in this world depends upon brains.’”
[14] We may recall the words of Lear:—
“Is man no more than this? Consider him well: Thou owest the worm no silk, the beast no hide, the sheep no wool, the cat no perfume:.... Thou art the thing itself: unaccommodated man is no more but such a poor, bare, forked animal as thou art.”
[15] Says Darwin, “So little is this subject understood, that I have heard surprise repeatedly expressed at such great monsters as the Mastodon ... having become extinct; as if mere bodily strength gave victory in the battle of life. Mere size, on the contrary, would in some cases determine ... quicker extermination from the greater amount of requisite food.” In the Russo-Japanese War, one of the effective factors was the greater area of the Russian soldier as a target, and the disparity between the food requirements of the little victors and the big losers.
[16] Quoted from a Paper read by Mr. Galton before the Eugenics Education Society, October 14, 1908, and published in Nature, October 22, 1908.