The Decline of the Eugenics Movement

THE DECLINE OF THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT

The Origins of Modern Eugenics

The modern idea of eugenics originated in England in 1883 with Sir Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin who helped found a British society to study eugenics. A sister organization to the British group, the American Eugenics Society, was formed in the United States in 1935. The implicit belief of eugenicists was that races were genetically superior or inferior and that to mix races meant putting "pure racial stocks" at risk. Scientific evidence gathered through the genetic study of plant observation suggests that the contrary result is the case.

Eugenics in the United States

In the early 1930s the concept of selected sterilization, mostly of those in mental institutions, was commonly accepted in twenty-seven states, although several eventually withdrew the legislation authorizing the practice. The idea behind the practice was that to succeed in building a strong nation, social engineering had to extend into controlling the human reproductive cycle. In 1934 Scientific American did not hesitate to proclaim that "one-fifth of the population of the United States today is surplus," while noting that the eugenics movement had not yet proved its case for full population control. Such caveats did little to temper the partisans of full-scale eugenics.

The German-American Connection

Until 1933 the American eugenics movement displayed strong power in influencing domestic legislation concerning race and racial purity, and American eugenicists received praise from Europeans, especially German eugenics advocates. By the time the Nazis came to power it was commonly believed that the two leading eugenics movements were in the United States and Germany. Nazi Germany purported to follow the precedents set by American sterilization policies, especially the California sterilization law. Soon, however, Nazi propaganda took the lead in explaining the benefits of sterilization for a "purer race." Further-more, Nazi policies extended to the whole German nation, while eugenic laws in the United States encountered obstacles at federal, state, and local levels. The secretary of the American Eugenics Society, Leon F. Whitney, reported on a regular basis on the progress of Nazi policy. It seemed to American eugenicists that the German treatment of the Jews, including sterilization, beatings, and arbitrary arrests, was no different from the American treatment of blacks and was therefore acceptable in their eyes. However, as German measures against the Jews became even more radical, including deportation and summary executions, relations between the American and German eugenics movements cooled considerably. Nazi abuses of eugenics in the name of anti-Semitic policy tainted the term and might have contributed to the toning down of American rhetoric in the field. The rise of genetics as an established field of biology also dispelled eugenic myths.

UNITED STATES PLANT PATENT N⁹ 1

Working on raising trailing roses, Henry F. Rosenberg of New Brunswick, New Jersey, was able to reproduce asexually a new kind, previously unknown in the United States or elsewhere. Under the conditions set forth in Section 4886 of the Revised Statutes of Patents approved by Congress on 23 May 1930, Rosenberg filed an application on 6 August 1930 for a "climbing or trailing rose" that was approved on 18 August 1931. The patent claimed an "everblooming habit" from spring through fall in the New Brunswick region. At the time the value of granting plant patents was deemed recognizable only in cases in which a legal battle over property ensued. No thoughts were given yet to the development of agricultural farming seeds mutated for greater returns.

Source:

Orson D. Munn, "United States Plant Patent No. 1," Scientific American, 145 (November 1931): 303.

Sources:

Ignatius Cox, "The Folly of Human Sterilization," Scientific American, 151 (October 1934): 188-190;

Stefan Kiihl, The Nazi Connection: Eugenics, American Racism, and German National Socialism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993);

J. H. Landman, "Race Betterment by Human Sterilization," Scientific American, 150 (June 1934): 292-295.