by Edwin Black
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 modem 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 race-ology 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 Briinn, 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 sociallyacceptable.”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 Modem 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 Riidin 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 Riidin, 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 i
s 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 ofKemp.37
Thus Rockefeller inaugurated another eugenic outpost in Europe. It was not Germany; it was Denmark. It was not eugenics; it was genetics.
