Created 'University of London: Report of the Galton Laboratory Committee,' 22nd May 1913.
22 May 1913

Created E.M. Phillips et. al., Survey Schedule 'As to Frequency of Albinism in China.'
From 1908 to 1912
Description:

‘As to Frequency of Albinism in China.

A.

Doctors Name: E. Margaret Phillips. B.Sc. M.B.ChB.

Town and Province: Pingyen, Shantung.

Number of years hospital practice in China: 5 years

Number of different hospital patients seen in 1909: 3,000

How many cases of Albinism seen in hospital work? None

How many elsewhere? None.

Any cases heard of? One heard of in village 3 miles away (a female). Said to be not extremely uncommon here, though the sufferers remain in seclusion at home.

Have the Chinese any name for Albinism? If so what? [m.s. Chinese characters], Pai Kuán Tzŭ

Have the Chinese any idea as to the cause of A.? The Chinese attribute it to some disease or weakness of the mother during pregnancy.

Have you had the opportunity of questioning and examining any case of A.? (If so, please give details under B.) No

Have any cases of pied Albinism or other deficiency of pigmentation come under your notice? We frequently notice here slighter degrees of deficiency of pigmentation, i.e. light brown instead of black hair.

Can you procure photographs of any cases of deficient or anomalous pigmentation? No

B.

1. Questions.

...

Photograph: (Alongside a normal native.)

Please post at your early convenience to Dr. McAll, or to Dr. A. H. Skinner, Hankow.'

[in Usher’s hand: ‘Received from A.H.S. Nov. 7. 1910. Aberdeen.’]

Created H.S. Houghton et. al. Survey Schedule 'As to Frequency of Albinism in China.'
From 1908 to 1912
Description:

‘As to Frequency of Albinism in China.

A.

Doctors Name: Henry S. Houghton

Town and Province: Wuhu, Anhui.

Number of years hospital practice in China: Four

Number of different hospital patients seen in 1909: 16,000

How many cases of Albinism seen in hospital work? None

How many elsewhere? One or two, at most.

Any cases heard of? Yes, the condition is known

Have the Chinese any name for Albinism? If so what? [m.s. Chinese characters, ‘(P.T.O.)’]

Have the Chinese any idea as to the cause of A.? [m.s.:] (P.T.O.) [overleaf: ‘The characters given are the colloquial common name “Yang-tèo-tài,” and the meaning implied is a metempsychosis (the goat or long haired sheep to man) [note: ‘Received from A.H.S. – Nov. 7 – 1910. Aberdeen [illeg.])’]]

Have you had the opportunity of questioning and examining any case of A.? (If so, please give details under B.) No

Have any cases of pied Albinism or other deficiency of pigmentation come under your notice? No

Can you procure photographs of any cases of deficient or anomalous pigmentation? No

B.

1. Questions.

Pedigree as far as possible (e.g. by making out a family tree of relationships, showing sexes at age of death, and cause of death). The more extensive the pedigree the better. All information is desired bearing on whether Albinism is or is not the expression of a prevalence of scanty pigmentation in a particular stock. Hence the importance of the following:-

In the family has there been:- (a) any Intermarrying, e.g., of cousins?

(b) any Peculiarities as to colour of hair or eyes?

as to Fecundity.

as to General Physical or Mental Vigour.

(c) any defect other than Pigmentation.

2. Examination.

Colour of skin:- Presence, Description and Distribution of Pigment Spots and Freckles.

Hair colour:-       Scalp.                    Eyebrows.

                                Eyelashes.           Body-hair.

Eyes: Colour of iris                                           Of pupil

Can any red be seen in the pupil?

Is there pigment at Corneal Margin?

“    “        “      in the Conjunctiva?

Nystagmus?       Strabismus?       Photophobia?

State of Vision?                                Any Abnormal Refraction?

Is the Pigment of the Retina Defective?

“  “      “                  of the Choroid Defective?

Photograph: (Alongside a normal native.)

Please post at your early convenience to Dr. McAll, or to Dr. A. H. Skinner, Hankow.’

Created K. Pearson, 'Appeal for Funds to Maintain the Institute of Applied Statistics, the Biometric and Galton Laboratories,' c.1925.
1925

Created K. Pearson, Albinism in Dogs & Men [1913] [Lecture on Albinism A]
1913
Description:

‘In the year 1906 the late Edward Nettleship and I began a lengthy inquiry into albinism in man. Before long we took into partnership C.E. Usher, whose large contributions to our series of pedigrees and observational work on all forms of leucosis more than entitled him to full responsibility for our joint publication. Nettleship’s splendid power of following up details of family history, his relative leisure, his patient enthusiasm, and above all his wide ophthalmological knowledge provided what I personally largely lacked, and his recent death has been a grave loss to our joint work. Luckily in my remaining colleague, Mr Usher, most of these features are still present, combined with a youth and vigour, which is of endless profit to our joint work.

Early in the course of our researches, we found that the difficulties arising in dealing with man for the several problems of albinism were very great owing to the extreme rarity of material for microscopic examination and we were forced for many of our problems to turn to other types of life. Albinism is relatively rare in the [1-2] dog, but fortunately for our work Nettleship in 1907 was able to procure three albino dogs Tong I, Jack and Jill, and later these were added to by the purchase of two others Beenie and Spook, while certain number of other albinos have been offered to me of recent years. I have had no necessity for them because we have bred something like 50 or 60 albinos from our foundation stock. All these dogs are pure bred Pekingese, but as they differ in other features, but pigment from the normal dog, we term the whole breed of pure-bred Pekingese albino dogs Dondos. Every Dondo that has been brought to me or that I have received any report of – and Dondos occur sporadically among the Pekingese – is ultimately descended from a certain pair Ah Cum and Goodwood Meh. Five Pekingese – the first to come to England – arrived after the looting of the Imperial Palace in 1860 – one ‘Sooty’ went to Queen Victoria [note: ‘the Queen, I mean’], was kept in the Royal Kennels & never bred from. Schlorff and Hytien went to Lord John Haye, and formed the basis of his extensive kennel. He has bred once a white [2-3] dog with dark eyes & black nose, but never had an albino. The other pair of the 1860 batch Guh & Meh were rich chestnut brown with black masks & points. They were kept going by direct descent at Goodwood till the early nineties without record of albinism. Then 1896, Ah Cum & Mimosa were brought from the Imperial Palace at Pekin by Mrs Douglas Murray, and from the mating of Ah Cum with Goodwood Meh – a descendent of the 1860 Meh – or from his supposed sister Mimosa – all the albinos that I have been able to trace descended. The only rule to avoid an albino Pekingese appearing sporadically in your kennel is to avoid the Ah Cum & Meh stock, or imported Pekingese, who are likely to come from their ancestry. I have not been able to convince myself that true albinos have appeared in China. They are cream white, or yellow dogs with black or liver colour noses, but if absolute albinos have appeared, they are probably killed, much as human albinos in China till quite recently appear to have been disposed of or outlawed. One of the Chinese names for albinos is Yang ren – ‘foreign devil’ – a name, I promptly gave to my early & most perfect Dondos.

Now albino has been defined as “an organism in which there is complete absence of pigmentation, other than the blood and bile pigments.”

It is one of the evils of science that definitions are usually made by text-book writing or those who have not very fully examined the material bearing on the subject. Albinism may be defined as a lack of full normal pigmentation, but an absolute lack of melanin pigmentation would exclude something like 95% of albino birds, nearly all human albinos, and a very great number of albino mammals. How many it is impossible to say, because but little adequate microscopic examination has been made. Even today but little is known about the pigmentation of the internal organs of albinos. Our albino dogs are free of all internal melanin pigment, a deaf white cat showed absence of internal pigment granules in all the internal organs where pigment is usually found. On the other hand an albino rabbit and a rat were reported to have internal pigment, while a second albino rat had none. As a result the pure bred Dondo has no pigment granules in the hair of the coat, and this statement is consistent with quite a considerable macroscopic colour towards cream or yellow. Usually the eye is largely devoid of pigment, but there is always some of the epiblastic layers of iris and ciliary body. Further, in the coats of some Dondos as puppies a few pigment granules will be found, which sometimes dis-appear with the first or second shedding of the coat, but in some Dondos there is a permanent slight pigmentation of the hair. Now all the points can be paralleled from human albinism. Of course very few sections of the human albinotic eye have been microscopically examined, but in such that have it is the rarest exception not to find some granular pigment; it occurs almost invariably in the eyes of adult human albinos. One of the only cases, I know, of no granules being discovered, occurred in the case of a very noteworthy albino, but there we could only examine a small portion of the iris removed in an operation for cataract, and it is impossible to argue from an absence here to an absence everywhere. Even in the most complete human albinos we have been sometimes able to extract single hairs from the scalp well pigmented, and one perfect ‘clinical’ albino of our record has a jet black lock of hair at the back of his head. In every feature from approximately complete albinism to very imperfect albinism and even to piebaldism, the parallelism between albinotic man & albinotic dog can be followed up. Perhaps the general “albinotic facies” is the most striking feature of resemblance in man & dog.

I would first familiarise you with the appearance of the Dondo. Here are photographs. You will see a living specimen outside. The first question is, does the Dondo breed true? The real answer to that question involves a treatise. In a certain sense it does breed true. That is to say there is something albinistic – some degree of albinism about the offspring, but there can be very considerable range of variation in the albinism, and this range not only comes from different albinos, but from breeding with the same pair. A recent review in ‘Nature’ of our monograph on albinism was very contemptuous of our work because we had not divided up our albinos into Mendelian classes, and suggested that the chief value of our work would be the provision it made for somebody else to carry out such analysis. I am fully aware that Mendelism having started with the broad categories: albino and not albino, now tells us that thirteen types of albino rats exist, and that with rabbits and mice there must be a still larger number. Perhaps in men and dogs they will assert 20 or 50 types of albinism. I merely outbid them and assert that if they come to the hair, the eyes & the skin in men & in dogs and examine them microscopically they will find an infinity of types, every individual is practically a type, and rigid discussions between grades of pigmentation do not exist. We have bred over 50 pure-bred Dondos. They do breed true to albinism in general, but exceptions arise. To begin with the eyes after death examined microscopically do show considerable range of pigmentation, precisely as occurs in the eyes of the albinos of dark races & probably in a less marked way in the eyes of European albinos – certainly in those of Armenia and Syria. You cannot divide eyes up as some Mendelians have done into true blue lacking in anterior pigment and not true blue eyes possessing anterior pigment. Eyes passed - far more carefully than is obviously done in the published Mendelian researches – as true blue macroscopically, show usually some colour pigment on microscopic examination, while the stroma lying between the anterior and posterior surfaces is dotted in greater or letter extent with pigment granules. There is every grade of pigmentation from a markedly loaded anterior surface to one passed as without anterior pigment in which a few granules will probably be discernable with the microscope. Just as the Mendelian category – absence of pigment – fails with eye, so it fails with coat. Marked aberrations are rare, but albinism does not breed true, if by that is meant its absolute like. Jack & Jill have given us very white coated dogs like Patty, but they have also given us cream coloured albinos, down to brown – look at the coats exhibited – and in one rare instance, they gave us Fe a piebald with imperfectly albinotic eyes.

In the above I am speaking of pure-bred albinos, but with extracted albinos I get wider deviations, and have almost established a chocolate albino. In looking through [8-9] the late Professor Weldon’s mice data, I found a record, without comment, of two extracted albino mice producing offspring which could not be called albinotic. I have not ventured to mention that result till tonight, because we have so frequently been told that albino & albino will only give albino, & in the absence of comment I was not sure how far Weldon had himself realised the gravity of the result. But when I have learnt what can happen with extracted albinos in dogs and seen what happens in man, I have little doubt of the authenticity of Weldon’s record. All albinism as a rule is imperfect, especially in the extracted form, and imperfect albinos can give rise to albinos so imperfect, that you are doubtful whether they are to be called albino or not.

Having proved that these pure-bred Dondos formed a breed which would go on with rare exceptions perpetuating itself, we next looked for a type of dog of somewhat the same size, which was in marked contrast for purposes of hybridisation. We chose the pure bred black Pomeranian. It is fairly high from the ground, has a markedly different [9-10] leg shape, a wholly different muzzle, ear, and bark; its psychical characters are wholly different too. Black Poms with the largest amount of black were selected. Olga’s parents were black, her four grandparents, her eight great grandparents, her 16 great-great grandparents and 28 out of her 32 great-great-great grandparents; [30] of the 32 were known and 2 unknown. I would draw your attention to the difference between the muzzle of Olga & the normal Pekingese. The result of crossing the black Pom & the albino Pek is the second type of dog I mention to you tonight, which we term the Pompek. The Pompek is a black dog generally with a white shirtfront. In a few cases the white shirtfront dwindles to a few white hairs. It is rare that such white hairs are not findable. We have had 25 such Pompeks. The muzzle of the Pompek we at first thought Pekingese, but when we compared it with the Pekingese we thought it Pomeranian. When we actually measured the heads of our dogs we found it a blend. There was no dominance of head form in any of its characters. That [10-11] is a strong argument for measurement, rather than mere impression in classifying into Mendelian categories! – But is there dominance of coat-colour? The Pomeranian has no white shirt front, and at least 19 of our 25 dogs have marked white shirt fronts. There is dominance only in the sense that there is more black than white. But now comes a remarkable fact, two out of the 25 Pompeks are not black at all, but they have a white shirt front, but the coat is uniform chocolate. Further, the skin of the paws is not black but liver colour, the noses and lips are liver colour. The eyes of one examined microscopically show faint brown pigmentation only on the fundus and far less iris pigmentation than is the case of the usual Pompek. The surviving chocolate dog examined with the ophthalmoscope showed a fundus obviously paler than that of the normal Pompek. There was red reflex[? – i.e. reflection?] from the eyes of both these Pompeks. The eye was imperfectly albinotic although unequal to that of the Dondo in extent of albinism. In short these chocolate dogs in coat & skin & eyes show a blend of albino & normal black Pomeranian. Two other dogs in this litter are rather dark red, than black, & only one is a normal black & white Pompek. [11-12] Prince crossed with another albino ‘Spook’ gave two normal black & white Pompeks, one very dark red & two Anna & Douglas very hard to describe as red or black described as black when puppies, but red brown now. There is no universal law of dominance at all and we must either assert blending or segregation to occur in the first generation. Unfortunately so far only one male of this type has survived and we cannot yet say what happens, when the chocolate or red Pompek is crossed with the same class.

We are now in a position to cross the Pompek with the Pompek or with the Dondo. I take the latter first. If albinism were a simple character, we should anticipate nothing but Pompeks & Dondos to result. Pompeks do result, though often of a rather rusty black, Dondos result, but often with very imperfect albinism. Dondo & Dondo pups, at birth are either cream white or café au lait, the distinction is quite marked but it very largely passes away in the first year. But in the case of Pompek crossed with Dondo, this café au lait type, or scraped chocolate type can remain permanently, and give a very remarkable new type with albinotic eyes, pink nose and this coloured coat. I have now bred such [illeg.] dogs. Dams from first generation Pompek & pure Dondo, [12-13] are of a litter of which the others were two pure albinos, and there were no Pompeks; and the other three from crossing a pure Dondo Wang, with a Pompek extracted from Pompek & Dondo. I hope these café au lait albinos may perpetuate themselves, but crosses are not possible as yet, as we have only yearling dogs. In the hope that we may establish a permanent breed of these semi-Dondos, I have given them an independent name to the memory of the first great student of albinism, the Belgian [sic – Eduardo Cornaz appears to have been Swiss] ophthalmologist, and call them Cornaz spaniels.

But the 2nd generation Pompek, the 2nd generation Dondo & Cornaz spaniel are not the only types which appear when Dondo is crossed with Pompek. Brindle red dogs have appeared in this generation. These brindle red dogs when crossed inter-se give almost entirely brindle reds, the exception being about one albino in seven or eight. I have bred about 17 of these red brindles now & hope to get rid of the occasional albinism. They are a most delightful type of dog and I find them in great demand. I have named them the Galton spaniel. Thus the [13-14] Galton spaniel arises either from crossing Pompeck with Dondo, or from crossing Galton spaniels inter se. I have also got it by crossing Galton Spaniel with Dondo in which case it seems to me a more beautiful dog than when obtained in the other two ways, as it tends to be more pure red & less brindle. The Galton spaniel is a most charming and, I think, if it be possible, deserves to be established as a separate breed. At present the head wants steadily[?] selecting as it looks, what it is, a blend. As in the case of Pomeranian crossed by Dondo, there have been exceptions to the rule that Dondo crossed by Pompek, gives Pompek, Dondo, Cornaz spaniel or Galton spaniel. My colleague Mr Usher has obtained one very remarkable litter consisting of two Pompeks, two black & white dogs, genuine piebalds with dark eyes, and a café au lait or lilac skewbald with albinotic eyes. All died as puppies except one Pompek & it has not yet been found possible to repeat the experience. The relation between piebaldism & albinism is far closer than is usually admitted by Mendelians. Our crosses of Pompek with Pompek have so far not been very successful. I have made [14-15] myself four such crosses, two were infertile the other two produced six puppies, which consisted of two Pompeks, two albinos (extracted), and two red dogs or Galton spaniels. Mr Usher has made four such matings leading to two extracted albinos, one fairly complete the other imperfect, to one [illeg.] dog, which we may claim as a Galton spaniel, to six Pompeks, and to one ‘chocolate’ dog with semi-albinotic eyes, which I imagine though I have not yet seen the coat corresponds to a Cornaz spaniel.

At present there has been no crossing of a Pompek with a black Pomeranian. I have crossed albino from Pompek & Dondo with a pure bred Dondo. I obtained five albinos, all with somewhat impure coats streaked with dorsal[?] red. They can be distinguished at once from pure bred Dondos by their ugly heads & very often their clumsy size. I have had recently a litter from two albinos of coloured ancestry. The mother was from a Pompek and Dondo, and the father from a Galton spaniel and a Dondo. The offspring are all albinos but so far as can be judged at present - they are only a few days old – of a very imperfect kind. In fact they are all possibly Cornaz spaniels. It must not for a moment be supposed that the types I have discussed are definitely & rigidly defined classes. They certainly are not. The Dondo gives crossed by itself a considerable variety of albino offspring, the true Dondo, the lilac albino, and the lilac skewbald. The extracted albinos range from Dondos white, through almost all phases of streaky red or lilac up to the ‘scraped’ chocolate of the Cornaz spaniel. The Galton spaniel, ranges from the darkest brindle to almost a golden colour; there are dogs we hardly know whether to class as black, rusty black or darkest red. There is a practical continuity of coat colour with lumps at particular grades, those I have indicated with the names I have introduced to you tonight. What happens in coat-colour, happens in eye pigmentation also. The microscopic examination of sections of the eye shows an enormous range not only of variety but quantity of pigmentation. As for head shape the chief characters blend and neither dominate, nor segregate in our experience. Thus far we have not deduced any black [15-16] dogs or red dogs which exhibit pure dominance, there is always an occasional albino turning up. But the albinism tends to be less & less perfect, and, I believe, it will be possible ultimately to obtain almost any grade of albinism. I have at present a bitch with one normal and one albinotic eye, and a brown skewbald coat, Choo Ko, or ‘Wan eye’. Mated with her own father, however, she has not yet perpetuated her hetero-chromia, but given me three skewbald puppies, one of whom Ming Wang, I show you tonight. He has imperfectly pigmented mucous membrane – the liver colour. Choo Ko is like our Dondos a piebald Pekingese directly descended from Ah Cum & Goodwood Meh on one side.

My firm conviction is that if you can obtain in any species with a normal black or dull colouring, an absolute or imperfect albino, then you can secure every variety of colour by judicious mating. The mating of an albino and a normally pigmented individual leads to a general pigmentation break-up and almost every variety of pigmentation will occur. In almost every case of dark race piebald [16-17] that I have been able fully to investigate, you ultimately reach negro and white, negro, and Indian, Chinese, and Philippine crosses. The piebald appears not in the first cross but in later generations. There is a very close parallelism between men & dogs; in human albino families we find a far larger percentage of red hair than in the general population, often of a very brilliant type; the remarkable golden blonds which occur in the piebald in negro albinotic stocks, - an experience far beyond the range of random distribution of such rare anomalies – all emphasise the relation of albinism in man to albinism in dogs. I am much inclined to think that the white man as well as the copper-coloured races, have been deduced by relation of imperfect varieties of albinism from a primitive dark-skinned race.

It has been said by a distinguished Mendelian that the greyhound is an “incorrigible hybrid”, and cannot be used for demonstrating [17-18] hereditary properties. I have no doubt that I shall be told that our Pekingese & our Pomeranians are also incorrigible hybrids. If so, I think we must also include man as an incorrigible hybrid. If this be so, then I reply that I am personally alone interested in the study of heredity in incorrigible hybrids.

The moral of [the] lecture tonight to[sic] this: we started with two types of dogs which bred relatively true to head-shape and coat-colour. We have reached head shapes of almost every variety, and wide ranges of coat-colour; some of these appear to fall into classes, which again breed, not absolutely, but relatively true. As far as I have experience many of the characters thus reached are not characteristic of either original breed. The general disturbance due to the cross has produced fundamental changes in the germ plasm, which, perhaps, some day the cytologist will explain, as he is starting to do with plant-hybrids. I find nothing to confirm the view that hybridisation is a mere shuffling of definite unit characters. Yet that Mendelian view has been preached by anthropologists, and is being now taught by sociologists wholly regardless of the slender evidence on which it is based. What happens asks Dr Fischer of Freiburg after race crossings?

“Does a new race arise? Or a mixed race with blended or new characters? Does one race more or less dominate the other?”

Dr Fischer asserts that the last question has been answered by Bean, Salaman & Davenport for the dominance in hair, eye & facial characters in man.

“Again,” he writes “the answer to the first question has been given by the thousands of hybridisation experiments of botanists & zoologists – no new race is to be expected. Characters always separate out again according to the Mendelian rules, the unit characters are always found in thousandfold combinations, alongside each other. - [..]. characters are persistent, an immense number of combinations arise, but no new race... Von Luschau was the first to emphasise the process, he pointed out how the old types always reappear, types which existed in a country thousands of years ago. Race mixture [19-20] leads, he said, to ‘sorting out’ – (“Rassenmischung zu einer Entwischung”). Today, when we know Mendelian segregation this is intelligible without any further explanation.”

So far Dr Fischer.

According to this view man for thousands of years has consisted of the same component unit characters, endlessly shuffled kaleidoscope fashion. Every character in man as we know him now either existed in Palaeanthropus [sic], or in one of his contemporaries.

To take this view is to destroy the whole philosophical basis of Darwinism. The gradual evolution of man by the selection of small variations suited to his changing environment. Neither theologian nor metaphysician have shaken the foundations of Darwinism in the past to anything like the same extent, as those who assert the absolute true [sic – i.e. truth] of the doctrine of unit characters. The day is not too far distant when we must reject the doctrine of unchangeable unit characters or give up any consistent form of Darwinian evolution. The Biometric Laboratory does not criticise Mendelism because it is supported by those, who have not realised the nature of Galtonian methods, [and wish] to destroy their application to heredity. Our criticism arises from deeper sources. Where we have been able to investigate ourselves, as I have shown you in the case of dogs tonight, there are no such rigid classes as those demanded by the idea of a unit-character, the ‘true blue eye’, and the albinotic eye have really every grade of pigmentation, the piebald has every variation in extent of piebaldism, and these various grades are hereditary. Dominance is not a universal rule of inheritance, there is segregation in the first generation as in the second. There is nothing to lead us to suppose that all changes are due to a shuffling of persistent ‘unit’ characters, and that if new characters have appeared in the course of evolution they are due to an inexplicable ‘mutation.’ The moral of my lecture tonight is twofold – there is still some hope for a philosophical theory of Darwinian evolution; and I urge that those who are rushing forward and describing epilepsy, [21-22] mental defect, insanity, to say nothing of shyness, and indolence, as ’unit characters,’ are going far beyond what the data permit: and their teaching may involve grave social consequences, when we apply it to legislation and advise on the basis of it marriage or restraint from marriage. Albinism was a ‘unit character’ not many years ago, now we are told there are 15 to 20 types of it & perhaps more. ‘Mental defect’ is a ‘unit character’ just now, there will be 15 to 20 types of it, no doubt, in a few years. I appeal for delay in judgement, and [that] the public should not accept without being cautioned, a theory of heredity, which not only reverses all philosophical Darwinism, but which does not stand the analysis of measuring rod and microscope when they are applied to it.’

Created K. Pearson, Albinism in Dogs & Men [1913] [Lecture on Albinism B]
1913
Description:

‘In a recent German Dictionary of the Natural Sciences there is an article by Dr Eugen Fischer on Race and Race Formation [E. Fischer, ‘Rassen und Rassenbildung, Rassenmorphologie, Rassenpathologie, Rassenphysiologie’, in Gottlob Eduard Link et. al. (eds.) Handwoerterbuch der Naturwissenschaften (Jena: G. Fischer, 1913) https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/012312933]. Dr Fischer is not the hack writer one so often finds as a contributor to encyclopaedias and dictionaries; he is an anthropologist of distinction and the opinion given by him represents fairly the current scientific opinion in Germany, and I fear in England also as far [as] we possess in such matters any independent opinion, - on the origin and decline of races. I venture to translate for you Dr Fischer’s section on Final Result of Race-Crossings: “A specially important question for the understanding and judgement of so many modern anthropological groups is that concerning the final result produced by race crosses. Does a new race arise? A mixed race with blended or new characters? Or, does one race more or less dominate? This last question has – so far as it concerns heredity – been already answered above. (The answer Dr Fischer has previously given is a reference to the papers of Bean, Salaman and Davenport, on dominance in [1-2] hair, eye, & facial characters.) Again the answer to the first question has been made by thousands of hybridisation experiments of the botanists and zoologists – no new race is to be expected. Characters always separate out again according to the Mendelian rules, the unit-characters are always found in thousandfold combinations alongside each other. The total population remains equal to the so-called F2 –generation (the second generation of hybrids) it is even to the percentage frequency of each character identical with the grandchildren of the pure race-ancestors. Of course it is supposed that no selection of special characters takes place and that there is completely random mating. In the case of man we are absolutely certain that it cannot be otherwise... The characters preserve themselves, an immense number of combinations arises, but no new race... Von Luschen was the first to emphasise this process, he emphasised how the old types always reappear, types which existed in a country thousands of years ago; Race mixture leads he said to a ‘sorting out’ (Rassenmischung zu einer ”Entwischung”). To-day when we know Mendelian segregation this is intelligible without any further explanation.[“]

So far Dr Fischer. According to this view man for thousands of years has consisted of the same component unit characters, and all that has taken place is endless shuffling of the same series of unit characters kaleidoscope fashion. The individuals who carry any given type of character may be more numerous now than in the past, but that type existed from all time, or if it has appeared at any stage in history, it has appeared as a sudden sport or mutation, which seems to be little more than a new name for the old ‘special creation’ of each type. Either man as we know him existed longside [sic] Palaeanthropus [sic], or he is compounded of unit characters which were all contained in [illeg.] Neanderthal man, and have been merely reshuffled, or he is the product of a “mutating fit” which has occurred since. Whichever view you take the whole conception of Darwinism the gradual evolution of man by the selection of small variations suitable to his environment is swept away. Neither theologians nor metaphysicians have been such opponents of Darwin as the Mendelians, and this [3-4] because the latter have largely started from the Darwinian camp & professed to be of its kind. The day is not far distant when the alternatives before us will be clearly recognised, we have to reject Mendelism or give up any consistent form of Darwinism, and that opposition between Mendelism & Darwinism is well known to the leading Mendelians even if they refrain from avowing it. The time, they probably consider, is not even yet ripe for such an avowal. Meanwhile memoir after memoir is published professing to demonstrate that all sorts of characters from plants to the lower animals and from these to man “Mendelise.” These memoirs are very largely of the type criticised by Dr Heron in his recent lecture on mental defectiveness – plastic material is made to fit an elastic theory in the manner of Dr Davenport. When it is convenient, a whole group of individual characters – each unmeasured - is treated as a whole, thus we have Salaman’s conception of the whole face treated as Jewish or Gentile, and we are told that Jewishness is recessive to Gentilism. When a character on the other hand does not Mendelise, we are told that [4-5] it is because we are dealing with a whole group of Mendelian units & that until they are separated out, it is not possible to determine whether Medelism applies or not. Not so many years ago we were informed that albinism in man was a Mendelian character. Dr Davenport even maintains it at the present day. Professor Bateson discretely [sic] remarked in the discussion on Heredity at the Royal Society of Medicine in 1908, that he had shewn pedigrees of albinism as an example of a character which did not follow Mendelian rules, but that those [note: ‘Proc. R. Soc. of Medicine Vol. II, 1909, p. 58.’] rules did apply to albinism in many animals. Personally I have shewn you in my second lecture when dealing with material at least twenty times as large as Dr Davenport’s, I can find no confirmation of Mendelism in human albinism. Another authority ships out all difficulty in the following manner:

Among albino rats, for instance the author of this article has reasons to believe, upon theoretical grounds resting on an experimental basis, that probably no less than thirteen types exist. With rabbits and mice there must be a still larger number. [note: ‘Encyclopaedia Britannica Art. Albinism p. 510, Vol. I, 11th Edn.’]

Perhaps in dogs accordingly there may be 50 or 100 a type, for every possible case of offspring that a posteriori are found to occur! If that is a philosophical account of albinism, I personally should prefer the facts and an absence of all theory whatsoever! But the [5-6] matter is much more serious than may appear on the surface. The grave fact that man can mould the future of his own race by marriage selection and rejection is becoming more & more recognised, and the patriot and the status-man of the future will turn to science in order to ascertain, where offspring are desirable and where not. Are we, or are we not, to pledge ourselves to the fashionable view propounded by Dr Fischer that race mixture leads to nothing but reshuffling of characters, which has existed in any country for thousands & thousands of years, and that any novelty, if indeed there be such, is due to a sport? Well, I think, before we accept that view, we should not only criticise the sort of manner in which writers like Davenport reach Mendelian results and apply them to the most important social problems, but we should try and find out for ourselves by examining new data whether Mendelian rules do apply to the lower animals and can then be transferred to human beings. The topic of my lecture tonight is going to be hybridisation in dogs. It is not my purpose to show you pretty animals & ask you to admire them. I want you to [6-7] ask yourselves are these data consistent with Mendelism, and if not, what safety is there in applying Mendelian rules to human beings, and telling the sane offspring of the insane to marry into normal stocks?

In my second lecture I remarked to you that in association with my two colleagues Mr E. Nettleship and Mr C.H. Usher, both well known ophthalmological surgeons, I started an inquiry into human albinism. That inquiry developed almost beyond our powers of coping with it, and one of the most important sides of it was the comparison of albinism in animals with albinism in man. Owing to a lucky chance Mr Nettleship was able to purchase the albino bitch Tong I, who eventually passed to me; she was followed by his purchase of two albino puppies Jack & Jill. Later Spook was obtained who passed to Mr Usher, and he in turn purchased the albino bitch Beenie. These dogs are all pure bred Pekingese of the best strains sired by prize dogs & Tong I, Jack & Jill obtained prizes themselves. From these fine dogs, our foundation stock, we have in [7-8] the course of 4 or 5 years had 56 albino dogs besides crosses with normal dogs leading to upwards of 50 non-albino dogs. Photographs of these dogs have been taken; on death their skins have been preserved, and all the chief internal organs for typical cases examined; the eyes have been carefully sectioned and the hairs microscopically examined. For the facts and material I show you tonight I have largely to thank my colleagues. You may take it that they are quite unbiased; indeed Mr Nettleship is, I take it, a Mendelian, and I do not know whether Mr Usher is or is not another. I, a non-Mendelian do not distrust any of the facts upon that account & I think you can trust them also. But I release my colleagues wholly for [sic] any responsibility for my conclusions. It is possible that they would not accept them or would differently interpret them. For myself, I feel convinced that these facts will not bear a Mendelian interpretation and I shall ask you to examine them from that standpoint.

In the first place, as far as Mr Nettleship has been able to ascertain, albinism first appeared in Pekingese in the offspring of [8-9] champion Goodwood Lo, a red dog with black mask, from Ah-lu-ta, a Golden sable. Goodwood Lo himself is descended from Goodwood Meh and Ah Cum, the former was mahogany red and the latter has been described as “bright sable red”. He was imported directly from the Palace at Pekin in 1896 by Mr & Mrs Douglas Murray and his skin is set up in South Kensington museum as that of a typical representative of the Pekinese [sic] breed. Our dog Tong I was a granddaughter of Goodwood Lo & Spook the whitest of all our albinos was Tong’s granddaughter. The second pair of our foundation stock, Mr Nettleship’s Jack & Jill were descended from Goodwood Lo & from Ah Cum & Meh. Beenie the last acquisition of Mr Usher was a granddaughter of a normal brother of Jack’s. The actual coat colour of these dogs varies from a light yellowish cream to pure white, much whiter in the Tong group than in the Jack & Jill group. This yellow tinge is very common with human albinos; it does not arise from pigment granules in the hair, but from a diffuse, probably lipochrome colouring substance. In the bulk of these dogs there is no melanin pigment in the coat at all; [9-10] in others, but only so far in the Jack & Jill group there are “foreign bodies” here & there, and it is a disputable point whether they are accompanied by granular pigment or not; in still others an occasional granule can be found; but there is nothing beyond what can be found in the hair of albinos of various native human races. In the internal organs, including the heart, lungs, hair, spleen, brain, internal ear, etc where pigment is found in the normal dog no pigment was found in the mesoblastic tissues of iris, ciliary body and choroid; the retinal epiblastic of iris was lightly pigmented, there was also pigment in certain other parts of the eye. The eye contains about the same amount of pigment as we have found in the eye of an albino negro, and it is apparently the only pigmented part of the animal. But one point is quite clear, i.e. that as in the case of man, albinism is not a unit character, but actually its amount differs from dog to dog & various grades of albinism exist. Even the coats [10-11] of some faun & red Pekinese with dark eyes which pass for normal dogs have no pigment granules ion their hairs, while Mr George Brown’s cream dogs with black muzzle & dark eyes – Huang-tu & Pailu are perfect albinos of the coat.

The causes which have produced albinos in the Pekinese & different grades of albinism are unknown to us, but it is easy to find such cases arising in the wild dog, the Dingo of Australia. I owe one such dog to Mr Tyrwhitt[-]Drake, whose pack of Dingos has shown recently incomplete albinism, a second case was sent to me direct from Australia with a normal skin & the eyes of the albinistic & normal dogs. If we place the skins in order of presence of red pigment, we find that this is the order of the amount of pigment found by Mr Coates in the eyes, the albinism of the eyes increases with the albinism of the skin. We have albinism spontaneously appearing in the wild dog & the colour of the coats approaching nearly to the cream of some of our albino Pekinese. The important point here is to mention that there is no rigid line between albino & normal, it is a quantitative step. [11-12] That is precisely what I have found in the case of man.

Now the dog has many characters which we can study from the standpoint of heredity. We can in this case take the degree of albinism of the eyes, the colour of the coat, the length of the hair, the nature of the muzzle, or the shape of the head, besides a variety of psychological characters, which everybody who studies dogs will at once recognise. In our work with dogs we have crossed the white coated albino Pekingese with the black coated Pomeranian. No greater contrast within the limits of easy matings could be imagined. The Pekinese is a royal dog with lordly habits; he is fearless, self-willed, keen on scent, and may even be hunted in a pack, he is intelligent & of cleanly habits. Compared with him the Pomeranian is a cockney upstart; he snarls rather than barks and is almost invariably a coward, of doubtful habits. He will admit defeat at the claws of a cat or consent to share a hearthrug with her, which none of my Pekinese would ever submit to, indeed I have seen them roll over and put to flight a collie dog who had behaved disrespectfully, although they will not seek a fight. [12-13] If you tread on the tail of Ling the dog in the cage there, he will not howl, but growl & retaliate if he can by taking a piece of your toe, even if you are his master. Later he will apologise handsomely. A Pomeranian would have howled & then fawned upon you for comfort. It is singular to see in the hybrids some of the psychical characters of the Pomeranian appearing under a physically Pekinese exterior.

I propose to consider the several hereditary characters of these dogs.

First as to the albinism. Does it obey the laws of Mendel? In the first place we must consider, whether an albino mated with a coloured Pekinese gives all albino. Here is such a mating, VI.24 x VI.46, all the offspring are coloured dogs. But all the offspring were coloured dogs. But all the offspring need not be coloured; here is such a mating VI.31 x VI.38, the offspring were these albinos and two coloured dogs. The first result tells us that albinism in Mendelian language must be a recessive character, the second result the Mendelian explains by asserting that VI.38 carried latent albinism, while he would suppose VI.46 did not. He cannot contradict this, because V.38 was a red dog called Ping Pong and we know nothing of its ancestry. VI.46 was a black dog imported from China in 1907, and the history of neither can be followed. Here arises our first difficulty. In a stock like this all going back to the Palace in Pekin it is impossible to assert that a dog has or has not albinism latent, i.e. it is a (DR), we simply call him a hybrid as far as albinism is concerned, when he has any albino offspring and when he doesn’t have any we at once call him a dominant normal a (DD), but change him to a (DR), if an albino turns up later. In order to surmount this difficulty we have introduced the pure black Pomeranian. I never heard of an albino Pom, and we may be certain that our Pomeranian dogs are (DD)s or when crossed with the albino have all their offspring (DR)s. We have therefore to consider the possible matings of (DD), (DR) & (RR), namely:

(i) (DD) x (DD) = 4(DD) – i.e. all normals

(ii) (DD) x (DR) = 2(DD) + 2(DR) = 50% normals + 50% latents

(iii) (RR) x (RR) = 4(RR) i.e. all albinos

(iv) (DR) x (DR) = (DD) + 2(DR) + (RR) = 25% albinos

(v) (DD) x (RR) = 4(DR) = all apparent normals

(vi) (DR) x (RR) = 2(DR) + 2(RR) = 50% albinos.

[14-15] It is impossible to test (i), because whenever a normal dog mated with a normal dog gives an albino we say both parents were (DR) or carried latent albinism.

It is generally impossible to test (ii) because if an albino did appear we should say that the (DD) was really a (DR) & transfer to (iv). It is the like with the (v) type of mating for if an albino did appear it would in its turn be transferred to (vi). Thus (i), (ii) and (iv), when we are not certain of our (DD) will tell us nothing for or against Mendelism.

Now let us look at the remaining three cases, where we actually are certain of our characters. First albino & albino. We have 16 litters of this type and around 66 puppies have been born. The anomalies that occur have really concern[ed] the extent of the albinism, and they occur in particular in the Jack & Jill offspring. Now you have seen what Jack & Jill are like. Here is the coat of a normal albino, practically an adult dog. Here again the coat of an albino puppy. Now what do you call this coat? It is very hard to assert that it is that of an albino dog, when its own sister at [15-16] the same age has a coat of this kind. Again here is another son Fo of Jack & Jill – he is practically a piebald, white & faun. Still more is this the case with Fi as you may judge from her photographs. Yet in order to establish Mendelism you must assert all these dogs to be albinos. If you judge by the eye, and not by the coat none of these dogs are complete albinos, just as very probably few human beings are complete albinos. Thus your dogs are producing various grades of albinism – less intense than their own, just as the normal dingo in its turn produces variations tending to incomplete albinism, from which in all probability more marked grades of albinism could be reproduced. Those who to fit a theory in their obsession cram all these dogs into one category & speak of albinism as a unit character, are doing as much harm to the real study of heredity, than those who speak of mental defect as a Mendelian unit character, while the[y] screen[?] under it epilepsy, neuralgia & god knows what not.

I now turn to the mating of (DD) with (RR) of normal dog with albino dog. As I have said this mating must give no albino, because when it does the normal is at once stated to be a “latent albino.” The only case where we can be sure of our clarification is when we mate the albino Pekingese with a black Pomeranian. Three such Pomeranians have been used Olga, Dido & Prince. Mr Usher chose these dogs because they have as black an ancestry as it is possible to get in the case of the Pomeranian. Olga has both parents black, all four grandparents, all eight great grandparents, all 16 great, great grandparents, and of its 32 great great great grandparents, 28 were black, 2 were brown and the colour of 2 unknown. Prince is the son of Olga & a black dog Janos[?] and all his ascendants up & including his 32 great great great grandparents are all black & it is not till we get to the sixth ancestor in ascent that we touch a brown dog. Dido is a less pure bred black. She has one brown grandsire and one brown great great granddam. From Dido & Olga Mr Usher has had 2 and 4 litters respectively including twelve puppies from albino male Pekinese. From the albino bitch Beenie and Prince there has so far been one litter with four puppies. Now what [17-18] might we expect? Albinism is recessive, therefore we should expect to get black dogs with dark eyes. The hybrid we call the Pompek. It is a black dog with dark eyes, but in almost every case there is a white shirt front. Where does that shirt front come from? It is hardly deduced from the Pom ancestry, which has had whole colour dogs. There is in my mind little doubt that the alternative ancestry constitutes the white shirt front to the Pompek. Donald dhu the Pompek I have here tonight is nearly a whole black dog, but my photographs will show this white shirt front. Are you going to pass that shirt front wholly by and talk about dominance of the black? But this is not the end of the matter - besides these black & white Pompeks there have appeared in the litter by Prince from Beenie not brown dogs, but two chocolate dogs, & yet Prince has not even a brown dog in his ancestry until you get to the 6th ancestral generation. We are informed that pure bred black Poms crossed with pure bred white Poms will give chocolate dogs. In other words, even if we pass over our white shirt fronts, we find the possibility of a blend in the chocolate Pompek. It is [18-19] difficult to understand what is meant by the statement that albinism is recessive in such cases. It is true that no perfect albino has arisen in the first generation, but it is equally true that no perfectly black dog has arisen, for even in Donald dhu it is possible to find some white hairs, and he is exceptionally black. I have no doubt ardent Mendelians would tell you that this is a case of imperfect dominance. But what is the good of a rule of dominance at all, if a careful inspection of your hybrids leaves you in doubt as to how to classify them? If the offspring of a sane individual and a mentally defective woman is markedly neurotic or hysteric, what purpose is gained by talking of mental defect as a recessive character?

Next let us turn to the mating of latent albino with latent albino, i.e. of (DR) with (DR). These matings should give one quarter albinos. I have already pointed out the difficulty of settling among these Pekinese what is an individual with latent albinism. If we take only the test that two dogs shall have produced one albino we are excluding those cases in which two (DR)s produce no albinos. In particular [19-20] our pedigree as a rule only contains only those litters of two given dogs that do contain albinos. Of course the Pompeks are all certain (DR)’s. Putting all the available evidence for Pekinese together we have 11[19?] litters producing 46 puppies of which 14 were albinos – not a very good Mendelian quarter but not so bad that any argument against Mendelism could be based on it. At present we have only succeeded in getting two Pompek & Pompek crosses, leading to 8 dogs. Of these eight dogs six are black with white shirt fronts, thus resembling with perhaps a little more white the first cross, one is a dog, Sheila, with normal eyes, but a sable coat; in coat she resembles not the albino, but the normal Pekinese and it is quite impossible to say why she should come in at all on the Mendelian system; and the eighth dog had albinotic eyes, but a cream coloured coat with a white shirt front. If the appearance of a dog with black muzzle sable coat & normal eyes together with an incomplete albino be evidence of an albinotic character, then the experiment provides the required Mendelian result, but personally I wholly fail to grasp in what Mendelian category Sheila is to be placed. She is not an albino or [20-21] recessive; she is not a dominant for that is a whole black coated Pom, and she is not a hybrid or (DR) for that is a black dog with a white shirt front. She is a reversion to a fairly familiar type of Pekinese, who has no business in this Mendelian scheme at all.

Lastly let us consider the mating of albino (RR) with latent albino (DR). We have at present only 5 such matings giving 7 albinos and 17 normal dogs – a very poor ratio of equality. But the matter is much worse if we confine our attention to the cases of certain (DR) namely the Pompek with Pekinese albinos, we have bred at present 15 such dogs. Only 3 are albinos of a kind, and 12 are non-albinos – a remarkably poor half! Of these fifteen dogs six are of the (DR) type i.e. a black dog with a white shirt front; a seventh possesses not only a white shirt front but one white paw, two only are complete albinos; two are red dogs reverting to the normal Pekinese; two are perfect piebalds, i.e. black & white in patches as you will see by the skins, and one is a lilac skewbald with red eyes. The appearance of the piebalds when the [21-22] hybrid is mated back with one of the original stocks we have already referred to in the case of man. There are no piebalds, as far as we are aware in Pomeranians, they exist but are rare in the case of Pekinese & although the tendency to piebaldism appeared in the offspring of the albinos Jack & Jill, we have no record of it in our Pekinese normal ancestry. The results with their reversions to distant ancestry seem far too complex for any Mendelian simple formula of dominant & recessive characters to cover them. They correspond exactly to the wonderful breaking down of pigmentation which occurs in the case of man, when a dark race is crossed with an albino and the offspring again mated with one of the parent races; not only albinos & blacks may appear but piebald negros, & xanthous negros with yellow or red hair. Albinism is not a simple Mendelian unit character it is a quantitatively graded character, & from albino & melanotic individuals in a race almost every single shade of colour & every variety of piebaldism can be produced by judicious crossing.

So much for the colour results of these [22-23] dog breeding experiments, which of course are still far from complete.

I now turn to the shape of the head and the muzzle. There can hardly be a greater contrast than [the] broad head of the Pekinese with its short muzzle and the narrow head & long muzzle of the Pom. One felt at once here was a very marked character which in its different forms was hereditary in the two species, and which ought to be a very good feature to test Mendelism from. The first cross between Pomeranian & Pekinese were all described by us as “short muzzled dogs”, and I must confess that I spoke very glibly myself of the “dominance” of the short muzzle. The long fine muzzle of the Pom was clearly recessive, and it ought to come out again when the Pompek was crossed with Pompek. It cannot be said to have done so; what we have got are rather mongrel looking heads which are neither Pom not Pekinese. It then dawn[ed] on me that these things are not to be described by such vague Mendelian categories as short & long muzzle & that it was absolutely needful to measure all the dogs’ heads before one could be certain [23-24] what was taking place. Accordingly I arranged a rough scheme of measurement for the dogs heads. It must be rough, for we take it on the living dog, and it is often not an easy task to apply the callipers to the head of an active & self-willed young dog. Still I am quite sure these measurements are far more valid than any mere appreciation of long or short muzzles. I call for our present purposes the total length of the head the distance from occipital ridge to the point in the sagital plane of the middle line of the nostril, from the lather[?] point to the bridge of the nose, as near the [N]asion as I can get on the living dog, I call the nasal length. The maximum breadth of the head is found on the zygomatic arches; and lastly the breadth of the jaw is taken just under the eyes on the upper jaw. I then make these indices;

The head index = maximum breadth/maximum length

The muzzle index = length of nose/breadth of jaw

The nose index = length of nose/maximum length of head

It is the heredity of these three Indices that I have investigated & we inquire whether they “Mendelise”. If I am told that they are very [24-25] complex characters I reply that they are simplicity itself compared to such a vague entity as the “Jewish race,” or indeed to a more general application of Pekinese or Pomeranian muzzle – or again to piebald or non-piebald

We have the following mean results:

Head index Muzzle index Nose index

Pekinese 81 48 27

Pomeranian 68 102 42

Thus not only are the means widely different but the ranges in the dogs of both races we have measured in no case overlap. Now what happens when we cross two Mendelian characters? According to Mendel one will dominate.

Now here are the head indices of 9 Pompeks. I should be glad to know whether the long or short head has here “dominated”? The highest head index in a Pompek is the lowest we have observed in a Pekinese & the lowest head index in a Pompek is the lowest we have yet observed in a Pom. In other words, if segregation means the occurrence of characters in the original stocks, it occurs already in the first generation of hybrids. There is no possibility of speaking of dominance.

When the Pompek is crossed with Pompek we find the range of variation still further extended, it goes from 58 to 83, instead of from 65 to 79. But if we cut off the Mendelian quarters at either end and say there are Poms & there are Pekinese, we should be equally justified in asserting that the quarters in the first hybrid generation are Poms & Pekinese, for they fall practically outside the same divisions. The whole process would be simply arbitrary & made in order to reach Mendelian quarters & a great deal of the present Mendelian dichotomies are precisely of this character.

Now take the muzzle index. Here we have in the first generation of hybrids one muzzle index which stands right below the Pekinese and a range from 41 to 77. Are we to call this “dominance” of the Pekinese muzzle? Why 8 out of the 9 Pompek indices are in excess of anything we have found for Pekinese, which range any [sic] from 45 to 50! We might just as well fix 50 as our limit & term it “dominance” of the long muzzle! Now we come to the result of mating Pompek with Pompek, 7 of our second generation of hybrids now lie gain within the Pompek range & one is pulled up without quite [26-27] reaching the pure form range – this is Sheila. We are not justified in asserting that the first two are Pekinese & the last a Pom: for on the same evidence the dog with a muzzle index of 41 in the first generation must be a Pekinese & segregation have taken place in the first generation of hybrids.

Precisely the same result flows from our returns from Nose Index. The three largest Pompeks are already Pekinese, and the highest Pompek a Pom. In the second generation of hybrids, two dogs instead of three fall into the Pekinese range, but two dogs instead of one fall into the Pom range. There is thus little more segregation in the second generation than in the first. Only further experiments will show how far any of these extremes will breed true & there are not at present enough extremes alive to test this point.

In the next series of crosses we have made that of albino Pekinese with Pompek, the same difficulty of interpretation arises. If the Pekinese character were dominant, all the offspring should be like the Pekinese; 50% will breed true, 50% will not. If the Pekinese character be recessive then 50% should be like the Pekinese [27-28] 50% like the Pom. This is true of any single one of the characters.

If we take the muzzle index – none are like the Pom, therefore the Pekinese muzzle must be “dominant.” But only two fall below & are just above the Pekinese range. 30% at most is a poor 50%.

In the case of the head index, two dogs exceed the Pekinese range, but the crosses cover the entire range of Pekinese, Poms & Pompeks. It is impossible to say that 50% are Pekinese & 50% Pompeks, nor can we assert dominance of either Pekinese or Pom character.

Absolutely the same applies to the nose-index the results obtained cover the whole range of Pekinese, Poms & Pompeks. We can assert no dominance and no 50% of either Pekinese or Pomeranian element.

In fact the moment we begin to measure characters in the dogs and not to take vague appreciation of Pekinese or Pomeranian characters we fail to find any approach to Mendelian rules.

What rules do then approximately hold for these measurable characters? Why they simply seem to blend in the manner that Sir Francis [28-29] Galton showed us years ago holds in the case of measurable characters in man. The accompanying slide brings this out markedly. The one anomalous results is in the muzzle index of the actual Pompek. This is intermediate between the muzzle indices of Pekinese & Pomeranian, but is not half-way between,- 61 instead of 75. It is conceivable that a larger number of Pomeranians measured will show that 102 as the mean muzzle index of Pomeranians is too high.

Mendelism has become the mode – no other conception of heredity can today obtain a hearing. Yet, I believe, the time will shortly come when a reaction will set in, and the views of Galton will again come by their own. At any rate the present experiments on dogs seem to me to indicate that there is still a chance for philosophic Darwinism. Even by hybridization, a new race can be created which is not a mere shuffle of old unit characters, but is a true intermediate. It remains to be seen whether new forms lying outside the original Pekinese & Pomeranian ranges cannot be perpetuated – say a black dog with a white shirt front a head of over 72, a muzzle index [29-30] of 60 and nose index of 32. Such a dog possesses characters which do not appear in the parent breeds. It is far too early yet to assume with Dr Fischer, that nothing new can come into the world of mankind, because botanists and zoologists have answered by “thousands of hybridization experiments that no new race is to be expected, but only a shuffling of old unit characters. “ Thus far these hybridization experiments have not been conducted solely with a view to finding out the facts, they have been dominated by a theory, to which everything else is recessive. I believe when the callipers receive general application, and the record of facts is undertaken by those without theory then there will be some possibility of testing whether the Darwinian philosophy is to dis-appear before a theory which provides nothing but a shuffling of old unit characters varied by the rare appearance of an unexplained “fit of mutation.”

Meanwhile I venture to assert that at least dogs can demonstrate for us that the application of Mendelism to anthropology and to social problems is wholly premature and [30-31] that rules as to disease and pathological states, which have grave social bearing as for example that mental defect is a Mendelian recessive, or that normal numbers of insane stocks may safely marry into healthy stocks – ought not to be propounded as guides to human conduct. If there is to be a real science of Eugenics then we must at least avoid spanning the crevasses in our knowledge by a snow bridge of theory. A record of facts lasts for all time, but theory is ever in the making or unmaking, - a mere fashion which describes more or less effectually our experience – to extrapolate it beyond that experience in nine cases out of ten leads to failure – to disaster when it touches social problems. In all that relates to the evolution of man & to the eugenic problems of race betterment, it is wiser to admit our present limitations than propound like Drs Fischer & Davenport sweeping Mendelian racial theories. Let us as Eugenicists adopt the tone of the soothsayer in Anthony & Cleopatra, and when we are asked “Isn’t you, sir, that know things?” reply: “In Nature’s infinite book of secrecy, a little can be read.”’

Created K. Pearson, Appeal for Funds to maintain and extend The Institute of Applied Statistics, including the Biometric Laboratory and the Galton Laboratory for Eugenics, University of London (1924).
1924

Created K. Pearson, Lecture on Albinism (at the Royal Institution) (c.1909).
1909
Description:

Lecture on Albinism in Man I (c.1909).

‘The supplies to the joint circular of Mr Nettleship & myself were fairly copious and in conjunction with the literature we have been able to engrave nearly 600 pedigrees of albinotic human stocks covering upwards of 1500 cases of albinism in every variety of race and almost every land.’ (f.2)

In highlighting the most prominent contributors to the study: ‘I would refer [especially] to the excellent photographic work of Dr. G.A. Turner of Johannesburg among the Mytopi[?] and Kaffir boys. This is of peculiar interest as showing the transition of the negro to blondism [sic], to partal and ultimately to complete albinism. There have been many others to whom we owe much aid...’ (f.3)

‘In India the albino may have been an outcaste, refused the customary rites on death; in South Africa, he may be treated as unlucky & other “boys” refuse to work with him; but in Loango & parts of Western Africa, we find him the chosen confident [sic] of kings, the purist, the man who may take from any one what he needs or pleases without fear of opposition for as the negroes say “God has created the albino but like the white not like the black in order that he may live without work.”’ (f.3)

‘I think there is some evidence to prove that albinism is more frequent now-a-days than it could have been in the 18^th century. Pilgrimages to see individual albinos, learned monographs before scientific societies and papers in the medical journals reporting the discovery of new cases are hardly possible in the 20^th century, and I am inclined to think that the relative frequency of albinism in Europe now is greater than it was a few centuries ago. There is, I believe, a considerable correlation between at least one group of albinos and marked physical delicacy, and in this case the lessening of the intensity of the struggle for existence has notably increased the frequency of other less robust types of man. White animals, Lord Bacon has told us, were in his day dis-allowed by the agriculturist and the breeder on account of their delicacy and at present the white shorthorn cattle finds its way first into the meat market.’ (f.5)

Albinism not noticed until the slave trade: ‘Europe got excited about albinism owing to the discovery of white and piebald negroes. The capture of negroes for slaves in Africa and the breeding of slaves in America led to the discovery that the Ethiopian can change his skin. Slave owners were startled by some of their negroes going white in patches which spread until the whole body, hair and skin became as white as in the case of a European. This change in the bulk of cases is accompanied by no pain, and is not confined to the negro; we find it in the European, the Asiatic and the Arab as well. It is termed by the medical profession leucoderma, and has been supposed to be a pathological condition or disease acquired during life. The existence of piebald negroes and whites has been attributed by some to leucoderma. The inheritance, however, of the piebald condition, and the birth of persons with congenital white patches is much against this hypothesis.’ (f.6)

‘The transition from ‘complete’ albinism to partial albinism is so gradual that there is the utmost difficulty in stating where the line is to be drawn. There is no definite test which has yet been applied to determine whether the skin is or is not definitely free of pigment. The hair of nearly all human albinos shows diffused pigment. A sweeping statement that [13-14] the hair of albinos is ‘white’ is simply misleading.’ (ff.13-14)

‘I want to emphasis the fact that there is almost every grade of albinism, and this not only in intensity, but in the extent to which it affects the whole of the skin, the hair or the eyes.’ (f.15)

‘It is not certain... at present, to what extent these [aforementioned] native albinos with black pupils & blue or gray eyes, are albinotic so far as the pigmentation of the various parts of the eye is concerned. What is certain is that they form a remarkable contrast to their racial fellows; they very often exhibit little or no photophobia or nystagmus, and the skin is as white and as little unpleasant as that of a European child. The bearing of this class of albinos on certain race problems seems to me to have been too much disregarded. It wanted, I believe, a large collection of photographs, such as we have now brought together to get some real insight into the problem.

Let me put it to you from the historical standpoint. The white man distinguishes himself fundamentally by colour from the black man. The black man was a being of a different order who might be treated as chattel. The fundamental distinction was not – as it might have been [-] of intelligence – but one of skin. A black slave was possible, but not a white. The appearance of white offspring to black parents was a phenomenon which created very great excitement [18-19] and curiosity throughout Europe. Not a little of this took in pre-Darwinian days a strange theological form. There were grave discussions as to whether Adam was black or white, just as there were such discussions as to whether Hebrew was his tongue. There was no second Tower of Babel to account for difference of colour. How did a portion of the progeny of Adam become copper-coloured and black? The discovery of the negro-albino came as a revelation. The birth of a white child to negro parents was a demonstration that the original Adam was white, such cases were to be put down as a statistic; as reversions on the part of the negro to his original type. The philosopher Maupertius discusses this problem at some length, and settles in favour of white Adam, laying stress on the white reversions in the negro race. The Abbé Demanet[?] wrote a long dissertation in 1767 to prove that Adam & Eve were white & that there were no black or red men before the deluge, because no one had wandered into torrid zones. After the Tower of Babel man scattered & moved into hot climates, which altered the skin colour, and the mothers by flattening their children’s noses & so forth gave them the acquired [19-20] peculiarities which we see in the dark races as inherited characters. The appearance of the white negro is a sufficient proof that black is only a hereditary variety of white. The whole discussion is sufficiently amusing, but there is in all seriousness a real problem behind it all, summed up in the human desire for unity & simplicity of origin. In post-Darwinian times are we to look upon the three fundamental types of man as evolved at three different times or centres, and if so form a common proto-type or not? Was the man-like ancestor in skin colour nearer to the white, the copper, or the black races? How if that ancestor had originally something approaching a white or a copper skin might we not anticipate that white & other races would occasionally “mutate” in the black direction? We know that partial albinism in the black & copper races presents us over and over again with skins which alone could hardly be differentiated from the European.’ (18-20)

‘I think we may safely say that no evidence will be easily found free of suspicion which shows the birth of black offspring to white parents. To my mind this does not indicate that white is the original skin colour of a manlike ancestor, it seems to me to point to loss of colour as a possible mutation in a coloured race, and that if we have to look for a single origin of the human race, the manlike ancestor must have had a dark skin, one far more like the negro than the European white. This seems [22-23] consonant also with what we know of white animals which are scarcely the primary types of the races in which they appear.

Poesche[?] emphasising the Baconian view of the delicacy of white animals has also deduced the white man from the dark. He looks upon blondism as a disease acquired by the present European races in coming westward from Asia in the swamps of Russia – presumably the inheritance of an acquired character. I do not see that we gain anything by terming any form of albinism pathological, unless we mean to assert that complete albinism is a great hindrance to healthy enjoyment of life under our existing environment. But the possibility of a wide range of pigment variation occurring in the black races from the dead white of the albino, to the rosy white of the European, to the copper of the oriental and to the red of the Indian appears indisputable; and this range of variants does not occur in the white or copper races of man. It seems a reasonable hypothesis therefore that the manlike ancestors of man were closer to the negro in colour than to the dark races. “Can the [23-24] Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots?” Surely the answer must be yes, if we start from the knowledge of the white negro, and bear in mind the evolution from earlier types. The xanthous negress, the partial albinos of the dark races are after all, perhaps, of more importance than the white hedgehog or albino weasel of the museums; they may not be merely passing sports, the playthings of the monograph writers and the stock in trade of the showman. They may possibly indicate the line of descent, which our own ancestry has followed. Darwin believed that the skin colour of the races of mankind has arisen by sexual selection. He speaks of the jet-blackness of the negro being gained by sexual selection (Descent of Man, p. 604). He is not very definite on the point as to what measure of lightness the manlike being had from which the races of man were differentiated by sexual selection. I throw out the suggestion that the “subhuman” had a dark skin, whose variants towards albinism have given us the copper and European races. The white man may be an offshoot of a negroid ‘subhuman’, but the negro as obtained [24-25] by sexual selection [24-25] from a white ancestry seems to me wholly improbable. Those intermediate links between dark skinned races and their complete albinos, those stages which I have endeavoured to show you are congenital & inherited, those cases of partial albinism, which the superficial student of living forms may pass by as merely pathological and of no moment, may, I suggest, be the key which unlocks one puzzle, as to the possibly unique origin of the races of man.’

 

Lecture on Albinism in Man II:

‘Whether the offspring of two human albinos would always be an albino we do not know. It might mean that some generations of selection were needful to establish a race of albino men. With two albinos each born of non-albinotic parents give albinotic offspring, Mr. Nettleship has the extreme good fortune, and, if I may say so, the anxious responsibility of being the owner of three albino dogs. If he can create a race of albino dogs he will have added much to our knowledge. Still greater bearing on the case of man might be deduced from the story of the albino monkeys, complete typical albinos, which used to be preserved in the stalls of the less complete albino elephants of Siam. Wide is the range of occurrence in mammals and birds... [3-4]... but... it is but rarely that an albino breed has been established.... The white mouse & the white rat have survived as domesticated races, but would they have done so in wild life?’ (ff.3-4)

Re: difficulty of differentiating races on basis of their colour/hair/skeletal characteristics: ‘Cranial characters are again very difficult. A series of negro skulls can be distinguished at once from a series of European skulls, but there are no definite craniometric tests by which the negro skull can be at once separated from a mixture. Quite recently a distinguished anatomist gave such tests, but applying them to a large collection of English skulls almost 20 p.c. of the English were demonstrated by this test to be negroes! You cannot be certain of many negroid skulls whether they are certainly negroid or not, although the average characters differ. As a matter of fact, it is a “general appreciation” by which a skull is said to be negroid, and only in very definite cases can we be absolutely certain that a skull picked from a mixed series is negroid. There are many negro skulls which if placed in a European series would pass & many European skulls which if placed in a negro collection would also pass. The craniological differences are not nearly so distinctive as the colour differences, and if the skin can be mutable, the skull need not present itself as an insuperable difficulty in the way of evolution of the white from the black...'

 

Created W.A. Dobson et. al., Survey Schedule 'As to Frequency of Albinism in China.'
From 1908 to 1912
Description:

‘As to Frequency of Albinism in China.

A.

Doctors Name: W.A. Dobson

Town and Province: Yeingking[?].

Number of years hospital practice in China: 13

Number of different hospital patients seen in 1909: 2,000

How many cases of Albinism seen in hospital work? One

How many elsewhere? None

Any cases heard of? no

Have the Chinese any name for Albinism? If so what? No general name

Have the Chinese any idea as to the cause of A.? Blank

Have you had the opportunity of questioning and examining any case of A.? (If so, please give details under B.)

Have any cases of pied Albinism or other deficiency of pigmentation come under your notice? Vitiligo many cases.

Can you procure photographs of any cases of deficient or anomalous pigmentation? Not now. Those I have seen in Vitilga differ in no respect from cases at home,

B.

1. Questions.

Pedigree as far as possible (e.g. by making out a family tree of relationships, showing sexes at age of death, and cause of death). The more extensive the pedigree the better. All information is desired bearing on whether Albinism is or is not the expression of a prevalence of scanty pigmentation in a particular stock. Hence the importance of the following:-

In the family has there been:- (a) any Intermarrying, e.g., of cousins?

(b) any Peculiarities as to colour of hair or eyes? not able to give you this [response also covers (c) below]

as to Fecundity.

as to General Physical or Mental Vigour.

(c) any defect other than Pigmentation.

2. Examination.

Colour of skin:- Presence, Description and Distribution of Pigment Spots and Freckles. White & pink.

Hair colour:-       Scalp.    Yellow white      Eyebrows. Yellow white

                                Eyelashes. d[itt]o             Body-hair. d[itt]o

Eyes: Colour of iris           bluish grey                          Of pupil                                reddish

Can any red be seen in the pupil? yes

Is there pigment at Corneal Margin? slight

“    “        “      in the Conjunctiva? none

Nystagmus? No                                Strabismus? Slight           Photophobia?   some

State of Vision?                ?              Any Abnormal Refraction? ?

Is the Pigment of the Retina Defective?                Did not examine              

“  “      “                  of the Choroid Defective? “    “    “

Photograph: (Alongside a normal native.)

Please post at your early convenience to Dr. McAll, or to Dr. A. H. Skinner, Hankow.

Case was seen years ago’