e many crimes which are not crimes,
per se, but which are merely infractions of man-made laws, or
representing rebellious acts against an unjust and cruel social order.
Thus, for instance, a man or a woman who defying the law, would give
information about birth control, and be convicted for the offence,
would be legally a criminal. Morally he or she would be a high-minded
humanitarian. A man who would throw a bomb at the Russian Czar or at a
murderous pogrom-inciting Russian Governor would be considered an
assassin, and if caught would be hanged; and in making up the pedigree
of such a family, a narrow-minded eugenist would be apt to say that
there was criminality in that family. But as a matter of fact, that
"assassin" may have belonged to the noblest-minded heroes in history.

The eugenists will therefore pay little attention to criminality in
the ancestry as a dysgenic factor. As long as the matrimonial
candidate himself is not a criminal, the ancestral criminality should
constitute no bar to the marriage. It is not likely to show itself
atavistically in the children. Altogether a good deal of nonsense has
been written about atavism. And people forget that the same rules of
heredity that are applied to physical conditions cannot be applied to
spiritual and moral qualities, the latter being much more dependent
upon environment than the former. Of course the various circumstances
must be taken into consideration, and each case must be decided upon
its merits. No generalizations can be permitted. The _kind_ of crime
must always be considered.

And, furthermore, it should be borne in mind that not only is a
criminal ancestry _per se_ no bar to marriage, the marriage candidate
himself may be an ex-criminal, may have served time in prison, and
still be a very desirable father or mother from the eugenic viewpoint.
A man who in a fit of passion or during a quarrel, perhaps under the
slight influence of liquor, struck or killed a man is not, therefore,
a real criminal. After serving his time in prison he may never again
commit the slightest antisocial act, may make a moral citizen and an
ideal husband and father.

This is not a plea for the under dog. For in this case, where the
future of the race is at stake, all other considerations must be put
into the background. I simply plead for an intelligent consideration
of the subject. Many honored citizens are worse criminals and worse
fathers than many people who have served p