itions of law and sentiment. We must study human variety, and the
distribution of qualities in a nation. We must compare the
classification of a population according to social status with the
classification which we would make purely in terms of natural quality.
We must study with the utmost care the descent of qualities in a
population, and the consequences of that marked tendency to marriage
within the class which distinguishes all classes. Something is to be
learnt from the results of examinations in universities and colleges.

It is desirable to study the degree of correspondence that may exist
between promise in youth, as shown in examinations, and subsequent
performance. Let me add that I think the neglect of this inquiry by the
vast army of highly educated persons who are connected with the present
huge system of competitive examination to be gross and unpardonable.
Until this problem is solved we cannot possibly estimate the value of
the present elaborate system of examinations.

_II.--Restrictions in Marriage_

It is necessary to meet an objection that has been repeatedly urged
against the possible adoption of any system of eugenics, namely, that
human nature would never brook interference with the freedom of
marriage. But the question is how far have marriage restrictions proved
effective when sanctified by the religion of the time, by custom, and by
law. I appeal from armchair criticism to historical facts. It will be
found that, with scant exceptions, marriage customs are based on social
expediency and not on natural instincts. This we learn when we study the
fact of monogamy, and the severe prohibition of polygamy, in many times
and places, due not to any natural instinct against the practice, but to
consideration of the social well-being. We find the same when we study
endogamy, exogamy, Australian marriages, and the control of marriage by
taboo.

The institution of marriage, as now sanctified by religion and
safeguarded by law in the more highly civilised nations, may not be
ideally perfect, nor may it be universally accepted in future times, but
it is the best that has hitherto been devised for the parties primarily
concerned, for their children, for home life, and for society. The
degree of kinship within which marriage is prohibited is, with one
exception, quite in accordance with modern sentiment, the exception
being the disallowal of marriage with the sister of a deceased wife, the
propriety of