THE CROSS-BREEDING OF RACES

WE have seen that there is no simple rule as to the "mating" of individuals of a species with individuals of another closely allied but distinct species. Such mating very rarely comes about in natural conditions, but man by his interference sometimes succeeds in procuring "hybrids" between allied species. Hybrids between species belonging to groups so different as to be distinguished by zoologists as distinct "families" or "orders" are quite unknown under any circumstances. Such remoteness of natural character and structure as is indicated by the two great divisions of hoofed mammals—the even-toed (including sheep, cattle, deer, antelopes, giraffes, pigs and camels), and the odd-toed (including tapirs, rhinoceroses, horses, asses and zebras) is an absolute bar to inter-breeding. So, too, the carnivora (cats, dogs, bears and seals, and smaller kinds) are so remote in their nature from the rabbits, hares and rats—called "the rodents"—that no mating between members of the one and the other of these groups has ever been observed, either in nature or under artificial conditions.

Even when individuals of closely allied species mate with one another it is a very rare occurrence that the hybrids so produced ripen their ova and sperms so as to be capable of carrying on the hybrid race, though sometimes they do ripen them and breed. The great naturalist Alfred Wallace, in his most valuable and readable book called "Darwinism," expressed the opinion that the apparent failure of hybrid races to perpetuate themselves by breeding was to a large extent due to the small number of individuals used in experiments on this matter, and the in-and-in breeding which was the consequence. One of the great generalizations established by Darwin is that in-and-in breeding is, as a rule, resisted in all animals and plants, and leads when it occurs to a dying-out of the inbred race by resulting feebleness and infertility. A large part of Darwin's work consisted in demonstrating the devices existing in the natural structure and qualities of plants and animals for securing cross-fertilization among individuals of the same species but of different stock. Both extremes seem to be barred in nature—namely, the inter-breeding of stocks so diverse in structure and quality as to be what we call "distinct species," and again the inter-breeding of individuals of the same immediate parentage or near cousinship. What seems to be favoured by the natural structure and qualities of the plant or the animal is that it shall only breed within a certain group—the species—and shall within that group avoid constant self-fertilization or fertilization by near cousins. Thus we find numerous cases in which, though the same flower has both pollen and ovules, and might fertilize itself, the visits of insects (specially made use of by mechanisms in the flower) carry the pollen of one flower to the ovules of another and to flowers on separate plants growing at a distance. It is necessary to note that there are, nevertheless, self-fertilizing flowers, and also self-fertilizing lower animals, the special conditions of which require and have received careful examination and consideration, upon which I cannot now enter.

In relation to the question of the possibility of establishing hybrids between various species experimentally, I must (before going on to the cognate question of "mongrels") tell of an interesting suggestion made to me by my friend Professor Alphonse Milne-Edwards not long before he died, and never published by him. He was director of the Jardin des Plantes in Paris, where there is a menagerie of living beasts as well as a botanic garden and great museum collections and laboratories. He held it to be probable, as many physiologists would agree, that the fertilization of the egg of one species by the sperm of another, even a remotely related one, is ultimately prevented by a chemical incompatibility—chemical in the sense that the highly complex molecular constitution of such bodies as the anti-toxins and serums with which physiologists are beginning to deal is "chemical"—and that all the other and secondary obstacles to fertilization can be overcome or evaded in the course of experiment. He proposed to inject one species by "serums" extracted from the other, in such a way as seemed most likely to bring the chemical state of their reproductive elements into harmony, that is to say, into a condition in which they should not be actively antagonistic but admit of fusion and union. He proposed, by the exchange of living or highly organized fluids (by means of injection or transfusion) between a male and female of separate species, to assimilate the chemical constitution of one to that of the other, and thus possibly so to affect their reproductive elements that the one could tolerate and fertilize the other. The suggestion is not unreasonable, but would require a long series of experiments in which the possibility of producing such "assimilation," even to a small extent and in respect of less complex processes than those ultimately aimed at, would have to be, first of all, established. My friend did not live to commence this investigation, but it is possible that some day we may see the obstacle to the union of ovum and sperm of species, which are to some extent allied, removed in this way by transfusion or injection of important fluids from the one into the other.

We must not lose sight of the fact, in the midst of these various and diverging observations about the fertilization of the ova of one species by sperms of another species, that there is such a thing as "parthenogenesis," or virgin-birth. In some of the insects and lower forms of animals the egg-cell habitually and regularly develops and gives rise to a new individual without being fertilized at all. And in other cases by special treatment, such as rubbing with a brush, or in the case of marine animals by addition of certain salts to the water in which the eggs are floating—or, again, in the case of the eggs of the common frog by gently scratching them with a needle—the eggs which usually and regularly require to be penetrated by and fused with a spermatozoon or sperm-filament before they will develop, proceed to develop into complete new individuals without the action upon them of any spermatozoon. In such marine animals as the sea-urchins or sea-eggs it has been found that the eggs deposited in pure sea-water, though they would die and decompose if left there alone, can be made to develop and proceed on their growth by the addition to the sea-water of the sperm filaments of a star-fish (the feather star or comatula). The spermatozoa or sperm-filaments do not, however, in this case fuse with the egg-cells. They mechanically pierce the egg-coat, but contribute no substance to the embryo into which the egg develops. They have merely served, like the scratch of a needle on the frog's egg and the brushing of insects' eggs, to start the egg on its growth, to "stimulate" it and set changes going. It appears thus that the fertilizing sperm-filaments of organisms generally have two separate and very important influences upon the egg-cells with which they fuse. The one is to stimulate the egg and start the changes of embryonic growth; the other is to contribute some living material from the male parent to the new individual arising from the growth and shaping of the egg-cell. The first influence can be exercised without the second, as is seen in the case of the eggs of some sea-urchins stimulated to growth by the spermatozoa of some star-fishes. It happens that these marine animals are convenient for study and experiment because their eggs are small and transparent and that they and the spermatozoa are freely passed into the sea-water at the breeding season, in which the fertilization of the eggs takes place.

When these facts are considered we have to admit that in the mating of two species which will not regularly and naturally breed together, there may be a limited action of the spermatic element which may stimulate the egg to development without contributing by fusion in the regular way to the actual substance of the young so produced, or only contributing an amount insufficient to produce a full and normal development of the hybrid young. Such cases not improbably sometimes occur in higher animals, though they have not been, as yet, shown to exist except in the experiments with sea-urchins' eggs and feather-star's sperm.

In all animals and plants, but especially in domesticated and cultivated stocks or strains, varieties arise which, by natural or artificial separation, breed apart, and give rise to what are called "races." Such races in natural conditions may become species. Species are races or groups of individuals, which, by long estrangement (not necessarily local isolation) from the parent stock and by adaptation to special conditions of life, have become more or less "stable"—that is, permanent and unchanging in the conditions to which they have become adapted. They acquire by one device or another the habit of not breeding with the stock from which they originally diverged—a repugnance which may be overcome by human contrivance or by natural accident, but is, nevertheless, an effective and real quality. Distinct forms, which have not arrived at the stability and separation characteristic of species, are spoken of as "races," or "varieties." It is very generally the case that the "races" of one species can inter-breed freely with one another, and with the original stock, when it still exists. Comparatively little is known as to the behaviour of wild or naturally-produced "races." Practically all our views on the subject of "races" and their inter-breeding are derived from our observation of the immense number and range of "races" and "breeds" produced by man—as farmer, fancier, and horticulturist. It has been generally received as a rule, that the various races produced in the farm or garden by breeding from a species, will inter-breed freely, and produce offspring which are fertile. A special and important series of races, in which human purpose and voluntary selection necessarily have a leading part, are the races of man.

The offspring of parents of two different races is called a mongrel, whilst the term "hybrid" has been of late limited, for the sake of convenience, to the offspring of parents of two different species. Mongrels, it has been generally held, are fertile—often more fertile than pure-bred individuals whose parents are both of the same race, whilst "hybrids" are contrasted with them, in being infertile. We have seen that infertility is not an absolute rule in the case of hybrids, and it appears that there is also a source of error in the observations which lead to the notion that "mongrels" are always fertile. The fact is that observations on this matter have nearly always been made with domesticated animals and plants which are, of course, selected and bred by man on account of their fertility, and thus are exceptionally characterized by fertility, which is transmitted in an exceptional degree to the races or varieties which are experimentally inter-bred, and, consequently, may be expected to produce fertile mongrels. Alfred Russel Wallace insisted upon this fact, and pointed out that in a few cases colour varieties of a given species of plant have been found to be incapable of inter-breeding, or only produce very few "mongrels." This has been established in the case of two dissimilarly-coloured varieties of mullein. Also the red and the blue pimpernel (the poor man's weather-glass, Anagallis), which are classed by botanists as two varieties of one species, have been found after repeated trials to be definitely incapable of inter-breeding. Wallace insists in regard to crossing, that some degree of difference favours fertility, but a little more tends to infertility. We must remember that the fertility of both plants and animals is very easily upset. Changed conditions of life—such as domestication—may lead (we do not know why) to complete or nearly complete infertility; and, again, "change of air," or of locality, has an extraordinary and not-as-yet-explained effect on fertility.

Infertile horses sent from their native home to a different climate (as, for instance, from Scotland to Newmarket) become fertile. A judicious crossing of varieties or races threatened with infertility will often lead to increased vigour and fertility in the new generation, just as change of locality will produce such a result. Physiological processes which are not obvious and cannot be exactly estimated or measured are then, we must conclude, largely connected with the question of sterility and fertility. Mr. Darwin has collected facts which go far to prove that colour (as in the case of the black pigs of Virginia, which I cited in Chapter X.), instead of being a trifling and unimportant character, as was supposed by the older naturalists, is really one of great significance, often correlated with important constitutional differences. It is pointed out by Alfred Wallace that in all the recorded cases in which a decided infertility occurs between varieties (or races) of the same species of plants (such as those just cited), those varieties are distinguished by a difference of colour. He gives reasons for thinking that the correlation of colour with infertility which has been detected in several cases in plants may also extend to animals in a state of nature. The constant preference of animals—even mere varieties of dog, sheep, horses, and pigeons—for their like, has been well established by observation. Colour is one of the readiest appeals to the eye in guiding animals in such selection and association, and is connected with deep-seated constitutional qualities. "Birds of a feather flock together" is a popular statement confirmed by the careful observation of naturalists. Thus we arrive at some indication of features which may determine the inter-breeding, or the abstention from inter-breeding, of diverse races sprung from one original stock. The "colour bar" is not merely the invention of human prejudice, but already exists in wild plants and animals.

We now come to the questions, the assertions, the beliefs, and the acts concerning the inter-breeding of human races, to the consideration of which I have been preparing the way. The dog-fancier has generally a great contempt for "mongrels." Breeders generally dislike accidental crosses, because they interfere with the purpose which the breeder has in view of producing animals or plants of a quality, form, and character which he has determined on before-hand. This interference with his purpose seems to be the explanation of beliefs and statements, to the prejudice of "mongrels." Really, as is well known to great breeders and horticulturists, a determined and selective crossing of breeds is the very foundation of the breeder's art, and there is no reason to suppose that a "mongrel" is necessarily, or even probably, inferior in vigour or in qualities which are advantageous in the struggle for life in "natural"—that is to say, "larger"—conditions of an animal's or plant's life; not those limited conditions for which the breeder intends his products. Indeed, the very opposite is the case. In nature, as Mr. Darwin showed, there are innumerable contrivances to ensure the cross-breeding of allied but distinct strains. Dog-owners who are not exclusively bent upon possessing a dog which shows in a perfect way the "points" of a breed favoured by the fashion of the moment, or fitting it for some special employment, know very well that a "mongrel" may often exhibit finer qualities of intelligence, or endurance, than those exhibited by a dog of pure-bred "race." And the very "races" which are spoken of to-day as "pure-bred," or "thoroughbred," have (as is well known) been produced as "mongrels"—that is to say, by crossing or mating individuals of previously-existing distinct and pure breeds. The history of many such "mongrel breeds," now spoken of as "thoroughbred," is well known. The English racehorse was gradually produced by the "mongrelizing," or cross-breeding, of several breeds or races—the English warhorse, the Arab, the Barb. A very fine mongrel stock having at last been obtained, it was found, or, at any rate, was considered to be demonstrated, that no further improvement (for the purposes aimed at, namely, flat-racing) could be effected by introducing the blood of other stock. The offspring of the "mongrels" Herod, Matchem, and Eclipse accordingly became established as "the" English racehorse, and thenceforward was mated only within its own race or stock, and was kept pure or "thoroughbred." Another well-known mongrel breed which is now kept pure, or nearly so, is that of the St. Bernard's dog, a blend of Newfoundland, Bloodhound, and English Mastiff.

Often the word "mongrel" is limited in its use to signify an undesired or undesirable result of the cross-breeding of individuals of established races. But this is not quite fair to mongrels in general, since, as we have seen, the name really refers only to the fact they are crosses between two breeds. When they happen to suit some artificial and arbitrary requirement they are favoured, and made the starting-point of a new breed, and kept pure in their own line; but when they do not fit some capricious demand of the breeder they are sneered at and condemned, although they may be fine and capable animals. No doubt some mongrels between races differing greatly from one another, or having some peculiar mixture of incompatible qualities the exact nature of which we have not ascertained, are wanting in vigour, and cannot be readily established as a new breed. In nature the success of the mongrel depends on whether or not its mixture of qualities makes it fitter than others to the actual conditions of its life, and able to survive in the competition for food and place. In man's breeding operations with varieties of domesticated animals and "cultivated" plants, the survival of the mongrel depends upon its fitting some arbitrary standard applied by man, who destroys those which do not suit his fancy, and selects for survival and continued breeding those which do.

What is called "miscegenation," or the inter-breeding of human races, must be looked at from both these points of view. We require to know how far, if at all, the mixed or mongrel offspring of a human race A with a human race B is really inferior to either of the original stocks A and B, judged by general capacity and life-preserving qualities in the varied conditions of the great area of the habitable globe. And how far an arbitrary or fanciful standard is set up by human races, similar to that set up by the "fancier" or cultivator of breeds of domestic animals. The matter is complicated by the fact that what we loosely speak of as "races" of man are of very various degrees of consanguinity or nearness to one another in blood, that is, in stock or in ultimate ancestry. It is also complicated by the fact that we cannot place any reliance upon the antipathies or preferences shown by the general sentiment of a race in this (or other matters) as necessarily indicating what is beneficial for humanity in general or for the immediate future of any section of it. Nor have we any assurance that what is called "sexual selection"—the preference or taste in the matter of choosing a mate—is among human beings necessarily anything of greater importance—so far as the prosperity of a race or of humanity in general is concerned—than a mere caprice or a meaningless persistence of the human mind in favouring a choice which is habitual and traditional. I have referred to this point again in the last paragraph of this chapter.

In regard to marriage between individuals of different European nationalities, a certain amount of unwillingness exists on the part of both men and women which cannot be ascribed to any deep-seated inborn antipathy, but is due to a mistrust of the unknown "foreigner," which very readily disappears on acquaintance, or may arise from dislike of the laws and customs of a foreign people. English, French, Dutch, Scandinavians, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Italians and Spaniards have no deep-rooted prejudices on the subject, and readily intermarry when circumstances bring them into association. Though the Jews by their present traditional practice are opposed to marriage with those not of their faith, there is no effective aversion of a racial kind to such unions, and in early times they have been very frequent. During the "captivity" in Babylon and again after the "dispersal" by the Romans, the original Jewish race was practically swamped by mixture with cognate Oriental races who adopted the Jewish faith. So far from there being inborn prejudice against intermarriage of the peoples above cited, it is very generally admitted that such "miscegenation" leads frequently to the foundation of families of fine quality. The blend is successful, as may be seen in the number of prominent Englishmen who have Huguenot, German, Dutch, or Jewish blood in their veins.

But when we come to the intermarriage of members of the white race of Europe with members of either the negroid (black) race or of the yellow and red mongoloid race, a much greater and more deeply-rooted aversion is found, and this is extended even to members of the Caucasian race who, possibly by prehistoric mixture with negro-like races, are very dark-skinned, as is the case with the Aryan population in India and Polynesia. It is a very difficult matter; in fact, it seems to me not possible in our present knowledge of the facts, to decide whether there is a natural inborn or congenital disinclination to the marriage of the white race, especially of the Anglo-Saxon branch of it, with "coloured" people, or whether the whole attitude (as I am inclined to think) is one of "pride of race," an attitude which can be defended on the highest grounds, though it may lead to erroneous beliefs as to the immediate evil results of such unions, and to an unreasonable and cruel treatment both of the individuals so intermarrying and of their offspring. There is little or no evidence of objection to mixed unions on the part of the coloured people with whites, no evidence of physical dislike to the white man or white woman, but, on the contrary, ready acquiescence.

A curious aversion to marriages with whites on the part both of North American Indians and of negroes is, however, recorded from time to time in the official reports of the United States Government.

Two beliefs about such unions are more or less prevalent among white men in the regions where they not infrequently occur. Neither of these beliefs is supported by anything like conclusive evidence. The one is that such unions lead to the production of relatively infertile offspring; the mixed breed or stock is said to die out after a few (some seven or eight) generations. It is, however, the fact that the circumstances under which this occurs suggest that it is not due to a natural and necessary infertility. The other assertion is that the offspring of parents—one of white race and the other of black, yellow or brown—tend by some strange fatality to inherit the bad qualities of both races and the good qualities of neither. This is a case to which must be applied the saying, "Give a dog a bad name and hang him." The white man in North America, in India, and in New Zealand desires the increase and prosperity of his own race. Like the fancier set on the production of certain breeds of domesticated animals, he has no toleration for a "mongrel." In so far as it is true that miscegenation (marriage of white and coloured race) produces a stock which rapidly dies out—this is due to the adverse conditions, the opposition and hostility to which the mixed race is exposed by the attitude of the dominant white race. To the same cause is due the development of ignoble and possibly dangerous characteristics in the unfortunate offspring of these marriages more frequently than in those who find their natural place and healthy up-bringing either in the white or the coloured sections of the community. The "half-breed" is in some countries inexorably rejected by the race of his or her white parent and forced to take up an equivocal association with the coloured race.

That some, at any rate, of the evils attributed to "miscegenation" are due to the baneful influence of "pride of race" is evident from the fact that the Portuguese (with the exception of a small aristocratic class) have not since the early days of the fourteenth century, perhaps in consequence of established association with the Moorish and other North African races, shown that pride of race and aversion to mixture with dark-skinned races which is so strong a feature in the Anglo-Saxons, their successors and rivals as colonists. The long-standing admixture of black blood in the Portuguese population before the colonization of South America, has led to a toleration on the part of the Portuguese colonists of "miscegenation," both with Indians and the liberated descendants of imported negro slaves. The consequence is that in Brazil there is no condemnation of black blood; children of mixed parentage and of coloured race attend the same schools as those of European blood, and freely associate with them. There is no notion that that portion of the population which is of mixed negro, Indian, and white blood is less vigorous or fertile than the unmixed, nor that vice and feebleness are the characteristics of the former, whilst virtue and capacity belong to the latter.

The determined hostility of the Anglo-Saxon race in North America and in British India to "miscegenation" is in the case of the United States to be explained by the peculiar relation of a large slave population in the Southern States to a pure white slave-owning race: whilst in India we have a handful of white men temporarily stationed as rulers of millions of "natives," but never accepting India as their home. The attitude of the Anglo-Saxon race to the North American Indians, and also to the Maoris of New Zealand, has never been so extreme in the matter of miscegenation as it has been to negroid people and to the very different though dark-skinned people of the East. In support of that opinion may be cited the fact that some of "the first families of Virginia" are proud of their descent from Pocahontes, the Algonkian "Princess" who married the Englishman Rolfe. In New Zealand there are many families of mixed Anglo-Saxon and Maori blood. Though they are not ostracized, as are the half-breeds of negro blood in the United States, there is a firm tendency to relegate the half-breeds in New Zealand to the Maori section of the population, which it must be remembered includes some of the richest and most prosperous landowners in the colony.

It may be questioned whether there is in this matter a greater "pride of race" among Anglo-Saxons than among other Northern European peoples. Neither the French nor the Germans have established great colonies like the English, nor undertaken the administration of a huge Eastern Empire, and have, therefore, not shown what attitude they would adopt under such circumstances. The tolerance and easy-going humanitarianism of the French in relation to "miscegenation" in their dependencies in past times has never had the significance or practical importance which it would have possessed in the English Colonies and in the great Indian Empire.

There is, on account of the sporadic and exceptional occurrence of modern instances, no information of any value as to the results of mixture of other races of man. In early times and among more primitive or less civilized peoples there appears to have been, when immigration or conquest gave the opportunity, no obstacle to a free intermixture of an incoming race with the natives of an invaded territory. The "pride of race" has, nevertheless, throughout historic time been a frequent factor in the adjustment of populations of diverse races, and though "colour" has been a frequent "test" or symbol of the superior and exclusive race, it has not been the only characteristic exalted to such importance. Such "pride of race" has frequently excluded the members of a closely allied but conquered racial group from intermarriage with the conquerors, and has only disappeared after centuries of persistence. The term "blue blood" is interesting in this connection. It is the "saing d'azure" of the Gothic invaders, the conquerors of the Iberian and Moorish people of Spain. It refers not to any "blueness" of the blood itself, such as distinguishes veinous from arterial blood, but to the blue colour of the veins as seen through the colourless skin of a northern race (the Goths), as compared with the invisibility of the veins when the skin is rendered more or less opaque by a brown pigment, as in the Moors and the swarthy Iberians.

Among the people of Western Europe marriage has assumed more and more a character which is almost unknown in the rest of the world. Whatever the future may be in regard to this matter, there is no doubt possible that the place given to women in Western Europe by the ideals of chivalry and the practice of the northern race (which has so largely displaced the traditions of the Roman Empire) has established a relation of the sexes in which marriage and consequent parentage have ceased to be regarded as a mere regularization of animal desire and appetite. The accepted, but not always consciously recognized, view of marriage in Western Europe is that the union so sanctioned and the families thereby produced should be the result not of the mere physical necessity of irresponsible victims of an impulse common to all animals, but the outcome of the deliberate choice of man and woman attracted to one another by sympathy, understanding and reciprocal admiration, based upon knowledge of character, mental gifts and aspirations, as well as upon bodily charm. A rarely-expressed but none the less deeply-seated conviction exists that from such unions children of the finest nature, nurtured in circumstances most likely to make them worthy members of the community, will be born and reared. It is this conviction which leads to, or at any rate endorses, the exclusiveness which is described as "pride of race." The Anglo-Saxon man and equally the Anglo-Saxon woman (as well as the allied races of neighbouring nationalities) recognize a responsibility, a race duty, resulting from accumulated tradition, the heirloom of long ages of family life, which causes the man to be ashamed of, and the woman to shrink with instinctive horror from, union with an individual of a remote race with whom there can be no real sympathy, no intimate understanding. That seems to me to be the explanation and the justification of the "colour bar."

In relation to the probable effectiveness of sexual selection among uncivilized peoples in favouring and maintaining a particular type or form of features, hair, etc., characteristic of the race, independently of the life-preserving value of such qualities, I may mention, before quitting this difficult but strangely fascinating subject, a fact observed by a traveller in Africa, and related to me by him. Other similar facts are on record. Among the negroes employed as "porters" by my friend, some thirty in number, was one who had a narrow aquiline nose and thin lips. He was as black and as woolly-haired as any of them, but would if of fair complexion have been regarded by Europeans as a very handsome, fine-featured man. Such cases are not uncommon in parts of Africa, where probably an unrecognized mixture with Arab or Hamite blood has occurred. My friend expected this man to be a favourite, on account of what to him appeared to be "good looks," with the girls of the villages at which he camped during a three months' journey. At every such village, as they journeyed on, the travellers were received with joy and good nature. The negro porters were fÊted and made much of by the young women. But one alone was unpopular and regarded with ridicule and dislike. This was the handsome negro with the fine, well-modelled nose and beautiful European lips. The black beauties turned their backs on him, in spite of his amiable character and kindly overtures. They invariably and by open confession preferred the men with the thickest lips, the broadest noses, and the most thoroughly (as we should say) degraded prognathous appearance and disgusting expression. Hence no doubt the young negresses were likely to perpetuate in their offspring the features which are characteristic of their race, and hence it is probable that mere capricious sexual selection of individuals most completely conforming to a preferred type—irrespective of the value of the features preferred—may have great effect in both the selection and the maintenance of the peculiarities of the type. Dark skin may thus have been selected, until it became actually black; a slight curling of the hair, until it became woolly; thickish lips and broadish nose, until they became excessive in thickness and breadth.