Eugenics – the word, the science, the principles – fell into disrepute with the close of World War II when the world realized with horror where eugenics concepts could and did lead: Originally thought of as a beneficent study to identify the best human physical, intellectual and moral traits with the goal of improving mankind in general, eugenics had been used to justify the murder of millions who were deemed not to possess the best human traits – with best defined as “like us” and worst as “like them.” In reality, without going to the murderous extremes of the Nazis, eugenics had always been a racially and socially charged study. In the United States, “best” meant white, native-born of British or northern European origin, Protestant, educated, and wealthy. Non-white, immigrants, southern and eastern Europeans, Irish, Catholics, Jews, blacks, Asians, Indians … all were inferior by definition.

While eugenics as a formal study dates only to about the turn of the 20th century, the general idea of the improvement of the human race had long before swept Mormonism into its scope. To non-Mormons, polygamy was the obvious cause of what they saw as the development of an obviously inferior physical and moral race – assumptions that are discussed in fascinating clarity in W. Paul Reeve’s award winning Religion of a Different Color: Race and the Mormon Struggle for Whiteness. From the Mormon perspective, polygamy in particular and the elevating principles of the gospel in general were responsible for the obvious improvements in the human race to be found among the Mormon people.

I know scholars are working on the Mormon attitude toward eugenics in the early 20th century; at the moment, however, I don’t know where to refer you for the best report. Suggestions are welcome. I can give you a concrete illustration of Mormon participation with a formal eugenics study.

Among the many scientific and educational endeavors funded by Andrew Carnegie, the Carnegie Institution of Washington opened its Station for Experimental Evolution in 1904, in Cold Spring Harbor, New York, with the goal of studying heredity and evolution through plant and animal experimentation. The SEE’s director, Charles Benedict Davenport, also directed the work of other labs and experimental stations, and through these other connections the scope of the SEE expanded to include, among other things, a Eugenics Record Office to seek out and analyze data regarding the human traits that were then believed to be passed from one generation to the next through genetic inheritance – that is, not just physical traits, but mental and moral traits as well.

Questionnaires regarding this supposedly heritable traits were distributed throughout the country, and some of them ended up on the desks of Church leaders in Salt Lake City in 1917. Some, including apostle George Albert Smith, filled out the forms and returned them to the Eugenics Record Office.

The survey, a multi-page booklet, sought information about the personal completing the questionnaire, both of his parents, all four of his grandparents, and himself and all siblings. Questions covered basic identifying information, physical description, occupations and illnesses, cause of death, and “Special tastes, gifts or peculiarities of mind or body. Character, favorite pursuits, etc.”

George Albert Smith described his grandfather, George A. Smith, an apostle during Brigham Young’s presidency, as “pioneer, minister, legislator,” who had had no “grave illnesses in youth” but who had “weak lungs in middle age.” His “special tastes, gifts, or peculiarities” were “Wonderful memory, splendid character, no bad habits, great reader, traveled extensively. Weight about 300 lbs.”

His mother, Sarah Ann Libby Smith, had “good character, amiable disposition.”

A good memory must have been a prized possession in George Albert’s eyes – not only did he identify that as one of his father’s traits, but as a trait of his mother’s father, Lorin Farr: “Splendid memory, very active, great traveler, good character, no bad habits.” Lorin Farr, George Albert reported, had been the father of 20 sons and 16 daughters – you have to wonder how often a questionnaire was returned with numbers like that!

The travels of his family also seemed to be of high importance to George Albert; I wonder at the outlook that could see that as a heritable trait, but there it is, not just for his grandfathers, but for George Albert’s father, as well. John Henry Smith, he reported was of “Good character, great reader. Traveled all over world. Wonderful gift for making friends. Large man with attractive personality.” His mother Sarah was also “Fond of travel,” as well as a “splendid housekeeper.”

Filling in the blanks to report his own traits, George Albert reported that he had attended public school and the Brigham Young Academy, then studied mathematics, history, and biography at the University of Utah. His occupations were student, salesman, missionary, minister, and banker. He had had two surgeries to correct his strabismus (I’m sure it’s known, but I don’t know whether in George Albert’s case his eyes were crossed or misaligned outward). He had also had typhoid fever, and reported his “nervous exhaustion.” As for his “Special tastes,” George Albert described himself as “Artistic & affable, very energetic & active. Tall & slender. Excellent character, Extensive traveler. Exemplary habits. Teacher of Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

And so he went through all of his siblings. One brother was “cheerful & industrious,” another was “frank & outspoken.” Several were “musical”; one sister was “fond of Domestic Art.”

Then followed a summary chart for every person named on the survey.

Height? (without shoes; very short, short, medium, tall, or very tall)
Weight? (slender, medium, or corpulent)
Color of hair? (before graying: albino, flaxen, yellow-brown, light brown, medium brown, dark brown, black, clear red, dark red, or dark brown red)
Color of eyes? (pale blue, dark blue, blue with brown spots, light brown, dark brown, black, yellow blue-gray or green, reddish brown) Indicate “if eyes constantly wander or twitch.”
Complexion or skin color? (blond, intermediate, brunette, dark brown, black, yellow, yellow-brown, reddish brown)
Indication of general mental ability, and in vocal music, drawing or coloring, literary composition, mechanical skill, mathematics, and remembering.
General bodily energy?
Defects in sight or hearing?
Condition of speech? (normal, lisping, stammering, dumb, speech unintelligible)
Temperament? (phlegmatic, intermediate, nervous, alternating in mood)
Use of hands? (right, left, ambidextrous)
Birthmarks?
Hare lip or cleft palate?
Abnormal fingers?

According to his own reckoning on these measures, George Albert was tall, slender, blond, with light blue eyes, with intermediate skin color. He had exceptional mental ability, with exceptionally good abilities in vocal music but only medium skills in drawing, literary composition or mechanical skill. Exceptional talents in mathematics and remembering, and with exceptional bodily energy. His eyes were imperfect, but his hearing was good. He had normal speech and was right handed.

I feel there are issues related to eugenics that are peculiar to Latter-day Saints, so I tack them on clumsily to the end of this post, without answers, without room to explore, but simply to point them out:

Nothing here seems pernicious on the face of it – but in 1917 the world hadn’t yet awoken to the perverted uses to which such data might be put. That’s always a consideration, even when we think identifying the best can result only in celebrating and perpetuating the best. But as we’ve seen in Mormon history, it’s a delicate balancing act: When we claim, for instance, that the Lord blesses some of his children for their worthiness in the premortal existence, by teaching, say, that such spirits are born into LDS families or in favorable earthly circumstances, the inevitable conclusion is that some spirits who are less favored in mortality must have been less worthy in the premortal existence … and that is swampy ground we do not want to retread.

Possible resolutions: There are observable inequalities in human birth. Those of us who were blessed by birth into easier circumstances than others were simply blessed, beyond anything that can be attributed to our own premortal character. Or we have faulty understanding of exactly what mortal circumstances are in fact blessings. Or the blessings of our birth lay upon us obligations that, individually and collectively, we must meet lest those blessings turn to curses in the end.