The selection of the material for these charts was made on the basis of the importance of these families to the state. By this is meant not at all the contributions to the official, political, or economic welfare of the state, but exactly the reverse.

The families were selected as giving the widest possible geographical range, as indicating a divergence of defects and delinquencies. There is also considerable variety in the type of home environment surrounding the main portions of the families studied. This was planned in order to bring to the information concerning families belonging primarily to the following classifications: 1) Urban population, some major portion of the family having its home in one or more of the larger towns or cities. 2) Rural population, the family being scattered over thinly settled sections of the state. 3) Hill population, representing the mountainous districts. 4) More or less isolated valley population.

In no case has it been possible to stick very closely to any definite classification. One of the outstanding results of our study has been to show that such classifications cannot be adhered to with any strictness. We have found no family which could be limited at all closely by any one of the groupings given above.

Some of the characteristics of the family which decided us to include it in our study have been as follows: 1) Feeble-mindedness 2) Insanity 3) Habitual criminality.

Here again in most cases a family which is noticeable for its feeble-mindedness is apt also to contribute several of its members to penal institutions. In general a deficient family is found to be also delinquent and the reverse is similarly true.

As regards pauperism, in every case this characteristic, which may be classed midway between deficiency and delinquency and usually overlaps on both sides, is seldom encountered alone. Almost invariably these families too are found to contain a number of individuals belonging to the delinquent or mentally deficient or defective groups. While it is far less convenient for a study of the present character to find such overlapping and dovetailing as indicated above, it is one of the important findings of the Survey. I would not imply that Vermont presents an unusual situation in this regard. The same thing is found in surveys of other communities and states. it tends to break down the artificial distinctions which are sometimes made in handling the dependent classes, as they are called.

For obvious reasons the names given in the following histories are fictitious.

FAMILY NO. 1. The Preston Family. This is one of the most fertile fields of investigation. The family itself has been highly fertile, so that the number of individuals shown on our chart is at present 436. The source of the information in this case, as in the others to follow, is from records and investigations by the Vermont Children's Aid Society, the Vermont Industrial School records, and the investigations of the Eugenics Survey Field Worker. One girl has been a charge of the Children's Aid Society and an inmate at the Industrial School. Members of the earlier generations are scattered rather widely through western Vermont and go over to eastern New York state.

The inception of this undertaking is due to interest in Vermont's position amongst the states in the Draft Board examinations. A number of small problems in heredity had been previously undertaken by members of the class in Heredity at the University, and so much interest was aroused in studying inheritance problems amongst families in Vermont that a rather careful study of Davenport's tables of drafted men was made by the entire class.

In connection with the last mentioned investigation, some members of the class as well as the instructor carried on a somewhat lively correspondence with the Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, and with its Director, Dr. Davenport. The Record Office, and especially Dr. D. were very emphatic in urging a study of conditions in Vermont having to do with the excessive number of defective men as found by the Draft Boards. The accompanying chart gives a brief summary of some of the worst conditions. It serves to explain in a measure the particular ways in which Vermont falls almost to the very bottom of the lists of states.

Dr. D. puts forth in his voluminous analysis of the Draft Board examinations some conjectures as to the reason for the poor status of Vermont. It appeals very strongly to the workers at Cold Spring Harbor to have Dr. D.'s guesses examined and tested in the light of as complete a survey as can be made.

It is easy to theorize on the causes for deficiency, delinquency and dependency in any community. Each one of us perhaps feels ready to explain why Vermont fell down so badly in the Draft Board examinations. It may be that Davenport is at least partly right in attributing the large number of rejections to unusually stiff examinations. This should be checked up before the theory is taken very seriously, and is no doubt possible even now to determine what the relative stiffness of the examinations was in 1917.

Davenport finds that the states having a high percentage of French Canadians in the population were near the bottom of the list. It may be that he is right in regarding these two conditions as having a relationship of cause and effect. There seems to be a reasonable doubt, however, and very few appear to be ready to adopt Davenport's suggestion as adequate.

It is pointed out with perfect justice that the cream of Vermont's youth is constantly skimming itself away by migration to the other states. A more thorough study of the tables in [Davenport's] analysis should be made to determine at least partially whether there is any connection between the total number of young men of draft age in 1917 and the total population. If such a ratio can be ascertained it should be interesting to compare it with similar ratios in other states. It might prove to be true that Vermont has more children, more old people, and fewer young men than are to be found elsewhere. If this should be so it would be easy to persuade oneself, whether rightly or wrongly, certainly with a degree of reasonableness, that this smaller proportion of young men represents the less desirable element, mentally, morally and physically.

Having outlined the reason for undertaking the present Survey, a word may be appropriate in regard to the machinery behind the undertaking.

During the last Legislature the present speaker and the members of the State Board of Health were asked for definite examples of degeneracy of the hereditary sorts, and found that there was very little information to be had. We felt that it would be highly desirable to analyze some of the Kallicak and Jukes families of Vermont, trace their members to the penal and charitable institutions, and ascertain the conditions under which they were born and brought up.

Since the University was already conducting a course in Heredity it seemed reasonable that it would undertake a Survey, if one could be arranged for. A public-spirited former citizen of Vermont came forward at the first suggestion with a donation of a sum of money with which to conduct this work. The Children's Aid Society generously offered to surrender the services of Miss Harriett E. Abbott, then in charge of the work of that organization in Bellows Falls. Miss A- was engaged as the Field Worker, and brings to the task much experience in studying conditions in the poorer families all over the state. She has made a special study of the hereditary aspects of her work, and has taken training courses at Cold Spring Harbor and Columbia University.

An advisory Committee has been chosen to go over the matter of the Survey, and one meeting was held in Burlington in September.

List: - Pres. Guy W. Bailey Prof. A. R. Gifford Dr. C. F. Dalton, State Board of Health Prof. K. R. B. Flint, Northfield Mr. R. H. Walker, Windsor Dr. E. A. Stanley, Waterbury Mr. Charles W. Wilson, Vergennes Dr. T. J. Allen, Brandon Miss Lena C. Ross, Rutland Mr. C. H. Dempsey, Comm. of Ed. Dr. H. G. Ripley, Brattleboro Retreat

As a result of the meeting of the Advisory Committee the program of the Survey which is now being undertaken is briefly as follows:

1.The Purpose of the Survey.

This has been left very largely for the investigation itself to determine.

It was thought to he a wise plan to let the means determine the end as much as the end the means. Plainly, there is need of eugenical legislation, there is need of support for a number of existing institutions, both state and charitable. Coordination of effort is always desirable, and it may be that a study of certain Conditions may make that easier. At present the object of the Survey is to outline all the information that we can get hold of in regard to the hereditary aspects of defectiveness amongst two classes of persons in Vermont: (1) prisoners and inmates of state institutions generally, and (2) backward children In the schools.

The purpose of the Survey is not strictly or mainly scientific, but rather practical and humane. Constructive work is the aim in view. The actual betterment of conditions in Vermont is sufficient reason for conducting the study.

2. Method of Study.

For the present, and perhaps throughout the year (It should be mentioned that the funds are made available for one year only), the two outstanding features of the Survey will be amongst school children and sentenced prisoners in the state institutions.