JF Ptak Science Books LLC Post 1022
The once-esteemed journal, The Eugenics Review (1909-1968, published in London by Macmillan & Co., with Darwin's son Leonard as it president and guided by a very well placed "consultative council") is an issue-to-issue marvel of dead and repugnant ideas. It seems more now an encyclopedia of The Great Ill Wind than anything else, and this of course ironically in spite of its own sterling pedigree.1
I occasionally pick up an issue an graze, and usually something strikes the sensibilities immediately. Today it was the issue for April 1926, and the article "The Merxplas Beggar Colony". I had never heard of a "beggar colony" before this, today, and was surprised to learn that there were six of them in Belgium , one of which was Merx plas, with many of them established beginning in the 18th century. Merx plas was a physical entity, a containment camp (or perhaps better a "concentration camp?") where tramps/beggars/the habitually unemployed/thieves/pimps were sentenced to between two and seven years' stay. People went in, and they could not come out--so although not a prison, it seems more a communistic prison setting with an post-dated exit sign.
The Eugenics Review took a quick view (in this four page article) of places like Merx plas Belgium) as social engineering tools, with heavy medical/biological/pathological metaphors. The author, J.G. Pringle, quotes a "M. Le Jeune" who found the sound idea in his statement: "this (habitually unemployed) class could be eliminated by a process of segregation" leaving the real unemployed a chance to find work once removed from this "contagion". Mr. Pringle agrees: "While segregated they would not reproduce either their species, their diseases, or their vices".
Indeed. Merx plas was also opened not only for these above-mentioned people, but was expanded to include "convicted epileptics, tuberculous persons and mentally deficient persons". He continues: "it would appear that this further classification of inmates will make possible the selection of individuals for whom any liberation whatsoever could be shown to be inadvisable".
There were generally about 5,000 people at Merx plas--a quick look at the stats reveals that at any given time 75% of the population had made at least one previous tour there; 25% had been there at least three times. I'm not so sure what that means in terms of anything save that the state prevented these guys from reproducing.
In general Mr. Pringle likes what he sees and wants the communal work farms to be instituted in Great Britain. He closes: "The measure of success achieved at Merx plas in dealing with a type of parasite which is also a source of social contamination would form a happy precedent for a similar experiment in this country".
Such imaging of a class of people in terms of disease, contagion, social contamination and the "correcting" of their behavior in terms of "segregation", virtual sterilization and "elimination" takes me immediately to the question: what's left? Once they began to creep in TB persons and the "feeble-minded" and not let them out, how else best to deal with beggars and tramsp who continue to abuse the system, especially once you've already introduced the idea of these folks being disease/contagion and that their incarceration is a form of segregation and elimination? I guess they could talk about not letting anyone out again, but, well, it sounds like Merx plas was already an economic drain and stain; how much could it support? The math starts to look big and bad and bloody at this point.
In general though the road to a conclusion to these unhappy thoughts was sterilization (which I wrote about a little here and elsewhere on this blog)--but this is a story for another day.
Notes
1. The eugenics people identified their intellectual foundations in the work of master multi-tasker and genius Sir Francis Galton, and had much help along the way with the likes of the superior R.A. Fisher, Charles Davenport, Henry F. Osborn, Bernhard Mallet, R.W. MacBride, Julian Huxley, W.P. Pycraft, Francis and Leonard Darwin, and many others.
Comments