they did not operate sufficiently to produce any marked change in the prudential habits of the poor with regard to marriage, would still have a most beneficial effect on their conduct in a political light; and undoubtedly one of the most valuable of these effects would be the power that would result to the higher and middle classes of society of gradually improving their governments without the apprehension of those revolutionary excesses, the fear of which at present threatens to deprive Europe even of that degree of liberty which she had before experienced to be practicable, and the salutary effects of which she had long enjoyed.

From a review of the state of society in former periods compared with the present, I should certainly say that the evils resulting from the principle of population have rather diminished than increased, even under the disadvantage of an almost total ignorance of the real cause. And if we can indulge the hope that this ignorance will be gradually dissipated, it does not seem unreasonable to expect that they will be still further diminished. The increase of absolute population, which will of course take place, will evidently tend but little to weaken this expectation, as everything depends upon the relative proportion between population and food, and not on the absolute number of people. In the former part of this work it appeared that the countries which possessed the fewest people often suffered the most from the effects of the principle of population; and it can scarcely be doubted that, taking Europe throughout, fewer famines and fewer diseases arising from want have prevailed in the last century than in those which preceded it.

On the whole, therefore, though our future prospects respecting the mitigation of the evils arising from the principle of population may not be so bright as we could wish, yet they are far from

1 I cannot believe that the removal of all unjust grounds of discontent against constituted authorities would render the people torpid and indifferent to advantages which are really attainable. The blessings of civil liberty are so great that they surely cannot need the aid of false coloring to make them desirable. I should be sorry to think that the lower classes of people could never be animated to assert their rights but by means of such illusory promises as will generally make the remedy of resistance much worse than the disease which it was intended

to cure.

being entirely disheartening, and by no means preclude that gradual and progressive improvement in human society, which before the late wild speculations on this subject was the object of rational expectation. To the laws of property and marriage, and to the apparently narrow principle of self-interest which prompts each individual to exert himself in bettering his condition, we are indebted for all the noblest exertions of human genius, for everything that distinguishes the civilized from the savage state. A strict inquiry into the principle of population obliges us to conclude that we shall never be able to throw down the ladder by which we have risen to this eminence; but it by no means proves that we may not rise higher by the same means. The structure of society in its great features will probably always remain unchanged. (We have every reason to believe that it will always consist of a class of proprietors and a class of laborers; but the ✓ condition of each and the proportion which they bear to each other may be so altered as greatly to improve the harmony and beauty of the whole.) It would indeed be a melancholy reflection that, while the views of physical science are daily enlarging so as scarcely to be bounded by the most distant horizon, the science of moral and political philosophy should be confined within such narrow limits, or at best be so feeble in its influence as to be unable to counteract the obstacles to human happiness arising from a single cause. But however formidable these obstacles may have appeared in some parts of this work, it is hoped that the general result of the inquiry is such as not to make us give up the improvement of human society in despair. The partial good which seems to be attainable is worthy of all our exertions, is sufficient to direct our efforts and animate our prospects. And although we cannot expect that the virtue and happiness of mankind will keep pace with the brilliant career of physical discovery; yet if we are not wanting to ourselves, we may confidently indulge the hope that to no unimportant extent they will be influenced by its progress and will partake in its success.

CHAPTER II

THE DECLINING BIRTH RATE

The decline in fertility as shown by corrected birth rates, 80.- Causes of the declining birth rate, 84. The natural rate of population-increase in different countries, 94. The effective desire for offspring, 96.- Spencer's theory of individuation, 100.

[It would be interesting to review the earlier critics of Malthus, but it would serve no essential purpose, interesting and curious as many of their ideas were. In the main they either combat his theory on theological grounds, aim their shafts at some nonessential part of it, or attempt to set up crudely supported theories of their own to demonstrate the baselessness of a fear of overpopulation. The first attempt to deal with the population problem, after Malthus, which has had any influence on present-day thought was that of Herbert Spencer, a theory based upon biological and physiological postulates. Spencer's theory is worthy of close attention, but it is without scientific proof. John Rae's sojourn and observations in Hawaii led him to emphasize a psychological factor- the desire for offspring-and its variability in the face of racial contacts, a matter also touched upon by Robert Louis Stevenson.1

The necessity for a restatement of the theory of population has been forced in recent years not only by the development of the social sciences, but by the declining birth rate, which Malthus did not and could not foresee. Not only has the ratio of births to total population fallen, but the actual fertility rate has decreased also. Nevertheless the death rate has declined so fast that the rate of natural increase is as high as, or higher than, at any time in the past hundred years. While the decrease in the birth rate

1 The South Seas, chap. v.

calls for explanation, and while its bearing on the future of the population problem must be analyzed, it remains evident from the table of natural increase that the fundamental question of the relation of population to subsistence is before the future, as the past, for solution.]

4. THE DECLINE OF HUMAN FERTILITY IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND OTHER COUNTRIES AS SHOWN BY CORRECTED BIRTH RATES1

In dealing with birth statistics one or the other of two objects may be desired: to ascertain the rate of natural increase of a community, or to determine its fertility. The first object is achieved by deducting the crude death rate from the birth rate as ordinarily stated. The statistics thus obtained are of great importance as indicating the results of the natural forces at work. But they deal with results only, and if the forces themselves are to be made an object of inquiry, a rearrangement of the facts and their statement in different terms from those of the crude birth and death rates are necessary. The corrected rate measures a force, the crude rate the result of the operation of this force. Thus in the case of death rates the inherent tendency to mortality is measured, not by the crude, but by the corrected death rate, the crude death rate stating the result of the tendency to death acting upon a population of given age and sex constitution. The Registrar-General's reports have accustomed us to the distinction for death rates, and we should not think of using crude death rates as an index of mortality in this sense. But for birth rates it is otherwise. The birth rate as ordinarily stated, which will be referred to henceforward as the crude birth rate, is still generally employed as the measure of the tendency of a population to increase by natural means, no other measure being in most cases readily available. That such use is often entirely misleading will be abundantly proved by numerous specific instances in the course of this paper.

1 By Arthur Newsholme, M.D., and T. H. C. Stevenson, M.D. Adapted from th Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Vol. LXIX (March, 1906), pp. 34-87.

If a clue as to the future and an explanation of past experience is required, a method of stating the birth rate analogous to that by which corrected death rates are obtained is necessary. Such a birth rate should be an accurate measure of the tendency of the community to increase, just as the corrected death rate forms an accurate statement of its tendency to decrease. In other words, the corrected birth rate must be a measure of fertility, which, operative in a population of given constitution as to age, sex, and conjugal condition, produces as its result the crude birth rate. . . .1

It must be remembered that by the method of calculation adopted in this paper, the influences of differences in proportion

1 The authors' description of their method of calculating corrected birth rates is given in the Journal of Hygiene, Vol. V, No. 2, April, 1905.

In order fairly to compare the fertility of two populations, or of the same population at different periods, it is necessary to take some community of known age, sex, and marital condition, find in said community the actual birth rate in each age group of married women of childbearing age, if we are seeking legitimate birth rates (or of all women of childbearing age, if we are seeking "total" birth rates), and to regard these rates by age groups as standard fertility rates for those groups. The authors chose the rates of Sweden in 1891 as the standard. Secondly, knowing the age, sex, and marital distribution of the population of England and Wales in 1901, they find for each age group of married women of childbearing age (15-20, 20-25, etc.) the number of children that would have been born in England and Wales had the women there had the same actual fertility, age for age, as those in Sweden in 1891, This gives a hypothetical legitimate birth rate, calculated on the whole population, of 34.91, and this rate the authors take as their standard birth rate with which other birth rates are compared. Thirdly, suppose we wish to compare the fertility of London women with those of England and Wales as a whole. In the same way a standard birth rate for London is calculated. It represents the birth rate London would have had, had London women in 1901 been of the same fertility as Swedish women in 1891. It turns out to be 36.95. The question is if London had had the same age, sex, and marital distribution of its population as had England and Wales, what would its crude birth rate have been? This is the "corrected birth rate" for which we are seeking. The 34.91 ratio of the standard rate of England and Wales to that of London is .9448. The standard rate of England and Wales, in other words, is only 94.48 per cent of that of London because London has an age, sex, and conjugal distribution of its population more favorable to childbearing than have England and Wales at large. It follows that if we multiply the actual recorded London rate by this "factor of correction" (.9448) we shall get a figure which represents the birth rate London would have had had its population been of the same age, sex, and conjugal distribution as that of England and Wales. Since London's crude birth rate in 1901 was 27.42, its corrected birth rate was 0.9448(27.42), or 25.91. The factor of correction is of course different for each community. — ED.

36.95

or