1 (

2

says; The yield of the soil stands in direct ratio to the human labor expended, and the proper fertilizers applied to it," and Henry George maintains that the economies from subdivision of labor more than make up for any losses occasioned by resort to poorer soils, and he illustrates his point from the history of California, where he says labor was more productive in 1879 than in 1849. The objection brings into question the truth of the law of diminishing returns, or rather the interpretation of it. For it must be remembered that diminishing returns do not begin immediately after the first application of labor and capital. An increasing return to the maximum may precede the inevitable decrease. The point of maximum returns varies with different products and can be ascertained only by experiment, but a point of diminishing returns is finally reached in all extractive industries. It is quite possible that the productive power of labor may have increased in California in the 30-year period mentioned; but it would be rash to conclude, therefore, that it would continue to increase indefinitely with an indefinite growth of population. The law of diminishing returns is too well established by the experience of every farmer and too widely accepted as a theory to be lightly abandoned.

We may conclude then, that the essential propositions in the Malthusian theory have been only slightly modified by the attacks of critics. As evolution proceeds it is possible that the power of generation declines somewhat; and in advancing societies the progress of the arts and the advantages of greater cooperation and division of labor are undoubted influences in helping to defer the point of diminishing returns; but we have no reason to suppose that these influences are sufficient to render invalid the general principle that population tends to increase faster than the food supply.

Although the essential principles enunciated in the Malthusian law must be regarded as sound, the law is far from satisfactory because it fails to explain existing variations in birth rates among different classes and peoples. If birth statistics are explained in Malthusian terms, it is evident that an increase in numbers is checked among the poorer classes by a high death rate, and among the middle and upper classes by a low birth rate. And inasmuch as the rate of increase is lowest among the wealthier classes, the conclusion is that the preventive check.is more effective than the positive check; but the reason for the difference does not appear in the Malthusian theory. The objection to the Malthusian law is not that it is incorrect but that it is insufficient. In fact the theory leaves off about where a modern theory of population should begin. To explain variations in birth rates more must be known about the conditions under which population checks, especially the preventive check, act.

Dumont's theory. A helpful supplement to the Malthusian theory is to be found in the suggestion of Arsène Dumont 1 that population varies inversely with “social capillarity”; that is, the tendency to rise in the social scale. The valuable point contained in this formula is that if family burdens conflict with the maintenance of a given standard of living, the latter will be chosen in preference to the former. This fact, which seems to be of general application, accounts for the smaller rate of multiplication of the middle class, because it, under the present conditions of competition, has considerable difficulty in retaining or raising the standards generally prevailing in that class. In a modified form it explains too the small families of the upper class for, although large families would not in that circle interfere with standards of living so far as expense was concerned, they would interfere with personal comfort and with the performance of exacting social obligations, which after all do enter into standards of living. It helps also to explain the high birth rate of the unskilled laboring classes, for in their case maximum wages come at an early age, permitting youthful marriages, and standards of living are not so easily affected by size of family. The families of casual laborers may fall below the poverty line when the children are young, but they rise above it when the children have become wage earners; and the important point is that with them variations in fortune do not interfere with social standing.

This theory explains also the greater decline in the birth rate in the more progressive countries, for in those countries the standards of living are constantly rising and to maintain a social position more is necessary than the simple continuance of former standards; whereas in countries like Russia the great mass of the population has no hope of improving its condition, and hence no incentive exists for checking the procreative instinct. This law, which might be called the social law of population, includes more than the economic factor, although economic factors are probably the chief influences controlling the growth of population in the middle class. Yule 1 has shown that in England industrial conditions, as indicated by price changes, have affected directly both the marriage rate and the birth rate. The decline of the marriage rate is not sufficient however to make up for the decline in the birth rate. Leaving out of account the marriage rate, a direct correlation is to be found between economic factors and the birth rate. Newsholme and Stevenson 2 from their study of the decline of human fertility conclude that: " It is associated with a general raising of the standard of comfort; and is an expression of the determination of the people to secure this greater comfort. It is not caused by a greater stress in modern life, but is a consequence of a greater desire for luxury.” Conditions indicate that social ambition is stronger than the parental desire; and, although this may be deprecated by those who emphasize the need of a rapid increase in population, the importance of an effective social ambition should not be minimized, for it furnishes the incentive to raise standards of living. It is true that in certain groups the social desire is exaggerated, possibly perverted, but this fact does not invalidate any normal expression of the desire. In the long run normal social ambition should not interfere with healthy family life. The recent decline in birth rate in certain groups is probably a temporary phenomenon, an attempt at readjustment to new and probably somewhat unhealthy industrial conditions. It seems to accompany concentration of wealth and the relatively poorer position of the middle and lower classes.

1 Journal, Royal Statistical Society, March, 1906.
2 Journal, Royal Statistical Society, March, 1906.

Summary of Influences Affecting the Birth Rate. Before proceeding to a discussion of the death rate, a preliminary statement of the laws of population may be made. The natural fertility of the human species seems to be sufficient to warrant a higher rate of increase than actually exists. In fact there is no reason to suppose that the fecundity of the human race as a whole has declined. The action of selection would be sufficient to keep up the fertility of the race, provided fertility was an inherited trait, and Pearson concludes that it is.' Infertile families would be quickly eliminated, and those who were least fertile would come to bear a smaller and smaller proportion to the total population.

No people is actually multiplying at its inherent capacity, both because death rates are higher than the minimum, and because birth rates are lower than the maximum. Many influences are at work to restrict the growth of populations in both these ways. The ultimate restricting factor would be a scarcity of food; but other causes usually intervene to limit numbers among civilized peoples long before they are in danger of restriction from starvation. In a country with plenty of fertile land, as was the case in the American colonies, early marriages and a high rate of multiplication are to be expected until the land is appropriated and class distinctions arise which alter the conditions of multiplication. In old and more stationary countries, like Austria, the population has accustomed itself to a particular standard of living; and the rate of increase is that permitted by the environment on the accustomed plane of living. If conditions of production do not change the birth rate remains comparatively stationary. If progress is stimulated and wealth increases, the added wealth may either be absorbed by an increase in numbers, or more wealth may be consumed per capita, thus raising the standard of comfort. Ordinarily both tendencies will be present. Those who feel the effects of the increased wealth first will probably consume more and others belonging to the same general class will imitate them. Those who receive the wealth later and more slowly will probably multiply more rapidly with little or no improvement in standards. Individuals

will try to hold to the standards in their own class, and if this becomes difficult under the new conditions, they will defer marriage or limit births rather than fall to the level of the class below them.

Three variables must be considered in the problem of population; the environment, by which is meant wealth producing possibilities, the standard of living, and the rate of multiplication, or at this point of the discussion we may say the birth rate. If the environment does not change, the other factors vary inversely. If a high standard of living is maintained the birth rate must be low, but if a low standard satisfies a people the birth rate will be high. In case the environment changes for the better, both the other factors might rise; and, in case the environment becomes less favorable, both might be lowered, though in the latter case the birth rate usually declines more rapidly than the plane of living. In case wealth producing facilities improve, either one of the other two factors might show the greater increase according to the character of the improvement. If the increase in wealth were gradual and small in amount, population would probably increase more rapidly, but if the increase in wealth were rapid and considerable in amount, the standard of living would probably rise conspicuously. Changes in the relative positions of the standard of living and of the birth rate might conceivably come from improvements in education or other psychological changes, but they are most likely to result from the stimulus of alterations in the external environment.

REFERENCES FOR COLLATERAL READING

ELLIS, H., The Task of Social Hygiene, Ch. 5.

HANKINS, F. H., The Declining Birth Rate, Journal of Heredity 5: 361.

HOLMES, S. J., The Trend of the Race.

MALTHUS, T. R., An Essay on the Principle of Population.

NEWSHOLME, A., The Declining Birth Rate.

NITTI, F. S., Population and the Social System.

Report of the National Birth Rate Commission.

SPENCER, H., Principles of Biology.

TAUSSIG, F., Principles of Economics, Vol. II, Chs. 53, 54, and 55. WOLFE, A. B., Readings in Social Problems, Chs. 1, 2, and 6.