Year. Number of Number of Cases Percentage of England and Members at of lying-in cases paid to Wales: births the beginning Benefit paid total Membership per 1000 of of each year. during year. at beginning the total of year. population.
1866 10,571 2,300 21.76 35.2 1867 12,051 2,853 23.68 35.4 1868 13,568 3,075 22.66 35.8 1869 15,903 3,509 22.07 34.8 1870 18,369 4,173 22.72 35.2 1871 21,484 4,685 21.81 35.0 1872 26,510 6,156 23.22 35.6 1873 32,837 7,386 22.49 35.4 1874 40,740 9,603 23.57 36.0 1875 51,144 13,103 23.66 35.4 1876 64,421 15,473 24.02 36.3 1877 76,369 18,423 24.11 36.0 1878 84,471 20,409 24.16 35.5 1879 90,603 22,057 24.34 34.7 1880 91,986 22,740 24.72 34.2 1881 93,615 21,950 23.45 33.9 1882 96,006 21,860 22.77 33.8 1883 98,873 21,577 21.82 33.5 1884 104,339 21,375 20.51 33.6 1885 105,622 21,277 20.14 32.9 1886 109,074 21,856 20.04 32.8 1887 111,937 20,590 18.39 31.9 1888 115,803 20,244 17.48 31.2 1889 123,223 20,503 16.64 31.1 1890 131,057 20,402 15.57 30.2 1891 141,269 22,500 15.93 31.4 1892 153,595 23,471 15.28 30.5 1893 169,344 25,430 15.02 30.8 1894 184,629 27,000 14.08 29.6 1895 201,075 29,263 14.55 30.4 1896 206,673 30,313 14.67
In this remarkable table the percentage of births to total membership gradually rose from 21.76, in 1866, to 24.72, in 1880, and then gradually declined to 14.67 in 1896.
This is a striking instance of the fact that the decrease in the total birth-rate is due more to a decrease in the fecundity of marriage, than to a decrease of the marriage-rate.
Mr. Webb adds:--"The well-known actuary, Mr. R.P. Hardy, watching the statistics year by year, and knowing intimately all the circ.u.mstances of the organisation, attributes this startling reduction in the number of births of children to these specially prosperous and specially thrifty artisans entirely to their deliberate desire to limit the size of their families."
The marriage-rate in England and Wales commenced to decline about three years before the sudden change in the birth-rate of 1877, and continued to fall till about 1880, but has maintained a fairly uniform standard since then, rising slightly in fact, the birth-rate, meanwhile, descending rapidly.
CHAPTER IV.
MEANS ADOPTED.
_Family Responsibility--Natural fertility undiminished.--Voluntary prevention and physiological knowledge.--New Zealand experience.--Diminishing influence of delayed marriage.--Practice of abortion.--Popular sympathy in criminal cases.--Absence of complicating issues in New Zealand.--Colonial desire for comfort and happiness._
There is a gradually increasing consensus of opinion amongst statisticians, that the explanation of the decrease in the number of births is to be found in the desire of married persons to limit the family they have to rear and educate, and the voluntary practice of certain checks to conception in order to fulfil this desire.
It is a.s.sumed that there is no diminution in the natural fertility of either s.e.x. There is no evidence to show that s.e.xual desire is not as powerful and universal as it ever was in the history of the race; nor is there any evidence to show that the generative elements have lost any of their fertilizing and developmental properties and power.
Dr. J.S. Billings in the June number of the _Forum_ for 1893, says that "the most important factor in the change is the deliberate and voluntary avoidance or prevention of child-bearing on the part of a steadily increasing number of married people, who not only prefer to have but few children, but who know how to obtain their wish."
He further says, "there is no good reason for thinking that there is a diminished power to produce children in either s.e.x."
M. a.r.s.ene Dumont in "Natalite et Democratie" discusses the declining birth-rate of France, and finds the cause to be the voluntary prevention of child-bearing on the part of the people, going so far as to say that where large families occur amongst the peasantry, it is due to ignorance of the means of prevention.
The birth-rate in none of the civilized countries of the world has diminished so rapidly as in New Zealand. It was 40.8 in 1880; it was 25.6 in 1900, a loss of 15.2 births per 1000 of the population in 20 years.
There is no known economic cause for this decline. The prosperity of the Colony has been most marked during these years.
Observation and statistics force upon us the conclusion that voluntary effort upon the part of married couples to prevent conception is the one great cause of the low and declining birth-rate. The means adopted are artificial checks and intermittent s.e.xual restraint, within the marriage bond, the latter tending to replace the former amongst normal women, as physiological knowledge spreads.
Delayed marriage still has its influence on the birth-rate, but with the spread of the same knowledge, that influence is a distinguishing quant.i.ty.
Delayed marriage under Malthusian principles would exert a potent influence in limiting the births, because early marriages were, and, under normal circ.u.mstances would still be, fruitful.
In the 28th annual report relating to the registration and return of Births, Marriages and Deaths in Michigan for the year 1894 (p. 125), it is stated that "The mean number of children borne by females married at from 15 to 19 years of age inclusive, is 6.76. For the next five year period of ages, it is 5.32, or a loss of 1.44 children per marriage, this attending an advance of five years in age at marriage."
Voluntary effort frequently expresses itself in the practice of abortion. Many monthly nurses degenerate into abortionists and practise their calling largely, while many women have learned successfully to operate on themselves.
The extent to which this method of limiting births is practised, and the absence of public sentiment against it, in fact the wide-spread sympathy extended to it, may be surmised from the facts that at a recent trial of a Doctor in Christchurch, New Zealand, for alleged criminal abortion, a large crowd gathered outside the Court, greeting the accused by a demonstration in his favour on his being discharged by the jury. A similar verdict in a similar case in Auckland, New Zealand, was greeted by applause by the spectators in a crowded Court, which brought down the indignant censure of the presiding Judge.
In New Zealand there is no oppressive misgovernment, there is no land question in the sense in which Nitti applies the term, there is no poverty to account for a declining birth-rate or to confuse the problem.
There is prosperity on every hand, and want is almost unknown. And yet, fewer and fewer children, in proportion to the population, and in proportion to the number of marriages, are born into the colony every year. The only reason that can be given is that the people, though they want marriage and do marry, do not wish to bear more children than they can safely, easily, and healthfully support, with a due and ever-increasing regard for their own personal comfort and happiness.
They have learned that marriage and procreation are not necessarily inseperable and they practice what they know.
CHAPTER V.
CAUSES OF DECLINING BIRTH-RATE.
_Influence of self-restraint without continence_.--_Desire to limit families in New Zealand not due to poverty_.--_Offspring cannot be limited without self-restraint_.--_New Zealand"s economic condition_.--_High standard of general education_.--_Tendency to migrate within the colony_.--_Diffusion of ideas_.--_Free social migration between all cla.s.ses_.--_Desire to migrate upwards_.--_Desire to raise the standard of ease and comfort_.--_Social status the measure of financial status_.--_Social attraction of one cla.s.s to next below_.--_Each conscious of his limitation_.--_Large families confirm this limitation_.--_The cost of the family_.--_The cost of maternity.
The craving for ease and luxury_.--_Parents" desire for their children"s social success_.--_Humble homes bear distinguished sons. Large number with University education in New Zealand_.--_No child labour except in hop and dairy districts_.--_Hopeless poverty a cause of high birth-rates_.--_High birth-rates a cause of poverty_.--_Fecundity depends on capacity of the female to bear children_.
The first or direct cause of this decline in the birth-rate then, is the inhibition of conception by voluntary means, on the part of those capable of bearing children.
This inhibition is the result of a desire on the part of both s.e.xes to limit their families.
Conception is inhibited by means which do not necessitate continence, but which do necessitate some, and in many cases, a great amount of self-restraint. But how comes it, that in these days of progress and prosperity, especially in New Zealand, a desire to limit offspring should exist amongst its people, and that the desire should be so strong and so universal?
The desire for this limitation must be strong, for there is absolutely no evidence that the pa.s.sion for marriage has lost any of its force; it must be extensive for the statistics show its results, and the experience of medical men bears the contention out.
While the marriage pa.s.sion remains normal, offspring cannot be limited without the exercise of self-restraint on the part of both parties to the marriage compact. Artificial means of inhibiting conception, and intermittent restraint are antagonistic to the s.e.xual instinct, and the desire for limitation must be strong and mutual to counteract this instinct within the marriage bond.
The reasons for this strong and very general desire, that marriage should not result in numerous births must have some foundation. What is it?
It cannot be poverty. New Zealand"s economic experience has been one of uniform progress and prosperity. There is abundant and fertile land in these islands where droughts, floods, and famine years, are practically unknown. Blissards and destructive storms are mysterious terms.
Fluctuations in production take place of course, but not such as to result in want, to any noticeable extent. There are no extremes of heat and cold, no extremes of drought and flood, no extremes of wealth and poverty. The climate is equable, the progress is uniform, the cla.s.ses are at peace.
Every natural blessing that a people could desire in a country, is to be found in New Zealand. Climate, natural fertility, and production, unrivalled scenery in mountain, lake, and forest, everything to bless and prosper the present, and inspire hope in the future. Why is it that, with all this wealth, and with the country still progressing and yet undeveloped, a desire exists in the heart of the people to limit families.
The reason is social not economic, if one may contrast the terms.
Take women"s att.i.tude to the question first. Our women are well educated. A state system of compulsory education has placed within the reach of all a good education, up to what is known as the VI. or VII.
Standard, and only a very few in the colony have been too poor or too rich to take advantage of it.
Most women can and do read an extensive literature, and to this they have abundant access, for even small country towns have good libraries.
Alexandra, a little town of 400 inhabitants amongst the Central Otago mountains, has a public library of several thousand volumes, and the people take as much pride in this inst.i.tution as in their school and church.
People move about from place to place, and it is surprising how small and even large families keep migrating from one part of the colony to another. They are always making new friends and acquaintances, and with these interchanging ideas and information.
Cla.s.s distinctions have no clear and defined line of demarcation, and there is a free migration between all the cla.s.ses; the highest, which is not very high, is always being recruited from those below, and from even the lowest, which is not very low.
The highest cla.s.s is not completely out of sight of any cla.s.s below it, and many families are distributed evenly over all the cla.s.ses. A woman is the wife of a judge, a sister is the President of a Woman"s Union, another sister is in a shop, and a fourth is married to a labourer.
If one of the poorer (they do not like "lower") cla.s.s rises in the social scale, he or she is welcome--if one of the richer (they do not like "higher") falls, no effort is made by the cla.s.s they formerly belonged to to maintain her status in order to save its dignity or repute.
In other words, there are not the hindrances to free migration between the various strata of society that obtain in other lands. Not only is that migration continually taking place, but there are very few who are not touched by a consciousness of it.