CONCLUSION: EMINENT OPINIONS
THE PROGRESS OF HOLLAND
_WAGES AND THE COST OF LIVING. C. V. Drysdale, D.Sc._
Unlike those of other countries, who, in Lord Morley’s words, have
shirked the population question, the statesmen of Holland have been
fully alive to it, and have made their country the only one where
facilities have been given to the poorer classes to freely obtain
knowledge as to the best means of restricting families. The following
strong statement by Heer S. van Houten, late Minister of the Interior in
the Netherlands (Staats Kundige Brieven, 1899), leaves no doubt as to
this difference of outlook:—
“Wage-slavery exists as a consequence of the carelessness with which the
former generation produced wage-slaves; and this slavery will continue
so long as the adult children of these wage-slaves have nothing better
to do than to reproduce wage-slaves. The fault lies in our poorer
classes themselves, and also in some clergymen and _orthodox pedants_
who, in their preaching about morality, only permit a choice between an
unnaturally lengthened celibacy or an ever-increasing family with the
bonds of marriage, and who prevent the acceptance of the higher
morality, which finds such easy acceptance among the better classes, of
marriage and restriction of the family to the number which the parents
can feed and comfortably rear.”
And Heer N. G. Pierson, late Dutch Minister of Finance, has expressed
himself equally strongly in his Political Economy, which has just been
translated into English:—
“No improvement in the economic situation can be hoped for if the number
of births be not considerably diminished.”
Under the ægis of these gentlemen and of Heer Gerritsen, a prominent
Councillor of Amsterdam, a Dutch Neo-Malthusianische Bond was formed in
1881, and has carried on an active propaganda among the working classes,
with the help of a number of qualified medical men and trained midwives.
So great has its success been that it now numbers over 5,000 members,
and it was recognised by Royal Decree in 1895 as a society of public
utility. An enormous number of practical brochures describing methods of
limitation are sent out gratis annually, and poor men and women can get
gratuitous advice in every important centre in Holland.
The result of this work, as indicated by the vital statistics, is
clearly seen in Fig. 11. The birth-rate has fallen from 37 in 1876 to 28
in 1912, and with especial regularity and rapidity during the last few
years. The death-rate has fallen more regularly and rapidly than in any
other country in the world (from a value averaging about 25 per 1,000 to
only just over 12 per 1,000 in 1912), and the infantile mortality has
similarly shown the most rapid fall on record. It will be observed that,
far from this decline in the birth-rate having checked the increase of
population, the rate of “natural increase” is now higher than at any
previous period, and the highest in Western Europe. This indicates not
only that social conditions are rapidly improving, but that the
productive efficiency of the population is increasing, instead of
diminishing, as in our own country, where the “natural increase” has
fallen from 12 to 10 per 1,000. This is explainable on the eugenic
ground that in Holland family restriction has taken place among the
poor, and has thus tended to eliminate unfitness; while in this and
other countries the poor are almost entirely ignorant of restrictive
methods. And this view is strikingly confirmed by the paper read by Dr.
Soren Hansen at the Eugenics Congress of 1912, in which he stated that
the average stature of the Dutch people had increased by four inches
within the last fifty years. An examination of the heights of the young
men drawn for military service shows that since 1865 the proportion
under 5 ft. 2½ in. in height has fallen from 25 per cent. to under 8 per
cent., while that of those above 5 ft. 7 in. has increased from 24.5 per
cent. to 47.5 per cent. This is a most decided evidence of increased
well-being and elimination of unfitness. On the many occasions that I
have been in Holland, I have never yet seen any cases of that terrible
physical deterioration and economic misery which are so conspicuous in
this country. Further, the emigration of the Dutch population is almost
infinitesimal.
As regards wages and cost of living, Dutch statistics do not give
weighted index numbers to compare with the other figures. But the
unweighted mean of money wages of workers in the different government
services show the most rapid increase recorded, being about 25 per cent.
in Holland between 1894 and 1908, as against 18 per cent. in France and
10 per cent. in England and Wales. (Fig. 12).
As to prices, it is not easy to come to a definite conclusion, as some
articles have risen and some fallen in price; but there seems good
ground for believing that the cost of living has risen comparatively
little in Holland, and that real wages have therefore risen very
materially during the period when they have been declining in this and
other countries. It is certainly difficult in any case to see how the
undoubtedly great advance in health and physique experienced by the
Dutch population could have taken place without a great increase in real
wages.
According to a diagram given in the Manchester Guardian of August 16th
last the cost of living in Holland had gone up by 23 per cent. in 1912.
An examination of detailed prices, however, showed a relatively small
rise up to 1909.
These facts, together with many others which could be adduced, make it
clear that in Holland, the only country in which the population problem
has been realised and facilities for family limitation been extended to
the poor, the expectations of the Neo-Malthusians have been completely
justified, and their doctrines have received the confirmation of
experience. Amsterdam, in which the first lady doctor in Holland opened
a gratuitous clinic for the instruction of poor women in preventive
methods, has now the lowest deathrate and infantile mortality of any
European capital. And this is in no way attributable to any extension of
State help either of a socialistic type, or of that familiar to us in
this country, as Holland has been distinguished for its adherence to
individualism, and has apparently adopted hardly any measure of State
assistance.
_DR. S. ADOLPHUS KNOPF IN THE SURVEY, quoting Dr. J. Rutgers,
Honorable Secretary to Neo-Malthusian League of Holland._
“All children you now see are suitably dressed, they look now as neat as
formerly only the children of the village clergyman did. In the families
of the laborers there is now a better personal and general hygiene, a
finer moral and intellectual development. All this has become possible
by limitation in the number of children in these families. It may be
that now and then this preventive teaching has caused illicit
intercourse, but on the whole morality is now on a much higher level,
and mercenary prostitution with its demoralizing consequences and
propagation of contagious diseases is on the decline.
The best test (the only possible mathematical test) of our moral,
physiological and financial progress is the constant increase in
longevity of our population. In 1890 to 1899 it was 46.20; in 1900 to
1909 it was 51 years. Such rise cannot be equalled in any other country
except in Scandinavia where birth limitation was preached long before it
was in Holland. None of the dreadful consequences anticipated by the
advocates of clericalism, militarism and conservatism have occurred. In
spite of our low birth-rate the population in our country is rising
faster than ever before, simply because it is concomitant with a greater
economic improvement and better child hygiene.”
The good doctor closes his letter by saying: “One must have been a
family physician for twenty-five years like myself in a large city
(Rotterdam) to appreciate the blessings of conscious motherhood
resulting in the better care of children, the higher moral standard. And
all these blessings are taken away from you by your government’s
peculiar laws, made to please the Puritans.”
Dr. Jacobi, Ex-President of the American Medical Association and the New
York Academy of Medicine, said:
“The future of mankind is conditioned by its children. Unless they be
healthy and fit to work physically and mentally, they can not perform
any duty in the service of the family, the municipality or the state.
Hereditary influences propagate epilepsy, idiocy, feeble-mindedness and
cretinism. Such children should not have been permitted to be born. Yet
the prohibition of unnecessary and not wanted accessions of human beings
is considered criminal.”
Dr. Lydia Allen de Vilbis of the New York State Department of Health,
said that among the 25,000 deaths of children under one year of age that
occur annually in New York State, half were due to causes with which
medical boards could not hope to cope—the defective, the deformed, the
crippled, the diseased.
“What are we going to do about these babies who are born only to suffer
and die?” she asked. “There are at least 12,000 a year, 1,000 for each
month, more than thirty a day. What for? Because we are so stupid that
we still believe a pound of cure is better than an ounce of prevention.”
_MARY ALDEN HOPKINS. Harper’s Weekly, 1915._
“Last year more than ten thousand children were proposed to the
Department of Charities of New York City for commitment to
institutions,” writes John A. Kingsbury, Commissioner of Charities in
the Department of Public Charities of New York City, in reply to my
inquiry concerning his view of the limitation of families. “Poverty or
sickness or unemployment has outworn the welcome of more than ten
thousand innocent little citizens in their own homes. These children are
paying the penalty of the social error of too large families. It is
frequently remarked that children are often found in the largest number
in those homes which are least equipped to properly provide for them. I
believe it is as serious a mistake for parents in adverse circumstances
to bring children into the world for whom they are not prepared, as for
parents in affluent circumstances to decline to bear children because of
the inconvenience or embarrassment to their scheme of living. If
contraception can benefit the born by limiting the unborn, without
bringing about any physical or moral deterioration in human lives, I am
unqualifiedly in sympathy with it.”
_JUDGE WM. H. WADHAMS, Court of General Sessions, New York. “The
Spreading Movement for Birth Control.” The Survey, Oct. 21, 1916._
In the Court of General Sessions, New York City, Judge Wadhams suspended
sentence upon a woman, mother of six children, who had pleaded guilty to
a charge of burglary, her second offense. His investigation showed, the
judge declared, that the mother had made a hard, but unsuccessful
attempt to support her children since the father had been driven from
his work in garment working five years ago. Meantime, two of the
children had been born. Said Judge Wadhams:—
“Her husband is not permitted by the authorities to work because of his
being ill with tuberculosis. It would be dangerous for him to work on
children’s garments. It might spread consumption to the innocents. There
is a law against that. As a result of this law the husband has had no
work for four years. Nevertheless, he goes on producing children who
have very little chance under the conditions to be anything but
tubercular, and, themselves growing up, repeat the process with society.
There is no law against that. But we have not only no birth regulation
in such cases, but if information is given with respect to birth
regulation people are brought to the bar of justice for it. There is a
law they violate. The question is whether we have the most intelligent
law on this subject we might have. These matters are regulated better in
some of the old countries, particularly in Holland, than they are in
this country. I believe we are living in an age of ignorance, which at
some future time will be looked on aghast.”
_LETTER ADDRESSED TO PRESIDENT WILSON BY A GROUP OF NOTABLE ENGLISH
WRITERS AND SOCIOLOGISTS, September, 1915._
To the President of the United States,
White House, Washington, D.C.
Sir,—We understand that Mrs. Margaret Sanger is in danger of criminal
prosecution for circulating a pamphlet on birth-problems. We therefore
beg to draw your attention to the fact that such work as that of Mrs.
Sanger receives appreciation and circulation in every civilised country
except the United States of America, where it is still counted as a
criminal offence.
We, in England, passed a generation ago, through the phase of
prohibiting the expressions of serious and disinterested opinion on a
subject of such grave importance to humanity, and in our view to
suppress any such treatment of vital subjects is detrimental to human
progress.
Hence, not only for the benefit of Mrs. Sanger, but of humanity, we
respectfully beg you to exert your powerful influence in the interests
of free speech and the betterment of the race.
We beg to remain, Sir,
Your humble Servants,
(Signed)
Lena Ashwell,
Dr. Percy Ames,
William Archer,
Arnold Bennett,
Edward Carpenter,
Aylmer Maude,
Prof. Gilbert Murray,
M. C. Stopes,
H. G. Wells.
_GLOSSARY OF MEDICAL TERMS USED IN THIS VOLUME._
_Abortion_: As soon as the male _sperm_ has met and joined with the
female _ova_ any attempt at removing it or preventing its development or
further growth is called _Abortion_. _Abortion_ is not to be confused
with the _prevention of conception_. The practice of _Birth Control_,
founded on the _prevention of conception_ will eventually do away with
the necessity of _abortion_.
_Abortion_: the expulsion of the fetus before it is viable.—Dorland’s
Medical Dictionary.
_Abortion_: the arrest of any action or process before its normal
completion, as the _abortion_ of pneumonia.—Stedman’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Birth_: the delivery of a child—Gould’s Practitioner’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Birth Control_: a new social philosophy dedicated to conscious and
voluntary motherhood, and racial betterment.
_Conception_: the act of becoming pregnant.—Stedman’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Conception_: the fecundation of the _ovum_ by the
_spermatozoon_.—Gould’s Practitioner’s Medical Dictionary.
_Contraception_: the prevention of conception.—Stedman’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Contraceptive_: anything used to prevent conception.—Dorland’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Contraceptive_: an agent for the prevention of conception.—Stedman’s
Medical Dictionary.
_Fecundation_: impregnation or fertilization.—Dorland’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Fetus_: the unborn offspring of any viviparous animal; the child in the
womb after the end of the third month: before that time it is called the
_embryo_.
_Malthusianism_: (Thomas Robert Malthus, English political economist,
1766–1834). The doctrine that population increases in geometrical
progression; and the teaching, founded on this doctrine, that
over-population should be prevented.—Stedman’s Medical Dictionary.
_Doctrine of Malthus_: the doctrine that the increase of population is
proportionately greater than the increase of subsistence.—Gould’s
Practitioner’s Medical Dictionary.
_Theory of Malthus_: that small families will abolish poverty and
disease; recommends _continence_ and _late marriage_ to bring about this
result.
_Theory of Neo-Malthusians_: that small families will abolish poverty
and disease; recommends _early marriage_ and use of _preventive checks_
to bring about this result.
_Pregnancy_: gestation, fetation, gravidity.—Stedman’s Medical
Dictionary.
_Pregnancy_: results from the meeting and fusion of two living cells,
the cell furnished by the male (_spermatozoon_) and that by the female
(_ovum_). To avoid or to prevent conception or pregnancy, then, consists
of stopping the male cell from uniting with the female cell.
_Prevention of Conception_: to prevent the male _sperm_ from meeting the
female _ova_.
_Prevention of Conception_: the only logical and practical means for
eliminating _abortions_ when a child cannot be carried to full term.
_Preventive_: anything which arrests the threatened onset of
disease.—Stedman’s Medical Dictionary.
Modern Art Printing Co., New York.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
1. Changed ‘importing’ to ‘imparting’ on p. 6.
2. Added missing targets for the footnotes on pp. 33 and 34.
3. Changed ‘There are given’ to ‘These are given’ on p. 57.
4. Changed ‘since when’ to ‘since then’ on p. 59.
5. Changed ‘dotted are’ to ‘dotted area’ on p. 71.
6. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 21-23’ to the three illustrations on p.
90 per discussion on p. 71. Since no countries were identified the
three were left as one image.
7. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 24’ to the first illustration on p. 90
per discussion on p. 71.
8. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 25’ to the second illustration on p. 90
per discussion on p. 71.
9. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 26’ to the third illustration on p. 90
per discussion on p. 71.
10. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 27’ to the first illustration on p. 91
per discussion on p. 71.
11. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 28’ to the second illustration on p. 91
per discussion on p. 71.
12. Added missing caption ‘Fig. 29’ to the third illustration on p. 91
per discussion on p. 71.
13. Changed ‘Neuman’ to ‘Newman’ on p. 94.
14. Changed ‘they they’ to ‘that they’ on p. 103.
15. Changed ‘it shall be lawful’ to ‘it shall be unlawful’ on p. 110.
16. Changed ‘Table 8’ to ‘Table 18’ on p. 117.
17. Changed all mentions of the Michigan city from ‘Ann Harbor’ to ‘Ann
Arbor’.
18. Changed ‘Hubner’ to ‘Huhner’ on p. 186.
19. Changed ‘prostalic’ to ‘prostatic’, ‘diplethorize’ to
‘deplethorize’, and ‘chronic suggestion’ to ‘chronic congestion’
on p. 186.
20. Changed ‘physic and somatic’ to ‘psychic and somatic’ on p. 187.
21. Changed ‘always two paries’ to ‘always two parties’ on p. 187.
22. Changed ‘STANDPOINT OR’ to ‘STANDPOINT OF’ on p. 205.
23. Changed ‘65.5’ to ‘60.5’ on p. 210.
24. Changed ‘records, were contracted’ to ‘records, were contrasted’ on
p. 211.
25. Changed ‘Alfred Scott Warthin’ to ‘Aldred Scott Warthin’ on p. 229.
26. Changed ‘which is 1870–2’ to which in 1870–2’ on p. 232.
27. Changed ‘provision is’ to ‘provision is not’ on p. 235.
28. Changed ‘contions’ to ‘relations’ on p. 236.
29. Changed ‘about mortality’ to ‘about morality’ on p. 245.
30. Silently corrected typographical errors.
31. Retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed.
32. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
End of Project Gutenberg's The Case for Birth Control, by Margaret H. Sanger