CHAPTER II.

THE REMEDY: OLD AND NEW.

The principle stated at the end of the preceding chapter being assumed,

the question arises: How can the evils caused by the constant tendency

towards over-population be prevented? The method which Mr. Malthus

proposed was the substitution of the prudential (or birth-restricting)

for the positive (or life-destroying) check. He advised late marriage

and celibacy as the most moral means of restraining population. He

urged that men should wait until they were in a position to provide

for a family before undertaking the responsibilities consequent upon

the marriage state. He says: "Our obligation not to marry till we have

a fair prospect of being able to support our children will appear to

deserve the attention of the moralist, if it can be proved that an

attention to these obligations is of more effect in the prevention of

misery than all the other virtues combined; and that if, in violation

of this duty, it was the general custom to follow the first impulse

of nature, and marry at the age of puberty, the universal prevalence

of every known virtue in the greatest conceivable degree would fail of

rescuing society from the most wretched and deplorable state of want,

and all the diseases and famines which usually accompany it."

This, then, was the prudential check advocated by Malthus; but since

his time it has been perceived that his remedy is in itself the cause

of evils scarcely less terrible than those which it was designed

to remove. Further, it is one which, in the vast majority of cases,

could not possibly be put into practice; for it assumes a power of

mental control over the sexual passion which exists in a comparatively

small number of individuals.

The physiological evils arising from celibacy, and, in lesser degree,

from prolonged abstention from marriage, are of the most disastrous

nature. Celibacy is necessarily a condition of privation and suffering,

since it involves the deliberate and incessant suppression of the

most powerful instinct of mankind. The pure and elevating joys of

wedded and family life are shut out, and existence is shorn of its

most delightful features. The unselfish pleasure of promoting the

happiness of a loved wife and children is denied to the morbid and

gloomy celibate, doomed to a solitary and cheerless existence. And

even when permanent celibacy is not contemplated, marriage may be

deferred until the bloom and brightness of life are gone for ever,

until delay and disappointment have soured the temper and choked the

fountain of affection.

Dr. Bertillon, of Paris, has proved conclusively by statistics derived

from France, Holland and Belgium, that married persons, especially

males, live much longer than single ones, and are less liable to become

insane, criminal, or vicious. It has been shown that the married state

reduces the danger of insanity by nearly one-half. With regard to the

effects of celibacy upon individuals, Dr. Holmes Coote is reported

in the Lancet to have said: "No doubt incontinence is a great sin;

but the evils connected with continence are productive of far greater

misery to society. Any person could bear witness to this who has had

experience in the wards of lunatic asylums."

In addition to the personal ills arising from celibacy, it must be

remembered that late marriage directly encourages prostitution, the

most hideous blot upon our social state. Malthus, indeed, laid great

stress upon the duty of chastity whilst young men were engaged in

accumulating the means to enable them to marry and rear a family later

in life. He might as fitly have preached to the whirlwind, or exhorted

the storm to moderate its violence. The power of restraint is given

to but few men; and, even when that restraint can be exercised, it

is only at the cost of much suffering and physical and moral detriment.

The later school of thinkers, whilst adopting the principle formulated

by Malthus, propound an infinitely better method of compassing the

end which he had in view. They advocate early marriage and limited

families. It is not necessary that young men and women should sacrifice

the youth and freshness of their lives in order that they may marry

when the evening shadows are lengthening around them. The blessings

of domestic comfort, of intimate companionship and of family love

are opened to them in the noontide of life, when the possibility of

enjoyment is at its highest point. Mrs. Annie Besant says: "To be

in harmony with nature, men and women should be husbands and wives,

fathers and mothers, and until nature evolves a neuter sex celibacy

will ever be a mark of imperfection.... No one who desires society

to be happy and healthy should recommend late marriage as a cure for

the social evils around us. Early marriage is best, both physically

and morally; it guards purity, softens the affections, trains the

heart, and preserves physical health; it teaches thought for others,

gentleness and self-control; it makes men gentler and women braver

from the contact of their differing natures. The children that spring

from such marriages--where not following each other too rapidly--are

more vigorous and healthy than those of middle-aged parents; and in

the ordinary course of nature the parents of such children live long

enough to see them make their start in life, to aid, strengthen,

and counsel them at the beginning of their career."

Medical science has shown that the size of families is absolutely

under the control of parents, if they will but exercise a reasonable

degree of care and forethought. A young couple may now enter the

marriage-state without misgiving: for the number of their offspring

can be regulated in proportion to their means as surely as they can

determine the amount of their expenditure upon clothing or luxuries.

Thus the teachings of Malthusianism, combined with the later

development of innocent prudential checks, open up boundless

possibilities for the improvement of social conditions. When the law

of population--a law of nature--is clearly understood, it becomes

possible for man, by the exercise of his reason, to control its

operation, just as he constructs dykes to protect his crops from

floods, or diverts the lightning harmlessly into the ground.

Let us see, then, how the general adoption of the New-Malthusian

principle of early marriage and limited families would affect the

welfare of individuals and of the nation at large.

The knowledge of prudential checks immensely increases the

possibility of happiness for every man and woman whose means are

"limited." Marriage ceases to be a hazardous enterprise, which may

bring in its train liabilities terribly out of proportion to the

power of meeting them. The husband is relieved from anxiety lest

his children may increase whilst his ability to provide suitably

for them remains a fixed, or even diminishing, quantity. The wife

need no longer dread the burden of continual child-bearing and the

incessant servitude of domestic drudgery. How much of the drunkenness

that exists amongst the working-class is due to the discomfort of a

crowded and cheerless home! The husband, wearied with his day's toil,

returns to his narrow lodgings to find his wife, harassed and soured

by the petty cares of a large family, sharp in temper and tongue. The

tender romance of courtship is dispelled by the never-ending round

of household slavery, with the constant need of "making both ends

meet," of contriving that every sixpence shall do the work of a

shilling. And over all there hangs the haunting fear that sickness

or loss of employment may disable the bread-winner, and that the

wolf of hunger, ever waiting outside, may show his fangs within

the door. Little cause is there for wonder that in many cases the

sweetheart of happier days becomes a shrew and slattern, or that the

toil-worn husband flies to the ruinous joys of the tap-room in a vain

attempt to escape from the vexations that surround him in his "home."

And what of the children? They are at once the innocent cause and

the helpless victims of the misery that encompasses them. The wage

that would amply provide for two or three is inadequate for the

proper support of seven or eight, and their little frames suffer from

insufficient nourishment. The overburdened mother cannot bestow upon

so large a flock the loving care and attention that children need for

their proper physical and mental development. Thus they grow up (if

haply they survive), enfeebled in mind and constitution, transmitting

to the next generation their own defects in an aggravated form.

It is amongst the very poorest of our fellow-creatures that we see

the horrors of over-population in their most heartrending aspect. In

the squalid courts and alleys of our great cities the dismal stream

of child-life is constantly at high-water mark. The parents, ignorant

and hopeless, callous by reason of their daily contact with misery,

"increase and multiply" instinctively, as do the beasts of the

field. Amongst the poor the birth-rate is (broadly speaking) double as

high as that of the richer classes. A few years ago the birth-rate in

wealthy Kensington was 20 per 1,000; in the poor district of Bethnal

Green it was 40 per 1,000. This deplorable state of things is not

peculiar to Great Britain: it prevails, with slight variations as to

details, in all so-called civilised countries.

But the birth-rate tells only one-half of the piteous tale: it is the

death-rate which completes the measure of human suffering caused by

the insensate increase of population. In the course of his address

to the Association of Sanitary Inspectors in 1888, Sir Edwin Chadwick

stated that amongst the gentry and professional persons the deaths of

children under five years of age in Brighton formed 8·93 per cent. of

the total deaths, while among the wage-earning class they formed

45·44 per cent. He also said that in Brighton the mean (or average)

age at death for wage-earners is 28·8 years; for the rich it is 63

years. Dr. Playfair has shown that 18 per cent. of the children of

the upper class, 36 per cent. of those of the tradesman class, and

55 per cent. of those of the workmen die before they reach the age

of five years.

Here we see the painful positive or natural checks to population at

work in our very midst. Death stands with his sword and ruthlessly

strikes out the redundant lives. What pen can picture the frightful

suffering indicated by the figures given above? The mother's pangs

of child-birth: her protracted agony of grief as she watches the

ravages of disease upon the weakly frame of her ill-fed, ill-clothed,

ill-tended babe: the last dread scene when death releases from

its misery the child that should never have been called into

existence! This squalid tragedy is enacted a thousand times; and the

upshot of it all is five hundred little coffins hastily thrust into

the earth.

And what of those that survive? Here and there one may rise above

his fellows in the struggle for existence; but the vast majority of

those who pass through the valley of the shadow of death emerge into

a laborious and joyless existence. Of the males a section will drift

into pauperism or crime; many of the females will be driven by want

to the shameful traffic of prostitution. The honest and industrious

are doomed to a life of incessant toil and privation; and with their

numerous offspring will begin another cycle of the obscure tragedy.

In this way, the nation ever renews within itself the elements

of its own weakness and despair. The question of the unemployed is

ultimately a question of over-population; and wages are reduced by the

competition, one against another, of desperate men seeking bread for

their wives and families. Trade Unions and other forms of combination

may partially and temporarily improve the condition of a section of the

workers; but in the long run every advance in comfort is overtaken and

swallowed up by the increase of population stimulated by prosperity.

Thus, unless the teachings of New-Malthusianism be generally acted

upon, poverty will remain a permanent feature of society; and, as we

have already said, the element of poverty is a constant menace to the

community at large. The strength of a chain is that of its weakest

link. The wealth, luxury, and refinement of society exist upon a frail

tenure if the desperation of the poorest class is suffered to pass

a certain limit. History has shown us the civilisation of centuries

extinguished by hordes of barbarians, driven by hunger from their

sterile lands. In Paris, during times of revolutionary excitement,

the Faubourg St. Antoine pours forth its thousands of gaunt and

tattered spectres to make war upon society.

Prudence in the matter of population, then, is seen to be the only

way of conserving the most valuable and progressive elements in

human society. In this, as in other countries, the apostles of the

new teaching have been confronted by the prejudices handed down from

previous generations; and in the succeeding chapter we shall trace

the history of the Malthusian movement in England and abroad.

The Malthusian Handbook Designed to Induce Married People to Limit Their Families Within Their Means. · 第 2 / 5 章