The stigma of shame which has branded all illegitimate maternity unfortunately justifies the many cases of abortion, and even infanticide. Things ought to change in this respect, and in the future no pregnancy ought to be a source of shame for any healthy woman whatever, nor furnish the least motive for dissimulation. P. 411.
THE SMALL FAMILY SYSTEM. C. V. Drysdale, D.Sc.
Illegitimacy.—As far as statistics are concerned, the most valuable evidence is that relating to illegitimacy. The Registrar General’s Reports contain a useful amount of information upon this point, and give us the number of illegitimate births per thousand unmarried women within the fertile period, between the ages of 15 and 45. This illegitimacy rate for England and Wales is represented in Fig. [13], and it is noticeable that the fall since the year 1876 has been extremely rapid, much more so in fact than that of the fall in the general birth-rate or in the fertility rate of the married women. While the general birth-rate has fallen from 36.3 to 25.6 (or by 26.5 per cent.), the illegitimate birth-rate has fallen from 14.6 to 7.9 per thousand unmarried women (or by nearly 50 per cent.). This is most striking and satisfactory. An extreme instance is given in the county of Radnorshire, which in 1870–2 had a fertility rate of 308.6 births per 1,000 married women, which sank to 188.7 in 1909, or by 39 per cent. In the same interval the illegitimate birth-rate fell from 41.8 per 1,000 unmarried women to 7.2, or by no less than 83 per cent. In Holland a drop of the legitimate fertility from 347 to 315 per 1,000 coincided with a fall of the illegitimate fertility from 9.7 to 6.8 per 1,000, i.e., at a much greater rate. It is true that France, with its low and decreasing fertility rate (from 196 to 158 per 1,000 between 1881 and 1901), has had a comparatively high and increasing illegitimacy rate (from 17.6 to 19.1 per 1,000); and that Ireland, with a somewhat high and slightly increasing fertility (from 283 to 289 per 1,000), has the lowest and a falling illegitimacy rate (from 4.4 to 3.8 per 1,000). But this has been heavily outweighed by Austria with an equally high and steady fertility (from 281 to 284 per 1,000) with the highest illegitimacy rate known (43.4 to 40.1 per 1,000), while Germany comes second with an illegitimacy rate of 27.4 per 1,000 in 1901. Though it cannot be said, therefore, that the lowest birth-rate produces the lowest illegitimacy rate, it most certainly cannot be said that family limitation has had any evil effect in increasing legitimacy. The bulk of the evidence is quite decidedly the other way. In the case of the most notable exception—that of France—we have the authority of Dr. Bertillon for saying that the greatest decency and lowest illegitimacy are found where the birth-rate is lowest. We may also quote from our own Registrar General, who said in his Annual Report for 1909:—
“Except in the cases of the German Empire, Sweden, France, Belgium, and the Australian Commonwealth, the falls shown in illegitimate fertility in Table LXXXIV are greater than the corresponding falls in legitimate fertility.”
So far as the evidence of illegitimacy is concerned, therefore, it may be taken as definitely established that the adoption of family restriction has not led to greater laxity among the unmarried. But it would, of course, be quite unjustifiable to claim that this evidence is final. It may not mean that there is less lax conduct but only that there are fewer results of lax conduct. It is perfectly open for the orthodox moralist to claim that the greater knowledge of preventive methods has permitted an increase of laxity with a reduction of the ordinary effects. This must remain a matter of conjecture. When we find, however, that not only has illegitimacy decreased, but also deaths from abortion and from the diseases ordinarily associated with irregularity, there seems no justification whatever for the contention that chastity has been relaxed. It must not be forgotten in this connection that the encouragement to early marriage afforded by the possibility of avoiding the economic burden of a too early or too large family affords the most likely of all methods for removing the temptations to unchastity and for conquering the hitherto untractable “social evil.” Although the average age of marriage in this country has been rising somewhat lately (probably on account of the increasing cost of living), it is interesting to note that it is lower and fairly steadily decreasing in France. For first marriages the average age at marriage of French men has fallen from 28.6 in 1856 to 27.88 in 1896–1900, and of French women from 24.25 to 23.5 in the same period. This cannot be regarded as otherwise than a very good sign.
(Note: It is noteworthy in this connection that the French marriage laws are so strict that many thousands of couples live out of wedlock in preference to complying with them.)
PAUPERISM
We need not dwell upon this question, as the amount of pauperism depends upon a large variety of circumstances. But it is satisfactory to note that pauperism in England and Wales, i.e., the number of persons relieved annually per thousand of the population, has fairly steadily fallen from 34.5 in 1875 to 26.4 in 1910, or by 23.5 per cent. during the period of the declining birth-rate. This is so far reassuring, in that it indicates that the easier circumstances engendered by smaller families do not lead to idleness, as is frequently contended. The industry and saving habits of the French peasantry are world-renowned, and it is worthy of note that France is almost the only country in which the real wages of the working classes have been increasing of late years, while they have dropped 15 per cent. in this country, and nearly 25 per cent. in prolific Germany.
THE REPORT OF THE POOR LAW COMMISSION. By Sir Edward Bradbrook, C.B. Eugenics Review, Vol. 1, April 1909. Eugenics Education Society, London.
The Commissioners throw a strong light upon the ineffectiveness of existing measures when they show that the great and growing expenditure upon education and upon the public health has had no result in reducing pauperism, which is on the contrary of late years deplorably increasing, and that the advance in the rate of wages, and the diminution in the cost of living have been equally ineffectual.