| 1872 | 1881 | 1891 | 1901 | 1911 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total population | 206,162,360 | 263,896,330 | 287,314,671 | 294.361.056 | 315.001.099 |
| Per cent. increase in decade | 23.1 | 13.1 | 2.4 | 7.0 | |
| British Provinces | 195,840,000 | 199,200,000 | 221,380,000 | 231,600,999 | 244,279,888 |
| Per cent. increase in decade | .08 | 1.6 | 11.0 | 4.5 | 5.5 |
Thus the rate of increase of population has been exceedingly slow except as regards the totals for 1881 and 1891, and for the British Provinces in 1891. But the Census Commissioners themselves state that the first few enumerations rapidly increased in completeness, which probably accounted for a good deal of the two former increases; while as regards the British Provinces, there was an increase in area of no less than 25 per cent. between 1881 and 1901, which heavily discounts the increase of 11 per cent. in population in 1891. The average increase in the British Provinces comes out at only 4.3 per cent. per decade over the whole period from 1861 to 1911; so when the increase of area is taken into account it may be doubted whether there has been any great excess of births over deaths at all.
A more absolute contradiction to the theory that a “glorious fertility” produces numbers and vigor it would be difficult to conceive. India is a land of famine. We all know of the terrible holocausts of 1876–8 when over five million perished, and that of 1899–1901, which was held responsible for over a million deaths, besides numerous smaller ones. But as Mr. W. S. Lilly has written in India and its Problems, “We may truly say that in India, except in the irrigated tracts, famine is chronic—endemic. It always has been.” Sir Frederick Treves in his charming work, The Other Side of the Lantern, has expressed the same opinion, and he says:—“These are some of the great hordes who provide in their lean bodies victims for the yearly sacrifice to cholera, famine, and plague.” The average death-rate of 34.3 per thousand, which is probably underestimated, means, with a population of 315 millions, over ten million deaths annually. Were the Indian death-rate 10 per thousand as in Australasia, there would be only three million deaths. Hence, unless medical authorities can give good reason for postulating an inherent racial predisposition to premature death among the inhabitants of India, this means that at least seven millions of lives are wasted annually by starvation or the diseases to which it renders them an easy prey.
There can be no doubt in the mind of anyone who studies the figures, that India is a chronically, seriously over-populated country, despite the oft-quoted dictum of Sir William Hunter. That India might produce food enough to feed her present population need not be contested. But that any action on the part of the authorities will succeed in providing for an increase of ten millions annually is inconceivable. The whole Empire owes a tribute of gratitude and admiration to Sir A. Cotton whose magnificent irrigation schemes have so greatly increased the possibilities of agriculture. They have no doubt been the real cause of the 7 per cent. increase of population in the last decade. This, however, only means providing for two out of the seven millions to be saved; and irrigation like everything else has its limits.[[9]] Nothing will remove starvation, pestilence, misery and unrest from India, except the adoption by her people of the parental prudence of western nations.
[9]. In the article on India in the “Encyclopaedia Britannica” it is stated that the Irrigation Commission of 1901–03 emphatically asserted that irrigation alone could not cure famine.
The idea has been constantly put forward that the religious prejudices of the Indian population make such a contingency impossible. Is it certain, however, that this is so? The Census Report of 1901 suggested that in Assam some restraints upon births had been in vogue. In 1911, again, the Vice-President of the Calcutta Municipality, Babu Nilambara Mukerji, M.A., called attention to the extreme poverty caused by over-population, and strongly advocated such restraints. His address seems to have been received with considerable favor, and I have been asked to write articles for prominent native papers on the subject.
The project of encouraging emigration from India has, of course, been put forward. But the recent experiences in South Africa and elsewhere hardly favor this proposition, and Mr. Archer in an interesting article on “India and Emigration,” in the Daily News of December 26, pointed out that the real difficulty of over-population could not be appreciably lessened in this way.
Ceylon.—In view of the foregoing, reference may be made to Ceylon which has published its birth and death rates continuously since 1881, though I do not know what reliance can be placed on them. Fig. [8] shows that the birth-rate has rapidly risen from 27 to 41 per thousand, but that the death-rate and infantile mortality have also greatly increased.
The Empire.—The top line in Fig. [1] shows the increase of the population of the whole of our Empire according to the Statistical Abstract just issued. The figures are as follows:—
| Census | 1891 | 1901 | 1911 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Population | 345,356,000 | 385,572,000 | 417,268,000 |
| Per cent. increase in decade | 11.6 | 8.3 |