Germany.—As France is held up as the awful example of a low birth-rate, so is Germany regarded as the good example of a high one. It is certainly fear of Germany that is responsible for so much of the anxiety concerning our birth-rate.
That the population of Germany is increasing very rapidly is quite true, and it certainly has also a relatively high birth-rate. (Fig. [10]). But the birth-rate has fallen rapidly since 1876, and despite this the natural increase of population has actually accelerated, because the death-rate has fallen still more rapidly. As the German death-rate is still considerably above the 9 or 10 per thousand line, there is plenty of room for this process to continue. The curve of actual increase of population in Fig. [1], shows that it has become exceedingly high of late years, despite the great fall in the birth-rate.
Those, however, who still think that Germany’s high birth-rate is a source of advantage to her may be consoled to know it will not continue long. The fall in the last few years has been phenomenal; and the statement made in a German paper a few days ago that at the present rate the German birth-rate will be down to that of France in ten years’ time appears to be justified. The birth-rates of her large towns are already close to this point (Berlin 20.4, Hamburg 21.8, Dresden 20.2, Munich 21.9, while that of London is still about 24) and the country districts are sure to follow. But the example of Berlin is a most striking one as to the fallacy of regarding high birth-rates as conducive to rapid increase. Fig. [11] shows that the birth-rate of Berlin rose with great rapidity from 32 per thousand in 1841 to over 45 in 1876, since when it has fallen even more rapidly. But, neglecting sudden variations due to war and epidemics, the death-rate has risen and fallen in such close correspondence as to produce comparatively little change in the rate of natural increase. The variation of the infantile mortality is very similar. On all grounds, therefore, it seems difficult to see what advantage Germany has derived from her high birth-rate, and the disadvantages were so obvious that it is little wonder that the German people have decided in favor of a low one.
Austria shows very similar variations to Germany.
Russia.—Russia has the largest population of any European nation, 120,588,000 in 1911. Its birth-rate for many years was the highest in the world, very nearly 50 per thousand. But its death-rate and infantile mortality have been the highest in Europe, so that its rate of increase of population, though rapid, has been less than that of New Zealand or Australia. Over two millions of unnecessary deaths have taken place annually, and one infant in every four (or over a million annually) dies in its first year. The war with Japan, a country of half its population and a much lower birth-rate, strikingly illustrated the inefficacy of mere numbers. In the Standard of March 6, it was stated that although the general recruiting standard in Russia is lower than in Austria, France, Germany, or Great Britain, the rejections in many localities reach the enormous figure of 70 per cent.
The Netherlands.—The foreign countries already dealt with are quite sufficient to give us a fair idea of our position among the great powers as regards the birth-rate question. No thoughtful person, however, can fail to see that this has another aspect which has generally been quite overlooked. It will therefore be of special interest to study the record of a nation in which this has been kept in view for many years. Holland is an intensely patriotic country, and its need for military efficiency is beyond dispute. It is inconceivable that her statesmen could contemplate a policy in any way detrimental to this. Yet it appears that in 1881 an organisation having as its direct object the reduction of the birth-rate, especially among the poor, was formed in Amsterdam, and that it received the warm support of Dr. van Houten, Minister of the Interior, and of Mynheer N. G. Pierson, the Finance Minister. It was thus enabled to conduct an energetic propaganda in favor of small families among the poorest classes, whose means or health did not permit them to do justice to large families. In 1895 its work had become so appreciated that it was approved by Royal Decree as one of the Societies of Public Utility. To-day it is a large and flourishing association with medical and other helpers in all the great centers. Thus in Holland the diminution of the birth-rate has been favored and directed on humanitarian and eugenic lines; and there has been a tendency for the State to become more individualistic in character, rather than to adopt that policy of State assistance which has been forced on most other nations by the gravity of their social problems, and which, by pressing on the educated classes, has led them seriously to restrict their numbers.
The results of their policy as regards the numbers and health of the population can be seen from Fig. [12]. The birth-rate has fallen steadily and rapidly, especially in the last decade. The death-rate, however, has fallen so much more rapidly, that it has now reached 12.3 per thousand in 1912—the lowest figure in Europe; and the natural increase has reached 15.7 per thousand, the highest figure in Western Europe. The infantile mortality has also fallen more rapidly than in any other country. Indeed, Amsterdam and The Hague, the principal centres of the propaganda, had the lowest general and infantile mortality of all the great cities of the world, according to our Registrar-General’s Annual Summary for 1912.
Fig. 12.—THE NETHERLANDS.
When we turn from the question of numbers to the physical and social condition of the people, the results are even more gratifying. Those who have traveled in Holland will, I think, admit that the country looks prosperous, and the men, women and children robust and contented. Slums such as we have in our great cities seem practically non-existent; nor is there any sign of the stunting and anaemia so noticeable in our large towns, and even in our countryside. Dr. Soren Hansen in the Eugenics Congress of 1912 stated that the average stature of the Dutch people had increased by four inches in the last fifty years. The army records given in the official Year Book of the Netherlands are also most striking. The number of young men drawn annually for conscription by lot has increased from 27,559 in 1865 to 48,509 in 1911 (out of a population of 6,000,000); and of these the proportion over 5 ft. 7 in. in height has increased from 24.5 per cent. to 47.5 per cent., while that of those under 5 ft. 2½ in. has fallen from 25 per cent. to under 8 per cent. This is doubtless due to the fact that in Holland the poorest and least fit have been encouraged to be prudent, while in our country they have been having the largest families—the fitter classes having smaller families in consequence. Real wages which have fallen here and in Germany have apparently gone up in Holland, and her agriculture has rapidly improved. In every way that I have been able to test, her prosperity and progress has been most satisfactory. Moreover, Holland stands next to ourselves as a successful coloniser. Her possessions in the East and West Indies occupy an area of 783,000 square miles with a population of 38,000,000 (seven times her own population), 81,000 being Europeans. Germany, with a home population ten times greater, has colonies aggregating 1,029,000 square miles with a population of only 14,000,000 inhabitants, of whom but 25,000 are whites.