[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR, — Mr'. A. J. Ellison
says in his letter in your issue d April 30th that France, as a result of its low birth-rate, had comparatively greater losses in the late War than any other belligerent. If this means that a low birth-rate increases the proportion of men of military age, it is a weak argument against the small family system. It is surely not a fact that last century the population 01 Provence or any other province decreased. If much land in Provence has gone out of cultivation, the reason will be that it was poor and not worth cultivating when other emploP ment could be obtained. As regards the statement that in the towns there were not enough Frenchmen to do the Work and foreigners entered, one may point out that a collate!' is to be envied which has more than enough jobs for all it men and that it is only since 1914 that the foreign population has grown rapidly.
Mr. Ellison says that if we allow our population to decrease we increase the amount of taxation which each individual must bear. I submit that a decrease of our slum
Population would have quite the contrary effect. Poverty would quickly be eliminated if the poor ceased to have more children than they can provide for and if all men worked their best.—
Previous page
