POPULATION
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]
Sm,—" Janus" is, I am afraid, right in thinking my statement defective in form, though I think it is not inaccurate in sub- stance. It is quite usual, in such calculations, to confine attention to female population, but this is, of course, done on the assumption that the proportions between male and female remain fairly constant, and this assumption should not be made without explanation when one is dealing with a period during which the numbers of the male population have been affected by war mortality. In fact, however, during the period 1921 to 1931 there were not only more women aged 15 to 50 than ever before, but also more men. This, at least, is true of England and Wales, where the oak age group 15 to 50 was about 200,000 more in 1921 than in 1911. The conclusion seems to be that the increase in the number of families during this period would have been much greater but for war mortality among men.
It may be worth while drawing "Janus' " attention to the fact that, in 1921, there were actually more males aged 0 to 20 in England and Wales than females. If, therefore, he is right in drawing attention to the male rather than to the female population in the immediate past, I am right in drawing attention to the female rather than to the male population in the immediate future.—I am, Sir, &c., EUSTACE PERCY.
The Old Rectory, Albury, near Guildford.
Previous page
