The Problem of the Family IL—The " Black Coated "

T'largest decline in the birth-rate has been in the professional and leisured classes. The smallest =lilies are found among the most prosperous and Intellectual, and especially among a section of the prosperous that is not intellectual. Excess of wealth or exclusive mental employment usually mean a small family or no fainily at all.

This has been recognized by every authority since r. Karl Pearson pointed it out in 1903. " The more prosperous the social class, the lower the fertility,". has become an axiom of sociologists.

Dr. T. H. C. Stevenson of the General Register Office, -hose position gives his writings on this matter the highest authority, has pointed out again and again the low birth-rate of the well-to-do.

Here are his figures, based on the 1911 census (the last census confirms them) for the average births per 1,000 married males under fifty-five :— Upper and middle class .. .. 119 Intermediate .. . • .. 132 Skilled workmen .. 153 Intermediate .. • • 158 Unskilled workmen • • 213 In other words, the inhabitants of the slums are raising families averaging nearly twice as large as the inhabitants of country houses and good suburban homes. • This rule of lower families for- the more prosperous is Modified by another,. which- has not yet received recog- - nition. Inside the " black-coated " class the family tends to increase as relative prosperity increases. Take five hundred struggling lawyers and five hundred pro- sperous lawyers, or take five hundred men of established position in the Church and five hundred poor parsons, and the average family—as I will show later—is markedly larger among the more prosperous.

This is a fact of genuine significance. It means that the main cause of the smaller family of the professional classes is, not a shrinking by cultured women from motherhood, but economic necessity. People do not have large families because . they believe that, they, cannot fittingly support them.

For the purpose of this inquiry, I gathered figures of 2.155 families of established position in the learned professions and politics. The average length of marriage was between twenty and twenty-five years.

What did I find ?

Over 12 per cent. of the men in good professional positions are. unmarried. Over 21 per cent. middle-class marriages to-day are childless. Fifteen per cent. are content with one child. Just under 21 per cent. have two children and just over 12 per cent. have three children. Three per family is the average minimum on which a class can maintain itself. Fifty-seven per cent. of the families of the professional men I investigated are below this minimum.

The average number of living children was 2.12 per cent. It may be urged that the professional classes paid a very heavy toll of their youth in the War. That, tragic as it is for us, is one of the regular features that must be reckoned with in all movements of population. The unquenchable sorrow in many lonely homes in England is that many parents who thought one son enough now find that war has left them childless. In younger professional families, the average family is much smaller than 2.12.

My average of 2.12 may seem surprisingly high to those who have studied previous statistics on this matter. Dr. Stevenson gave the average family among the " black-coated " classes, in a paper read before the Royal Statistical Society as 1.68. My figures refer to those in reasonably prosperous circumstances. Dr. Stevenson's take the class as a whole.

Dr. Stevenson's table is of such interest that I venture to reproduce it.

Children (living) in Class 1 occupations :— Army officers .. • 1.41

Architects

1.52 Naval officers 1.27 Artists 1.55 Clergymen (C. of E.) 1.72 Commercial travellers .. 1.77 Other ministers .. 1.71 Accountants 1.60 Barristers 1.55 Auctioneers .. • • 1.76 Solicitors 1.62 Bank clerks .. • • 1:29 Physicians .. 1.57 Civil Service clerks • • 1.64 Teachers 1.50 Insurance clerks.. • • 1.76 Authors, journalists, dee. 1.58 Commercial clerks . • 1.56 Consulting engineers .. 1.57 Private means .. • • 1.44 As a result of my inquiries I find the largest average families among the clergy, the average there being 2.9. Next come nonconformist ministers, 2.8, lawyers 2.2, Members of Parliament 2.1 and doctors 2.1. Judges are well up in the list.

Here are my figures in detail :— Doorons.

Number of cases ..

• •

469 Unmarried ..

• •

63 Married ..

. •

406 Total number of children

• •

848 Average per family

- •

2.1

Number of children.

None 1 ..

•

88 66 2 .. 100 3 .. 74 4 48 5 16 6 11 7 • 2 8

• • - •

1 LAWYERS.

MEMBERS OF PARLIAXENT.

Number of cases 480 Number of cases 464 Unmarried 58 Unmarried 89 Married .. 422 Married 375 Total number of children 923 Total number of children 802 Average per family 2.2 Average per family 2.1

Number of Children.

Number of children.

None .. 97 None 87

1

71 1 69 2 90 2 81

3

62 3 58

4

57 4 43

5

26 5 21

6

9 6 10 7 6 7 1 8 • • . • 4 9 2 10 • •

1

12 . • • 1 13 1 NONCONFORMLST MINISTERS. CLERGYMEN.

Number of cases .. 140 Number of cases 472 Unmarried 8 Unmarried .. 42 Married .. 132 Married' .. .. 430 Total number of children 369 Total number of children 1,281 Average per family .. 2.8 Average per family .. 2.96 Number of children. Number of children.

None • • .. 19 None .. 84 1 ..

16

44 2 • • 27 2 69 3 • • 30 3 .. 66 4 • .

17

60 5 8 5 .. 45 6 . • 6 .. 31 7 • . 4 7 .. 14 8 . • 2 8 .. • • 6 .. 1 9 .. 410 7 10 .. 3

0.0

1

There can be no possible doubt about the main reason for the decline of the birth-rate among the "black coated." A decrease in fertility among certain classes accounts for a small proportion. But the overwhelndui cause is deliberate restriction the family. Many childless couples would give their all for offspring, but for every one of them . there are a hundied who plan and use means to limit their family or to have no family at all, No one who is not wilfully blind can deny this. Tht limitation of birth_ has spread through the professional and leisured classes like an epidemic. A few years ago the restriction of the family was a secret and somewhat shameful affair. To-day it is boldly and openly advocated, and public opinion among the " black-coated " classes is strongly behind it. Parents of large families are placed on their defence by the public opinion of their neighbours, and are regarded as at the best foolish, and at the worst selfish and self-indulgent.

To keep and educate a child costs about as much as to run a motor-car. Many prefer the car.

A few attempts have been made by questionnaires to find how far birth-control is practised among pro- fessional folk. Mr. Sydney Webb some years ago made such an investigation. He obtained replies from 81(1 married couples : 242 admitted limitation of the family, 74 did not.

Dr. Agnes Savill and Dr. Major Greenwood, Jr., made an inquiry of college women and their friends on behalf of the National Birth Rate Commission : 18/ did not reply to the questions, 289 said that they limited their families, and 188 said that they did not ; 180 gave the reason for limitation as economic, and 90 gave health. It may seem to some a surprising feature of this inquisition that, the average family of those who tried limitation was 2.4, and of those who did not 1.6.

Up to now the decline in the birth-rate has been mainly among the " black coated." Is the movement spreading to the skilled and unskilled working classes ? Or are we going to see the lop-sided growth of society continued, with the largest fa,oalies coming from the poorest? These questions I will examine in my next article.

F. A. MACKENZIE.