qualities depend on a definite pathological condition, and some of them seem to be inherited in accordance with definite Mendelian laws. No such simplicity marks the descent of desirable qualities. Nevertheless, it is certain that the presence of such qualities in the parents will result in a larger number of the children possessing them, or something like them, than in families less richly endowed by nature. Good and noble qualities are the greatest possession of our race. To a preponderating extent they are born, not made, and can only be developed where they are already latent. To secure the improvement, or even to prevent the deterioration, of our race it is necessary to replenish our national exchequer of life more freely from our better than from our worse stocks.

Now the present upper classes are the result of a thousand years of selection-selection for character and ability by which men rise to eminence, selection for the womanly virtues and graces for which they choose their wives. Disturbing causes doubtless have come in. Men have risen by accident or ingenuity rather than by character or ability, and women have been married for their worldly possessions alone.

But broadly speaking, natural selection has worked well; families that have risen by virtue of their qualities, often manifested through several generations, have remained in the front rank of good citizenship, by reason of the same qualities handed down by inheritance, and showing themselves in one or other of the everspreading lines of descent. By reason of their large numbers, such families have permeated all classes, and the nation has been recruited from stocks which have proved themselves worthy to be winners in life's race.

Thirty years have sufficed to alter all this. In detail, the change is ob

us.

vious to every one-families of two or three replace the eight or ten of the last generation. The "only child" and the couplet are now familiar to all of But the total effect and the loss to the nation pass almost unnoticed. People band themselves together into societies for protecting low-grade aborigines from extinction, for preserving the homely crocodile and the playful tiger, for making life possible to the remains of the buffalo herds of America and the wild asses of Africa, and nevertheless these same tenderhearted individuals watch with acquiescence, and often assist as far as possible, in the process of suppressing one of the finest manifestations of the human race, the well born, well bred, tried and trusted men and women of their own flesh and blood.

If the same decrease in reproduction had reached all classes of the community, its effects would have arrested more general attention. It would have changed to such a degree the Registrar-General's returns that the birthrate of the country as a whole would have sunk below the death-rate, and a rapidly-shrinking population would have become the most obvious problem of the age. Yet the actual position is

more serious than one which would at once have become a manifest danger. While the birth-rate of the best elements of all classes-of the skilled artisan no less than the landed family of ancient lineage, and the professional man of eminent ability-is falling fast, that of the casual laborer of thriftless stock, and of the feeble-minded class. still at large in our midst, remains at its old high level. Increased hygienic knowledge and growing medical skill enable the parents to rear an even larger fraction of their defective offspring to perpetuate the evils of which they bear the seeds. The average character of the race is but the average character of the individuals which

compose it. If the proportion of the better stocks diminish and that of the worse stocks increase, the race itself must suffer an ever-growing deterioration.

The decay of nations is no new theme -Greece, Rome, Spain have passed away as world-wide Empires-slavery, malaria, lust of gold, foreign conquest, bloated armaments, decay of religion, have all in turn been summoned to account for their decadence. But in Greece and Rome, at any rate, the acknowledged dearth of children in the patrician families, and of other families as successively they came to the top, must gradually have drained the race of its best innate qualities. Perhaps it is unnecessary to seek for the political and economic causes which have been called in to explain the decline and fall of empires. The more insidious and far more deadly cause of wrongly-directed selective birth-rate may, after several generations, have produced its natural effect. In this year for the first time in England the Treasury have hesitated to let the burden of exceptionally severe direct taxation weigh as heavily on the fathers of families as on the unmarried. Doubtless we as a nation shall feel it necessary before long to make some more effective expression of our esteem and gratitude to the fathers and mothers of healthy children of sound and worthy stock. We have taken the first step-a right one, let us say at once. But let us turn back a page or two in our national history; would our grandfathers, nay, even our fathers for the most part, have understood the reasons of such a course of action. "Lo, children are an heritage and gift that cometh of the Lord," says the Psalmist, "happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them." Nous avons changé tout cela, we may say cheerfully as individuals, but, as a nation, we can hardly look on the matter so light

shall not be

heartedly. "They ashamed when they speak with their enemies in the gate," goes on the shrewd old observer of human affairs, moralizing over the "arrows in the hand of the strong man." Just at present, few civilized Western nations are satisfied with their birth-rate, and are not eager to discuss the matter even with their friends. It is well perhaps to take stock of the actual position in the British Isles.

Now we will examine the birth-rate of the upper classes in three sections of the community, with the help of such books of reference and such personal knowledge as are available. For the upper class in one important section of the people, that of the thrifty artisans, figures provided by the Friendly Society returns have already been published by Mr. Sidney Webb, and show a falling off, in one such society, in the number of children born to ten thousand members from 2472 in 1880 to 1165 in 1904. This branch of inquiry, therefore, having been adequately dealt with, remains outside our present scope.

We will consider the three classes represented by the stable landed and aristocratic families of the last 150 years in Burke's Peerage, the professional, official and cultured classes who find their way into that useful book of reference, Who's Who, and the purely intellectual section of the community, who are sorted out of all ranks of life, at considerable trouble and expense, and are to be found occupying the fairly-well-paid and permanent posts, as heads of houses, professors, tutors, bursars, lecturers, and the like, at one of the two great English Universities.

A hundred fertile marriages for each decade from 1830 to 1890 have been taken consecutively from the pages of Burke's Peerage, from those families who have held their title to nobility for

at least two preceding generations. In this way, a fairly uniform section of the population was obtained, representing roughly the titled part of the landed aristocracy, and excluding the commercial middle-class element in the present peerage. Moreover, we thus get the full effect of hereditary stability, and do away with any disturbing influence that might be supposed to arise from a sudden advent to prosperity. The results may probably be taken as representative also of the families of the landed aristocracy to whom a title has not fallen. For the first ten years, marriages taking place between 1831 and 1840 gave an average of 7.1 births to each fertile couple; from 1841 to 1860, the average for each decade remained constant at about 6.1; from 1871 to 1880, there were 4.36 to each marriage; from 1881 to 1890, 3.13 births are recorded; and it seems probable that the next decade would show another decrease, but it is impossible at present to obtain figures of much value, as one cannot be sure that the births have really ceased, even though an interval of ten or more years may have elapsed since the last one was recorded. Thus our stable upper classes during the past fifty years have reduced their birth-rate by more than one-half, and have passed well below the point at which the number of births compensates for the number of deaths. Their extinction on these lines is clearly only a matter of a few generations.

Turning to the pages of Who's Who, to study the more prominent members of the official and professional classes, the lack of detail necessitates a slightly different treatment. The marriages of inhabitants of the British Isles, where the number of offspring were recorded, were classified in two groups-those occurring before 1870 and those after that date, with the omission in each case, of individuals of the class con

sidered in the preceding investigation. A second subdivision was also made, for it became apparent after a short study that clerical families could more profitably be considered apart, as manifesting other tendencies. Of marriages in lay families taking place before 1870 and recorded consecutively, there is an average of 5.2 children to each couple; the exact figures are 743 children to 143 couples. After 1870, the average is 3.08, or 1264 children to 410 pairs of parents. These figures are appreciably lower than those obtained from a study of the Peerage at corresponding dates, but it must be remembered that Burke records all or nearly all births which take place, while the entries in Who's Who probably refer only to such children as are alive at the time the entry is made. The clerical families, being but a sub-section of the whole, are less numerous, but, taking approximately those occurring in twice the number of pages, we find that before 1870 there were 463 births to 93 marriages, giving an average of 4.99 for each marriage, and after 1870, 437 children to 104 marriages-an average of 4.2. From the dates of marriage and preferment supplied it is clear that the children were born chiefly before their fathers attained distinction. Hence it is fair to assume that these numbers are more or less representative of the clergy as a whole, and that they, as a body, have been less affected by the prevailing tendency to small families. This conclusion seems to indicate that pecuniary conditions alone are not sufficient to explain the phenomena, since no one can the clerical profession of being sensibly overpaid.

accuse

Turning now to the consideration of the official population of the University of Cambridge, the members occupying the more permanent and better-paid posts have been divided into four groups those who, being unmarried,

have presumably no offspring; those who, being married for five years and upwards, have no children; those whose youngest child is over ten years of age and are therefore unlikely to have more children; and those who, having children under ten years of age, may possibly further increase their holding on the future. It must be observed that, in the first three groups, the distinctive effect of the enforced celibacy of the Fellows of Colleges up to 1882 is still probably vis

ible.

In 1909 there were 67 men apparently in a position to maintain a family who remained celibate; there were 40 childless couples, representing 80 individuals; while 70 married couples were responsible for 199 children-a total of 287 adults to 199 children. The decrease is no longer comparative, nor can a prospective diminished infant mortality be called upon to set things right. Actually and absolutely the next generation of these "intellectuals" will be about 30 per cent. less than the previous one, and, in accordance with the usual statistical result, only about half of these children can be expected to become parents in their turn. Nor do the recent marriages afford much comfort, since 67 marriages have so far resulted in only 164 children, and, though the tale is probably not yet completed, neither is it yet possible to estimate the number of confirmed celibates or of infertile marriages. There is no reason to suppose that the University of Oxford would show a better record of national responsibility than does Cambridge.

The condition of celibacy, till recently attached to all College Fellowships in both Universities, must have resulted in a disastrous elimination of ability from the innate qualities of the nation. It is impossible to estimate the harm thus done to our race. It is, perhaps, only exceeded by the injury to

Europe generally produced by the introduction of the principle of celibacy of the Roman Catholic clergy and religious orders, and its enforcement throughout the ages when the only refuge of the quiet student, or the man and woman of gentle virtue, was the cloister. Had the object of those who promulgated this decree been to banish from the earth all the milder qualities, all the higher forms of religious instinct, no more efficient method could have been devised.

It should be noted, however, that, in respect to the main question now under discussion, the Roman Catholics alone among our families of good stock, taught by the principles of their religion, have kept a right sense of social responsibility. Among them alone the birth-rate is maintained, and the figures are very significant, showing clearly that there is no real decrease in fertility in the classes involved in our survey. If present tendencies continue, the future of England, perhaps of the world, lies with those born in Roman Catholic homes.

During the course of the inquiries and examinations entailed in extracting the foregoing figures, it was natural to observe what became of the large families born in the first half of the nineteenth century and the last half of the eighteenth century. Of our books of reference a complete Peerage alone provides sufficient data for a detailed analysis. We are therefore reduced to considering that section of the upper classes which coincides with the first group already examined; accordingly the same limitations as to "creation" were observed. Furthermore, the number and careers of sons alone were tabulated, and, in order to investigate the effect of large families, such families only were taken as had given birth to 3 sons or more. For the first

period, between 1750 and 1800, 97 consecutive marriages in which the succession to the title was involved were considered. This represented a study of about a quarter of that part of the volume devoted to family histories, and resulted in the truly surprising total of 468 sons, or nearly 5 sons to a marriage. Of these sons, 34 died before reaching maturity, and in 131 cases the details given are not sufficient to permit classification, though it is quite clear from several indications that want of detail does not indicate lack of occupation. It is especially in the case of the eldest sons that particulars of the careers are lacking, owing to a faulty arrangement of the material involved. Of the 303 sons remaining, 119 went into the Army, of whom 21 died in the Service and 34 became Generals; 57 went into the Navy, 12 lost their lives, and 20 became Admirals, 66 took orders, 14 becoming bishops or deans, 35 served the country in permanent posts or entered the Diplomatic and Colonial services, 14 went to the bar, of whom 2 became judges, 2 took up medicine for a profession, and some few are mentioned simply as members of Parliament.

The second period of marriages, between 1800 and 1850, gives very similar figures, though the slowness of promotion compared with that in the period of the Napoleonic wars leads to a smaller number of Generals and Admirals. From 111 marriages we have 511 sons, 48 died immature and 95 are unclassified; 169 went into the Army, 17 lost their lives, 9 attained the rank of General, 42 entered the Navy, of whom 5 died on service and 9 became Admirals. The Church accounts for 56, while 3 attained the dignity of bishop or dean; 38 entered the Government services, 16 went into the law, 1 into medicine, 2 into banking and commerce, and 26 became members of Parliament.

The most noticeable difference in the two groups is in the number of those unclassified, and in the higher proportion in the earlier period of those who, having entered the Army or Navy, attained distinction or fell in the service of the country. The second difference shows the effect of the Napoleonic wars. It seems likely that the first difference is due, partially at any rate, to the insufficiency of family records in the earlier time, and that many of those who in that period are unclassified served in the Army or Navy, at any rate for a short while; those sons being especially remembered whom family pride rejoiced in as having distinguished themselves above the average of their fellows, or family piety commemorated as amongst those who had fallen by the way on the path to glory.

In considering these figures as શ whole, the first deduction we draw is that in past generations those who found themselves placed by birth in a position above their fellow-men did not enter into the competition for increased wealth, but paid their debt to the country in actual personal service. The professions they chose are notoriously under-paid. They did not follow the advice of the Eastern sage to "take the cash and let the credit go," but steadily kept to the narrow limits of national duty, and accepted at once the opportunities and limitations of their station in life. Nowadays, we hear much talk about the lack, both in quality and quantity, of suitable men to replenish the ranks of the Army and the Church, and many plausible reasons and excuses are found. Surely the chief cause is not far to seek. One of our writers, on a certain mock-tragic occasion, tells us "No birds were fly. ing overhead, There were no birds to fly." We may extract the essence of his wisdom and say that no younger sons are going into the Church and the