This page is referenced by:

• 1 media/A1N1A6P2-THUMB.png media/A1N1A6P2.png 2024-11-08T10:23:32-05:00 "Regarding the Depopulation of France" 31 Sociological musings on France's declining birth rates. Some perspectives from the medical field. plain 2024-12-03T17:10:18-05:00 Translation:
  Public opinion is stirred, and for good reason, with this important question of depopulation, which concerns the very vitality of France. Examining the figures published recently in the Journal officiel, it shows that the number of births will continue to decline.
  
  There has been, effectively, a progressive decrease of 11,720 births in 1886, of 13,505 in 1887, and of 16,794 in 1888.
  
  The statistics published by Dr. Bertillon show, among other things, that the number of families not having children is at 8%. This figure still appears lower than the reality; and Messrs. Lagneau and Charpentier estimate at 12% the number of sterile families.
  
  Among the causes invoked to explain this decrease, one must cite first and foremost syphilis and alcoholism. But there are competent doctors who believe that these causes do not have a large effect on birthrates.
  
  Here is what Dr. Vernial, who is specially focused on this subject, told us:

  Alcoholism can increase infant mortality, but not a decrease in the number of births. Since the alcoholic, no more than the syphilitic, sees his generative functions diminished; he continues to procreate, but his child carries at birth the seed of these grave illnesses. And furthermore, thanks to the content progress of medicine, the fearful accidents that were, just one century ago, the consequences of these terrible diseases, are becoming more and more rare.
  
  In a letter addressed to the Paris Anthropological Society, the Marquis of Saporta locates the cause of the lessening of birthrate in France in the habit of not contracting the marital union until an age closer and closer to maturity. But this fact is far from being proven, since the statistic shows, on the contrary, that the Breton and Savoyard departments, which present the highest birthrate, are precisely those where marriage takes place the latest.
  
  At one point, there was a major reason that opposed marriages taking place at a younger age: military service. But currently, young men do no more than three years of military service, this supposed cause has no real value.
  
  One reason, which merits further attention, is immigration from rural areas to large cities "where you can make a lot of money." Yet, it is certain that marriages are more frequent in the countryside, and that the birthrate there is higher than in the towns. The irregular households in Paris, notably, carefully avoid having children, and if by chance, despite the precautions taken, a child is born, they hurry to get rid of it by putting it in the care of the "faiseuses d'anges." Hence a formidable growth in infant mortality and, consequently, a decrease in the population of France.
  
  But all of these causes are not convincing enough; they cannot be more than just a minor factor in the matter. We believe that we must search in an entire different order of ideas, and this has to do with purely social reasons of order.
  
  The method of censuses established thus far does not permit to one make any conclusions on general laws. To give convincing results, statistics must be made not according to the topographical situation of the population, but according to social status. By dividing the population into three broad classes: 1st, the poor class, comprising purely manual labourers; 2nd, the well-to-do class, composed of small merchants, lesser functionaries, etc. 3rd, the upper class, the rich; we would see that birthrate decreases progressively going from the first to the third of these classes.
  
  The unfortunate who, a mercenary, has nothing but his manual and daily labour to provide for his existence, who has no capital, remains indifferent to the question of having a more or less numerous family; he even has an interest in seeing it grow; his children are more hands to help him in his work. A person who, on the contrary, whether by hard work or an inheritance, has happened upon a fortune, however small it might be, tends to decrease as much as possible the useless expenses on his capital, which he saves parsimoniously, and one more child to raise, diminishes his resources and the satisfaction of his personal desires. Furthermore, he attempts to set his children up in a social situation at least as lucky as the one he one he enjoys; to that end, he must not split the inheritance too much, and thus not have very many children.
  
  That is the only point one must consider, the only that explains the diminishing birthrate.
  
  The fortune and the property are parcelled up: the more we have, the more the number of small proprietors will grow. By applying this principle to the study of the population of France, we would note that where fortune is equally divided between all of the inhabitants, instead of being monopolized in the hands of the large proprietors, the birthrate is weak; conversely, the birthrate is high in families that have no personal fortune and live only by their daily labour.
  
  The decreasing population in France, a result of the decreasing number of births, seems to be a consequence of the material well-being of a large number, of the division of fortune and property between a large number of inhabitants.
  
  The law promulgated on 17 July 1889 and which, with the most praiseworthy of intentions, stipulates that "father and mothers having seven living children, legitimate or recognized, will not be added to the personal or property inscription role," will this give the result they had hoped for? One can doubt it. The declining birthrate is a profoundly regrettable fact from the demographic point of view, but it is a consequence of the improving social status. It is thus very unlikely that a legislative disposition can produce the slightest modification to a state of affairs that is above the laws. Laws must be derived from a social state, but are powerless to direct its evolution.
  
  Dr. P. Vernial

  For us, after the sinister drama to which the Hayem family has given its name, we believe that it is more pressing to convince fathers to die with eight children than to prevent young mothers from making newborns whom they cannot feed disappear. We must continue to repeat that there is much to modify in the economic organization, much to improve in the system of public assistance in France and in all of Europe, if we want to record fewer infanticides, and especially fewer suicides so shameful for a civilization that calls itself benevolent and democratic.
  
  And as Mr. Edmond Deschaumes said well, "before thinking about repopulation, think first about preventing depopulation! Before seeking to increase the number of births, work to diminish the number of voluntary deaths!"
  
  Let's welcome with a tender and generous hope the benevolent evolution occur in the improvement of social poverty. No doubt, it will not lead this civilization to that chimeric and inaccessible era of equal and perfect happiness, but it will bring reforms and researches that will end in a wiser application of principles of justice and humanity, and it will bring relief to those who only fault is having been born poor and without support.
  
  B.S. [Benito Sylvain]