The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, January 6, 1916. THE BIRTH RATE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 1493, 6 January 1916, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, January 6, 1916. THE BIRTH RATE.

A Sydney cable states that the birth rate tor the metropolitan area for the past quarter was 11.5 per cent, below the average. Writing to the Sydney Daily Telegraph on this subject, Dr Richard Arthur says :—“The most serious question Australia will have to face after the war will be that of population. Even in peace time the rate of increase, whether from natural increase or immigration, was slow, and, since the war, various factors, either limiting the increase or leading to actual decrease, have emerged. The chief of these Is the withdrawal from social life of a large proportion of men of the mariagable age. Many of these will never return to Australia, others will return maimed and dependant, and even those who do eventually marry will in many cases do so some years later than they would have in other circumstances. These things must make their effect felt in the birthrate; in fact, they have already begun to do so in a lessened number of births all over Australia. And it is certain that several years hence this effect will be even more marked. And it must not be anticipated that any deficiency in this respect will be made up by immigration. Whence is the immigration to come ? It is true that we could get plenty of female immigrants from Great Britain, but we do not want them now. We require young men to fill up the depleted ranks ot our primary producers and to be husbands for our daughters. But these young men are the very section of her population that the Mother Country cannot spare. Her need of them will be as great as ours, and it would be unpatriotic to seek to attract them here. France and Belgium are equally closed to us, and German or Austrian newcomers would be as welcome as lepers. First, of all, then, we must seek to encourage early, though not improvident, marriage. Among the better-to-do classes marriage is often postponed until an Income sufficient to maintain a certain social standard can be obtained. The remedy for this is a general simplification of ’jving. If a young couple can be content to start life in a small bouse, w‘.‘h no elaborate furnishings, and with uo consequent great expense in upkeep, tb £ y ma y ac ' celerate their marriage by years. Their parents should cogent gladly to this instead of opposing It, r-- I often done. In this regard !? would oe desirable that

certain banks and financial institutions which place restrictions on the marriage of their employees should withdraw these, or raise the salaries they pay. Further, we must do everything we can to make easy the possibility of marriage for returned soldiers, even in cases where they have lost limbs, or been otherwise partially disabled. These men who have fought and suffered for us should not be denied the privilege of fatherhood simply because their earning capacity has been diminished by their service to the nation. They should either be placed in positions, the duties of which are within their power, and the salary sufficient to marry on, or their pensions should be supplemented in the event of their marrying and having children by an amount adequate for the maintenance of wife and family. And this raises the further question It the time is not ripe to consider the question of the endowment of parenthood by the State. The principle of the minimum wage has been recognised. This means practically that every worker in a given occupation receives the same remuneration, whether he be a single man or a married man with a large family. The system may be a fair one from one point of view, but from another it is grossly inequitable. The bachelor who has only himself to maintain is comparatively well off on £2 14s or £3 a week, while the man with a family can barely procure the necessities of life on the same wage. In a country like Australia, where there is such bitter need for more population, it would be quite just from the national standpoint to require those who shirk the duty of having children to contribute to the maintenance of other people’s children. Thus an income tax of 10 per cent, on single * men and 5 per cent, on married men, levied without exemptions on all net incomes over .£7B a year, should produce enough to pay 5s a week for every child below the age of 14 years. This may not seem a large sum, but to the mother of a family of six children 30s extra each week to spend on their food would be a perfect godsend. This proposal may appear crude and unworkable, but it is certain that the position will have to be faced at a no distant date.