Handwritten corrections made by hand by Margaret Sanger. Sanger may have submitted this review to the New York Tribune; published version not found. For another draft of the review see Margaret Sanger Papers Microfilm, Library of Congress Microfilm LCM 128:634.
The ""Problems of Population and Parenthood"" is the second report of the British National Birth-rate Commission, 1918-1920. It is an exhaustive tome consisting of many hundreds of pages and is divided into two parts: the evidence taken for and against the control of Parenthood; and the findings of the Commission. To the cursory reader this is a splendid-looking effort toward a solution or one of the fundamental problems of the human race. Upon closer examination, however, we find two interesting facts that rather take away some of the value. In the first place, this Commission is self-appointed. One would imagine that if this Commission had not been appointed by the British Government, at least to be and operated and functioned under some indirect direct sanction of official interest. But such is not the case. The people involved gathered together under this distinctly Anglo-Saxon title on their own initiative. Even if there this were so, we might not object were it not for the second weakness: among the forty-one members of the Commission ten are clergymen; eight are medical men; only two are biologists; thirteen and twelve are women whose interests are social-reform work; the balance being laymen of varying import. Naturally the findings of such a self-appointed group of enthusiasts must be retrograde and reactionary. It is a curious example of the credibility of mankind that it accepts the opinions of unscientific minds upon purely scientific subjects!
The deeper we go into this massive book, the more amazed we become. The witnesses called before the Commission represent some of the most vital levels of thought in England, and America. Among the host we find Sidney Webb, Judge Neil and, Judge Lindsey of U.S.A, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Sir William Osler, Dr. Marie Stopes, Sir Rider Haggard, Mr. Harold Cox the editor of the Edinburgh Review, Mrs. Booth, Salvation Army,, W. L. George, and many, many others. What a hodge-podge of individuals. The list of witnesses almost reads as though the Commission had put alot of names in a hat and chosen them blindfolded, not and again luckily finding a significant individual.
Yet even with this, the hopeful student might seek to find real good in any effort to solve the problem. Unfortunately, every page but adds to the conclusions already listed. Many problems are taken up, but the essential one concerning the population question and the fall of the birth rate and its effect upon the country was not convincing neither thorough nor convincing, Having proved what is already known that the birth rate had fallen in England they next proceed to reluctantly discuss the causes. These are classified under infant mortality, venereal diseases and birth control. Much of the evidence taken deals with the classification of the causes of infant mortality, and a large proportion is found to be due to the infection of infants by parents with venereal diseases! On this subject much valuable evidence was given by Sir William Osler and Sir Bryan Donkin. They pointed out that if these diseases are to be checked they must be dealt with as diseases and the moral consideration entirely eliminated. If everyone could be persuaded to live clean lives the problem would be solved, but in the meanwhile as this conduct seems impossible for all people we cannot adopt measures to prevent the disease and at the same time retain the risk of incurring them as a deterrent to immorality. And the findings of the Commission resulted in a whitewashing of the prevalent system which permits the cure of venereal diseases, but provides no adequate method to prevent them!
The evidence taken on birth control was particularly interesting. It was pointed out that the conscious use of artificial methods to prevent conception were employed by the better classes, upper middle and artisan classes, while the population is recruited from the lower or unfit! The question of the use of these methods, and how far they are injurious to health seemed to be the bone of contention. Dr. Marie Stopes made an excellent report and as she is one of the greatest living an able biologist having made a special study of birth control her testimony and experiences are valuable. Harold Cox's testimony was also intelligent and far-reaching. The only suggestion given by various other witnesses was such as to invite the production of still greater hords hordes of the unfit unwanted progeny. No suggestions were given to stop the production of the unfit or diseased, or feeble minded. There was some talk of the motherhood pension system--in other words the placing of a premium on motherhood, rather than the control of the unfit. One suggestion was immigration to the Colonies, as if these parts of the world desired their ranks to be recruited by the feeble minded, the physical and mentally unfit, etc. One witness carried on the idea, or maybe more, that the Empire should have a greater volume of population in order to hold its preeminent position in the sun. In other words, as someone recently said: The Commission asked the women of England to enter into a "cradle competition to save the Empire."
Need it be said that the conclusions of this Commission are worthless? They merely carry on sanction what is in existence to-day and put the seal of approval on the unscientic control of birth and population. The interested reader will do well to read the various resolutions made by different groups on the subject of voluntary restriction of the birth rate. (See pages clxii-clxvi). It is unfortunate that we are unable to treat this section at length because of the limits of space. The Commission condemned the practice of birth control.
Dr. Marie Stopes objected to the grounds upon which this decision was predicated and addressed a letter to each signer of the Reservation against birth control:
"As possibly you are aware, I consider that the question of the right use of sound hygienic methods of Birth Control as one of the very greatest importance."
She goes on to say that she noticed that this particular member had signed the reservation against birth control:
"Had the grounds of your objection been stated to be a religious or moral conviction, I should, have of course, have had no more to say, but you state above you signature that you base your condemnation of all scientific methods of control on 'medical evidence.'"
Dr. Stopes inclosed a self-addressed and stamped envelope for reply and a ready-prepared slip. In their replies not one quoted a page of the report containing medical evidence. In fact, there is not a line of reliable evidence throughout the report which would substantiate the decision against birth control. It is only one of the glaring weaknesses and ill-devised work of this self-appointed body of enthusiasts non-experts.
One sentence in the report seems to me to give the key to the Commission's entire state of mind: "It is for the women of the Empire to save the Empire by securing its continuance for the fulfilment of its beneficent mission in the world."
This article was reprinted by the American Birth Control League in a flyer with two other newspaper articles as "Real Facts About Birth Control," ca. April 1923 (Margaret Sanger Papers Microfim,Library of Congress LCM 129:580).
After ten years of incessant agitation and activity the much-discussed question of Birth Control has invaded the legislative halls of Albany. A bill intended to amend existing laws so that New York physicians may be authorized to disseminate contraceptive advice has been introduced. There will be a hearing on the matter in the Assembly Chamber on April 10. If enacted, we may hope for the beginning of a new era of social welfare and racial hygiene. But whatever the outcome, this bill means that Birth Control is no longer looked upon, even in the judicial and legislative field, as a topic "obscene and indecent," worthy only of ribald jest and suggestive leer.
No other great problem affecting the welfare of nation and race has been more misinterpreted and misunderstood, even by Americans who consider themselves well informed. Advocates of this doctrine do not beg for mere assent or approval. They ask for investigation and understanding, as the initial step toward support and adherence to their doctrines.
Much of the opposition to Birth Control has had its source among clergymen and other professional moralists. This ecclesiastic opposition is amazing in view of the fact that the "onlie true begetter" of the whole Birth Control movement, Robert Malthus, was himself a clergyman of the Church of England. He advocated " prudential checks" on the grounds of austere morality. Our clerical opponents also ignore the fact that many of the most noted champions of Birth Control today are clergymen. The most noteworthy example is that of the distinguished Dean of St. Paul's, London, William Ralph Inge.
There is a confusion in the public mind concerning the origin of the present movement, which must be distinguished from the so-called Neo-Malthusian movement of Great Britain and the Continent. The Neo-Malthusian League was the direct outcome of the celebrated trial in London in 1877 of Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs. Annie Besant, who had frankly admitted distributing among the English poor thousands upon thousands of copies of the pamphlet of a Boston physician, Dr. Knowlton, entitled "Fruits of Philosophy," originally published in this country in 1833. The Neo-Malthusian League, sponsored by those valiant pioneers, Charles and George Drysdale and Dr. Alice Vickery, soon spread to all countries of the Continent, and its doctrines were put into practice in Holland, where fifty-three Birth Control clinics, approved by the Dutch Government, have been conducted with great success for forty years.
The Birth Control movement, which has now absorbed the earlier Neo-Malthusian movement, originated right here in New York just a decade ago. While the Neo-Malthusians based their propaganda on the broad general basis of Malthus's theory of population, the expression "Birth Control" was devised in my little paper of advance feminism, The Woman Rebel, as one of the fundamental rights of the emancipation of working women. The response to this idea of Birth Control was so immediate and so overwhelming that a league was formed--the first Birth Control league in the world.
With all the flame-like ardor of pioneers we did not at first realize the full scope of this fundamental discovery. At that time I knew nothing of Malthus, nothing of the courageous and desperate battle waged by the Drysdales in England, Rutgers in Holland, of G. Hardy and Paul Robin in France, for this century-old doctrine. I was merely thinking of the poor mothers of congested districts of the East Side who had so poignantly begged me for relief, in order that the children they had already brought into the world might have a chance to grow into strong and stalwart Americans. It was almost impossible to believe that the dissemination of knowledge easily available to the intelligent and thoughtful parents of the well-to-do classes was actually a criminal act, proscribed not only by State laws but by Federal as well.
My paper was suppressed. I was arrested and indicted by the Federal authorities. But owing to the vigorous protests of the public and an appeal sent by a number of distinguished English writers and thinkers, the case against me was finally abandoned. Meanwhile "Birth Control" became the slogan of the idea and not only spread through the American press from coast to coast, but immediately gained currency in Great Britain. Succinctly and with telling brevity and precision "Birth Control" summed up our whole philosophy. Birth Control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks--those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.
In our efforts to effect the repeal of the existing laws which declare the use of contraceptive methods indecent and obscene, Birth Control advocates have been forced to battle every inch of the way. To get the matter before the Legislature of New York my path has led completely around the earth. Our effort has been to enlist the support of the best minds of every country, an object we have achieved even beyond our fondest expectations.
The backbone of the Birth Control movement has been from the time Malthus first published his epoch-making "An Essay on the Principle of Population">Principles of Population" essentially Anglo-Saxon. John Stuart Mill, Francis Place, Matthew Arnold, Thomas Huxley and our own Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Robert G. Ingersoll spoke openly in favor of control of the population. Today such thinkers and writers as H. G. Wells, Harold Cox (editor of The Edinburgh Review), Arnold Bennett, Dean Inge, William Archer, Havelock Ellis, Gilbert Murray, Bertrand Russell, John Maynard Keynes (editor of The Nation, and Lord Dawson, one of the King's physicians, and innumerable others in Great Britain speak openly and valiantly for Birth Control.
It is not without significance that since the inauguration of our agitation in 1913 there has been an immense recrudescence of interest in the persistent problem of population; and a number of new efforts, notably that of A. M. Carr-Saunders, to reinterpret the thesis so brilliantly advanced by that obscure clergyman, Malthus.
Most gratifying to the battle-scarred propagandist for Birth Control has been the awakening of the Orient. China and Japan for ages have been the notoriously overpopulated countries of the earth, the high birth rate, as always, accompanied by a high death rate, a high infant mortality rate and even acceptance of the widespread practice of infanticide. Famine, pestilence and flood have been the only checks to overpopulation in China, and these have been regarded even as a blessing by the yellow races. "Yang to meng ping" is a well-known exclamation in China--"Many men, life cheap!"
Following my sojourn in China last year, the Ladies' Journal of China, the most influential women's publication there, devoted a special edition of more than one hundred pages to the problem of Birth Control. In this paper Tzi Sang wrote: " Since Mrs. Sanger's visit, public opinion has been greatly influenced, and I understand that some educators are planning to propagate the doctrine in the interior so that our women will no longer be mere machines for breeding children. When the majority of our people know the benefits of Birth Control and believe that it is the remedy for plague, famine and war in China, then we can adopt the method of asking doctors to pass on their knowledge to women poor in health."
Set Lu, another writer in the same paper, points out that "If we study the actual situation in China we find that unconsciously the Chinese have attempted to practice Birth Control in a different way. Do we not throw away our babies?" frankly asks this writer of his compatriots. His answer is interesting: "Savages practice infanticide, but civilized people use scientific methods of prevention. Herein lies the difference between a barbarous and a civilized people. No wonder that our civilization fails to make any noticeable advance."
Both in Japan and China, as a result of my visit, and especially as the effect of the attempt upon the part of the Imperial Japanese Government to suppress Birth Control and to shut its door in my face, the subject of birth control has aroused the deepest and most widespread interest among all classes. In both these great Oriental empires the roots of a permanent Birth Control movement have struck deep in popular interest, and undoubtedly will exert a great influence toward bringing down the alarmingly high birth rates to the level of those of Western civilization. The importance, the immediate necessity of an autonomous control of the birth rate by the races of the Orient is by no one more emphatically stated than by that eloquent and picturesque writer and traveler, J. O. P. Bland.
Since the first Birth Control clinic established in this country was raided by the New York police in Brownsville some years ago, and its founders sentenced to jail as petty miscreants, the whole current of opinion has advanced, not merely in this country but throughout the world. The results of the intelligence tests, the menace of indiscriminate immigration, the fertility of the unfit and the increasing burden upon the healthful and vigorous members of American society of the delinquent and dependent classes, together with the growing danger of the abnormal fecundity of the feeble-minded, all emphasize the necessity of clear-sightedness and courageously facing the problem and the possibilities of Birth Control as a practical and feasible weapon against national and racial decadence.
With the invasion of the New York Legislature exponents of this challenging doctrine may well congratulate themselves that they have won another victory against their opponents. Whatever the outcome of the hearing on April 10, Birth Control in any event will have compelled serious attention from our legislators. If we can convince the Assemblymen and State Senators that this is a matter which concerns not merely a group of "well-meaning" feminists, but is organically bound up with the biological welfare of the whole community, we shall consider that our efforts have not been entirely in vain.
This is the first of a six-part series. Only five articles have been located. For the second article, see "A Better Race Through Birth Control," Nov. 1923; for the third article see "Woman and Birth Control,", Dec. 1923; for the fifth article see "Birth Control in China and Japan,", Feb. 1924 and for the sixth and last, see "The Birth Control Movement in 1923," Apr. 1924.
No great problem affecting the welfare of nations and races has been so misinterpreted and misunderstood, even by men who consider themselves well informed, as that of population and Birth Control. Advocates of Birth Control do not ask merely for assent and approval. They demand investigation and understanding as the initial steps toward support of and adherence to their doctrine.
Much of the opposition to Birth Control has had its source among clergymen and other professional moralists. This ecclesiastic opposition is the more surprising in view of the fact that the only true begetter of the whole Birth Control movement was Robert Malthus, himself a clergyman of the Church of England. He advocated prudential checks which called for the most austere morality. Our clerical opponents also ignore the fact that many of the most noted champions of Birth Control today are clergymen. The most distinguished example is the Dean of St. Paul's Cathedral, London, the Very Reverend William Ralph Inge.
The backbone of the Birth Control movement, from the time that Malthus first published his epoch-making An Essay on Population, has been essentially Anglo-Saxon. John Stuart Mill, Francis Place, Matthew Arnold, Thomas Huxley and our own great men-- Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Robert G. Ingersoll, all spoke openly in favor of the control of population. Today such thinkers and writers as H. G. Wells, Harold Cox (Editor of the Edinburgh Review) Arnold Bennett, Dean Inge, William Archer, Havelock Ellis, Gilbert Murray, Bertrand Russell, John Maynard Keynes (Editor of the The Nation and Athenaeum,> E. W. McBride, and Lord Dawson (the King’s Physician) and innumerable others in Great Britain speak openly and valiantly for Birth Control.
The present movement in this country must not be confused with the Neo-Malthusian movement in Great Britain and on the Continent of Europe. In England the Neo-Malthusian League was the direct outcome of the celebrated trial of Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs. Annie Besant, who had openly and in the face of the authorities distributed among the English poor thousands upon thousands of copies of pamphlet by a Boston physician, Dr. Knowlton, entitled “The Fruits of Philosophy”--a pamphlet originally published in 1833 in this country. The Neo-Malthusian League, sponsored by those valiant pioneers, Charles and George Drysdale and Dr. Alice Vickery, soon spread its influence to all parts of the Continent. In Holland its doctrines were openly put into practice, and fifty-three Birth Control clinics, approved by the Dutch Government, have been conducted there with great success for forty years.
The Birth Control movement, which has now absorbed the earlier Neo-Malthusian movement, originated in New York, just a decade ago. While the Neo-Malthusians based their propaganda on Malthus’s theory of Population and earnestly discussed the scientific aspects of the question, the slogan “Birth Control” was put forward in my little paper of advanced feminism, Woman Rebel, and was used as the battle cry of fundamental rights in the fight for the emancipation of the working woman. The response was so immediate and overwhelming that a league was formed--the first Birth Control League in the world.
With the flame-like ardor of pioneers we did not at first realize the full scope of our campaign. At that time I knew nothing of Malthus, nothing of the courageous and desperate battle waged by the Drysdales in England, Rutgers in Holland, G. Hardy and Paul Robin in France, for this century-old doctrine. I was merely thinking of the poor mothers of the East side who had so poignantly begged me for relief, in order that the children they already had brought into the world might have a chance to grow into strong and stalwart Americans. It was almost impossible to believe that the dissemination of knowledge easily available to intelligent and thoughtful parents of the well-to-do classes was actually a criminal act, proscribed not only by State laws but by Federal laws as well.
My paper was suppressed. I was arrested and indicted in the Federal court. But, owing to the vigorous protests of the public and to an appeal sent by a number of distinguished English writers and thinkers, the case against me was finally dismissed.
Meanwhile Birth Control, as the slogan of the movement, not only spread through the American press from coast to coast, but immediately gained currency in Great Britain. Succinctly and with telling brevity these two words sum up our whole philosophy. Birth Control does not mean contraception indiscriminately practised. It means the release and cultivation of the better elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extinction, of defective stocks--those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.
Birth Control aims to introduce into the creation of the next generation of American citizens the sound and scientific principles observed by the gardener and the agriculturist. We must cultivate the human garden by proper spacing, by improving the quality of our precious crop of children by methods of intensive cultivation and not by the production of mere numbers. As long as we wilfully, as a nation, waste the most precious resources we have--our child life-- let us hold our tongues about the dangers of Birth Control. The advocates of Birth Control place a higher value on the life of a child than do its opponents. We want every child born in this country to bring with it the heritage of health and fine vitality. This is the true wealth of our United States.
The first Birth Control clinic in this country was established in Brownsville, Brooklyn, in 1916. It had but a brief existence. It was raided by the police and its founders sentenced to jail as petty miscreants but it is not without significance that, since then, there has been an immense recrudescence of interest in the persistent problem of population, and that a number of new efforts have been made--notably by A. M. Carr-Sanders, to reinterpret the thesis for which so massive a foundation was laid by that obscure clergyman, Thomas Malthus. The whole current of opinion in regard to the question has advanced, not merely in this country and in England, but all over the world. The results of the intelligence tests, the menace of indiscriminate immigration, the fertility of the unfit, and the increasing burden upon the healthful and vigorous members of American society of the delinquent and dependent classes, together with the growing danger of the abnormal fecundity of the feeble-minded, all emphasize the necessity of clear-sightedness and courage in facing the problem, and throw new light on the possibilities of Birth Control as a practical and powerful weapon against national and racial decadence.
We are not, I must repeat, trying to force this doctrine upon the American public. Every day thousands of poor mothers are begging us for help, fully conscious that their sacred duty to the children they have already brought into the world demands that they shall not assume further parental responsibilities which they cannot fulfil. It is in answer to those unfortunate and conscripted mothers that we have banded ourselves together in the American Birth Control League.
(To be continued)