Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1897-06-11
A FRENCHMAN'S VIEW.
His Opinion Of tho Depopulation of His


Country.
The population of France Is now
definitely known, and, as was to be ex-
pected, the increase since the last CEN
sus is Insignificant compared with that
of neighboring countries, says Scalpel
Is this a sign of weakness? Does 1t
mean decadence? We will endeavor to
supply an answer to these important
questions. There are people who
maintain that an increase of popula-
ton does not always coincide with the
richness of nation, that quality is OF
more consequence than quantity, and
so on. 1t is certain, however, that
from a military point of view-espe-
cially as regards Germany--the nu-
merical inferiority Of his country can
not but be a source of the deepest
anxiety to every patriotic Frenchman.
Let us examine few Of the statistic
al facts disclosed by the recent emu
meration. Rural depopulation is gen.
eral everywhere, but even in the most
prosperous of our towns there Is no
augmentation worth speaking of. Ac-
cording to the last London census the
number of inhabitants resident in the
British capital was 4,411,270. That is
to say, about 100000 less than the
whole Of Ireland. The increase dur
ing the preceding quinquennium was
200, 42S. Now let us turn to Paris. The
prospect is by no means brilliant, not
withstanding the fact that the totals
show an increase of S7,250 inhabitants.
AS the compilers are careful to point
out, this result has occurred In spite
of a diminution of natality. 1t simply
proves once more that the mania for
GENERALIZATION causes steady now or
immigrants from the provinces to the
capital. Parisisns may sleep in peace
The Seine will always be lined on
both sides, even though the people lin
ing 1t should have no children.
The dearth of children in France Is
due to the fact that the French peo-
pie do not choose to have families.
This is proved by the census in the
most striking and conclusive manner.
The old fable that the diminution Of
population was caused by excessive
mortality during infancy can no longer
gain credence. 1t is not the high-death
rate that is blameworthy, but the low
birth-rate. Neither can the defective
natality be laid to the charge of pow
erty. The richer Frenchman Is the
fewer children he has. This is equally
true in town and country. The rich,
the educated, the cultured, are the cul-
prits. The census just taken confirms
the melancholy reflections which were
published some time ago by DR.. Ber-
tillon. His assertion that II France
was to be repopulated it would be
thanks to the lower orders is amply
sustained. Grenelle heads the list OF
births, while the Champs Elysees are
at the foot.
Poverty is unquestionably one Of the
chief causes of depopulation, but 1t is
far from being the only one. If the
birth-rate diminished in the lower
stratum of society, poverty might be
incriminated, but unfortunately the
figures point in precisely the opposite
direction. Should we not rather blame
the decadence of an effete civilization
in which refinement is pushed beyond
the limits of reason? Maternity is an
instinct; it is nature ITSELF Now there
is nothing so hostile to instinct as edu-
cation which is based essentially on
hypocrisy and makes children actors,
teaching them to dissimulate their real
thoughts, and, after rapid reflection, to
substitute for them others which may
conduce toward polteness, but are des-
titute of all sincerity. By dint of
alternating man from natural habits
education will end in making him a
purely artificial creature, unfit for his
position and incapable of adding vigor
to the race. Women, unsexed by lux
ury, will develop an increasing dislike
to maternity. That will be the oppor-
tunity for less civilized peoples to in.
wade us and make slaves of us, until
they, too, in their turn shall become
a,,I