Washington sentinel., 1898-04-23
ENGLAND.
THE BoGRY OF COVER POPULATION. ,
India

That India under British rule is grow
ing poorer while the rest of the world
is growing richer, and that the lot OF
the Indian peasant is becoming harder
while elsewhere the toilers are entering
into a new and easier life, is now
scarcely denied even by the most
ootimist Of official apologists, But they
are at no loss tor an explanation. Eng
land has given India the blessings of
peace. The old check on population by
war has ceased to operate. The popu-
lation has therefore enormously in.
creased. Inferior lands had to be
resorted to; and the standa'd d Of comfort
has thus fallen. And then they talk in
a grand way of the twenty million new
mouths added to the population every
ten years, and of the difficulty which the
psternal and kindly Government of India
has in providing for their subsistence.
Now let US look al this apology a little
more closely, and consider, not the
absolute addition to population, which
tells us nothing, but the relative increase,
the rate per cent. at which the popula.
tion grows Excluding Upper Burma
| (annexed in the middle of the period
under review we find that the pOpula.
ton of British India had in 1891 density
OF 747 per square mile, and had in-
creased at the rate OF o.97 per cent.
per annum in the preceding ten years.
If one excluded Lower Burma also the
numbers would be 26e and ga respect
lively. Now this IS, no doubt, a dense
population, But the rate of increase,
lar from being anything exceptional, is
surpassed IN many countries where the
density is even greater. Thus in Bel.
gium in 1896 the density was as great
as S7I, and the annual increase 600 per
cent. In England in 1891 there was a
population Of $50 to the square mile, and
the average yearly increase of the pre-.
ceding ten years was III per cent
considerably more than that of India in
spite of the greater density. In Ger.
many in 1890, the density was 747, just
that OF India, if one includes Lower
| Burma, but the average annual increase
of the preceding ten years was, not
o 81, but 1. IS per cent, while in partlc-
ular parts Of Germany it was even
greater. Lest, however, it be argued
that, though the density and rate of
increase in India are less than in many
nations of Europe, the conditions of
life are too dissimilar for the comparison
to be Of much value, one may 60 to
| Asia and take the case Of Japan-the
only large independent State for which
| one has the required statistics. In Japan
in 1891 one finds density of 273 to the
square mile. and an average annual
increase for the four preceding years of
"a That is position of affairs very
close 20 that OF India. if Lower Burma
be excluded. For Japan. from its
more northernly situation, is a country
the inhabitants of which require more
food to sustain lIfe. 1t is able to export
iood, 1t supports, not indeed with ease,
bur with leas difficulty than India, a
much greater taxation per head. And
its poverty, however severe according
TO European standards, is far less than
that of India. 1t may, indeed, be urged
/ AheA hAAG anu FdGlGu OCGu'
pations of the Japanese mark them of
from the Indians, whose old manufac-
lures have been ruined by British com.
petition, and whose institutions have
become rigid in the resistance to alien
government and ideas. Iti dangerous
argument for an apologist. But one
may accept it, and turning to India. as
TO a world in itself, one may see if an
increase Of population that would cause
no alarm in east or west, is there suffci.
ent to plunge the people into ever
increasing poverty.
And first, without going beyond the
geographical borders Of India, let us
compare the part under British rule with
s7me Of the most populous Native
States. In the Native States under the
authority of Madras (the single State OF
Travancors furnishing more than two
thirds of the populationJ one finds a
density of 3SS and yearly increase OF
I 1,o6 per cent, and in Baroda. density
Of aga with an increase of los, a density
aud an increase in each case in excess oil
| AnC dNEAhkE AOl DAlNl5Al lEIIALOIYs AnG
in Mysore. while it is II ue that the den.
sitY is less-I77 to the square mile-the
increase is much greater, in fact
as much greater, as 1871, or nearly
double that of British India. II, then,
the rapid increase Of the population ot
British India is the true cause Of Its
poverty, what must be the state o
Baroda, Mysore, and Travsncorep Yet
strange as it may seem, these States are
spoken of as comparatively prosperous
Il seems that it is only on British terri
tory that an increase of population is
fatal to prosperity. II, again, one con
siders, not British India, as a whole but
each Province separately, one still find:
that there is nothing abnormal about
the growth of population-nothingt tha
cannot be matched ard more thar
matched from the neighboring State.
under Indian rule.
Thus one sees that the population o
India, a most fertile country inhabited
by a most frugal people, increases at
slower rate than that Of many countries
IN Europe, at about the same rate Al
Japan, and at slower rate than that o
many Native States within its owl
borders; that India suffers under
poverty which is continually increasing
that the signs of this poverty are to D,
found in districts where the population
is even diminishing; that of the othe
States with which one has compared il
though representing a great range o
| ciwllizaiinn and nrnsnariLv snnn. ricl