Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1922-01-12
THE PROLIFIC FOREMA N-Bv Frederic J. Haskin

crease is uuS wholly 10 his
study shows once more that the problem of
restricting and reg ating immigration is the
real population problem in tho United States
and one which seems nowhere near solu-
rlon.
The surprising thing in this tabulation is
that it fails to discover any class which is
highly prolific, and reveals for instance.
that road-workers and clergymen run neck
and neck race in the production of children,
while garbage me1 and scavengers have on
an average only ITO Of a child more per
family than lawyers, justices, and judges.
It is true that this tabulation shows the
professional classes as averaging about one
third less prolific than the people who work
for wages in a city; but it gives one very
strongly the impression that the poor mans
huge family, which is always held up to us
as such an unfortunate and common thing,
must be much less common than is supposed.
If it were common. some of these averages
would inevitably be higher.
Factory Workers
For example, the largest wage-earning
class in the cities is that of factory workers
In the factories you find most OF those I'M
migrant families which are reputed to be so
large. This tabulation lists about 40 different
occupations in manufacturing and the me-
chanicaI industrie~ The highest average num-
Der of children living per family is touno
among furnacemen smeltermen, heaters ana
pourers, who persp1re to MAINTAIN an average
of ga children per family.
Electricians and ,engravers arr found to be
the least prolific men in the manufacturing
industries, averaging on'y FL children Nv
ing per family. The great majority of the
types of workers in factories have less IMAM
living average.
Comparing. these with the professionals
we find that clergymen are the only profes-
sional class having an avearge or three Nv
ing children Architects, artists and sculptors
have two Musicians, photograph ers, doctors
teachers and writer's are in the same class
with an average of but FL children per fam
lily Actors, chemists, dentists, inventors and
engineers all average slightly less than Two
living children per family.
Thus it would seem that the differ nee
in size of families between Wage-Workers
and professionals is not nearly as large as
has been assume and that families OF
more than three or four children must be
rare everywhere in the United States.
It is also commonly asserted that among
working people many more children are born
to die than anon the wel-to-do, but this
is also hard to substantiate from the hgures.
It is true that the discrepancy between
number of children born and number living
is slightly larger among laborers stevedores
and -lOOm-nXerS tnan IL IS among 1oCIoIo'
lawyers and judges, but the difference IS not
large Stevedores average 3.8 children born
and 80 children living. Lawyers average
"a children born and 2.2 children living
The child of lawyer has only little bet
ter chance to survive than the child OF
stevedore, according to this.
1t is only in the country that consistent
1y higher rate of increase is found. Farm
ers, farm work.no N and farm laborers have
3.4, 80 and 8 children living o an average
per family, respectively. Here is slight in
crease, which doubtless accounts in part for
the movement from the farms toward the
city.
In general the picture which this tabula-
ton draws is that of country where COM
petition is hard in all OCCUPATIONS and re-
production therefore naturally slow. 1t is
country getting over it's age Of pioneer ex-
pansiveness, reaching the point when its pop
ulation. if let alone, would become relatively
stable. But this population is being constant
" increased from Without by the influx from
countries where the standard of living is
lower.
The immigration We were getting so years
ago was one we needed. There was abundant |
room for the immigrant then to attain to !
the American standard of living. There is no J
real room for the hordes who are coming /
now--no land. no jobs. They can find places
only by displacing, by underselling, someone
else.