Forbes: Education and Size of Families 



191 



ECONOMIC REASONS FOR SMALL 

 FAMILIES 



Scientific men have a conspicuously 

 small income when young. Given a 

 wife to support, together with a strong 

 interest in science to engage his atten- 

 tion, what is more natural than that 

 the financial needs should tend toward 

 a limitation in the size of the family; 

 and if limitation is well established 

 for a period of years, what is more 

 natural than that it should continue 

 regardless of future conditions. I have 

 no evidence that such is the case, and 

 proof would be difficult to obtain, but 

 the probabilities point to such a 

 conclusion. 



Financial needs are a variable, de- 

 pending upon the standard of living. 

 The problem is then to make the 

 income, the standard of living, and the 

 age of marriage meet at a common 

 point, as early in life as possible. All 

 three variables are difficult to change, 

 but our educational institutions have 

 a great effect on all people. 



The standard of living depends 

 largely on the incomes of the parents 

 and friends of the individual, and also 

 on the wife's surroundings. The de- 

 sired result can be obtained by reducing 

 the standard of living, which means 

 reducing the incomes of the older 

 members of society. A high standard 

 of living is desirable, but one higher 

 than necessary for physical and intel- 

 lectual health is injurious if it interferes 

 with the production of children of the 

 best inheritance for the coming genera- 

 tion. 



The colleges claim that they increase 

 the income of the older persons. That 

 is to say, in addition to cultural 

 benefits, the colleges a^lso give financial 

 benefits, but that these benefits are 

 not seen until late in life. It is evident 

 to all that the colleges decrease the 

 income of young people below the age 

 of 25 or 30 or possibly higher. We 

 therefore have a double charge against 

 the college, based on its own claims. 

 It puts two obstacles in the way of the 

 families of their graduates — a small 

 income when a large one is most needed, 

 and a large one when it can only be an 

 injury eugenically. Some of us ques- 

 tion the claim that the colleges increase 

 the incomes of their graduates at any 

 time of life. 



The proposition that I wish to make 

 is that the condition most favorable 

 to large families is an income Di the 

 sons equal to that of the parents at as 

 early an age as possible. I cannot see 

 how the education of the wife is an 

 important factor. At present this 

 condition is met among those of 

 inferior parents, and therefore of prob- 

 ably inferior inheritance, and among 

 the foreign families where the parents 

 have been kept back by ignorance 

 of our customs. It is farthest from 

 being true among those with the best 

 inheritance, and the colleges are largely 

 responsible for the condition. From 

 the point of view of eugenics, therefore, 

 is not college training one of the 

 greatest menaces to our civilization? 



Verj'- truly yours, 

 A. W. Forbes 



CONSPICUOUS VALUE OF PUREBREDS 



The value of purebred live stock, say 

 specialists in the United States Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture, is most noticeable 

 in those cases in which the capability of 

 the animals is measured most directly. 

 Among farm animals the best illustra- 

 tion can be found in dairy cattle, 

 though careful yearly tests of milk and 

 butterfat production are relatively 

 recent affairs. The enormous differ- 

 ences_among dairy cows when given 



the same opportunity have been 

 brought out clearly in a great number 

 of cases, and these difTerences are 

 strongly inherited through both the 

 sire and the dam. The average produc- 

 tion for purebreds and grades is much 

 above the average of all milk cows, 

 which is about 4,000 pounds of milk 

 and 160 pounds of butterfat annually. 

 — Weekly News Letter, U. S. Department 

 of Agriculture. 



