LAM'S OF MULTIPLICATION. 



273 



sexual intemperance is enough to obviate any hasty criticism of neo- 

 Malthusianism, whatever conclusion may be arrived at as to its 

 sufficiency. 



It is time, however, to point out the chief weakness in neo-Malthu- 

 sian proposals, which are at one in allowing the gratification of sexual 

 appetites to continue, aiming only at the prevention of the naturally 

 ensuing parentage. To many, doubtless, the adoption of a method 

 which admits of the egoistic sexual pleasures, without the responsi- 

 bilities of childbirth, would multiply temptations. Sexuality would 

 tend to increase if its responsibilities were annulled; the proportion of 

 unchastity before marriage, in both sexes, could hardly but be aug- 

 mented; while married life would be in exaggerated danger of sinking 

 into " monogamic prostitution." On the other hand, it seems probable 

 that the very transition from unconscious animalism to deliberate pre- 

 vention of fertilization would tend in some to decrease rather than 

 increase sexual appetite. 



It seems to us, however, essential to recognize that the ideal to be 

 sought after is not merely a controlled rate of increase, but regulated 

 married lives. Neo-Malthusianism might secure the former by its 

 more or less mechanical methods, and there is no doubt that a limita- 

 tion of the family would often increase the happiness of the home; but 

 there is danger lest, in removing its result, sexual intemperance become 

 increasingly organic. We would urge, in fact, the necessity of an 

 ethical rather than of a mechanical ' ' prudence after marriage, " of a 

 temperance recognized to be as binding on husband and wife as chas- 

 tity on the unmarried. When we consider the inevitable consequences 

 of intemperance, even if the dangers of too large families be avoided, 

 and the possibility of exaggerated sexuality becoming cumulative by 

 inheritance, we can not help recognizing that the intemperate pair are 

 falling toward the ethical level of the harlots and profligates of our 

 streets. 



Just as we would protest against the dictum of false physicians who 

 preach indulgence rather than restraint, so we must protest against 

 regarding artificial means of preventing fertilization as adequate solu- 

 tions of sexual responsibility. After all, the solution is primarily one 

 of temperance. It is no new nor unattainable ideal to retain, through- 

 out married life, a large measure of that self-control which must always 

 form the organic basis of the enthusiasm and idealism of lovers. But 

 as old attempts at the regulation of sexual life have constantly fallen 

 from a glowing idealism into pallor or morbidness, it need hardly be 

 said that the same fate will ever more or less befall the endeavor after 

 temperance, so long as that lacks the collaboration of other necessary 

 reforms. We need a new ethic of the sexes; and this not merely, or 



