POPULATION PROBLEMS 199 



rid our minds of all thoughts of prevision on the part 

 of bird-parents, or of any providence that favoured vari- 

 ations in the direction of racial welfare. What prob- 

 ably happened was this. Those types that varied 

 in the direction of better brains and increased parental 

 care, and at the same time in the direction of econo- 

 mised reproductivity, were naturally in certain con- 

 ditions of existence the surviving types, and directed 

 the course of racial evolution. Did reduced reproduc- 

 tivity prompt parental care ; or did the reduction of 

 the family and its worries make better brains pos- 

 sible ? We do not know. It is probable that two 

 more or less independent liues of variation — ^the organism 

 is a unity — worked into one another's hands. 



It is very interesting to press the question whether 

 increased civihsation may not directly lessen fertility. 

 But we cannot give a convincing answer. It is easy 

 to ask for the children of the great men of the world — 

 Aristotle, St. Paul, Descartes, Newton, Hume, Leib- 

 nitz, Kant, Kelvin, and so on ; but it is not difficult 

 to compile a good list of famous fathers — Darwins, 

 Herschels, BernouilHs, Jussieus, Hookers. Sir Walter 

 Scott was a seventh son ; John Wesley was one of nine- 

 teen ; Tennyson one of seven. The strongly indi- 

 viduated Brahmins and Rajputs of high caste are said 

 to show no dwindling fertility. 



What is one to make of the fact that the average 

 size of the family among college-trained gentlefolk in 

 the States is under two ? What is one to make of the 

 large number of childless marriages among profes- 



