COXCVll 



first point requiring consideration is the normal rate of increase of 

 population in this country. ' In the decade ending 1890 the population 

 increased by 15 per cent, or 1'44 per cent, per annum, but the increase 

 dui'ing this period was obviously abnormal. The mortality caused 

 .by the famine of 1876-78 fell heaviest on the very old and the very 

 young, and birth-rates for the time received a check. The result was 

 that in the surviving population the proportion of aged and juvenile 

 persons was abnormally low, and that of persons of what may be called 

 reproductive ages correspondingly high. Now the increase of popula- 

 tion is due to the exoess of the births over the deaths. The births 

 during the decade were abnormally high because of the abnormally 

 high proportion of persons of reproductive ages left in the population, 

 and the deaths were abnormally low because the proportion of aged and 

 juvenile persons among whom the death-rate is the liighest was ab- 

 normally low. The combined effect of both the causes was to enhance 

 the rate of increase of population for a short period far beyond what 

 it would be under normal conditions. The disproportion, however, 

 soon rights itself, and the rate of increase of population resumes its 

 normal level. It is clear, then, that the I5 per cent, rate is one which 

 is maintained for a brief period shortly after the population has been 

 reduced very considerably by frightful mortality such as that of the 

 famine of >876-78. This high rate may also be maintained when 

 there is extraordinary accession of prosperity resulting from exceptional 

 circumstances such as the " boom '^ in the decade ending 1870. In 

 either case, however, the effects must be merely temporary ; and I 

 mention this to show that it would not be right to treat the H per cent, 

 rate as if it were normal, and to expect that population would go on 

 increasing at this rate. In the Census Report of British India for 

 1881, the normal rate of increase was estimated at '6 per cent, for 

 districts liable to frequent failures of crops and '8 per cent, for the 

 remainder of the Presidency. Between 1870 and 1890 the population 

 increased by 14 per cent., or '6Q per cent, per annum, and as such a 

 frightful famine of 1877 is not likely to occur except once in a century, 

 1 per cent, per annum may be safely taken to be the normal rate of 

 increase for this country. 



The second question for consideration is: Is the production of the 

 country per head of the population lower now than it was in 1870 ? 

 If it is, it would not necessarily show that the country, notwithstanding 

 the temporary check received by" it, is not economically progressing in 

 the right direction, and this for two reasons, viz., first, 1870 marks the 

 end of a period of abnormal prosperity, when, owing to the American 

 war and consequent demand for Indian cotton, the Indian produce had 

 trebled in value, and large areas devoted to the production of food- 

 crops were cultivated with cotton crops, and inferior soils were taken 

 up for the cultivation of the former under the stimidus of high prices ; 

 and the season in 1870 itself is described in the Grovernment records to 

 have been " conspicuously favorable for agricultural operations ; " and, 

 secondly, in about the middle of the period the country was afflicted 

 with a terrible famine which caused a mortality of nearly four millions, 

 and a loss of revenue of 1*2 crores of rupees and entailed on the State 

 an expenditure of Q^ crores of rupees in dispensation of relief to the 

 suffering population. Let us, however, see what the actual facts are. 

 The population increased during the 20 years by about 4^ millions^ 



