124 



Lift ami Letterx of Francin G<ilt<in 



populations to a staDdard population (the average of the two) of wives. 

 The following resulted : 



From this table we see that Galton overlooked the fact that his Coventry 

 sample consisted of younger women than hi.s rural Warwickshire mothers, 

 and therefore would naturally have fewer children. The average difference 

 on the standard popidation is only "14 of a child, or if we take the awrage 

 interval between births to be 2*5 years, it follows that a |X)stponement of 

 marriage on the average for four months would explain this difference'. Thus 

 far Galton's paper would not justify any statement as to deterioration arising 

 from town-life. The lesser apparent fertility would be fully accounted for by 

 emigration of the younger women into the towns and a slight po.stponement 

 of marriage. Galton next proceeds to take the influence of mortality on the 

 town and rural populations. Failing other data he applies to Coventry the 

 mortality table of^ Manchester and to the rural districts of Warwickshire 

 that of the 'Healthy Districts.' I do not think either of these .steps is ju.sti- 

 fiable, nor again the method by which he applies these life-tables. He draws 

 the conclusion that : 



"the rate of supply in towns to the next adult generation is only 77 per cent., or say, three- 

 quarters of that in the country. In two generations the proportion falls to .'i9 per cent., that is 

 the adult grandcliildren of artisan townsfolk are little more than half as numerous as those of 

 labouring people who live in healthy country districts." (p. 23.) 



This conclusion has been often cited as if it were rigorous, whereas it is 

 rather an illustration of the grave difficulty of inquiries of this nature, even 



' This suggestion is siipjK)rtcd by the fact that as the women get older there is a less dif- 

 lereBoe between their number of children, e.g. Mothers 36-40, Factory 3-59 and Rural 3-52, 

 or the town is in excess. 



