462 
NATURE 
[ Oct. 12, 1871 

ing, and not literary teaching, he said, ought to be the 
basis of all other knowledge. 
One of the best recent utterances on the relation of the 
State towards Science is contained in the address of Prof. 
Huxley, delivered at Birmingham on Monday last, as 
president of the Birmingham and Midland Institute. In | 
this admirable discourse he spoke of the principles of 
governing, and the relation of the State to its members, 
in a manner which enables us to congratulate ourselves 
that Prof. Huxley is no longer among the advocates of the 
limitation of State furictions. He repudiated the idea of 
the functions of a Government being confined to those of 
‘a protective constabulary. Adopting the definition that 
the end of Government would be the good of mankind, 
he said he took it that the good of mankind meant the 
attainment by everyone of all the happiness which he 
could enjoy without diminishing the happiness of his 
fellow-men. The pursuits in which pleasure and happiness 
could be enjoyed by all, with detriment to none, were 
those which ought to be smiled upon by the State. If it 
were beyond the province of the State to interfere directly 
in commerce and the individual relations of men, it might 
safely foster these indirectly. He urged that it was the 
duty of Government to take the initiative in promoting 
the teaching of Science, leaving local energy, as soon as 
it could be evoked, to develop the work. The State 
should understand that local scientific institutions such as 
those at Birmingham, Manchester,and Newcastle-on-Tyne 
do not benefit the locality alone, but the nation at large. 
With regard to the effects of Government subsidies on 
private enterprise, Prof. Huxley clearly showed how base- 
less are the grounds of alarmon this head. There are 
those who maintain that the State has no right to do any- 
thing but protect its subjects from oppression, but even 
“ accepting the proposition that the functions of the State 
might all be summed up in one great negative command- 
ment, ‘ Thou shalt not allow any man to interfere with the 
liberty of any other man, Prof. Huxley said he was unable 
to see that the consequence was any such restriction as 
its supporters implied. If his next door neighbour chose 
to have his drains in such a state as to create a poisonous 
atmosphere which he breathed at the risk of typhus and 
diphtheria, it was just as much a restriction on his just 
freedom to live as if his life was threatened with a pistol. 
If his neighbour were allowed to let his children go un- 
vaccinated, he might just as well be allowed to leave 
strychnine lozenges about in the way of his (Prof. Huxley’s) 
children. And if his neighbour brought up his children 
untaught and untrained to earn their living, he was doing 
his best to restrict his (the lecturer's) freedom by increasing 
houses for which he had to pay.” 
There is nothing new in these utterances, nothing that 
was not obvious to thinking men years and years ago ; but 
they are of the highest importance nevertheless, for we | 
may now hope that their lead will be followed in our 
English fashion throughout the length and breadth of 
the land. It was wisely said not long ago, that one of the 
most certain ways to make the study of Science national 
would be to make Science itself fashionable. This is 
true, and we may now hope that this task will for the 
future fall on Cabinet Ministers and the like, for scientific 
men who attempt it are apt to become martyrs to the 
good cause, 
| the same consequences. 


THE LAWS OF POPULATION 
1. Population : its Laws of Increase. By Nathan Allen 
M.D. (Lowell, Mass., 1870.) 
2. Physical Degeneracy. By the same.i (New York : Ap- 
pleton and Co, 1870.) 
3. The Law of Human Increase. By the same. 
R. NATHAN ALLEN, in three pamphlets, of which 
the titles are given above, discusses different aspects 
of a question of grave importance to American society, 
and indirectly to other societies also—namely, the com- 
parative infecundity of that part of the population of the 
United States described as “native Americans.” This 
fact, which seems pretty generally recognised, first 
came before Dr. Allen as a matter of personal observation, 
and he gives us more precise information from census 
returns. It appears that in the State of Vermont, for in- 
stance, the birth-rate even of the whole population, includ- 
ing the foreign element, is but three-fifths of what it is in 
England, while that of the strictly American population 
taken alone is estimated at only one-half of the Eng- 
lish standard. This fact is the more remarkable, since, as 
Dr. Allen points out, “the comparison is between a people 
occupying the healthiest part of New England, engaged 
principally in agricultural pursuits, scattered in settle- 
ment, and a population situated as that of England is, 
living mostly in cities and thickly settled places, as well 
as composed largely of the extremes in society.” Nor 
was it always so with the same race ; for a hundred years 
ago the number of children under fifteen years of age was, 
relatively to the adult population, double what it is now. As 
regards the causes of this difference, Dr. Allen does not 
assign more than a secondary place either to emigration 
westward or to prudential considerations. He himself 
regards the physical weakness of American women, their 
inattention to the rules of health, and the over-straining 
of their nervous system, as the chief determining causes 
of the smail number of children in a family. We 
have the usual complaints of tight-lacing, low dresses, in 
sufficient exercise, and so on, which have been urged by 
physical moralists in all countries ; but more special evils 
are pointed out in “ the excessive use of fine flour bread,” 
and the overstrained intellectual education of girls. To 
the latter cause Mr. Herbert Spencer has already ascribed 
At all events the fact of general 
physical weakness in American women seems to be made 
| out, and is curiously illustrated from one point of view by 
the estimate of a manufacturer, that more than seven 
| million feeding dottles are annually sold in the United 
the burden of taxation for the support of gaols and work- | 
States. So many mothers are unable to nourish their 
| offspring ! 
Dr. Allen further ventures on a general theory of popu- 
lation, which may be stated broadly thus :—That fecundity 
depends upon the perfect development or harmony of all 
the organs of the body. The principle thus stated is very 
vague, and the author cannot be called successful in his 
attempt te give it precision ; but the subject is too large 
for discussion here. The practical counsels which he ad- 
dresses tohis countrywomen are valuable and judicious, but 
so long as large families are regarded with disfavour, advice 
in this direction seems little likely to meet with acceptance. 
More promising are his suggestions as to the origin of 
this sentiment. If it be chiefly due, as he implies, to 
