View report page

20
1904]
The continued decline in the birth.rate was commented on in the Annual
Report for 1902, and, therefore, there is little to say on this subject now.
It is a matter, which is, however, causing considerable anxiety in the
country, fcr the decrease is a national one. Indeed, in a Report of the
Registrar.General he states that in the year with which it deals, 1903, the rate
was the lowest on record.
In that report it is stated that the total population is not the most satisfactory
standard by which to measure the birth rate, because it does not take
account of the age constitution of the population, and particularly the age
constitution of the female population of conceptive age. For instance, the
proportion of women aged 15.45 to the total population of England and Wales,
which in 1871 and 1881 was 23.1 per cent., rose to 23.8 per cent. in 1891
and to 25.0 per cent. in 1901. If, therefore, the average fecundity of the
female population at these ages had remained constant, the birth rate in
proportion to total population would have increased during the past 30 years
by nearly 2 per cent.; stated in another way, had the ratio of births to the
female population of conceptive ages been identical in 1871 and in 1903, the
births registered in the latter year would have amounted to upwards of
one and a quarter millions, instead of the 984,271 actually recorded. Further
from 1871 to 1903 the female population aged 15.45 contained a constantly
decreasing proportion of married women, among whom the proportion of those
at ages under 25 years has continuously decreased. In view of these facts, the
Registrar General thinks that it is evident that a preferable method by which
to measure the birth rate is to calculate the proportion of births per 1,000
women of conceptive age. He then shows by certain tables that the decrease
in the birth-rate is not adequately shown. In his Annual Summary for 1904
he continues this argument, and there shows that if the ratio of births to the
female population had been the same in 1871 and 1904, the births registered in
London would have amounted to upwards of 166,000, instead of the 129,335
actually registered.
If this method were applied to Islington, but taking 1881 as the oasis instead
of 1871, the figures for which are not available, there would have been fully
12,021 births, instead of 8,890, the number actually registered, or an addition
of 3,131 births. If, on the other hand, the birth rate that attained in 1880-2
were applied to the total population for 1904, there would have been 11,982
births, instead of 8,890 the actual number registered, or an addition of 2,092.