LARGE FAMILIES.

Evening Star, Issue 20982, 22 December 1931, Page 8

LARGE FAMILIES.

“ Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them ” was said of old of children, but a world that finds itself .temporarily disorganised as a result of the greatest war is not so sure. The Psalmist wanted children because he lived in a world of war. Those who had enough of them, ho was convinced, would not be ashamed when they met their enemies in the gate. The modern world, or the more enlightened part of it, assuredly does not want them for that reason, though it can only hope and use its best wisdom to secure that it will never need them for it. The world will be near its end when it does not want them at all. Wo have not reached that pass yet, hut injunctions to limit births find increasing acceptance. In a time when too great a proportion of the population needs assistance from the rest, a large family has to be well buttressed with its own means of support to prompt the old measure of admiration. No persons, the creed is inclined to run, should have more children than they are sure that they will always bo able to support. Wo are not going to bo misled hero into an argument about birth control. Whatever case may bo made for that system, as it is generally understood in older lands, we must be poor masters of our own environment if it is necessary in such a sparsely populated country as New Zealand. We shall merely demur to the statement, made by one of our correspondents, that “ the churches have been forced to give way on tho birth control question,” tho fact looming largest in his mind, apparently, being that the Lambeth Conference of the Church of England consented to approve of it in the hundredth case. For tho rest it is dear that the

creed wo liavo before referred to, that no persons should have more children than" they aro sure that they will always be able to support, is not one that can be infallibly practised unless they are to be content to have none at all. No one can measure cither hard or prosperous times for the period that a family will take to grow up. No one can say when hard times will come, or how soon they will bo past. To quote Dr L. P. Jacks, “ by its very nature civilisation is, always has been, and always will be a dangerous enterprise.” If w'e could reach the “perfect and Utopian state ” envisaged by one of our correspondents to-day, when life will be “ one round of joy and pleasure, with nothing to mar happiness,” there would be nothing before that civilisation except to. perish. . “ Safety first,” it has been well said by Dean Inge. “ is not a Christian maxim.”

Much can bo said for largo families, when their parents aro of the proper kind, even though their life may bo a struggle. Not infrequently they aro the best disciplined families, their whole existence being a training in the consideration of others. Never expecting much, they can be easily the most contented. A photograph which wo published last week shows how they can bo upstanding and healthy. For our own part, wo should like to see a petition got up for the man, with a family of twelve, who has just been retrenched from Hillside to keep him in his job. There aro strong arguments for it. The raising of largo families may not be in accordance with the newest economics, but there aro Scriptural precepts for it, apart from that of the Psalmist, and it is not yet acknowledged to bo an offence for anybody to take his Scriptures literally. There is a King’s bounty for triplets, which might appear to add State authority to a much earlier approval. The strongest argument is that retrenchment has no purpose except economy. This man can keep his family much more cheaply, on the wage which he has earned from the Railway Department, than either the State or the community can keep them. The saving of his wage by the State would be the most delusive economy. .