POPULATION.

Waikato Times, Volume 97, Issue 15274, 26 June 1923, Page 6

POPULATION.

(To the Editor). Sir, —In your Saturday's issue there are two items of news *hat supenicially have ldtlc in common, but fundamentally deal with features of a problem which has always been at the root of social questions, and which in recent years has become steadily more acute. This problem is usually described as “the population question.” At the beginning of last century the writings of Malthus directed attention to its importance, and within the last year or two Dean Inge (to whom I must acknowledge an extensive debt for such conclusions as I have been able to reacii) has again concentrated on the question an intellect of extraordinary acuteness, and scholastic attainments which admirably qualify him for his task. Tlie items I refer to arc firstly the remarks of Mr F. Lye, M.P.. that New Zealand needs a satisfactory scheme of immigration, and secondly an article upon the acute position that has arisen

in the Kenya colony through the demand of the Indlun settlers lor the vote. Mr Lye’s lcmarks, as reported, give no indication as to what kind of system he would consider satisfactory, but the facts of the situation in Kenya are merely an extreme instance of a state of affairs into which we may ultimately be drawn by an extremely innocent looking programme. lam not suggesting that Mr Lye contemplated immigration by coloured people (although tills demand by the dark races is becoming more insistent every year), but immigration from any source raises its own peculiar problems. Within the compass of a letter of this kind it is impossible to develop the principles which must aken into account in deaLing with s tremendous question, but some reference to the main factors to be taken into account in framing a policy may be permitted. There is ample evidence to show that r'ecisely the same laws govern the rate of increase among mankind that rule throughout the animal world. Their importance relative to each other has been modified by civilisation and their operation somewhat disguised, but the fundamental problem is always food supply. Where food is plentiful and a living is easily made, population tends to increase rapidly; and vice versa. But the food supply also determines the standard of living. (I am using the term “food supply” as broadly covering clothing, housing, etc.) The more goods and services are consumed by the individual, the fewer Individuals can be maintained from the available supply at the standard they demand. Probably tv:o or three Chinamen could live comfortably on the standard of living which the New Zealand workman insists upon as a minimum, and in the long run would probably eliminate him in the continuous struggle for survival. This I s what the white population is really up against in Kenya to-day; what the population of New Zealand may be up against to-morrpw rf immigration is decided upon.

Precisely as every farm will carry only a certain number of stock and do them well, so any particular country will carry only a limited number of people at a given sLandard of living. .In the early stages of the development of a new country every new immigrant who is up to the standard of the rest will help to raise the standard of living, because a certain minimum population is necessary before it is economical to operate, for example, a boot factory or a sash and door factory. But this stage soon passes, and unless both (a) the immigrant is up to the standard of the people he is joining, and (b) lie is able to produce with the same labour as much as his predecessor, the standard of living is going to fall. There is thus for evencountry at any given time a "critical” number of people, which, if increased or decreased, will in both cases result in a fall in the standard of living. What is this number in New Zealand? Is it three, five, ten, or twenty million? I am only seeking to, state the problem, not to give an answer. But before we launch forth on' an immigration policy we must know: —-( 1) On what grounds an increase‘of population is desirable; (2) what size of population we arc aiming at, and in what time we wish to reach it; (3) what stock we propose to introduce and precisely how we are going to assimilate it.

I am not suggesting that the advocates of an immigration policy have not good grounds for their contentions, 1 hut I should like to sec such grounds in print. I may add that Ido not accept, bjCyond the extent indicated above, the popular view of “the standard of li\i:':g” which is, I believe, founded on false premises, and vitiates to a great extent the theories of Labour. —I am, etc., DOUGLAS SEYMOUR. Hamilton, June 24.