rate, nullified, when the people take
advantage of it, not to save and raise their standard of living, but to
breed to the very margin of subsistence. Henry George used to point out
that every mouth that came into the world brought two hands along with
it; but though the physiological fact is undeniable, the economic
deduction suggested will not hold good except in conditions that permit
of the profitable employment of the two hands.... If mouths increase in
a greater ratio than food, the tendency must be towards greater
poverty."[263]

It is one of the most unfortunate aspects of the situation that very few
Oriental thinkers yet realize that over-population is a prime cause of
Oriental poverty. Almost without exception they lay the blame to
political factors, especially to Western political control. In fact, the
only case that I know of where an Eastern thinker has boldly faced the
problem and has courageously advocated birth-control is in the book
published five years ago by P. K. Wattal, a native official of the
Indian Finance Department, entitled, _The Population Problem of
India_.[264] This pioneer volume is written with such ability and is of
such apparent significance as an indication of the awakening of
Orientals to a more rational attitude, that it merits special attention.

Mr. Wattal begins his book by a plea to his fellow-countrymen to look at
the problem rationally and without prejudice. "This essay," he says,
"should not be constituted into an attack on the spiritual civilization
of our country, or even indirectly into a glorification of the
materialism of the West. The object in view is that we should take a
somewhat more matter-of-fact view of the main problem of life, viz., how
to live in this world. We are a poor people; the fact is indisputable.
Our poverty is, perhaps, due to a great many causes. But I put it to
every one of us whether he has not at some of the most momentous periods
of his life been handicapped by having to support a large family, and
whether this encumbrance has not seriously affected the chances of
advancement warranted by early promise and exceptional endowment. This
question should be viewed by itself. It is a physical fact, and has
nothing to do with political environment or religious obligation. If we
have suffered from the consequences of that mistake, is it not a duty
that we owe to ourselves and to our progeny that its evil effects shall
be mitigated as far as possible? T