A. Population

1916. Freedman, Ronald, Pascal K. Whelpton, and Arthur A. Campbell. Family planning, sterility and population growth. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1959. 515 p. illus. (McGraw-Hill series in sociology) 58–14348 HQ766.5.U5F7

Precise information concerning the extent and success in American society of "family planning"—use of the several means, variously approved and variously reliable, of avoiding pregnancy—has been notoriously lacking. This book reports upon aconsiderable attempt to supply such information, conducted by the Scripps Foundation for Research in Population Problems of Miami University and the Survey Research Center of the University of Michigan and largely financed by the Rockefeller Foundation. It is based upon interviews with 2,713 white married women between the ages of 18 and 39, living with their husbands or separated temporarily by the latter’s military service. The "sample" was widely spread geographically and included diverse income levels and modes of living. The results show that "subfecundity" and actual sterility are very common and productive of much individual unhappiness, but that they make no great difference—at most a reduction of 10 or 15 percent—in the total number of births. They show that family limitation is generally approved and practiced and that there is a notable national consensus on family size—childlessness and a single child are both thought undesirable, whereas from two to four children are generally wanted and obtained. The authors report remarkably little variation between income levels, which may indicate that the sample was deficient in slumdwellers and "problem" families. The present family ideals, however, are sufficient to point toward rapid population growth and a probable total U.S. population of 312 million by A.D. 2000, with the present sex ratio but a larger proportion of children under 18. Family Growth in Metropolitan America (Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, 1961. 433 p.), by Charles F. Westoff and others, investigates the social and psychological factors thought to relate to differences in fertility among American couples living in the largest population centers of the Nation.

1917. Hauser, Philip M. Population perspectives. New Brunswick, N.J., Rutgers University Press [1961, c1960] 183 p. illus. 61–7090 HB3505.H3

Includes bibliography.

In these Brown and Haley lectures delivered at the University of Puget Sound, Hauser discusses the facts and consequences of three "explosions"—that in world population, as background, and those in U.S. total and metropolitan population, as main themes. People who derive encouragement from the economic stimulation provided by accelerated population growth, he argues, are shortsighted, missing short-run disadvantages and long-run dangers alike. Growth at the present rates means greatly reduced nonrenewable natural resources per head, an increased proportion of dependent persons young and old, increased pressure on virtually all public services, a decline in the already inadequate facilities for the aged, the spread of the lowered quality of elementary education to the higher grades, and the demand upon an inelastic economy for millions of additional jobs. The explosive spread of metropolitan areas has brought about a decline of civic responsibility, housing shortages affecting many groups, commuter congestion, and the impossibility of enforcing codes for building maintenance. Hauser also claims that the Negro’s higher rate of reproduction and his lack of preparation for urban living create a special set of problems. The primary element in all these explosions, the author insists, is "death control," the sharp reduction in mortality rates brought about by modern public health and medical practices; the only way to stabilize the population is through birth control and deliberate family limitation. Lincoln H. Day and Alice Taylor Day, in Too Many Americans (Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1964. 298 p.), enumerate their arguments for seeking early attainment of population stability in the United States and discuss how this goal might best be achieved.

1918. Kuznets, Simon S., and Dorothy S. Thomas, eds. Population redistribution and economic growth: United States, 1870–1950. Prepared under the direction of Simon Kuznets and Dorothy Swaine Thomas. Philadelphia, American Philosophical Society, 1957–64. 3 v. illus. (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, v. 45, 51, 61) 57–10071 HB1965.K8

Bibliographical references.

CONTENTS.—1. Methodological considerations and reference tables, by Everett S. Lee and others.—2. Analyses of economic change, by Simon Kuznets, Ann R. Miller, and Richard A. Easterlin.—3. Demographic analyses and interrelations, by Hope T. Eldridge and Dorothy S. Thomas.

This study emphasizes "the many and close links between economic growth and population redistribution; the interdependence of the various distributions and redistributions of population and of economic opportunities; and the importance of migration as the principal mechanism by which job-seeking elements in the population are adjusted numerically and by characteristics to changing temporal-spatial distributions of opportunities." The discussions are accompanied by numerous tables listing data on population growth, population movement, wages, incomes, and economic activity.

1919. Maclachlan, John M., and Joe S. Floyd. This changing South. Gainesville, University of Florida Press, 1956. 154 p. 56–12858 HB3511.M35

As a result of interregional migration, the population of the South has been growing more slowlythan that of the United States as a whole (an increase of 12.7 as against 14.5 percent between 1940 and 1950), despite its higher rate of natural increase. The white population in the South increased by 16.5 percent between 1940 and 1950, while the black population rose only 1.5 percent in the area as a whole and decreased in six of the 13 Southern States. The majority of the South’s counties—those predominantly rural—lost population, but the remainder showed rapid rates of increase, and the cities of the South grew more rapidly than those of "non-southern America." Income in the South, especially in the States worst off in 1940, likewise rose more rapidly than in other regions. A precipitous decline in the agricultural labor force was offset by a rapid rise in the white female labor force. All these figures point to basic and irreversible changes in the traditional patterns of Southern society.

1920. Sheldon, Henry D. The older population of the United States. With introductory and summary chapters by Clark Tibbitts. For the Social Science Research Council in cooperation with the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. New York, Wiley [1958] 223 p. (Census monograph series) 58–6086 HB1545.S5

Eleven special monographs were published with the census of 1920, but depression and war prevented such studies of the censuses of 1930 and 1940. The Social Science Research Council and the Russell Sage Foundation cooperated with the Bureau of the Census in ensuring the appearance of this Census Monograph Series interpreting the 1950 figures. Four of the volumes were noted in the 1960 Guide (no. 4395), and another is no. 1920below. During the first half of the 20th century, while the population of the United States nearly doubled, the segment aged 65 or over nearly quadrupled, rising from 3.1 million to 12.3 million. Within this older population, the number of males for each 100 females declined during the period from 102.1 to 89.6. Sheldon examines the statistical characteristics of this group with respect to geographic distribution, employment and occupation, living arrangements, and income. In 1950, 42 percent of the men over 64 remained in the labor force, as compared to 68 percent in 1890. The author states that earlier retirement does not necessarily mean sufficient income, adequate housing, proper medical care, or opportunities for utilizing leisure. Statistics on housing indicate, for example, that among households headed by persons over 64 in 1950, one-third lived in substandard housing, as against one-fourth for the middle-aged group. The other volumes in this series are American Families (240 p.), by Paul C. Glick, and Farm Housing (194 p.), by Glenn H. Beyer and J. Hugh Rose, both published in New York by Wiley in 1957.

1921. Taeuber, Conrad, and Irene B. Taeuber. The changing population of the United States. For the Social Science Research Council in cooperation with the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. New York, Wiley [1958] 357 p. (Census monograph series) 57–13451 HB3505.T3

"Sources for national demographic statistics": p. 327–334. Bibliographical footnotes.

This most general volume of the Census Monograph Series (see no. 1920 above) is concerned with the trends of greatest significance in all the fields covered by the census of 1950. In some instances the First Census of 1790 is the point of departure, but developments are more often limited to the present century. It is noted, for example, that the overall density of the population had risen by 1950 to 50.7 persons per square mile. A quarter of the population was contained in 28 of the Nation’s 3,103 counties, as against 39 counties in 1910. Significant changes in internal migration occurred in the 20th century, and marriage became a more general condition. The authors conclude with some very cautious projections, the point of doubt being whether the recent unusually high fertility rates will be maintained. Another commentary on the census of 1950 is provided by Donald J. Bogue in The Population of the United States (Glencoe, Ill., Free Press [c1959] xix, 873 p.). Intended primarily for reference use, it has an even greater proportion of tables, graphs, and maps than the Taeubers’ volume and seeks to interpret the changes of the 1950’s as revealed in the Current Population Reports of the Bureau of the Census and elsewhere. Bogue treats a number of topics which the Taeubers omit, including industrial composition, unemployment, confinement to institutions, religious affiliation, housing, and the populations of Alaska and Hawaii.