pubucations op 
 The American Academy of Pouticai. and Social vScience. 
 
 No. 1 80. 
 
 Issued Fortnightly. August 25, 1896. 
 
 The Growth of the French 
 
 Canadian Race in 
 
 America. 
 
 BY 
 
 John Davidson, 
 
 i I' 
 
 University of New Brunswick. 
 
 A PAPER SUBMITTED TO THE 
 AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE 
 
 PHILADELPHIA : 
 AMERICAN academy OF POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE. 
 
 Enclamd : P. S. King & Son, la and 14 King St., Westminster, London, S. W. 
 Francb : L. Larose, rue SouflBot 22, Paris. Germany : Gustav Fischer, Jena, 
 Italt : Direzione del Giomale degji F.conomistii Rome, via Ripetta loa. 
 Spain: E. Capdeville, 9 Plaza de Santa Aiia, Madrid. 
 
 Prict, 25 eents. A nnual Subscription, $6.00. 
 
The following papers, which are of particular interest to 
 
 Students of Social Questions, 
 
 have appeared in the Annai^, and been reprinted in 
 
 SEPARATE) KDITIONS. 
 
 THE FUTURE PROBLEM OF CHARITY AND THE UNEMPLOYED. 
 
 By Rnv. Dr. John Graham Brooks. Price, 23 Cents. 
 
 RELIEF WORK AT THE WELLS MEMORIAL INSTITUTE. 
 
 By Miss Hei^Kna S. Dudi,sy. Price, 25 Cents. 
 
 SOCIAL WORK AT THE KRUPP FOUNDRIES. 
 
 By DR. S. M. Lindsay. Price, 25 Cents. 
 
 RELATION OF ECONOMIC STUDY TO PUBLIC AND PRIVATE 
 
 CHARITY. By Prof. James Mayor. Price, 25 Cents. 
 
 THE FRENCH SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE. 
 
 By M. Faui, de Rousikrs. Price, 25 Cents. 
 
 PUBLIC HEALTH AND MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. 
 
 By Dr. John S. Bii,i<ings. Priu, 25 Cents. 
 
 RELATION OF ECONOMIC CONDITIONS TO THE CAUSES 
 
 OF CRIME. By Hon. Carroi.1, D. Wright, Price, 2$ Cents. 
 
 PREVENTIVE LEGISLATION IN RELATION TO CRIME. 
 
 By Hon. C. H. Reev% Price, 15 Cents, 
 
 ALCOHOL QUESTION IN SWITZERLAND. 
 
 By Hon. W. M11.LIET. Price, 15 Cents, 
 
 ECONOMIC BASIS OF PROHIBITION. 
 
 By Prof. S. N. Patten. Price, 15 Cents, 
 
 American Academy of Political and Social Science, 
 
 STATION B, PHILADELPHIA. 
 
THE GROWTH 
 
 OF THE 
 
 FRENCH CANADIAN RACE 
 
 IN 
 
 AMERICA. 
 
 It would be idle to suggest that economists have come to 
 anything like a general agreement regarding Malthus' 
 ** Laws of Population," and it is too late, nowadays, to rest 
 content with expressing the somewhat contemptuous wish 
 that critics might well employ a portion of their leisure in 
 reading the essay which they criticise. The whole 
 problem is still in controversy, and is likely to remain so 
 wherever the industrial conditions under which Malthus 
 wrote are absent. A great deal of the criticism amounts 
 1;o little more than a disproportionate statement of some 
 of the checks to population; a sort of criticism which is 
 really a corroboration of the theory criticised. All the 
 evidence collected and published since the essay appeared 
 has gone to show that population rarely treads on the 
 limits of subsistence, and that " by a natural tendency, 
 without any violent repression from external forces or 
 any painful restraint on desires, population has grown 
 less rapidly than wealth."* This, however, is simply 
 
 *I<evasseur's " I,a Population Francaise," Vol. iii, p. 109. 
 
 [213] 
 
2 Annals of the American Academy. 
 
 further evidence in addition to that which Malthus accu- 
 mulated in the successive editions of the essay, whose 
 many laaincB and imperfections he readily admits. It bears 
 out what he says about the operation of checks on the 
 principle of population; and demonstrates that the moral 
 check is much more important than the physical checks, and 
 that for the ' ' limits of subsistence ' ' we must substitute the 
 " standard of comfort." The theory of the " Iron Law of 
 Wages " has undergone a similar modification, and in becom- 
 ing more accurate has become less exact and precise. 
 Speaking generally, one may say that his critics have 
 endeavored to show that in numberless instances and from 
 an infinite variety of social, political, economic and reli- 
 gious causes, the ' ' Laws ' ' were steadily counteracted and 
 produced no effect, and that therefore such laws could not 
 exist. What they should have shown was that the laws 
 were so steadily counteracted by forces which were as 
 strong and as permanent as the alleged laws themselves, that 
 it became a mere barren and formal statement to express 
 them as Malthus had done; that while it might be true that 
 the checks of vice and misery were simply the indirect 
 methods by which the ultimate check of famine operates, 
 this could not be claimed of the check on population exer- 
 cised through moral restraint. In a note to the appendix 
 (6th Ed., Vol. ii, p. 453), Malthus writes: "It has been 
 said that I have written a quarto volume to prove that 
 population increases in a geometrical ratio, and food in an 
 arithmetical ratio; but this is not quite true. The first of 
 these propositions I considered as proved the moment the 
 American increase was related, and the second proposition 
 as soon as it was enumerated. The chief object of my work 
 was to inquire what effects these laws, which I considered as 
 established in the first six pages, had produced and were 
 likely to produce on society — a subject not very readily 
 exhausted. The principal fault of my details is that they 
 are not sufficiently particular; but this was a fault which it 
 
 [214J 
 
Growth of the French Canadian Race. 3 
 
 was not in my power to remedy. It would be a most 
 curious, and to every philosophical mind, a most interesting 
 piece of information, to know the exact share of the full 
 power of increase which each existing check prevents; but 
 at present I see no mode of obtaining such information." 
 
 This is indeed " one ha'penny worth of bread to this 
 intolerable deal of sack," and it seems rather dispropor- 
 tionate that the law should be established in six pages, 
 while a ' ' quarto volume ' ' was required to explain why the 
 theory and the facts did not correspond. The main object 
 of the essay, as may be seen even by running through the 
 table of contents, was to explain the counteracting causes 
 — to explain, for instance, the fact that while, at the end of 
 the second century, the popvilation of the Roman Empire 
 was about 45 millions, to-day the population of the same 
 region does not exceed 156 millions, giving an annual rate 
 of increase of merely .0007 per cent. To say in such an 
 instance as this that the natural tendency of population is to 
 increase at the annual rate of 3.19 per cent, doubling itself 
 every twenty-five years, is to make a purely formal state- 
 ment. The ' ' counteracting ' ' causes are so much the more 
 effectual, that to call them counteracting causes seems a 
 ludicrous disproportion. The utmost that can possibly be 
 said is that of all the forces present, that stated in Malthus' 
 law is relatively the strongest, and we cannot say what 
 degree of strength it has till we have determined ' ' the exact 
 share of the full power of the increase which each existing 
 check prevents." The line which critics should have taken 
 was that the famous " Laws of Population" were purely 
 hypothetical and mere devices of arrangement for classifying 
 the known facts. The place of hypothesis in economics has 
 been much discussed, with the generally accepted conclusion 
 that an hypothesis is little more than a device of arrange- 
 ment. An hypothesis may be a more or less adequate 
 system for arranging and classifying; and judging from the 
 disproportions of the essay, it might have been said that 
 
 [215] 
 
4 Annai^ of the American Academy. 
 
 Malthus had hit upon the wrong hypothesis, that some one 
 of the forces which he discusses as checking the increase 
 of population might have served as a better principle of 
 classification than the one he chose. 
 
 Indeed, from such a point of view, it is really immaterial 
 what hypothesis has been chosen, and the whole ardor of the 
 controversy would have been out of place. There can be no 
 doubt, however, that Malthus meant his principle of popu- 
 lation to have immediate practical application. The sub-title 
 of the essay (even in the sixth edition) indicates as much. 
 It is " a view of its past and present eflfects on human happi- 
 ness, with an inquiry into our prospects respecting the future 
 removal or mitigation of the evils which it occasions." The 
 very checks, the discussion of which occupies so much space, 
 are nothing more than particular modes in which the ulti- 
 mate check operates. Malthus, at least, puts forward the 
 principle as an hypothesis which is an adequate expression 
 of the facts. 
 
 From this point of view it becomes a matter of great 
 importance that a standard should be established. If the 
 phenomena are to be accurately estimated and measured, if 
 the effects of the various counteracting checks are to be 
 made definite, it is necessary that some standard rate of 
 increase should be established, that, it should not be arbi- 
 trary, but natural and capable of bemg applied in every 
 community. It cannot be said that Malthus is anywhere 
 at much pains to establish such a standard. He quotes 
 from various sources, relying ultimately on the authority of 
 Benjamin Franklin; and finally advances what he claims is 
 a very moderate estimate, viz. : that population, when left to 
 itself, will double every twenty-five years. He points out, 
 by the way, that in many agricultural districts, where 
 "vicious customs and unwholesome occupations are un- 
 known," population has been found to double itself in 
 much shorter periods; and he mentions that Sir William 
 Petty, in his "Political Arithmetic," had given it as his 
 
 [216] 
 
Growth op the French Canadian Rack. 5 
 
 opinion that population might double itself within ten years. 
 " But to be perfectly sure that we are far within the truth, 
 we will take the slowest of these rates of increase, a rate in 
 which all concurring testimonies agree, and which has been 
 repeatedly ascertained to be from procreation alone. 
 
 " It may safely be pronounced, therefore, that population, 
 when unchecked, goes on doubling itself every twenty-five 
 years, or increases in a geometrical ratio." — Book I., c. i. 
 
 Considering how much depends on the standard rate of 
 increase, one cannot say that Malthus has taken the task 
 very seriously. Six pages can hardly be deemed a sufficient 
 proportion of his space to be devoted to so important an end. 
 It may be that his proposition that population increases in a 
 geometrical ratio is proved so soon as * * the American increase 
 was related;' ' but surely a little more consideration was neces- 
 sary to show that this was the American rate of increase. The 
 statistics on which he has based this moderate rate of in- 
 crease are frequently drawn from local experiences, and are, 
 as often as not, mere casual conjectures on which little reli- 
 ance should have been placed. His own evidence goes to 
 show that the rate of increase varied from being a minus 
 quantity up to such a figure that population doubled itself 
 in ten years; while in small new settlements the rate of 
 increase was affected one way or another by local and tem- 
 porary causes the nature of which we cannot now determine, 
 and under conditions such that the compensatory effects of 
 averages could not be experienced. Statistics of limited 
 areas and short periods of time cannot be relied on to furnish 
 a standard by which so much is to be judged. For it should 
 be remembered that Malthus was incited to write his essay- 
 that he might forever silence the Utopians, such as Godwin 
 and Condorcet, who dreamed of a new heaven and a new 
 earth by a redistribution of wealth. But, even if we admit 
 the substantial accuracy of his authorities, can we accept as 
 a standard the experience of the New England States in the 
 century and a half before 1 800 ? Especially in its earlier half, 
 
 [217] 
 
6 Annai^ op the American Academy. 
 
 this was a period of vicissitudes, as he himself admits by 
 taking a cautious estimate. The growth of population must 
 have been nmch affected by immigration which is relatively 
 more important the farther back we go. Again, a tradition 
 of having large families and the pressing necessity of a supply 
 of agricultural labor which could be procured in no other 
 way must have tended to promote a rapid growth of popula- 
 tion. The evidence is too local and too temporary to support 
 the conclusions based on it. The experience of the New 
 England States is used to judge the whole course of history. 
 The rate of increase there observed is set up as the normal 
 rate in comparison with which all other rates of increase 
 are abnormal, and to be accounted for by counteracting 
 causes. Moreover one assumption, which is indeed explicitly 
 stated but in proof of which not even six pages, nor indeed 
 six sentences, are devoted, runs through the whole essay; 
 which is, that the natural ' ' prolifickness ' ' of all races is 
 approximately equal, and that to establish the rate of increase 
 for one race under the most favorable conditions is to estab- 
 lish the standard for all races. How much justification 
 there may be for this last assumption need not here be dis- 
 cussed, but it is important ti-.-'t we Si oild keep in mind that 
 some such assumption is beh nd evec^' application of the 
 principle of population in a '::•>. *^ry ofner than that in 
 which the standard rate has been oLseiTf.d and in industrial 
 and social circumstances diflferent from those under which 
 the "standard" population lived. 
 
 Leaving the last assumption as Malthus stated it (and it 
 is probably doubtful whether more than a general presump- 
 tion in its favor could be established even by the most wide- 
 reaching statistical research) we should first see under what 
 conditions a standard could be found. It is obvious that a 
 standard by which so much is to be judged should not be 
 established except on the clearest evidence and under condi- 
 tions which leave no room for doubt as to the forces at work 
 in producing the observed result. 
 
 [218] 
 
Growth of the French Canadian Race. 7 
 
 The race whose rate of increase is to be taken as standard 
 should also live under conditions which make it an easy 
 matter to ascertain the true rate of increase. The^e, probably, 
 would best be found in an isolated community, with little or 
 no communication with the outer world or with its immedi- 
 ate neighbors, inhabiting a new country where the condi- 
 tions of life are favorable for healthy and vigorous existence, 
 and in which neither the nature of the soil or climate, nor 
 the nature of the occupations of the inhabitants renders disease 
 especially frequent. Above all, the race, by customs and 
 traditions, and in every other possible way, should be little 
 apt to assimilate surrounding or immigrating peoples or to 
 amalgamate and lose its identity in that of the peoples among 
 whom its lot may be cast. In short, the circumstances of 
 the community must be such that v;e can clearly trace its 
 growth and be reasonably certain that no branch of the race 
 has escaped observation, and that the increase of no other 
 race or community has gone to augment the results. In 
 other words the circumstances must be such that we can dis- 
 cover the truth, the whole truth, and nothing that is not true. 
 It is not an easy matter to find a nation or race which 
 fully realizes all these conditions. The movements of popula- 
 tion during the present century render it almost impossible 
 to discover the true rate of increase. European countries 
 have lost, actually and potentially, by emigration. America 
 and new countries have gained so much by immigration, 
 potentially as well as actually, that no accurate deduc- 
 tion can be made from the rates of increase there observed. 
 Before the present century the populations of Europe were less 
 mobile than they have since become, but accurate statistics 
 are not available. Wherever we turn the attainment of 
 anything like iccuracy seems impossible, and any standard 
 of increase set up would retain the appearance of being 
 arbitrary. Fortunately, however, there is one race which 
 presents all the conditions necessary for accurate observation. 
 The French population of Canada is an isolated, homogeneous 
 
 [219] 
 
8 Annai^ of the American Academy. 
 
 body of which we cao observe the true increase; the whole 
 increase, and nothing but the true increase, and from this 
 source it is possible to set up a standard which shall not 
 be arbitrary even in appearance. 
 
 To begin with, we are in possession of accurate statistical 
 data covering two centuries and a half. Not only have 
 regular enumerations of the people been taken since the coun- 
 try passed into the possession of England, there were 
 sixteen enumerations before that event. Over and above these 
 census returns, which might partake of the inaccuracy of all 
 early census returns, we have at our disposal accurate 
 vital statistics covering the whole period during which there 
 have been French settlers on this continent. The parish 
 registers kept by the priests, during nearly three centuries, 
 give us a complete survey of the progress of the population. 
 These registers were rendered accessible by publication in 
 one of the volumes of the First Census of the Dominion 
 of Canada in 1871 and the results may be, and have been, 
 used not merely to verify but also to supplement the sta4:is- 
 tics gathered by the government agents. The registers 
 contain an impartial account of births and marriages and 
 deaths which are open to no suspicion of political inter- 
 ference. Thus, for the growth of the population, we have not 
 the random guesses, more or less well informed, made by 
 observers, more or less competent and more or less prejudiced, 
 but a series of tables on whose accuracy we can depend; 
 for their compilation was part of a religious function and 
 not the work of a possibly perfunctory government depart- 
 ment. In the case of the French Canadian population the 
 first and most essential condition is realized. The rate of 
 increase which may be established is based on reliable sta- 
 tistics and not on mere estimates; and these statistics cover a 
 long period, long enough at any rate to eliminate accidental 
 variations of time. 
 
 A second point of almost equal importance for establishing 
 a standard rate of increase is that during nearly a century 
 
 [220] 
 
Growth op the French Canadian Rack. 9 
 
 I and a half, ever since 1759, when New France passed 
 on the Plains of Abraham into the possession of the English, 
 the French Canadian has lived in isolation; and the conse- 
 quence is, that whatever rate of increase we discover, will be 
 a legitimate rate, not raised by immigration from abroad nor 
 interfered with in other ways which might render the real 
 increase uncertain. When the French Canadian became a 
 subject of the British crown, he retained only a sentimental 
 connection with the mother France across the seas. His 
 language, his laws, his customs, and his religion were guar- 
 anteed to him forever, and a great deal of that vexatious 
 regulation and interference which had hindered the develop- 
 ment of the colony (and was indeed the reason why France 
 failed as a colonial power) was removed. The French 
 Canadian remained free to develop, and we shall take the 
 first census after 1759 as the starting point of our calculation. 
 
 /Immigration from France which, prior to 1760, must pre- 
 vent the true and legitimate rate of increase from being 
 readily discernible, ceased, and during a century and a 
 half has remained practically a negligable quantity. It 
 is true that there was a large emigration from Acadia to 
 New France in consequence of English oppression; but it is 
 very probable that the greater part took place before 1765 
 (our starting point). The French population of Acadia in 
 1765 slightly exceeded 10,000, and in 1771 still amounted 
 (by estimate) to 8462. The decrease in these six years 
 was probably due more to the enormous mortality among 
 the population on the North Shore than to emigration. Of 
 late years a strong effort has been made by some of the 
 leaders of the French Canadians to strengthen the bonds 
 of sentiment which still unite them to France; and Quebec 
 provincial loans have been negotiated m Paris, at an extrava- 
 gant rate, rather than in London. The object has of course 
 been to divert to Canada some portion of the scant stream 
 of emigrants from France, and thus to reinforce French 
 Canadian influence in Canada, An especial effort was made 
 
 [221] 
 
lO 
 
 Annates op the American Academy. 
 
 in the early seventies to attract the inhabitants of Alsace and 
 Lorraine who had expatriated themselves rather than become 
 German citizens; but so far as can be seen, statistically, 
 neither this special effort nor any other has had any marked 
 effect. The number of French immigrants is still insig- 
 nificant, and not appreciably greater than the number of 
 German and other continental immigrants into the Province 
 of Quebec. The following table shows the number of French 
 and German born inhabitants of the provinces of Quebec 
 and Ontario since 1851: 
 
 Proportion per 1000 owning as Birth Place. 
 
 '> 
 
 
 
 France. 
 
 Germany. 
 
 Census Ykar. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ontario. 
 
 Quebec. 
 
 Ontario. 
 
 Quebec. 
 
 1851 
 
 I.O 
 
 0.4 
 
 10.4 
 
 0.2 
 
 1861 
 
 1.7 
 
 0.8 
 
 16.4 
 
 0.6 
 
 1871 
 
 1.0 
 
 0.6 
 
 14.0 
 
 0.7 
 
 1881 
 
 0.8 
 
 16 
 
 I2.I 
 
 0.8 
 
 1891 
 
 0.5 
 
 1-5 
 
 134 
 
 6.5 
 
 * JL " 1^^ It is evident from this table that the rate of increase in 
 (V' ^^ iT^rench Canada has been augmented but little by immigration 
 V from France, and this is the only source from which error 
 might come. The total immigration is in itself small, and 
 there is no danger of confounding, at least from 1 85 1 , any 
 other part of it with the natural increase of the French Cana- 
 dian people. The proportion of immigrants from France is 
 certainly not more than sufficient to counterbalance the 
 inevitable leakage which cannot be traced. Every nation 
 loses more or less by emigration in driblets so small that no 
 statistical account of it can be made. This leakage is les^ 
 perhaps in the case of the French Canadians than in any 
 other nation, but the increment of population by immigration 
 from France is no more than sufficient to make up for the 
 loss. 
 
 [222] 
 
Growth o^ the French Canadian Race. ii 
 
 The second condition of a reliable standard is therefore 
 present. Malthus took the increase of the New England 
 States as his standard and his standard is unreliable because 
 of the steady stream of immigration which was even then 
 flowing in, the increase due to immigration being then rela- 
 tively the more important that the population was small. 
 It happens that the standard he set up is accurate or 
 approximately accurate, but it only happens so. In the case 
 of the French Canadians we may take the increase from 
 1765, which we take as our starting point, to 1890-91, from 
 69,810 to 1,804,795, as a natural increase. 
 
 While it is necessary that the natural rate of increase 
 should not be augmented by immigration it is equally im- 
 portant that no part of the natural rate should be omitted on 
 account of emigration. If the rate of increase in the United 
 States, during last century and this, may not be taken as a 
 standard on account of immigration, still less can the census 
 reports of England during present century afford any basis for 
 establishing a true vStandard. E^'en if we add to the thirty- 
 eight millions of the present population of the United 
 Kingdom, the thirteen or fourteen millions who have left 
 the country since 18 15, we have not obtained a final result. 
 We should still have to add the potential increase of these 
 thirteen or fourteen millions. Even should we assume that 
 these would have iucreaseJl at the same rate as those who 
 have remained, we have still only a conjectural rate of 
 increase, based on the unverifiable, and probably false 
 assumption, that the emigration of these millions made no 
 essential difference in the rate of increase at home. 
 
 The people whose rate of increase may be accepted as a 
 standard must not have lost to any great extent by emigration. 
 We want the whole increase and not a part of it. At first 
 sight it appears that the French Canadian people do not 
 realize this third important condition. By means of the 
 census reports issued by the Dominion Government, we can 
 trace the decreasing movements of the French Canadian 
 
 [223] 
 
12 Annai3 of the American Academy. 
 
 population withiu Canada. Whether they go to British 
 Columbia or the Northwest, to Manitoba or to the Maritime 
 Provinces, they are still within reach of the census enume- 
 rator and the total increase in Canada can be ascertained 
 without much trouble. But there has been, over and above 
 these movements within the Dominion, an enormous emigra- 
 tion into the Qnited States, part of a general movement so 
 great as to be called by the Canadians an Exodus. It is not 
 enough for uf, to know that the French Canadian in the land of 
 his adoption retains the language, the religion, the customs, 
 the individuality of his race; it is not enough even to know, 
 that in his new enviroment he remains an isolated, unassimi- 
 lated unit, that he does not intermarry with the old inhabit- 
 ants or with other newcomers; that, in short, the increase is 
 still a pure and natural increase, if, after all, we cannot esti- 
 mate accurately in what numbers he has left his ancestral 
 home. General estimates in round numbers are of little value 
 for statistical purposes. Till recently we had to be content 
 with general estimates. The census reports of the United 
 Staf^'-'j prior to 1890 made no distinction between English 
 and French Canadians. We knew that there were so many 
 hundreds of thousands of Canadians in the United States, 
 but we did not know the proportions of the two nationalities. 
 The instructions issued to the United States census enum- 
 erators in 1 890 bade them distinguish between French and 
 English Canadians and by the publication of two Census 
 Bulletins, one. No. 357 (issued February 16, 1893), dealing 
 with ' ' Foreign born population distributed according to 
 country of birth 1 850-1 890 ; " the other. Extra Census 
 Bulletin No. 97 (issued November i, 1894), dealing with 
 ' ' Statistics of Foreign parentage, ' ' the information we 
 require for the purposes of this essay has been made acces- 
 sible. From these bulletins the lacincB in our statistics 
 have been filled up and the necessary data supplied for 
 estimating the rate of increase of the French Canadian 
 people whether resident in Canada or in the United States. 
 
 [224] 
 
Growth of ths French Canadian Rack. 13 
 
 We learn not merely how many French Canadians are 
 resident in the United States but also the number of their 
 increase of the first generation. The fact to which fre- 
 quent and emphatic attention is called in these bulletins 
 that the Frerch Canadian does not intermarry either with 
 the native born citizens of the United States or with foreign 
 immigrants renders it possible to ascertain with exactitude 
 the number of his increase. In comment on a table, p. 20, 
 Extra Census Bulletin No. 97, Dr. Carroll D. Wright says, 
 " It is at once apparent from these percentages that native 
 born women have married most freely with those nationalities 
 which were among the earliest contributors to our foreign 
 born element, and for this reason it is impossible to determine 
 accurately the proportion of these women who are themselves 
 native bom but of foreign extraction. 
 
 ' ' The percentage of persons with French Canadian fathers 
 and native mothers makes this assumption all the more 
 plausible, for the reason that this class is not disposed to 
 marry much, if at all, outside of its own people." 
 
 The figures referred to, as extracted from the table are: 
 
 Total white persons having French Canadian fathers, 
 497,650. 
 
 Total having mothers bom in French Canada, 442,041; 
 per cent, 88.83. 
 
 Mothers born in other foreign countries, 11,144; per 
 cent, 2,24. 
 
 Mothers native, 44.465; per cent 8.93. 
 
 Further on in the same bulletin, it is said: " An attempt 
 has been made to determine for the first time the approximate 
 number of persons in this country who were of French 
 Canadian extraction (p. 21) . . . "It appears that the 
 whole number of the French Canadian element in this 
 country in 1890 . . . ¥ as 537,298, while of the English 
 Canadian (including Newfoundland) was 1,163,645. There 
 \ is an unavoidable duplication in this table of 6930 white 
 persons having both parents born in Canada, one parent 
 
 [225] 
 
14 Annai^ of the American Academy. 
 
 being of English extraction, the other parent being of 
 French extraction. This duplication is small, however, 
 compared with the whole number of each element." 
 
 (p. 24.) 
 
 We are thus able to trace with accuracy the growth of the 
 population. We include none who have no right to be 
 included, and what is equally important, we practically omit 
 whom we should inclu de. The only defect in the information 
 derived from these bulletins is that no distinction is made be- 
 tween Canadian French and Acadian French. From the point 
 of view of the United States statistician there is no reason why 
 this distinction should be made, and, were it not that the early 
 estimates of the Acadians are conjectural, there would be no 
 reason for drawing the distinction in this examination. The 
 estimates of the number of Acadians in 1771 remaining in 
 what are now the Maritime Provinces, after the deportations, 
 emigrations and returns had ceased, are calculated from the 
 returns of the census of 187 1 on the supposition of a " natural 
 increase at the rule of 2.5 per annum, the normal rate of the 
 Acadians when left to themselves" (Census Report, 1871, 
 Vol. IV, Introd., p. xxviii), which means that the Acadians 
 double every thirty years. We shall see that this is rather 
 less than the rate of increase among the French Canadians, 
 but it would obviously be unsatisfactory to base any calcula- 
 tion of the rate of increase on an estimate based on an 
 assumed rate of increase. "It was apparently only about 
 1 771 that the Acadians saw the cessation of the emigration 
 which had diminished their population, and that having 
 again attained to easy circumstances, they began to increase 
 at the rate of 2.5 per annum. It is at this rate, taking the 
 census of 1871 for a basis, that the probable number of the 
 Acadian population in each centre has been fixed. . . . 
 in fact, the number of 8442, in the ratio of increase indicated 
 during the course of a century, accounts for the Acadian 
 population of 99,740 souls (the Acadian population of Prince 
 Edward Island and the State of Maine included) in 1871. 
 
 [226] 
 
Growth of the French Canadian Race. 15 
 
 Exchanges of settlers from Acadia to Canada and vice versa, 
 have taken place in ihe course of the century, but as these 
 exchanges almost balance each other, they have not affected 
 the general result" (Ibid, p. xxxiv).* 
 
 Except for the petitio principii involved by including them, 
 there would have been no reason for excluding them from 
 our calculation. As the matter stands, however, it is better 
 to make deduction from the total number of French Can- 
 adians returned in the census of 1891 of the number of 
 French Acadians in the Provinces of Nova Scotia, New 
 Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. According to Table 
 III, Vol. I, Canadian Census, 1891, there were in 
 
 Nova Scotia, ". 29,838 French 
 
 New Brunswick, 61,767 
 
 Prince Edward Island 11,847 
 
 ( < 
 
 103,452 
 I,ess number of Quebec French in 
 
 Maritime Provinces, 3>500 
 
 Total Acadians, .... 100,000 
 
 In 1 89 1 the census returns show a total of the French 
 speaking population of Canada, 1,404,974; so that after 
 deduction of the number of Acadians, we find the total 
 French Canadian population resident in Canada, 1,304,974. 
 The United States Bulletins, as mentioned above, do not 
 make any distinction between French Canadian and French 
 Acadian, but they afford the means of estimating approxi- 
 mately how many Acadians are included in the total of 
 537, 298 French Canadians resident in the United States. We 
 may safely assume that at least as large a proportion of 
 Acadians as of French Canadians have joined the Exodus- 
 
 ♦ By calculation based on Table V, Census Report, 1891, it appears that there is a 
 surplus of something like 3500 Canadian French resident in the Maritime Prov- 
 inces (subtraction ol Acadians in Quebec being made); and this number is accord- 
 ingly included in the total of French Canadians resident in Canada. 
 
 [227] 
 
i6 Annals of thb American Academy. 
 
 (popular estimate in New Bnins^vick is tLat the proportion is 
 larger). The French Canadians in the United States are in 
 rather more than the proportion jf i to 3 of the total French 
 population of Canada; so that we are safe in assuming that 
 more than 30 per cent of the Acadians are to be found in 
 the United States — that is more than 30,000. If, then, we 
 reduce the number of French Canadians returned in the 
 United States Census from 537,298 to 500,000, we are prob- 
 ably within the mark. 
 
 The third condition for the establishing of the standard 
 that no part of the natural increase should be omitted from 
 the calculation is accordingly realized in the case of the 
 French Canadians. The total increase of the people from 
 1765 to 1890-91 is ascertainable and the resulting rate is 
 therefore not based on conjecture. 
 
 It is further important for the establishing of a standard 
 rate of increase that the conditions of life and labor among 
 the people whose increase is taken as standard, should be at 
 least as favorable as in any other land; and there can be no 
 doubt that this is true in the case of the French Canadian. 
 The quelques arpents du neige as Voltaire contemptuously 
 designated New France have during the century and a half 
 been visited neither by war nor by pestilence (for we need not 
 over-estimate the skirmishes of 18 12). There has been se- 
 curity of life and property, and freedom of development; there 
 has been abundance of good land unappropriated; and, with 
 inexhaustible fisheries and unexhausted forests, with devel- 
 oping industry at home and unrestricted freedom of migra- 
 tion, there never has been any danger of population treading 
 on the limits of subsistence. The climate, though severe in 
 winter, is, at least, as favorable to healthy human existence 
 as any other that could be named. So that taken all in all 
 the general conditions are perfectly normal. 
 
 It may, however, be objected that all the conditions are 
 not normal, and that the excessive birth-rate among the 
 French Canadians prevents us from taking their rate of 
 
 [228] 
 
Growth of the French Canadian Race. 17 
 
 increase as a standard. Mai thus assumed, and as we said, 
 probably without warrant, that there is a natural " prolifick- 
 ness," which is the same for all nations, and that any di\er- 
 gence from this standard must be accounted for by means of 
 the checks on population. But if it be true that the birth- 
 rate of the French Canadian is four or five times as high as 
 the birth-rate of the English Canadian or of any other civilized 
 race, then a good deal of the pains which Malthus takes to 
 show how the operation of the checks accounts for the differ- 
 ent rates of increase is labor thrown away. However valid 
 the objection may be against Malthus' assumption, or 
 perhaps more strictly against his manner of stating the 
 assumption, it need not prevent us from using the French 
 Canadian rate of increase as a standard. 
 
 There can be no doubt of the very general opinion 
 in Canada and elsewhere that the French Canadians are 
 increasing out of all proportion to the rest. Their excessive 
 " prolifickness " is often the subject of remark, and the 
 statement is met with profound scepticism that the size of the 
 average family in Quebec is only a fraction larger than the 
 average family in Ontario, or than the average family taking 
 Canada as a whole, and is smaller by as large a fraction than 
 the average family in Prince Edward Island. What about 
 the tradition among the French Canadians, it is asked, that 
 the twentieth or the twenty-fourth child in a family belongs 
 to the parish priest, and is brought up and educated for the 
 church? What about the law passed by the late Count 
 Mercier in Quebec, providing that ' ' every father or mother 
 of a family, born or naturalized and domiciled in this Pro- 
 vince, who has twelve children living, bom in Ir^wf ul wedlock, 
 is entitled to one hundred acres of public lands selected by 
 him" (C. 20, 53 Vict.)- an enactment which, but for the 
 provision in favor of lawful wedlock, may be compared with 
 a good deal of the legislation and practice connected with 
 the relief of the poor at the end of last century in England ? 
 Yet in spite of prevalent opinion and of inferences naturally 
 
 [229] 
 
i8 
 
 AnnaIvS of the American Academy. 
 
 enough drawn from such legislation, the facts are quite 
 otherwise, as the following table must conclusively show: 
 
 Average Size of Family. 
 
 Province. 
 
 Upper Canada, after 1871 Ontario 
 Lower Canada, or Quebec .... 
 
 Nova Scotia 
 
 New Brunswick 
 
 Prince Edward Island 
 
 Manitoba 
 
 Northwest Territories 
 
 British Columbia 
 
 All Canada 
 
 1851. 
 
 6.2 
 6.2 
 6.1 
 6.1 
 
 6.2 
 
 1861. 
 
 6.4 
 6.0 
 6.0 
 6.3 
 
 6.2 
 
 1871. 
 
 5.5 
 5.6 
 
 5.7 
 5.8 
 
 5.6 
 
 18S1. 
 
 5-2 
 5-3 
 5-5 
 5.6 
 6.0 
 4.6 
 4.8 
 4-7 
 5-3 
 
 1891. 
 
 5-1 
 5-5 
 5-4 
 5-5 
 5-8 
 4.8 
 4.6 
 
 4-7 
 5.2 
 
 In one period alone has the average in Quebec been 
 higher than the Canadian average, and then the Canadian 
 average was low owing to the disturbance introduced by the 
 statistics of the new western provinces, where the average is 
 abnormally low. In 1 891, of all the Provinces the average 
 rises in Quebec alone, but the rise is not sufficient to be 
 more than a temporary interruption of a steady fall. The 
 average in New Brunswick was equally large, and there 
 only 25 per cent of the population are French ; in Prince 
 Edward Island, the average (5.8) is higher, and there only 
 18 per cent of the population are French ; in Nova Scotia, 
 the only other Province whose average exceeds the Do- 
 minion average, less than 7 per cent are French, while in 
 Quebec four-fifths, or 86 per cent, of the population are 
 French. 
 
 This result, which seems to confound all the popular 
 notions -garding the extraordinary families common in 
 French panada, is really quite compatible with the received 
 opinion. The number of children born into a family is so 
 very much in excess of the number in other parts of Canada, 
 and in other countries, that the assumption made by Mai thus 
 
 [230] 
 
Growth op the French Canadian Race. 19 
 
 of a natural ' ' prolifickness ' ' which is approximately the 
 same the world over, becomes quite untenable. Had Malthus 
 maintained that in the absence of vice and misery there is a 
 natural average of size of family, which is the same the 
 world over, much more might have been said for the assump- 
 tion. It does not appear that the extraordinary infant mor- 
 tality (which is the explanation of the paradox) can be 
 attributed to either vice or misery, the checks on which 
 Malthus at first lays so much stress, and of course it cannot, 
 in a Catholic country, be due to the prudential check as 
 interpreted by the neo-Malthusian. The causes are various, 
 but neither scarcity of food nor general misery can be 
 included among them. The French Canadian is not a weak- 
 ling, and the women are not such as give birth to sickly 
 children. One prevalent cause, infantile diarrhoea, is due 
 rather to excess of food, improper food,' and lack of care 
 about the child's diet, than to poverty and want. The 
 following table is extracted from the Summary of the 
 Census, 1881, Ages of the People, Table F, Vol. IV, 
 p. 22, et seq.: 
 
 Number Per Cent Living at Each Age. 
 
 
 "S 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 I 
 
 •1 
 
 
 
 cd 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -*' 
 
 a 
 
 
 Age. 
 
 H 
 
 ^ cd 
 
 CI M 
 
 s 
 2 
 
 pq 
 
 ■i 
 
 d 
 
 •n 
 
 t 
 
 1 
 
 
 s 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 % 
 
 iS 
 
 •s 
 
 s 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 'u 
 
 n 
 
 3 
 
 
 PM 
 
 ;zi 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 ^ 
 
 % 
 
 n 
 
 
 . . 
 
 2.73 
 
 2.75 
 
 2.52 
 
 2.62 
 
 329 
 
 2.89 
 
 0.46 
 
 1.75 
 
 2.80 
 
 I . . 
 
 2.29 
 
 2..^8 
 
 2.24 
 
 2.27 
 
 2.35 
 
 2.63 
 
 0.50 
 
 1.54 
 
 2.28 
 
 5 • • 
 
 2.71 
 
 2.65 
 
 2.65 
 
 2.73 
 
 2.92 
 
 2.49 
 
 0.64 
 
 2.12 
 
 2.75 
 
 21 . . 
 
 1.99 
 
 1.92 
 
 1.89 
 
 2.09 
 
 1.92 
 
 2.36 
 
 0.37 
 
 1. 21 
 
 1.98 
 
 The causes of such a heavy infant mortality as appears 
 from the above table cannot be far to seek, but perhaps an 
 extract from a letter received from Dr. E. Persillier La 
 
 [231] 
 
30 Annals of the American Academy. 
 
 Chapelle, President of the Conseil d'Hygi^ne of the Province 
 of Quebec, in answer to inquiries, may sufl&ce: 
 
 . . . . " I do not believe it would be correct to ascribe 
 to any single cause the phenomenon you inquire about, and 
 I am convinced it is the result of several factors. For one 
 the first cause of the heavy infant mortality among the 
 French Canadians is their very heavy natality, each family 
 being composed of an average of twelve children, and 
 instances of families of fifteen, eighteen and even twenty- 
 four children being not uncommon. 
 
 "The superabundance of children renders, I think, par- 
 ents less careful about them, and I have no doubt that for 
 one instance, the want of care about the alimentary diet is 
 an important cause of their premature death, and may 
 explain the abnormal proportion of deaths from diarrhoea 
 during the summer months; and this, not on account of poor 
 or insufiicient food, but on account of babies being allowed 
 to drink and even eat anything they want and at any time, 
 just the same as grown-up persons. . . . 
 
 " In a word, I think that want of proper care in every 
 way is the principal cause of this heavy infantile mortality, 
 and I am sure it is not due to any constitutional or radical 
 debility." 
 
 Whether or not we must regard this heavy infantile mor- 
 tality among the French Canadians as arising from the 
 operation of any one of Malthus' checks on the principle of 
 population and whether, in the event, we should require to 
 class lack of parental care and watchfulness as arising from 
 vice or from misery, is really beside our purpose. What we 
 have established is that the French Canadian race increases 
 at no abnormal rate, for after the first year the proportion 
 living at any given age varies little from the proportion among 
 other Canadians. 
 
 These, then, are the conditions and the measure in which 
 the French Canadian people meet them. No other race 
 seems to offer the same facilities for calculating the standard 
 
 [232] 
 
Growth of thk French Canadian Rack. 21 
 
 rate of increase; and the resulting standard may be accepted 
 with confidence. Malthus hastily assumed the standard of 
 increase of 3.19 per annum, and a good deal of the dis- 
 cussion has arisen because his critics had no confidence that 
 it was a true standard. It was hastily assumed and was 
 based on conjectural estimates which might be trustworthy 
 and might not; it was the casual increase of particular and 
 restricted districts without allowance made for temporary 
 and disturbing causes. That the rate he assumed was so near 
 the true natural rate as it was, was probably due as much to 
 " good luck as to good management," but at any rate it was 
 near the true rate, and the "Principles of Population," with 
 its discussion of the operation of the checks on the principle, 
 remains of permanent value. 
 
 We have taken the Census of 1765 as our starting point. 
 Emigration had practically ceased by this date; peace and 
 freedom of development were secured to the race by treaty. 
 From 1765 to 1890-91 we have 125 years of uninterrupted 
 growth — a peiiod long enough to afford a permanent standard 
 of the productive capabilities of the race, and during the greator 
 part of the period we have accurate statistics of population. 
 A certain degree of uncertainty enters into the figures given 
 from 1784 to 1844. The Census of 1784 was taken before 
 the influx of the Loyalists into the Eastern townships of 
 what is now the Province of Quebec, but is said to include 
 some fifteen thousand British settlers. From 1784 onward 
 the total given without distinctions includes an increasing 
 number of British settlers, and it is only possible by esti- 
 mating the proportion of Irish among the Catholics of Quebec 
 at a diminishing rate the further back we go from 1844. 
 From 1844 onward discrimination is made between English 
 and French Canadians. The intermediate stages are not of 
 much importance because the standard depends on the total 
 increase from 1765 to 1890-91. From 1851 the number of 
 emigrants is included, which accounts for the sudden increase 
 between 1844 and 1851 . The number of emigrants set down 
 
 [233] 
 
22 Annaw op thb American Academy. 
 
 in the table for the four decade years, 1851, 1861, 1871, 1881, 
 has been obtained by calculation. The United States Census 
 Bulletins give only the total Canadian immigration into the 
 United States for these periods; it is only for 189 1 that we 
 can definitely set down the number of French Canadians, 
 However, it appears that in 189 1 the French Canadians were 
 to the English Canadians in the proportion of 5 to 1 1 ; and the 
 totals given in Census Bulletin 357 are of the total Canadian 
 population at the respective censuses of 1850, i860, 1870, 
 1880. If, then, we take for these the same or a less proportion 
 of the total Canadian population in the United States, we 
 shall reach subvStantial accuracy for each decennial period. 
 For 1850 the proportion is 4:11; for 1880, 5:11; for i860 
 and 1870, midway between. It is necessary to reduce the 
 proportion in this way because the French Canadian joined 
 the Exodus, in large numbers, later than the English Can- 
 adians, as one would naturally expect. By the calculation 
 for these 3'ears we get rid of the difficulty which it is said 
 arises when we compare the Canadian Census of 1881 made 
 on the de jure plan with the census of 1891 which was made 
 on the de facto. Mr. Johnson, the statistician of the Canadian 
 Board of Agriculture, estimates (Toronto Empire Mail, 
 February 18, 1895), that the change of system involved a 
 difference of four per cent. If that were so, we should 
 require to deduct some forty thousand from 1881 in order to 
 obtain a true statement of the total French Canadian popu- 
 lation for that year. However, absolute accuracy is not 
 necessary at any intermediate stages, provided that at the 
 starting point and at the end of the period there is no doubt. 
 The census of 1765 is indubitably accurate, and the de facto 
 system of the Canadian Census of 1891 enables us to count 
 in the total return made by .he United States Census Bul- 
 letins without any danger of counting any considerable 
 section of the French Canadian twice over. 
 
 [234] 
 
Growth op the French Canadian Race. 23 
 
 Table of French Canadia7i Population, 1^65-1891. 
 
 Cemsds 
 Year. 
 
 French in 
 Canada. 
 
 Rate of 
 Increase. 
 
 French in 
 United States. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Rate of Increase 
 
 per cent per 
 
 decade. 
 
 1765 • 
 1784. 
 1805 . 
 
 69,810 
 
 98,012 
 
 215,000 
 
 310,000 
 
 538,213 
 
 695,947 
 
 880,902 
 
 1,005,200 
 
 1,186,008 
 
 1,304,745 
 
 
 
 69,810 
 
 98,012 
 
 215,000 
 
 3lo,cx« 
 
 538.213 
 
 749,696 
 
 983,162 
 
 1,207,071 
 
 1,511.997 
 1,804,795 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1844. 
 185 1 . 
 1861 . 
 1871 . 
 188 1 . 
 1891 . 
 
 
 
 
 • • t • 
 
 (1851-61)26.4 
 (1861-71)14.2 
 (1871-81)18.0 
 (1881-91) 9.7 
 
 (1850) 53.749 
 (i860) 102,260 
 (1870) 201,871 
 (1880 325,989 
 (1890) 500,000 
 
 (1851-61)30.6 
 (l86l-7x)23.0 
 (1871-81)25.38 
 (1881-91)21.64 
 
 The resulting rate of increase per cent per decade from 
 1765 to 1890-91 is 29.7, which gives the result that the 
 French Canadian population has doubled itself every twenty- 
 seven years. Malthus accepted as his standard a doubling 
 every twenty-five, and the result of our investigation practi- 
 cally corroborates his standard, and justifies to some extent 
 at least the disproportions of his treatise. 
 
 John Davidson. 
 
 University of New Brumwick. 
 
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POETICAL, AND 
 
 SOCIAI. SCIENCE. 
 
 The American Academy of Political and Social Science 
 was formed in Philadelphia, December 14, 1889, for the pur- 
 pose of promoting the Political and Social Sciences. 
 
 While it does not exclude any portion of the field indi- 
 cated in its title, yet its chief object is the development of 
 those aspects of the Political and Social Sciences which are 
 either entirely omitted from the programmes of other 
 societies, or which do not at present receive the attention 
 they deserve. 
 
 Among such subjects may be mentioned : Sociology, 
 Comparative Constitutional and Administrative L<aw, Phi- 
 losophy of the State, and such portions of the field of Poli- 
 tics, including Finance and Banking, as are not adequately 
 cultivated by existing organizations. 
 
 A special efibrt will be made to collect and publish mate- 
 lial which will be of use to students, and which does not now 
 reach the public in any systematic way, as, for example, the 
 texts in English of the Constitutions of leading foreign 
 countries ; regular accounts of current instruction in Politi- 
 cal and Social topics at home and abroad ; descriptive 
 bibliographies, discussions of Municipal Government, etc. 
 
 It will be seen that the Academy thus supplements the 
 efforts of existing societies of similar aims, and substantially 
 strengthens their work by contributing its share to beget a 
 deeper and more widespread interest in the general subject 
 of Political and Social Science. 
 
 The plan of the Academy includes regular scientific meet- 
 ings for the presentation of papers and communications, 
 establishment of a library, and the dissemination of knowl- 
 edge on Political and Social topics through its publications 
 and by such other means as may seem suitable. 
 
 During the winter, regular scientific meetings have been 
 held since the Academy was formed at which the papers 
 submitted have been read and discussed. 
 
To carry on the work of the Academy satisfactorily, large 
 funds are necessary. The income of the Academy at present 
 is aerived from the Annual Membership Fee, which is $5.00; 
 the Life Membership Fee, which is $100; and from the con- 
 tributions of those who may be willing to assist in its work. 
 It is desired to secure the establishment of prizes and fellow- 
 ships. 
 
 Anyone may become a member on being approved by the 
 Council and paying the Annual or Life Membership Fee. 
 Members are entitled to receive the regular publications of 
 the Academy, submit papers and communications, and to 
 attend and take part in all scientific meetings. Life mem- 
 bers are exempt from all annual fees. 
 
 The list of members now includes the names of nearly all 
 the prominent thinkers and writers on Political, Economic 
 and Social topics in the United States and Canada, and many 
 
 in Europe. 
 
 The co-operation of all persons interested in the scientific 
 investigation of Political and Social affairs is earnestly so- 
 licited. 
 
 The proceedings of the Academy are published in the 
 form of a periodical called the Annals of the American 
 Academy of Poi^itical and Sociai. Science, which, 
 together with such other matter as may be published for 
 that purpose, is sent to all members of the Academy free of 
 charge, A copy of the current number of the Annai^ will 
 be sent to any one for examination. 
 
 Papers and communications which the writers wish to 
 submit to the Academy with a view to their being read in a 
 Scientific Session and subsequently published in the Pro- 
 ceedings, as well as applications for membership, should be 
 sent to the following address : 
 
 American Academy of Political and Social Science, 
 
 STATION B, PHIIADJ^I^PHIA, PA. 
 
 N. B.— Fees and contributions may be remitted by postal 
 order on Philadelphia, or by draft on New York, drawn to 
 the order of the Treasurer, Mr. Stuart Wood, 400 Chestnut 
 Street, Philadelphia. 
 
The American Academy 
 
 OK 
 
 Political and Social Science - 
 
 PHILADELPHIA. 
 
 President, 
 EDMUND J. JAMES, PH. D., University of Chicago. 
 
 Vice-Ptesiden (s, 
 PROF. ROLAND P. FALKNER, PH. D., Phof. F. H. GIDDINGS, A. M^ 
 
 University of Pennsylvania. Columbia University. 
 
 Prof. WOODROW WILSON, Ph.D., 
 Princeton University. 
 
 Secretaries. 
 Corresponding Sec'y, General Secretary, 
 
 H. R. SEAGER, Ph.D., JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, PH.D., 
 
 3705 Locust Street. 3705 Locust Street. 
 
 Recording Sec^, 
 
 CLINTON ROGERS WOODRUFF, 
 
 514 Walnut Street. 
 
 Treasurer, Librarian, 
 
 STUART WOOD, JOHN L. STEWART, 
 
 400 Chestnut Street. Manual Training School. 
 
 GENERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE. 
 
 »R. C. K. ADAMS, DR. WM. PRESTON JOHNSTON, 
 
 President of Wisconsin University. President of Tulaiie University. 
 
 PROF. C. F. BASTABLE, VERY REV. JOHN J. KEANE, D. D., 
 
 Dublin University. Catholic University of America. 
 
 PROF. F. W. BLACKMAR, PROF. BERNARD MOSES, 
 
 University of Kansas. University of California. 
 
 J. G. BOURINOT, C.M.G., Ph.D., D.C.L., PROF. J. S. NICHOLSON, M. A., 
 
 Ottawa, Canada. Edinburgh University. 
 
 PROF. J. W. BURGESS, DR. HENRY WADE ROGERS, 
 
 Columbia College. President Northwestern University. 
 
 PROF. R. T. ELY, PROF. HENRY SIDGWICK, 
 
 Wisconsin University. Cambridge University. 
 
 PROF. HENRY W. FARNAM, PROF. WILLIAM SMART, 
 
 Yale University. Queen Margaret College, Glasgow, 
 
 PROF. W. W. FOLWELL, SIMON STERNE, Esq., 
 
 University of Minnesota. New York City. 
 
 HON. LYMAN J. GAGE, HON. HANNIS TAYLOR, LL. D., 
 
 Chicago, 111. Madrid, Spain. 
 
 PROF. JOHN K. INGRAM, LL.D., PROF. J. B. THAYER, 
 
 Trinity College, Dublin. Harvard Law School. 
 
 PROF. J. W. TENKS, DR. FRANCIS A. WALKER. 
 
 Cornell University. Pres. Mass. In-stibute oi Technolo»r. 
 
 LESTER F. WARD, Esq., 
 Washington, D. C.