^{Page 561 note 1} Smith, Adam, The Wealth af Nations (London, 1776); Everyman edn. 1957, vol.I, pp. 71–2.Google Scholar

^{Page 562 note 1} Ibid. p. 70.

^{Page 562 note 2} SirChild, Josiah, New Discourse of Trade (London, 1694), p. 102Google Scholar; SirPetty, William, A Treatise on Taxes, in Hull, M. (ed.), Economic Writings of Sir William Petty (London, 1899), vol. I, p. 34.Google Scholar

^{Page 562 note 3} Cantillon, Richard (ed. Higgs, A.), Essai sur la nature du commerce (London, 1931), pp. 83 and 85.Google Scholar Cf. SirDenham, James Steuart, An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Economy (London, 1767), p. 20.Google Scholar

^{Page 563 note 1} Malthus, T. R., Essay on the Principles of Population as it affects the Future Improvanent of Society (London, 1798), pp. 28–31 and 34–5.Google Scholar Although Malthus was pointing to the impending calamity of an unrestricted population, he rejected contraception.

^{Page 563 note 2} Bentham, Jeremy, Constitutional Code for Public Control of Communications, Water Supply, etc. (London, 1821), p. 109Google Scholar; Mill, J. S., Principles of Economics (London, 1861), p. 33Google Scholar; Place, Francis, Illustrations of the Principles of Population (London, 1922), pp. 165 and 173–4.Google Scholar

^{Page 564 note 1} Aird, John S., ‘Population Policy in Mainland China’, in Population Studies: a journal of demography (London), XVI, 1962–1963, p. 51.Google Scholar

^{Page 564 note 2} Peter Mazur, ‘Birth Control and Regional Differentials in the Soviet Union’, ibid. XXII, 1968, particularly pp. 319–20.

^{Page 564 note 3} Source: Ohlin, Göran, Population Control and Economk Development (Paris, 1967), tables 2.4 and 2.5, pp. 21–2.Google Scholar

^{Page 565 note 1} Ibid. p. 7.

^{Page 566 note 1} Sources: United Nations, Yearbook of National Accounts Statistics, 1969 (New York),Google Scholar tables 2 and 18 Statistical Yearbook, 1968 (New York), table 189; and Demographic Yearbook, 1969 (New York), table 2.

^{Page 567 note 1} Source: derived from Table 2, columns (4) and (5). The growth of population or income by 1% per annum results in doubling in about 70 years. The doubling periods can roughly be computed by dividing 70 by the percentage rate of growth. That is, growth at 2% per annum doubles in 35 years, 25 % in 28 years, and 35% in 20 years. Since Indonesia experienced a fall in income (a negative rate of increase of –0.6 %) during the period, it is not possible to calculate the income-doubling period.

^{Page 571 note 1} See estimates of the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (New York 1970).

^{Page 572 note 1} Cf. Leibenstein, Harvey, ‘Population Growth and the Take-off Hypothesis’, in The Economics of the Take-off into Self-sustained Growth (London, 1968), pp. 170–5.Google Scholar

^{Page 573 note 1} Source: International Institute of Educational Planning, Studies in Family Planning Programmes, 1962–65 (Paris, 1965, 1968, and 1969).

^{Page 573 note 2} U.S. President's speech to the General Assembly, 25 June 1965, on the 20th anniversary of the United Nations.

^{Page 574 note 1} Sharma, A. D., ‘A Note on Population as an Obstacle to India's Economic Development’, in Indian Journal of Economics (Delhi), XLVII, 4, 04 1967.Google Scholar