Page:EB1911 - Volume 07.djvu/905

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
881
DEAF AND DUMB


in fact, a general incapacity of the whole body and senses. It is incorrect to designate such persons as deaf and feeble-minded or deaf and idiotic, because in many cases their organs of hearing are as perfect as are other organs of their body, and they are no more deaf than blind, though they may pay no attention to what they hear any more than to what they see. They are simply weak in intellect, and this is shown by the disuse of any and all of their senses; hence it is incorrect to classify them according to one, and one only, of the evidences of this mental weakness.

Extent of Deafness.—The following table shows the number of deaf and dumb persons in the United Kingdom at successive censuses:—

Year. Number of Deaf and Dumb Persons.
United
Kingdom.
England
& Wales.
Scotland. Ireland.
1851 17,649 10,314 2155 5180
1861 20,224 12,236 2335 5653
1871 19,159 11,518 2087 5554
1881 20,573 13,295 2142 5136
1891 20,781 14,192 2125 4464
1901 21,855 15,246 2638 3971

From this we find that the proportion of deaf and dumb to the population has been as follows:—

Year.  Proportion of Deaf and Dumb to the Population. 
United
Kingdom.
England
& Wales.
Scotland. Ireland.
1851 1 in 1550 1 in 1739 1 in 1340 1 in 1264
1861 1 in 1430 1 in 1639 1 in 1310 1 in 1025
1871 1 in 1642 1 in 1972 1 in 1610 1 in 974
1881 1 in 1694 1 in 1953 1 in 1745 1 in 1008
1891 1 in 1814 1 in 2040 1 in 1893 1 in 1053
1901 1 in 1897 1 in 2132 1 in 1694 1 in 1122

There has, therefore, been on the whole a steady decrease of those described as “deaf and dumb” in proportion to the population in Great Britain and Ireland. But in the census for 1901, in addition to the 15,246 returned as “deaf and dumb” in England and Wales, 18,507 were entered as being “deaf,” 2433 of whom were described as having been “deaf from childhood.”

Mr B. H. Payne, the principal of the Royal Cambrian Institution, Swansea, makes the following remarks upon these figures:—

“The natural conclusion, of course, is that there has been a large increase, relative as well as absolute, of the class in which we are interested, which we call the deaf, and which includes the deaf and dumb. Indeed, the number, large as it is, cannot be considered as complete, for the schedules did not require persons who were only deaf to state their infirmity, and, though many did so, it may be presumed that more did not.

“On the other hand, circumstances exist which may reasonably be held to modify the conclusion that there has been a large relative increase of the deaf. The spread of education, the development of local government, and an improved system of registration, may have had the effect of procuring fuller enumeration and more appropriate classification than heretofore, while 1368 persons described simply as dumb, and who therefore probably belong, not to the deaf, but to the feeble-minded and aphasic classes, are included in the ‘deaf and dumb’ total. It is also to be noted that some of those who described themselves as ‘deaf’ though not born so may have been educated in the ordinary way before they lost their hearing, and are therefore outside the sphere of the operation of schools for the deaf.

“In connexion with the census of 1891, it has been remarked in the report of the institution that no provision was made in the schedules for distinguishing the congenital from the non-congenital deaf, and that it was desirable to draw such a distinction. To ascertain the relative increase or decrease of one or the other section of the class would contribute to our knowledge of the incidence of known causes of deafness or to the confirmation or discovery of other causes, and so far indicate the appropriate measures of prevention, while such an inquiry as that recommended has, besides, a certain bearing upon educational views.

“The exact number of ‘deaf and dumb’ and ‘deaf’ children who are of school age cannot be ascertained from the census tables, which give the numbers in quinquennial age-groups, while the school age is seven to sixteen. It is a pity that in this respect the functions of the census department are not co-ordinated with those of the Board of Education.”

Dr John Hitz, the superintendent of the Volta Bureau for the Increase of Knowledge Relating to the Deaf, Washington, D.C., U.S.A., gives the number of schools for deaf children, and pupils, in different countries in 1900 as follows:—

Africa.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
Algeria 1 3  37
Egypt 1 2  6
Cape Colony 4 9*  77
Natal 1 2  7
  7 16* 127
* Incomplete.

Asia.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
China 3 10  43
India 3 13  73
Japan 3 24 337
  9 47 453

Australasia.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
Australia 6 41 282
New Zealand 1  5  50
  7 46 332

Europe.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
Austria-Hungary  38 291 2440
Belgium 12 181 1265
Denmark 5 57 348
France 71 598 4098
Germany 99 798 6497
Great Britain 95 462 4222
Italy 47 234 2519
Luxemburg 1 3 22
Netherlands 3 74 473
Norway 5 54 309
Portugal 2 9 64
Rumania 1 3 46
Russia, Finland, Livonia  34 118 1719
Servia 2 2* 26*
Spain 11 60 462
Sweden 9 124 726
Switzerland 14 84 650
Turkey 1    
  450 3152 25,886
* Incomplete.


North America.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
Canada 7 130 768
United States  126 1347 10,946
Mexico 1 13 46
Cuba 1    
  135 1490 11,760

South America.

Country. Schools. Teachers. Pupils.
Argentine 4 18 133
Brazil 1  9  35
Chile 1  7  61
Uruguay 1    
  7 34 229