2.^ The Growth of Philippine Children BY JOHN FRANKLIN BOBBITT Formerly Instructor in the Philippine Normal School A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF CI.ARK UNIVERSITY, WORCESTER, MASS., IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OP THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, AND ACCEPTED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF G. STANLEY HALL Reprinted from the Pedagogical Seminary June, 1909, Vol. XVI, pp. 3.34 The Growth of Philippine Children BY JOHN FRANKLIN BOBBITT Formerly Instructor in ihe Philippine Normal School A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF CLARK UNIVERSITY, WORCESTER, MASS., IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, AND ACCKPTED ON THE RECOMMENDATION OF G. STANLEY HALL Reprinted from the Pedagogical Seminary June, 1909, Vol. XVI, pp. 3-34 Au;b jr THE GROWTH OF PHII.IPPINK CHILDREN^ John Franki,in Bobbitt Formerly Instructor in the Philippine Normal School, Manila, P. I. Child Study to date has occupied itself almost exclusively with children of the white races, and anthropology has been concerned chiefly with adults. Both of these fields of research have become widely extended, but neither has yet seriously undertaken the study of the children of the various colored races. This remains an almost untouched field. If one wishes to obtain exact data with reference to the physical or mental capabilities of the children of any race other than the white, there is scarcely a study to which one can refer with confidence. In the writings of travellers, explorers, teachers, and mission- aries, one finds numerous opinions as to the children. An- thropologists have in many cases made a few measurements and tests upon children, perhaps a half dozen in a tribe. The opinions, however, are too casual and conflicting, and the measurements too few and inexact as to age and other condi- tions, to be of great service in estimating either the physical or the mental efficiency of the children observed. The chief exceptions are a few studies made by the Japanese, and the recently-published elaborate study of Ales Hrdlicka upon the Indians of the Southwestern United States and Northern Mexico. To take a concrete case illustrative of our uncertainty in this field, it is usually assumed and frequently asserted that the children of the Tropics develop more rapidly and mature earlier than the children of colder lands. It is at present diffi- cult either to prove or to disprove the statement, owing to the dearth of exact statistical data. ^Special acknowledgments are due Dr. David P. Barrows, Director of Education, and Mr. G. W. Beattie, Supt. of the Philippine Normal School, for aid and encouragement in the work. Without their help this study could not have been carried through to its present propor- tions. Thanks are due also to Miss Jessie L. Durham, Supervisor of the londo Schools; to Mr. Guy V. Clinton, and Mr. F. R. Ivutz, prin- cipals of intermediate schools; to Mrs. John Fagan, Supervisor of the Philippine Normal Training School; and to Dr. Helen T. Woolley, who aided in verifying the ages of the students, J. F. B. 4 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN The question arose, howev^er, in a very practical way, in the Philippine Islands, in connection with the formulation of courses of study for the schools. In attempting to fit the stages of instruction to the stages of normal growth, the ques- tions naturally arose as to what the normal growth-stages are, at what age each appears, and how long each continues, in the case of the Mala)^ children of the Philippines. Such questions were of practical importance. If the periods of development of Philippine children are fore-shortened, then the courses of instruction should be correspondingly fore- shortened ; but if, on the other hand, their growth is as slow as that of European children, then for equal results they prob- ably require courses of instruction of equal length. In answer to the questions, there were no figures to which to appeal, and one could obtain from the teaching profession any sort of opinion that one might be looking for. The only method of finding out was to measure the children. This was undertaken, and the present study presents certain anthropo- metric evidence as to the rates and stages of their physical growth. This was naturally the first step to be taken even where the facts aimed at were the stages of mental growth and the age of mental maturity. The children measured were students in various Manila schools, — the Philippine Normal School, Tondo primary schools, Tondo Secondary School, Sampaloc primary schools, and the Sampaloc Intermediate School. In the Philippine Normal School, about three-fourths of the students measured were from the provinces outside of Manila, chiefly those of southern and central Luzon. In the two intermediate schools, about half were from the provinces ; and in the primary schools a considerable proportion were born outside of Manila. About all of the Christian provinces were represented ; but the major portion of the students measured were Tagalog, Pam- pango, Pangasinan, and Ilocano, One cannot say that the students measured were all of pure Malay blood, so widespread is the infusion of Spanish and Chinese blood in the archipelago. The most that can be said is that they were typical Filipinos, fair representatives of the Christian population of the archipelago. Measurements made on students that admitted themselves to be mestizos, or that gave unmistakable evidence in their appearance of the posses- sion of Spanish or Chinese blood were discarded. Besides determining growth-stages, a further aim of the study was to make a comparison of Philippine children with those of Europe or America in size and efl&ciency. In order that results might be entirely comparable, it was necessary to duplicate the methods and apparatus of some previous study GROWTH OF PHIIvIPPINE CHILDREN 5 made on white children. lyiterature on the subject was ex- ceedingly scarce in Manila, but I succeeded in finding a report of Director Smedley's work in the Child-Study lyaboratory in Chicago, for the year 1 899-1 goo, as published in the report of the Commissioner of Education for 1902. His study appeared to be a careful one, and both his methods and his apparatus were described in detail, verbally and graphically. In order to obain entirely comparable results, therefore, I duplicated his apparatus and used his methods. These are not here re- peated since they can be found in his report. The measurements taken were: (i) Height; (2) Span of arms; (2,) Sitting height; (4) Weight; (5) Vital capacity; (6) Grip of right and left hands. Span of arms was not measured by Mr. Smedley, but comparable measures were found in Porter's study on St. Louis children. One of the most significant of Mr. Smedley's measurements, that of en- durance as given by the ergograph, had to be omitted for lack of a duplicate instrument. This omission was unfortunate since, as may be seen later in this study, one is led to expect some rather surprising and perhaps quite favorable results. It is to be hoped that some one will be moved to carry through this portion of the study in the not distant future. The measurements on each child were recorded on an indi- vidual card, — yellow cards being used for boys, and white for girls, to prevent any possibility of mixing data of the two sexes. On each card were also taken the child's name, date of birth, date of measurement, his age, name of the church where he had been baptized in order that the date of birth might be verified, native province, and the race of his father and mother. One serious difficulty met with was obtaining the ages of the children. In a tropical climate, there is so little to mark the passage of time that the conception of a year is not at all well defined in the children's minds. They easily fail to keep track of their ages. Great effort had therefore to be made to obtain the true age. Of pupils born in the city of Manila, we verified the ages from the baptismal records in the churches. Also the ages given by a pupil to his teachers at different times were compared, and if he had given his age consistently for three or four times, it was considered evidence of correctness, but when he had given contradictory ages at different times, his statements had to be inquired into before his age could be determined. We impressed upon pupils the desirability of getting correct ages, and asked them to inquire of their parents so as to make no mistake. They are an extremely obliging people and they took an interest in the work ; so I have reason to believe that we obtained the true age in most cases. It re- 6 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN mains a source of some error, however, especially in the case of the younger pupils. In the case of students fourteen years old and over there is perhaps only very slight error in the matter of age. In verifying the ages of the younger pupils in the churches, it was found that when the age was given wrong, it varied upward from the true age about as often as downward, so that even if these errors had not been eliminated, they would not greatly have affected the median values. The errors that yet remain uneliminated are undoubtedly of this fluctuating sort, not seriously affecting median or average values where the number of pupils measured is considerable. After rejecting those of questionable age and the mestizo class — those with some Spanish or Chinese blood — records remain of i,i8o boys and 438 girls from 6 to 21 years of age. The numbers are large enough to show the approximate curves of growth, though, especially in the upper and lower age- extremes, the numbers are too few for exactness. This is clearly indicated by the irregular angular nature of some of the curves, particularly those for girls where the numbers are far fewer than in the case of boys. Still it is believed that a greater number of observations would do little more than to smooth out the irregularities. The pupils measured were typical of their class. The results of the measurements are shown in the following tables in the forms of medians, averages, variabilities, and yearly Meati Meas urements 0/ Philippine Boys Age go ^< P, CO 'Sco -M '0 Mm: Mm: Mm: Kilos: Kilos: Kilos: Cc: 6 6 1096 1050 605 18.0 12.0 II-5 950 7 18 1 135 1120 620 18.8 15-2 14.2 lOIO 8 32 1170 1156 648 20.3 16.5 15-7 1 130 9 41 1210 1 188 654 21.3 17.4 16.8 1210 10 70 1247 1237 673 23.0 19.0 18.0 1290 II 63 1299 1298 698 25.8 21.2 19.6 1400 12 94 1360 1365 720 28.4 22.9 21.4 1570 13 87 1403 1423 741 3I-I 25.0 23.8 I8I0 14 96 1471 1493 771 35-1 27.7 25.8 1950 15 130 1542 1581 812 41.4 35-1 31.8 2280 16 131 1582 1618 842 45-4 38.5 36.8 2570 17 145 1605 1649 851 47 -o 41.0 37-9 2810 18 97 1609 1664 855 48.9 43-1 39-7 2860 19 68 1620 1674 862 51.2 44-1 42.9 2970 20 54 1622 1678 866 51-6 44.4 41-5 3070 21-5 48 1610 1666 861 51-3 43-5 40.0 3000 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN 7 increments. If errors of age are entirely of a fluctuating character, it is possible that the medians may be less affected by this form of error than the averages. The diiferences, however, between the two are not great. The curves of growth shown in the charts are, with the exception of those dealing Mean Measurements of Philippine Girls 1- " tn be +j -M >^ Age SO s s CO eg CO +j a •a-5 u Mm: Mm: Mm: Kilos: Kilos: Kilos: Cc: 7 4 1 145 11^5 620 19.0 13.0 12.0 1 130 8 9 1175 1 165 638 20.3 15-2 14.2 1 130 9 15 1232 1235 657 22.8 18. 1 16.8 1210 lO 17 1273 1252 668 23.2 18.0 17. 1 1260 II 27 1305 1293 690 26.5 20.5 18.6 1300 12 33 1381 i37» 722 29.8 22.4 21. 1 1510 13 24 1425 1430 758 33-5 26.2 24-5 1610 14 32 1455 1470 772 36.5 26.6 25-4 1740 15 68 1480 1506 788 40.0 29-5 27-3 1970 i6 52 1488 1500 798 41.6 29.6 27.6 2000 17 54 1500 1534 803 43-4 30.3 28.3 2200 i8 40 1495 1523 806 44 31.0 28.3 2100 19 27 1498 1523 810 42.8 30.5 28.0 2200 20-5 26 i486 1510 803 42.5 30.3 27.0 2030 Averages and Variabilities of Philippine Boys Height 1 Weight CO ^ Si 1 n (A T^o a . a Age > < coP rt a <1 M s bfl > < Cd 4-» 5 4) coQ 'rt a (U Mm: Mm: Mm: Kilos: 7 18 1 148 47 18 18.9 2.1 8 32 1191 63 43 3-7 31 20.8 2.8 1.9 10. 1 9 41 1211 59 20 1-7 40 21.8 3-0 I.O 4.8 10 70 1252 40 41 3-4 70 23 -4 2.1 1.6 7-3 II (>3 1309 55 57 4.6 63 26.2 3-5 2.8 12.0 12 94 1366 78 57 4.4 94 29-5 5-4 3-3 12.6 13 80 1408 69 42 3-1 89 32-4 4-7 2.9 9.8 14 96 1461 81 53 3-a 96 35-9 6.2 3-5 10.8 15 130 1541 69 80 5-5 132 41-5 5-7 5-0 i5-b 16 131 1585 52 46 30 131 45-9 5-0 4-4 10.6 17 145 1602 5b 17 I.I 146 47-5 5-1 1.6 3-5 18 97 1612 56 ID 0.6 97 49.8 5-4 2-3 4.8 19 68 1626 45 14 0.8 67 52-4 5-7 2.6 5-2 20 54 1622 52 51 51-7 5-1 21-5 48 1621 54 47 51-7 4.9 8 GROWTH OF PHII^IPPINB CHItDRBN with annual increments, based upon median values. Curves based upon averages follow the same general lines ; the diflferences are but slight. All measurements are in terms of metric units. Age is that of the last birthday. Children called ten years of age in Span of Arms Height Sitting (A 4) v§ a (0 i» Vo fl I rt Age <" S iS s ^ M vi u > < '3 9 < h-i CD u 0) > < <1 l-H Mm: Mm: Mm: Mm: 7 iS 112S 58 18 623 21 8 31 1 169 69 41 3-6 31 647 30 24 3-« 9 41 1198 70 29 2-5 41 661 31 14 2.2 lO 70 1244 49 46 3-« 70 673 21 12 1.8 II 62 1299 62 55 4.4 63 699 24 26 3-9 12 94 1371 86 72 5-5 94 719 40 20 2.9 13 89 1425 »5 54 3-9 89 745 41 26 3-6 14 96 1480 93 55 3-9 96 770 49 25 3-4 15 131 1579 72 99 6.7 132 812 3<^ 42 5-5 i6 131 1621 f>3 42 2.6 131 841 32 29 3-6 17 145 1646 73 25 1-5 146 851 27 10 1.2 i8 96 16.56 68 10 0.6 97 859 29 8 0.9 19 63 1680 57 24 1.4 67 862 26 3 0.4 20 54 1676 56 51 866 22 4 0-5 21-5 48 1667 62 39 866 24 Grip of Right Hand | Grip of Left Hand] Vital Capacity Age B W) cd u a t> fl ^ ?o *-> A ^ v ?S a 4-> Age 1) ^ < 13 a s > < <1 K-l a 0) ::a Mm: Mm: Mm: Kilos: 7 4 1 135 51 4 18.8 2.2 8 9 1178 56 43 3-» 9 20.5 2.4 1-7 9.0 9 15 1228 54 50 4.2 15 22.7 2.8 2.2 10.8 10 17 1268 61 40 3-3 17 24.0 3-6 1-3 5-7 II 27 1295 57 27 2.1 27 26.6 3-6 2.6 10.8 12 33 1370 69 75 5-« 33 30.1 4.4 3-5 13.2 13 24 1428 51 5» 4.2 24 35-0 6.1 4.9 16.3 14 42 1454 46 26 1.8 42 3(^-5 5-4 1-5 4-3 15 68 1480 52 26 1.8 68 40-3 4-7 3-8 10.4 16 52 1485 55 5 03 52 42.2 5-5 1.9 4-7 17 54 1503 51 18 1.2 54 44-5 6.8 2-3 5-5 18 40 1504 51 I 0.1 40 44.0 4-5 19 27 1488 43 27 43-6 4.6 20-5 26 1497 6x 26 44 -o 6.9 Span of Arms | Sitti ng Height to ?§ n a (0 ?^ fl • p Age bo CS :-! > < 13 a a > < 13 ca 13 a la ^ a Mm: Mm: Mm: Mm: Mm: Mm: 7 4 H03 64 4 615 32 8 9 1 160 64 57 5-2 9 643 39 28 4.6 9 15 1218 54 58 5-0 15 656 27 13 2.0 10 17 1235 80 35 2.9 17 677 26 21 3-2 II 27 1295 68 42 3-4 27 688 30 11 1.6 12 33 1380 76 85 6.5 33 723 38 35 5-1 13 24 1441 60 61 4.4 24 756 29 33 4.6 14 42 1461 57 20 1.4 42 770 33 14 1.9 15 68 1499 61 38 2.6 68 788 30 18 2.3 16 52 1505 71 6 0.4 52 795 27 7 0.9 17 54 1521 5« 16 I.I 54 807 28 12 1-5 18 38 1514 54 40 808 28 I 0.1 19 27 1519 51 27 801 27 20-5 26 1515 61 26 799 3(> lO GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN Grip of Right Hand | Grip of Left Hand| Vital Ca pacity Age a 4; > a > c ^ < Kg: *. -~o ^ ^ 4:0 / / .i^ ^ ^^ 30 G ■rip "ht ,-^ ^ ^ffr -^ ^^ ^ **^ 20 c^ ^o^ X ..^ f^ ,>^ Ki] os- / /^ oU .^ / =-= == =o nr\ G rip Lei t ^ ^ 2dO ^ ^ ^ c^ -^ ^ u\ ers 10 .-^ -o- "3 ^z- X cr^ j5G= -n ==,^ =no ^ ita Cai L Dae: ty ,jg^ ^ :> A ^c^ r^ s^ ^ 1 Chart II. Absolute growth of Philippine Boys and Girls. GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN 13 Chart III. Yearly Increments of Growth in Percents. 14 GROWTH OF PHII 1 5 1 L 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 Ch art t: 9 2 02 1 Pel •06] It o IT \\ / V o \ --. V ^ r \ c v\ ^/ x=^ ^ M r \ ^^ o V 7 He p:1i1 1 V \ ^ ^ ( \ >=* ^ ^ Pe: 1^ *ce: It / V 1*? ^^^<. < /! / \ ^ in ( \ ^ r \ \ XXJ ft ^ r^ / 1^ w ..«_ \ / \ V >==^ ^ r Ive iffli J \ y ^ o t ^ ^ Pe3 'cei It ^n 1R ^ v^ 12 i \ ^ a: ^ ^ ^ ^^ \ ^ Q \ \ ^ / ^J % "^ o A. \ / > \ L I Grri p-H Lgrli' tH£ md "^ <. Plii liPT line Bo vs -o— Att leri san Bo ys =C3= Chart V. A Comparison of the Annual Increments of Growth of Philippine and Amer- ican Boys. GROWTH OF PHIIvIPPINE CHILDREN 23 Yoarsi V 8 9 13 1 1 12 13 14 15 18 17 IB 19 2Q Chart m. Pei cent Heighp Sitting i:i relation to Stature ^f:& Span of Arn:.s iiireoation bo Stature > TB 2:6 Chl oi Height for eact Kg. oj Weight Stren£:th of (xrip in relation tb'VT'eigfht Ph lippine. BC'YR Amer: cai: Bo:^3 Chart VI. A Comparison of the Relative Growth of Philippine and American Boys. 24 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN Chart VII. A Comparison of the Relative Growth of Philippine and American Boys. GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE; CHILDREN 25 Chart VIII. A Comparison of Philippine and American Girls in Absolute Growth. 26 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN Years- 7 i i i ^ V ) 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 F, 1 ^ Per cent o I \ O ( .=.^ ^«t=— a 3 1 A \, b^. "i==^^^7^^^^ 1] "^ N \ / NN o 9i \ / \ -t Heiff ht T *V^ t j^ i N p^ Per cent } lo \ l-dt 1€> v^ V. in f . y i / T \ i Q >^ x" \ ^ O \ \ \ •1 Weis ■ht \ > K^ o \ Per cent 90 ( "•fi y J 19 ' ,^^ x" ^^ 7^ ■^ / ) 1^ \ i ,^^ / y \ 8 /I \ / / \ V. '-£ 1 Qr- TD-Rif rhtH ind ) / ^ Phili DDine Girl 3— o— Ame rican n-irl Chart IX. A Comparison of the Annual Increments of Growth of Philippine and American Girls. GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN 27 Yoarsi V S 9 13 U 12 13 14 15 16 17 TR 1Q S C hart X. O He igli b Si ttii ig i: a relat Ion to 3tatur9 m±5 -9^^ Span of iLrrcs iii relation bo Stature -2:5 Caji. oj Htjig-t.t for eact. Ki?. oi' "^ 'eight Per ceht -8€- Sti'en^rth of (g-rh> in relation to ^T'eiight Phplipplnj) Girls Qirl^ America a Chart X. A'.Comparison of the Relative Growth of Philippine and American Girls. 2t GROWTH OP PHILIPPINE CHILDREN Ch^rt 8 ^ 10 tl t9. 13 14 1.5 IS 17 IB 19 ^0 KI Ra :io Ratio Df Oubegi. Height tD"V^^ei£-ht AB Vitkl (DaiDELCity in reflation to " Wdigli b ]jiter Stieng'th of (j-riT) in r el action to Vital Capacity Pe:: 10€^ ce:it Grip ol R-glil} Hand in relation to Left PIii liT)T)ine Girls Aniericai] Girls Chart XI. A Comparison of the Relative Growth of Philippine and American Girls. GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE; CHILDREN 29 Chart XII. A Comparison of the Growth of the Girls of the two races in their rela- tion to the Boys of their own race. 30 GROWTH OF PHII^IPPINE CHII.DRKN fore fifteen is due to the difference in height; it must be remembered that weight varies not as the height but rather as the cube of the height. In the tables and in Chart VII is shown the ratio of the cube of the height to the weight at each age for both races. The curves thus formed are parallel throughout, showing that the relation of the two races in weight is the same at all ages as for height. They show also that Philippine boys are at all ages taller relative to their weight ; or, stated more simply, Filipinos are more slender than Americans. Vital Capacity. Vital capacity varies also as the cube ot the height, so that the discrepancy here again, although ap- parent, is not real. The ratio of vital capacity to weight is about the same for both races at all ages, as shown in chart VII. The curves show a great expansion in lung capacity relative to weight for both races between the ages of fifteen and seventeen. Physical Proportions. Philippine boys are more slender than American boys of corresponding ages. Height sitting in pro- portion to total stature is about the same for both races, the difference of the averages being at no time more than one per cent. This indicates also that the two races are about equal in relative length of limbs. Span of arms relative to height appears to be from one to two per cent, less for Philippine boys before thirteen ; after this age both races are relatively equal. Strength of Grip. Before the age of thirteen, Philippine boys appear to be superior to American boys of corresponding ages in strength of grip both absolutely and relatively. From thirteen to fifteen, they are equal absolutely, but the Filipinos, being smaller, are relatively superior. After fifteen, Philippine boys fall behind in absolute strength, though retaining their relative superiority, as shown in Chart VI. In calculating strength of grip relative to weight, one must remember that both sets of boys were weighed with clothing, and that Ameri- can clothing is considerably heavier than the light tropical garments. In the curves, this slight but appreciable difference in weight favors the Filipino ; though it will go but a small way in explaining the results. This difference in the relative strength of grip not being perhaps what one might expect, the conditions of the tests were carefully examined to see that there was no source of error. One's first thought would be that the instruments used may have been dissimilar. But I used a duplicate of Mr. Smedley's instrument, manufactured by the same company. The instrument was tested several times for correctness. If Philippine pupils had recently been engaged in any form of labor specially adapted to developing the grip, as, for exam- GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE; CHILDREN 3 1 pie, the pounding of rice in mortars, this would be a disturbing factor; but it is thought this was not the case with the pupils measured to any appreciable degree. I am unable to discover any important dissimilarity of con- ditions. If none exists, one must conclude that Philippine boys are, weight for weight, stronger in a single effort of grip than American boys. The left hand as compared with the right is about the same for the two races; the left hand is from five to eight per cent, weaker, the relation varying somewhat with age. Variabilities. If one compares the variabilities given in the tables with those of Dr. Boas published in the Report of the Commissioner of Education for 1904, one notices that the greatest variability in height and weight occurs at fourteen and fifteen years in both races. This points further to a syn- chronism in the pubertal expansion of the two races. At this period both races appear to contain a large per cent, of both pre-pubescents and post-pubescents; this is doubtless the mean- ing of the wide degree of variability. Girls A comparison of the growth of Philippine and American girls is graphically shown in Charts VIII to XII. Chart VIII shows the growth of the girls of the two races to be about parallel up to the middle of the pubertal acceleration; after this period, Philippine girls fall behind relatively. Cor- responding growth-periods seem to coincide in time for the girls of the two races; and to differ most noticeably in the relative lack of growth-vigor in Philippine girls during later adolescence. This difference is less marked, however, with girls than with boys. Chart IX shows the greatest growth-increments to fall for both races at twelve or thirteen years. As with boys, the pubertal expansion seems to be more sudden with Philippine than with American girls, and to expend itself more quickly, resulting in a more rapid falling off in the degree of yearly growth after twelve or thirteen. Charts X and XI show relative physical proportions of the • girls of the two races. Height sitting in proportion to stature is the same for both; relative length of limb is the same; arm- span relative to stature differs but slightly. Philippine girls appear to be more slender up to fourteen years of age, after which period the ratio of height to weight appears to be about the same for the two races. Vital capacity relative to weight is distinctly greater for Philippine girls; girls differ in this respect whereas boys were about equal. In strength of grip Philippine girls appear to be superior to 32 GROWTH OP PHILIPPINE CHII.DREN American girls in absolute strength up to sixteen years, after which they are about equal. In strength relative to weight, Philippine girls seem to be superior at all ages, the difference ranging from ten to twenty-five per cent'. Relative strength of the left hand as compared with the right is about the same for the two races. In Chart XII an attempt has been made to compare the girls of the two races on a basis of their size and strength rela- tive to the boys of their own race. It is claimed that women differ from the men of their own race to a greater degree among some races than among others; the curves were con- structed to test this aspect of the matter. In the curves JOG per cent, represents boys; the curves show how much Philippine and American girls rise above or fall below average masculine standards of their race. The results show that in stature, sitting height, and span of arms, the girls of the two races are in this respect about equal, especially as they ap- proach adulthood. In weight, Philippine girls appear to be slightly superior; in strength of grip and in vital capacity Philippine girls are considerably superior, — from five to ten per cent. In other words, the girls of the two races, when their averages are compared with average masculine standards, are structurally about equal; but functionally, in the two as- pects measured, Philippine girls are nearer the standards set by the boys of their race than are American girls to American boys. This relation holds for late adolescence; and since the girls of both races seem to be mature by twenty, it doubtless holds true for the adults as well. Chinese Boys During the course of this study, I measured sixty Chinese boys at the Tondo Chinese School in Manila. Only pure- blood Chinese were measured, Chinese-Filipino mestizos being rejected. Their parents were mostly natives of southern China, — Amoy, Hong-Kong, Canton, Saigon. I was assured by the principal of the school that they could be depended upon to give their ages correctly; consequently they were taken at their word in the matter of age. But I very much doubt if they gave their ages even so accurately as did the Filipino children. In this connection one must remember that the Chinese count their ages, not from actual birthdays, but from the Chi- nese New Year. A ten-year-old Chinese boy is one who has ten times celebrated the Chinese New Year; on an average he is therefore nine and one-half years of age; whereas an Ameri- can or Filipino boy who says he is ten years old is on an aver- age ten and a half, or a full year older. In the tables, therefore, GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN 33 I have set back the ages of the Chinese one year so as to make them entirely comparable with the tables for Filipino and American boys. The following table presents their average measurements. Averages of Sixty Chinese Boys 4-> tn p^ ^ 4-> ^ ^ '^ rt -i-> ^§ JJ ^ '0 3S^ Age •a<3 ,£3 a 5 .bfl ap^ P, 3 CO ^ >^ 9 4 1237 680 1207 24.7 1350 19.7 19.2 lO 7 1275 702 1252 25.2 1380 19.7 19.2 II II 1286 695 1265 27.0 1470 22.6 21.0 12 9 1348 725 1342 30-4 1630 24.2 23-5 13 14 1390 750 1370 33-6 1770 27.0 25-9 14 10 1442 762 1447 35-1 2010 27.4 26.5 15 5 1585 841 I6I7 46.3 2450 40.1 36.1 ' . • i- These averages seem to show that in stature, height sitting, and span of arms, Chinese and Filipino boys are not far apart between the ages of nine and fifteen. Curves of growth appear to follow about the same lines up to that age. In respect to weight, Chinese boys are heavier, both abso- lutely and relatively. They are not so slender as Filipinos. In absolute strength of grip Chinese appear to be stronger, but relative to weight, they are of about the same strength. The left hand appears to be somewhat more nearly equal to the right in Chinese than in Filipino or American boys. The sitting height of Chinese boys seems to be somewhat greater than that of Filipinos or whites; or in other words, Chinese appear to have somewhat shorter legs comparatively, with a corresponding gain in the relative volume of vital or- gans. Span of arms relative to height shows them to have slightly shorter arms also before the age of fourteen. Since the above was written, I find in "Nature" of Oct. 15, 1908, some results of a far more complete study on the Chinese by Mr. A. H. Crook, Queen's College, Hong Kong. He measured 659 boys and youths between the ages of ten and twenty-four years, and presents an interesting comparison be- tween Chinese and English boys, A comparison of my results with those of Mr. Crook seems to indicate that Chinese boys of Manila are less developed than those of Hong Kong. Climate may have something to do with the matter; also it is possible that he measured a better class of students at Hong Kong than I found among the shop- keeper's sons in the public schools of Manila. Mr. Crook remarks on the small amount of chest expansion \l% m 34 GROWTH OF PHILIPPINE CHILDREN in Chinese boys. This was determined by measurements of chest girth. My figures for vital capacity, obtained in an en- tirely different way, confirm his conclusions. A Comparison of Philippine with Japanese Children It appears that the Department of Education in Japan meas- ures the height and weight of all Japanese school children. The average figures for the year 1901 for 869,014 children, as reported by Dr. Misawa in the March number of this Journal for the current year (p. 109) are, for boys, as given in the fol- lowing table. Beside them are the figures for Filipinos and Chinese for comparison. Height Weight Age Filipino Japanese Chinese Filipino Japanese Chinese Cm. Kg. 7 114. 8 106.5 18.9 17.6 8 119. 1 III.O 20.8 19. 1 9 121. 1 115. 6 123.7 21.8 21 .1 24.7 10 125.2 120.0 127-5 23-4 22.8 25 2 II 130.9 124.8 128.6 26.2 25.0 27 12 136.6 128.7 134-8 29-5 27.0 30 4 13 140.8 133-4 139.0 32-4 29.4 33 6 14 146. 1 137-6 144.2 35-9 32-5 35 I 15 I54-I 142. 1 158.5 41-5 35-2 4b 3 16 158-5 146. 1 45-9 38-2 Japanese boys to sixteen years of age are from six to twelve centimeters shorter than Filipino boys of corresponding ages. They are as much shorter than Filipino boys as the latter are shorter than American boys. The table shows the Chinese to be not appreciably different from Filipinos in height. This is one further item of proof that the mongoloid Malays of the Philippines are racially more closely related to the Chinese than to the Japanese. In weight the same relationship holds. LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 021 339 782 5