perism that has since become so frightful had begun to show its head. Seeing these things, it would seem to be obvious that his theory is merely to be regarded as descriptive of what had been, and what were bound to be, the effects of an unsound course of human action, but erroneously regarded as the necessary consequence of divine laws.

§ 6. So, too, is it with the Ricardo-Malthusian law of the occupation of the earth, in virtue of which man commences with the rich lands, and then obtains food in abundance, but in course of time finds himself compelled to resort to soils yielding less and less in return to labor and enabling the land-owner to claim a constantly increasing proportion, under the name of rent. Such being the law, the laborer becomes of necessity the bond slave the hewer of wood and drawer of water to the man who claims to own the land. That such is the inevitable result, cannot for a moment be doubted by any one who believes, with Mr. McCulloch, that, "from the operation of fixed and permanent causes, the increasing sterility of the soil is sure, in the long run, to overmatch the improvements that occur in machinery and agriculture"

man thus becoming more and more the slave of nature, whose representative-the land-owner-holds the key by help of which alone her gifts can be obtained.

Man becomes more free as the labor of the present acquires power over the accumulations of the past and less free as they acquire power over him. If the Ricardo theory is true, then is slavery provided for by the laws of God, and then must every effort at the enfranchisement of man prove to have been made in vain.

That theory involves, necessarily, the separation of men from their fellow-men, in search of distant and fertile lands; and yet, separate as they may, the original curse still follows them" the increasing sterility of the soil being sure to overmatch" any improvements they may make. The utility of the materials of which the earth is composed must diminish the value of the commodities required by man must increase and the value of man himself must decline; while the necessity for the service of the trader and transporter must be a constantly augmenting one. The more their services are required, the greater must be the differences

between the prices of raw products and finished commodities; and the greater must be the tendency towards that state of things in which might makes right — that one in which barbarism takes the place of civilization. Look to the doctrine from what point we may, it carries man so certainly towards slavery, that, were it true, it would be folly to undertake resistance.

§ 7. Happily for man, history tells a story widely different from that of Mr. Malthus. All that is by him depicted as a consequence of increase of numbers, is precisely what we see to have existed in the past, when population was small, and when men could occupy at will either the lands of the hills, or those of the valleys when no man had property in either and when none could demand rent; but when all-powerful nature forbade the occupation of the lower and richer lands, and limited the labors of man to those of the poor ones of the hills. Such having been the case, and man having steadily acquired power as the result of that combination which could come only with increase of numbers, it would seem very clear that these theories could be entitled to no consideration whatsoever; unless, indeed, it were possible for us to conclude that the Creator had instituted laws that were to work at one time forward, and at another backward-at one time up, and at another down while instituting, in relation to all other matter, laws which work so invariably in one direction, that having once determined what it is, man feels himself entirely safe in assuming that such it has been in all the times that are past, and that such it will be in all that are to come. That the Creator could have instituted such a system that he could so have acted towards the being he had placed at the head of creation is an idea so absurd as almost to warrant us in hesitating to credit that those by whom it was first suggested could really themselves have believed therein; and yet not a doubt that they really and honestly did so can now be entertained. What, however, could have been the cause of the error into which, men of high intelligence as they undoubtedly were, they fell? To obtain a reply to this question we must here briefly review the tendencies of the system as exhibited in the several countries to which reference has above been made.

What, in the first place, were the objects sought by it to be

accomplished? Did it look to the promotion of association and combination? Did it look towards the development of the powers of man? Did it look to the development, or even to the maintenance, of the powers of the earth? Did it seek to lessen that greatest of all the obstacles standing in the way of commerce, the tax of transportation? Did it, in any manner, tend to increase the utility of the matter of which the earth is composed to diminish the value of the commodities required for the uses of man-or, to increase the value of man himself? If such were its objects, then did it tend towards civilization.

That it did none of these things we know. It sought to prevent association. It prohibited diversity of employments, and thus forbade the development of mind, and the growth of the power of combination. It reduced the people subject to it to the condition of mere tillers of the soil — while enforcing the exhaustion of the land. All of these phenomena are those which attend the early ages of society those ages that we denominate barbaric those in which food is obtained with greatest difficulty those in which famines and pestilences abound and those in which the disease of over-population most exists. The system tended towards the reduction of the supply of the necessaries of life; and therefore is it that we find in Ireland, India, and Jamaica the most conclusive evidences of the truth of the doctrines of the English school. It was a retrograde policy, tending to cause a return of society to that state of barbarism from which it had emerged; and therefore was a retrograde theory required to enable those who sought to profit by it, to account for the diseases of which it was itself the cause. That theory was supplied by Messrs. Malthus and Ricardo, who gave us laws of God by help of which to account for famines, pestilences, and slavery, that were but the necessary result of the misconduct of man.

Such was the origin of that modern political economy which so entirely repudiates the ideas of Adam Smith, and finds in trade the substitute for commerce. Retrograde throughout, it requires that we should at once, and for ever, ignore the existence of an all-wise and all-benevolent Deity, and put our trust in a Being by whom had been instituted great natural laws in virtue of which men should necessarily, and "regularly, die of want.”

Retrograde throughout, it teaches

That, in the early stages of society, as the first miserable tools are obtained, by means of which to work, men are enabled to compel the earth to yield larger rewards to labor; but, that, as soon as they "have applied themselves to cultivation with any energy, and have brought to it any tolerable tools," a new law supervenes, in virtue of which the return to labor becomes yearly smaller than before.

That, although the progress towards civilization has everywhere been marked by an increase in the power of man over matter, there exist "fixed and permanent causes' why matter must everywhere, and under all circumstances, obtain greater power

over man,

That, although the value of man had everywhere increased, as the value of the commodities required for his use has diminished, the true road of progress is to be found in the direction of increased use for ships and wagons, because in their use is to be found the greatest increase in the value of those commodities.

That, although men have everywhere become more free as employments have become more diversified, and as the utility of the various kinds of matter has become more and more developed, the road of progress lies in the division of nations into agricultural and manufacturing ones-the single workshop being thousands of miles distant from the places at which the materials are produced.

That, although man has always thriven in the precise ratio in which the price of the raw material has approximated that of the commodity manufactured from it, his further progress is to be increased by the adoption of a policy looking to cheapening the raw materials and increasing the quantity thereof required to be given for the finished article.

That, although he has always acquired value with the growth of commerce, and with decline in the necessity for trade and transportation, his condition must be improved by establishing the supremacy of trade.

That, although progress had always been marked by increase in the power of labor over capital, it is now required that “labor should be abundant and cheap," in order that it may be kept "sufficiently under the control of capital."

* J. S. MILL: Principles of Political Economy, vol. i. p. 212.

Such being the tendency of all its teachings, it is no matter of surprise that modern English political economy sees in man only an animal that will procreate, that must be fed, and that can be made to work an instrument to be used by trade; that it repudiates all the distinctive qualities of man, and limits itself to the consideration of those he holds in common with the beast of burden or of prey; that it denies that the Creator meant that every man should find a place at his table, or that there exists any reason why a poor laborer, able and willing to work, should have any more right to be fed than the cotton-spinner has to find a market for his cloth; or that, as the reader has already seen, it assures its students that "labor is a commodity," and that if men will marry and have children without having previously made provision for them, it is for them to take their chance - and that "if we stand between the error and its consequences, we stand between the evil and its cure-if we intercept the penalty, (where it does not amount to positive death,) we perpetuate the sin."*

§ 8. Adam Smith knew nothing of any such "dismal science” as that above described. Having full faith in the advantages of commerce, he held in great contempt the system based upon the idea of converting a whole nation into a mass of mere traders in the products of other lands. Believing that "the one thing needful was, obviously, to make land yield the largest possible surplus," he favored its division, because "small farms," as he saw, could "afford a greater surplus than similar portions of a larger one;" and because his eyes had not been opened to the imaginary fact, that consolidation of landed property "raises universally the standard of competence, and gives force to the springs which set industry in motion."+ Had that idea been suggested to him, he would probably have inquired why it had been that, in all other countries, such consolidation had been the companion of depopulation, slavery, and moral and political death.

A firm believer in the equal rights of man, he was as little able to see the justice of prohibition of commerce among the colonists,‡

* Edinburgh Review, October, 1849.

+ MCCULLOCH: Principles, p. 259.

"To found a great empire for the sole purpose of raising up a people of customers may at first sight appear a project fit only for a nation of shopkeepers. It is, however, a project altogether unfit for a nation of shop