The poor laws became a source of evil; far from remedying pauperism, they increased it. Government provisions in favour of the poorer classes were inopportune. In short, the whole administration of public relief was defective. Multiplying the relief given, and enlarging the practice of allowances was of no avail: it ended by causing a progressive decline in wages. Indeed, at one time, the tithe which the poor-rate levied upon the tax-payers in general, became nothing else than a species of subsidy given to manufacturers. In reality, the taxpayers were not burdened for the benefit of the poor, but of the manufacturing classes, and the tax increased so much that the rate of the wages decreased while that of the reliefs increased. Such were the causes which prepared and produced the pessimistic philosophy and economics of which Malthus was probably then the greatest interpreter. In the great disproportionate distribution of wealth originated by the large growing industry and the rapid technical revolution, Socialism was already taking its rise. The chief spokesman of the new theories, William Godwin, a very successful agitator and a genial if not always a profound writer, but always most acute and daring, was placed more than any other in this grave contradiction. It is in truth very difficult to gather a broad and complete system from Godwin's disordered work; what is chiefly wanting to it is stability of views. While in his celebrated book, An Inquiry Concerning Political Justice, studying the forms of property he distinguishes between the contrary systems of private property and of supply and demand, and declares himself favourable to this last system, and hence to that of common property; nevertheless, he would have the great transformation to occur spontaneously, without revolution or the intervention of the legislature. The evils which oppress society belong in no way to the nature of things; on the contrary, it is from human institutions that misery and injustice arise. Social wealth not only exists in sufficient quantity, but, if properly distributed, could afford an easy existence in exchange of moderate labour. Let wealth be properly distributed, and give mankind sufficient time for education and culture, and unaided reason will become the guide of human action, and there will be no further need of coercion and violence. In short, Godwin's ideal was really an anarchical one, but mild and pacific. Among the greatest admirers of Godwin was the father of Robert Malthus. Not so the son. The study of history had shown him that progress, won by dint of sacrifices, was always very limited. and always gained by main force amid resolute, insurmountable, unceasing obstacles. Therefore, he did not trust the views of his father or the philosophy of Godwin; and it was while studying them that he conceived the plan of collecting the chief ideas, and in 1798 he published his famous essay. 225. The Theory of Population12 BY THOMAS ROBERT MALTHUS In an inquiry concerning the improvement of society, the mode of conducting the subject which naturally presents itself, is, 1, To investigate the causes which have hitherto impeded the progress of mankind towards happiness; and 2, To examine the probability of the total or partial removal of these causes in the future. The principal object of this essay is to examine the effects of one great cause intimately united with the very nature of man. This is the constant tendency of all animated life to increase beyond the nourishment provided for it. Through the animal and vegetable kingdoms Nature has scattered the seeds of life abroad with the most profuse and liberal hand. If the germs of existence contained in the earth could freely develop themselves, they would fill millions of worlds in the course of a few thousand years. Necessity, that imperious, all-pervading law of nature restrains them and man alike within prescribed bounds. The effects of nature's check on man are complicated. Impelled to the increase of his species by an equally powerful instinct, reason interrupts his career, and asks him whether he may not bring beings into the world, for whom he cannot provide the means of support. If he hear not this suggestion, the human race will be constantly endeavoring to increase beyond the means of subsistence. But as, by that law of our nature which makes food necessary to the life of man, population can never actually increase beyond the lowest nourishment capable of supporting it, a strong check on population, namely, the difficulty of acquiring food, must be constantly in operation. This difficulty must fall somewhere, and must necessarily be severely felt in some or other of the various forms of misery by a large portion of mankind. This conclusion will sufficiently appear from a review of the different states of society in which man has existed. But the subject will be seen in a clearer 19 Adapted from An Essay on the Principle of Population, or a View of the Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness, 6th ed., I, 1-24 (1826). The poor laws became a source of evil; far from remedying pauperism, they increased it. Government provisions in favour of the poorer classes were inopportune. In short, the whole administration of public relief was defective. Multiplying the relief given, and enlarging the practice of allowances was of no avail: it ended by causing a progressive decline in wages. Indeed, at one time, the tithe which the poor-rate levied upon the tax-payers in general, became nothing else than a species of subsidy given to manufacturers. In reality, the taxpayers were not burdened for the benefit of the poor, but of the manufacturing classes, and the tax increased so much that the rate of the wages decreased while that of the reliefs increased. Such were the causes which prepared and produced the pessimistic philosophy and economics of which Malthus was probably then the greatest interpreter. In the great disproportionate distribution of wealth originated by the large growing industry and the rapid technical revolution, Socialism was already taking its rise. The chief spokesman of the new theories, William Godwin, a very successful agitator and a genial if not always a profound writer, but always most acute and daring, was placed more than any other in this grave contradiction. It is in truth very difficult to gather a broad and complete system from Godwin's disordered work; what is chiefly wanting to it is stability of views. While in his celebrated book, An Inquiry Concerning Political Justice, studying the forms of property he distinguishes between the contrary systems of private property and of supply and demand, and declares himself favourable to this last system, and hence to that of common property; nevertheless, he would have the great transformation to occur spontaneously, without revolution or the intervention of the legislature. The evils which oppress society belong in no way to the nature of things; on the contrary, it is from human institutions that misery and injustice arise. Social wealth not only exists in sufficient quantity, but, if properly distributed, could afford an easy existence in exchange of moderate labour. Let wealth be properly distributed, and give mankind sufficient time for education and culture, and unaided reason will become the guide of human action, and there will be no further need of coercion and violence. In short, Godwin's ideal was really an anarchical one, but mild and pacific. Among the greatest admirers of Godwin was the father of Robert Malthus. Not so the son. The study of history had shown him that progress, won by dint of sacrifices, was always very limited and always gained by main force amid resolute, insurmountable, unceasing obstacles. Therefore, he did not trust the views of his father or the philosophy of Godwin; and it was while studying them that he conceived the plan of collecting the chief ideas, and in 1798 he published his famous essay. 225. The Theory of Population12 BY THOMAS ROBERT MALTHUS The In an inquiry concerning the improvement of society, the mode of conducting the subject which naturally presents itself, is, I, To investigate the causes which have hitherto impeded the progress of mankind towards happiness; and 2, To examine the probability of the total or partial removal of these causes in the future. principal object of this essay is to examine the effects of one great cause intimately united with the very nature of man. This is the constant tendency of all animated life to increase beyond the nourishment provided for it. Through the animal and vegetable kingdoms Nature has scattered the seeds of life abroad with the most profuse and liberal hand. If the germs of existence contained in the earth could freely develop themselves, they would fill millions of worlds in the course of a few thousand years. Necessity, that imperious, all-pervading law of nature restrains them and man alike within prescribed bounds. The effects of nature's check on man are complicated. Impelled to the increase of his species by an equally powerful instinct, reason interrupts his career, and asks him whether he may not bring beings into the world, for whom he cannot provide the means of support. If he hear not this suggestion, the human race will be constantly endeavoring to increase beyond the means of subsistence. But as, by that law of our nature which makes food necessary to the life of man, population can never actually increase beyond the lowest nourishment capable of supporting it, a strong check on population, namely, the difficulty of acquiring food, must be constantly in operation. This difficulty must fall somewhere, and must necessarily be severely felt in some or other of the various forms of misery by a large portion of mankind. This conclusion will sufficiently appear from a review of the different states of society in which man has existed. But the subject will be seen in a clearer 12 Adapted from An Essay on the Principle of Population, or a View of the Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness, 6th ed., I, 1–24 (1826). light, if we endeavour to ascertain what would be the natural increase in population, if left to exert itself with perfect freedom. Many extravagant statements have been made of the length of the period within which the population of a country can double. To be perfectly sure we are far within the truth, we will take a slow rate, and say that population, when unchecked, goes on doubling itself every twenty-five years, or increases in a geometrical ratio. The rate according to which the productions of the earth may be supposed to increase, it will not be so easy to determine. However, we may be perfectly certain that the ratio of their increase in a limited territory must be of a totally different nature from the ratio of the increase in population. A thousand millions are just as easy doubled every twenty-five years by the power of population as a thousand. But the food will by no means be obtained with the same facility. Man is confined in, room. When acre has been added to acre till all the fertile land is occupied, the yearly increase in food must depend upon the melioration of the land already in possession. This is a fund, which, from the nature of all soils, instead of increasing must be gradually diminishing. But population, could it be supplied with food, would go on with unexhausted vigor; and the increase in one period would furnish a power of increase in the next, and this without any limit. If it be allowed that by the best possible policy the average produce could be doubled in the first twenty-five years, it will be allowing a greater increase than could with reason be expected. In the next twenty-five years it is impossible to suppose that the produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to our knowledge of the properties of land. Let us suppose that the yearly additions which might be made. to the former average produce, instead of decreasing as they certainly would do, were to remain the same; and that the product of the land might be increased every twenty-five years, by a quantity equal to what it at present produces. The most enthusiastic speculator can not suppose a greater increase than this. Even then the land could not be made to increase faster than in an arithmetical ratio. Taking the whole earth, the human species would increase as the numbers 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, and subsistence as I, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. In two centuries the population would be to the means of subsistence as 256 to 9; in three centuries as 4096 to 13, and in two thousand years the difference would be almost incalculable. In this supposition no limits whatever are placed to the produce of the earth. It may increase forever and be greater than any |