Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

CHAPTER VI.

OF THE STATIONARY STATE.

§ 1. THE preceding chapters com- | completely to identify all that is econoprise the general theory of the economically desirable with the progressive mical progress of society, in the sense state, and with that alone. With Mr. in which those terms are commonly M'Culloch, for example, prosperity does understood; the progress of capital, of not mean a large production and a good population, and of the productive arts. distribution of wealth, but a rapid inBut in contemplating any progressive crease of it; his test of prosperity is movement, not in its nature unlimited, high profits; and as the tendency of the mind is not satisfied with merely that very increase of wealth, which he tracing the laws of the movement; it calls prosperity, is towards low profits, cannot but ask the further question, to economical progress, according to him, what goal? Towards what ultimate must tend to the extinction of prospoint is society tending by its indus- perity. Adam Smith always assumes trial progress? When the progress that the condition of the mass of the ceases, in what condition are we to people, though it may not be positively expect that it will leave mankind? distressed, must be pinched and stinted in a stationary condition of wealth, and can only be satisfactory in a progressive state. The doctrine that, to however distant a time incessant struggling may put offour doom, the progress of society must "end in shallows and in miseries," far from being, as many people still believe, a wicked invention of Mr. Malthus, was either expressly or tacitly affirmed by his most distinguished predecessors, and can only be successfully combated on his principles. Before attention had been directed to the principle of population as the active force in determining the remuneration of labour, the increase of mankind was virtually treated as a constant quantity: it was, at all events, assumed that in the natural and normal state of human affairs population must con stantly increase, from which it followed that a constant increase of the means of support was essential to the physical comfort of the mass of mankind. The publication of Mr. Malthus' Essay is the era from which better views of this subject must be dated; and notwithstanding the acknowledged errors of his first edition, few writers have done more than himself, in the subsequent editions, to promote these juster and more hopeful anticipations.

It must always have been seen, more or less distinctly, by political economists, that the increase of wealth is not boundless: that at the end of what they term the progressive state lies the stationary state, that all progress in wealth is but a postponement of this, and that each step in advance is an approach to it. We have now been led to recognise that this ultimate goal is at all times near enough to be fully in view; that we are always on the verge of it, and that if we have not reached it long ago, it is because the goal itself flies before us. The richest and most prosperous countries would very soon attain the stationary state, if no further improvements were made in the productive arts, and if there were a suspension of the overflow of capital from those countries into the uncultivated or ill-cultivated regions of the earth.

This impossibility of ultimately avoiding the stationary state-this irresistible necessity that the stream of human industry should finally spread itself out into an apparently stagnant sea-must have been, to the political economists of the last two generations, an unpleasing and discouraging prospect; for the tone and endency of their speculations goes

Even in a progressive state of capital,

in old countries, a conscientious or pru- tion, and those European nations which dential restraint on population is indis- have hitherto been so fortunate as to pensable, to prevent the increase of be preserved from it, may have it yet numbers from outstripping the in- to undergo. It is an incident of growth, crease of capital, and the condition | not a mark of decline, for it is not neof the classes who are at the bottom cessarily destructive of the higher asof society from being deteriorated. pirations and the heroic virtues; as Where there is not, in the people, or America, in her great civil war, is in some very large proportion of them, proving to the world, both by her cona resolute resistance to this deteriora- duct as a people and by numerous tion—a determination to preserve an es- splendid individual examples, and as tablished standard of comfort-the con- England, it is to be hoped, would also dition of the poorest class sinks, even prove on an equally trying and exciting in a progressive state, to the lowest occasion. But it is not a kind of social point which they will consent to en- perfection which philanthropists to dure. The same determination would come will feel any very eager desire to be equally effectual to keep up their assist in realizing. Most fitting, incondition in the stationary state, and deed, is it, that while riches are power, would be quite as likely to exist. In- and to grow as rich as possible the deed, even now, the countries in which universal object of ambition, the path the greatest prudence is manifested in to its attainment should be open to all, the regulating of population, are often without favour or partiality. But the those in which capital increases least best state for human nature is that in rapidly. Where there is an indefinite which, while no one is poor, no one prospect of employment for increased desires to be richer, nor has any reason numbers, there is apt to appear less to fear being thrust back, by the efforts necessity for prudential restraint. If it of others to push themselves forward. were evident that a new hand could not obtain employment but by displacing, or succeeding to, one already employed, the combined influences of prudence and public opinion might in some measure be relied on for restricting the coming generation within the numbers necessary for replacing the present.

§ 2. I cannot, therefore, regard the stationary state of capital and wealth with the unaffected aversion so generally manifested towards it by political economists of the old school. I am inclined to believe that it would be, on the whole, a very considerable improvement on our present condition. I confess I am not charmed with the ideal of life held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on; that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other's heels, which form the existing type of social life, are the most desirable lot of human kind, or anything but the disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress. It may be a necessary stage in the progress of civiliza

That the energies of mankind should be kept in employment by the struggle for riches, as they were formerly by the struggle of war, until the better minds succeed in educating the others into better things, is undoubtedly more desirable than that they should rust and stagnate. While minds are coarse they require coarse stimuli, and let them have them. In the meantime, those who do not accept the present very early stage of human improvement as its ultimate type, may be excused for being comparatively indifferent to the kind of economical progress which excites the congratulations of ordinary politicians; the mere increase of production and accumulation. For the safety of national independence it is essential that a country should not fall much behind its neighbours in these things. But in themselves they are of little importance, so long as either the increase of population or anything else prevents the mass of the people from reaping any part of the benefit of them. I know not why it should be matter of congratulation that persons who are already richer than any one needs to

be, should have doubled their means of consuming things which give little or no pleasure except as representative of wealth; or that numbers of individuals should pass over, every year, from the middle classes into a richer class, or from the class of the occupied rich to that of the unoccupied. It is only in the backward countries of the world that increased production is still an important object: in those most advanced, what is economically needed is a better distribution, of which one indispensable means is a stricter restraint on population. Levelling institutions, either of a just or of an unjust kind, cannot alone accomplish it; they may lower the heights of society, but they cannot, of themselves, permanently raise the depths.

On the other hand, we may suppose this better distribution of property attained, by the joint effect of the prudence and frugality of individuals, and of a system of legislation favouring equality of fortunes, so far as is consistent with the just claim of the individual to the fruits, whether great or small, of his or her own industry. We may suppose, for instance, (according to the suggestion thrown out in a former chapter,*) a limitation of the sum which any one person may acquire by gift or inheritance, to the amount sufficient to constitute a moderate independence. Under this twofold influence, society would exhibit these leading features: a well-paid and affluent body of labourers; no enormous fortunes, except what were earned and accumulated during a single lifetime; but a much larger body of persons than at present, not only exempt from the coarser toils, but with sufficient leisure, both physical and mental, from mechanical details, to cultivate freely the graces of life, and afford examples of them to the classes less favourably circumstanced for their growth. This condition of society, so greatly preferable to the present, is not only perfectly compatible with the stationary state, but, it would seem, more naturally allied with that state than with any other.

There is room in the world, no doubt, * Supra. v. 139.

and even in old countries, for a great increase of population, supposing the arts of life to go on improving, and capital to increase. But even if innocuous, I confess I see very little reason for desiring it. The density of popula tion necessary to enable mankind to obtain, in the greatest degree, all the advantages both of co-operation and of social intercourse, has, in all the most populous countries, been attained. A population may be too crowded, though all be amply supplied with food and raiment. It is not good for man to be kept perforce at all times in the presence of his species. A world from which solitude is extirpated, is a very poor ideal. Solitude, in the sense of being often alone, is essential to any depth of meditation or of character; and solitude in the presence of natural beauty and grandeur, is the cradle of thoughts and aspirations which are not only good for the individual, but which society could ill do without. Nor is there much satisfaction in contemplating the world with nothing left to the spontaneous activity of nature; with every rood of land brought into cultivation, which is capable of growing food for human beings; every flowery waste or natural pasture ploughed up, all quadrupeds or birds which are not domesticated for man's use exterminated as his rivals for food, every hedgerow or superfluous tree rooted out, and scarcely a place left where a wild shrub or flower could grow without being eradicated as a weed in the name of improved agricul ture. If the earth must lose that great portion of its pleasantness which it owes to things that the unlimited increase of wealth and population would extirpate from it, for the mere purpose of enabling it to support a larger, but not a better or a happier population, I sincerely hope, for the sake of posterity, that they will be content to be sta tionary, long before necessity compels them to it.

It is scarcely necessary to remark that a stationary condition of capital and population implies no stationary state of human improvement. There would be as much scope as ever for all kinds of mental culture, and moral and

social progress; as much room for improving the Art of Living, and much more likelihood of its being improved, when minds ceased to be engrossed by the art of getting on. Even the industrial arts might be as earnestly and as successfully cultivated, with this sole difference, that instead of serving no purpose but the increase of wealth, industrial improvements would produce their legitimate effect, that of abridging labour. Hitherto it is questionable if all the mechanical inventions yet made have lightened the day's toil of any human being. They have enabled a greater population to live the same life of drudgery and imprisonment, and an

increased number of manufacturers and others to make fortunes. They have increased the comforts of the middle classes. But they have not yet begun to effect those great changes in human destiny, which it is in their nature and in their futurity to accomplish. Only when, in addition to just institutions, the increase of mankind shall be under the deliberate guidance of judicious foresight, can the conquests made from the powers of nature by the intellect and energy of scientific discoverers, become the common property of the species, and the means of improving and ele vating the universal lot.

CHAPTER VII.

ON THE PROBABLE FUTURITY OF THE LABOURING CLASSES.

§ 1. THE observations in the preceding chapter had for their principal object to deprecate a false ideal of human society. Their applicability to the practical purposes of present times, consists in moderating the inordinate importance attached to the mere increase of production, and fixing attention upon improved distribution, and a large remuneration of labour, as the two desiderata. Whether the aggregate produce increases absolutely or not, is a thing in which, after a certain amount has been obtained, neither the legislator nor the philanthropist need feel any strong interest: but, that it should increase relatively to the number of those who share in it, is of the utmost possible importance; and this, (whether the wealth of mankind be stationary, or increasing at the most rapid rate ever known in an old country,) must depend on the opinions and habits of the most numerous class, the class of manual labourers.

When I speak, either in this place or elsewhere, of "the labouring classes," or of labourers as a "class," I use those phrases in compliance with custom, and as descriptive of an existing, but

by no means a necessary or permanent state of social relations. I do not recognise as either just or salutary, a state of society in which there is any "class" which is not labouring; any human beings, exempt from bearing their share of the necessary labours of human life, except those unable to labour, or who have fairly earned rest by previous toil. So long, however, as the great social evil exists of a nonlabouring class, labourers also constitute a class, and may be spoken of, though only provisionally, in that character.

Considered in its moral and social aspect, the state of the labouring people has latterly been a subject of much more speculation and discussion than formerly; and the opinion, that it is not now what it ought to be, has become very general. The suggestions which have been promulgated, and the controversies which have been excited, on detached points rather than on the foundations of the subject, have put in evidence the existence of two conflicting theories, respecting the social posi-. tion desirable for manual labourers. The one may be called the theory of

dependence and protection, the other that of self-dependence.

ideal. It has also this in common with other ideals, that it has never been his According to the former theory, the torically realized. It makes its appeal lot of the poor, in all things which to our imaginative sympathies in the affect them collectively, should be re- character of a restoration of the good gulated for them, not by them. They times of our forefathers. But no times should not be required or encouraged can be pointed out in which the higher to think for themselves, or give to their classes of this or any other country perown reflection or forecast an influential formed a part even distantly resembling voice in the determination of their des- the one assigned to them in this theory. tiny. It is supposed to be the duty of It is an idealization, grounded on the the higher classes to think for them, conduct and character of here and there and to take the responsibility of their an individual. All privileged and lot, as the commander and officers of powerful classes, as such, have used an army take that of the soldiers com- their power in the interest of their own posing it. This function, it is con- selfishness, and have indulged their tended, the higher classes should pre- self-importance in despising, and not in pare themselves to perform conscien-lovingly caring for, those who were, in tiously, and their whole demeanour their estimation, degraded, by being should impress the poor with a reliance under the necessity of working for their on it, in order that, while yielding pas- benefit. I do not affirm that what has sive and active obedience to the rules always been must always be, or that prescribed for them, they may resign human improvement has no tendency themselves in all other respects to a to correct the intensely selfish feelings trustful insouciance, and repose under engendered by power; but though the the shadow of their protectors. The evil may be lessened, it cannot be eradirelation between rich and poor, accord-cated, until the power itself is withing to this theory, (a theory also applied to the relation between men and women) should be only partly authoritative; it should be amiable, moral, and sentimental: affectionate tutelage on the one side, respectful and grateful deference on the other. The rich should be in loco parentis to the poor, guiding and restraining them like children. Of spontaneous action on their part there should be no need. They should be called on for nothing but to do their day's work, and to be moral and religious. Their morality and religion should be provided for them by their superiors, who should see them properly taught it, and should do all that is necessary to ensure their being in return for labour and attachment, properly fed, clothed, housed, spiritually edified, and innocently amused.

This is the ideal of the future, in the minds of those whose dissatisfaction with the Present assumes the form of affection and regret towards the Past Like other ideals, it exercises an unconscious influence on the opinions and sentiments of numbers who never consciously guide themselves by any

drawn. This, at least, seems to me undeniable, that long before the superior classes could be sufficiently improved to govern in the tutelary manner supposed, the inferior classes would be too much improved to be so governed.

I am quite sensible of all that is seductive in the picture of society which this theory presents. Though the facts of it have no prototype in the past, the feelings have. In them lies all that there is of reality in the conception. As the idea is essentially repulsive of a society only held together by the relations and feelings arising out of pecuniary interests, so there is something naturally attractive in a form of society abounding in strong personal attachments and disinterested self-devotion. Of such feelings it must be admitted that the relation of protector and protected has hitherto been the richest source. The strongest attachments of human beings in general, are towards the things or the persons that stand between them and some dreaded evil. Hence, in an age of lawless violence and insecurity, and general hardness and roughness of manners, in which

« НазадПродовжити »