CHAPTER II.

Application of the Second Principle: viz. that the Tendency of Population to keep within the Powers of the Soil to afford Subsistence CAN NEVER BE DESTROYED, and can only be altered or diverted from its natural Course, so as to induce a mischievous Pressure of Population against the actual Supply of Food, by grossly impolitic Laws and Customs; either, 1st, accelerating the Progress of Population beyond its natural Rate; or 2dly, depressing Agriculture below its natural Standard.

IN the preceding book of this treatise, it appeared evident, that at no period during the whole progress of society did population increase so fast as to exceed the means of subsistence, which the soil, under reasonable encouragement, was capable of affording; and that any unnatural interference with the progress either of population, or of agriculture, would be so far from producing any good effect, that, unless influenced by moral circumstances as in the case stated in the last chapter, it would only disarrange the order of society, prevent the further developement of its resources, and remain a dead weight upon the national prosperity, until the inconvenience arising from the load should rouse the community to cast it off, and set itself free to resume the natural course. The interference with the natural progress of population by the poor laws of England, and by the negligent facility of the pro

1

prietors of Ireland, are respectively conclusive on this point in the former case, being founded on moral expediency, it has led to a healthy advancement both in population and produce in the latter case, being directly in opposition to every principle of moral good, it has promoted the increase of a vicious and useless population, and by leading to political disorders, has retarded rather than advanced the progress of cultivation; so that in both cases it has left the powers of the soil perfectly capable, under a reasonable system, of answering all the demands that may be made upon it. Now if, notwithstanding an interference with the natural order of things conducted on two such opposite principles, the tendency of population to keep within the powers of the soil is not DESTROYED, but continues as complete as when the natural order of things was preserved, I think we may fairly conclude that that tendency NEVER CAN BE DESTROYED. But further, since no record exists of any country cultivated up to the full extent of its productive powers, or within a great distance from that point, we may safely venture to affirm, that none ever did exist in that condition. It will indeed appear almost impossible that such a condition should practically exist, if we reflect that the advance towards the highest stages of society, which by their artificial habits introduce a progressive abatement in the progress of population, have also a strong tendency to convert a considerable portion of the land to the production of the luxuries, rather than of the necessaries of life. In proportion as a community advances from the purely agricultural state, the higher ranks of society multiply, more of the produce of the land is consumed for purposes distinct from the

mere physical support of the people; more land especially is converted into pasture, with a view both to profit and to pleasure, and it is well known that its power of supporting people is thereby considerably diminished. The proposition may be worded thus: A constant advance in civilization being necessary to a corresponding progress in cultivation after the purely agricultural state of society is passed, and the same cause also progressively diverting more and more of the products of the increased cultivation from the bare support of the people, in consequence of the introduction of artificial habits; it follows that at no point during the continuance of such a system can the land be cultivated to its utmost point of production, or be incapable, by any alteration of system, of affording food for a further increase of people. In this point of view therefore it may be also said, that the tendency of population to keep within the powers of the soil to afford it subsistence CAN NEVER BE DESTROYED. But this is exceedingly far from proving, that an unlimited encouragement to population may not, during some steps in the progress, cause it to press perniciously against the actual supply of food, and even against that which can be conveniently supplied, consistently with preserving the artificial arrangements of society in its advanced stages; in other words, consistently with good order and regular government in those states of society. It should seem that something like a competition must be introduced between the luxuries of the higher orders and the necessities of the lower, the object of which is to induce the agriculturist to raise a supply for the respective demands of each party. It is not difficult to foresee on which side of the alterna

tive the competition will be successful (in a free country at least,) in producing the supply; but to point out the precise mode in which the victory will be obtained for the supply of the people's wants is not altogether so easy a task. In what manner to secure a further supply of food from the soil, for the wants of a commercial and manufacturing population, has been at all times a problem very far removed from mathematical demonstration. There is indeed scarcely any question in political economy, concerning which wider differences of opinion have prevailed: but as the application of the principle treated in this chapter essentially depends upon its solution, it will be absolutely necessary to investigate it in this place. The readiest mode of conducting such an investigation seems to be by an inquiry into the order of precedence between population and the production of food. I have freely given my own opinion upon this subject, and have not hesitated to argue upon it in the preceding chapters, as proved by the plain and obvious conclusion, that no man, after agriculture ceases to be the most profitable employment of capital, will expend his money in raising an inferior produce at an increased expense, unless he is impelled thereto by an extraordinary demand for that produce from a previously increasing population. But it is becoming, that on a point so controverted by political economists, especially when so many of great name hold an opposite opinion, that an inquiry into the truth should be regularly pursued by examining the arguments on each side.

CHAPTER III.

An Inquiry into the natural Order of Precedence between Population and the Production of Food.

To establish this order of precedence on either side by an invariable rule, applicable to all states of society, would be an attempt quite as desperate, and almost as wise, as to determine the famous question with respect to the comparative eligibility of a black or a bay horse for the commencement of a journey. If the respective condition of the animals, and not their colour, is the true criterion by which to determine the question as to any two particular horses, the condition of the people, and the state of society in which they may happen to be, will afford data no less conclusive, on which to settle the order of precedence between population and production, as to any particular community. The object is to ascertain the precise means by which population can be permanently encouraged, and food provided for it; or in more technical phraseology, whether agriculture be the efficient cause of the increase of population, or popula tion of the increase of agriculture. On this subject different opinions have been entertained by the writers on political economy, each very much according with the view of the question taken by its author in connexion with the particular system of society with which he has been chiefly conversant. Such a result is natural, and gives just ground for concluding that a comparison of their various opinions, conducted