POPULATION
277
POPULATION
The first author to deal systematically with the
problem was Gianmaria Ortes, a Venetian friar, in
a work entitled, "Reflessioni sulla populazione per
rapporto all' economia nazionale." It appeared in
1790, eight years before the first edition of Malthus's
famous work. According to Nitti: "Some pages of
Ortes seem quite similar to those of Malthas; he com-
prehended the entire question, the geometrical pro-
gression of the population, the arithmetical pro-
gression of the means of subsistence, the preventive
action of man, and the repressive action of nature"
(Population and the Social System, p. 8). However,
his book lacked the confident tone and the statistical
arguments of Malthus; consequently it was soon
overshadowed by the latter's production, and the
Anglican divine instead of the Venetian friar became
the sponsor of the world's best-known and most
pessimistic theory of population.
The Theory of M.\lthds. — In the twenty-two years that had intervened between the appearance of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations" and the "E.ssay on the Principle of Population" (London, 1798) of the Rev. Thomas Malthus (17G6-1834), the French Revolution had caused the downfall of the old social system, without improving the condi- tion of the French people; a succession of bad harvests had impoverished the agricultural districts of England, while her credit had become so impaired by the recent wars as to render very difficult the im- portation of supplies from abroad. On the other hand, the rapid development of the textile and other industries through the recent mechanical inventions had called new towns into existence, and greatly stimulated the increase of population; the system of public allowances of money to all pauper children encouraged improvident marriages among the poorer classes. Although there had been a considerable increase in the national wealth as a whole, the work- ing classes had received none of the benefit. In- creased production seemed to mean a disproportionate increase in population, and a decrease in the sub- sistence of the poor. The obvious objection, that this condition was attributable to bad distribution rather than to insufficient production, had indeed come to the attention of Malthus. In some degree his book was an answer to that very objection. William Godwin, a disciple of the French revolutionary philosophers, chiefly in his work "Political Justice", had been defending the theory that all the evils of society arose from defective social institutions, and that there was more than enough wealth for all, if it were only distributed equally. Malthus replied to this position with his "Essay on the Principle of Population". His thesis was that population con- stantly tends to outrun subsistence, but that it is held in check by vice — abortion, infanticide, prostitu- tion, and by misery in the form of war, plague, famine, an<l uiuKMM'ssary disease. If all persons were pro- vided with sufficient sustenance, and these checks re- moved, the relief would be only temporary; for the increase of marriages and births would soon produce a pfipulation far in excess of the foofl supply.
The first edition of Malthus's work had, therefore, a definite polemical purpo.se, the refutation of a com- munistic scheme of society. Its arguments were general and popular rather than systematic or scien- tific. They were based upon facts easily observed, and upon what the average man would expect to happen if vice and misery ceased to operate as checks to population. As a popular refutation of the theories of Godwin, the book was a success, but its author soon began a deeper inquiry into the facts from which he had drawn his conclusions. The result of his labours was the appearance in 180.3 of a second edition of the "Es.say", which differed so much in size and content from the first as to constitute, in the words of Malthus him.self, "a new work". In the first chapter of the
new edition he declared that "the constant tendency
of all animated life to increase beyond the nourish-
ment prepared for it" (p. 2) had not hitherto received
sufficient attention. Before attempting to prove the
existence of this tendency, he inquired what would
be "the natural increase of population if left to
exert itself with perfect freedom . . . under the most
favourable circumstances of human industry" (p.
4). On the basis of the history of North America
during the century and a half preceding 1800, and
from the opinions of some economists, he concluded
that "population when unchecked goes on doubling
itself every 2.5 years, or increases in a geometrical
ratio" (p. 6). A brief examination of the possi-
bilities of food increase convinced him that this
could never be "faster than in an arithmetical ratio"
(p. 10). Applying these conclusions to England
with its 11,000,000 Inhabitants in 1800, he found that
the natural result at the end of the nineteenth cen-
tury would be a population of 176,000,000, and sub-
sistence for only 5.5,000,000 (ibid.). The remainder
of the first volume is occupied with an account of the
positive checks, that is, vice and misery, which had
hitherto concealed this disastrous discrepancy be-
tween population and subsistence in the various
countries of the world. In the second volume he
discusses the means which have been proposed to
prevent an undue increase of population, and, there-
fore, to render unnecessary the action of the positive
checks. Some of the means that he recommended
were abstention from public provision for the en-
couragement of population increase antl for the relief
of the poor, and abolition of existing laws of this kind,
especially the Poor Law of England. But his chief
recommendation was the practice of what he called
"moral restraint". That is, persons who were un-
able to maintain a family properly should live in
chaste ceUbacy until such time as they had overcome
this economic disability (bk. IV, passim). In the
new edition of his work, con.sequently, Malthus not
merely pointed out a new check to pojjulation, but
advocated it, in order to prevent and forestall the
operation of the cruel and immoral checks auto-
matically set in motion by vice and misery.
Criticism of the Mallhusian Theory. — The theory may be briefly characterized thus: In its most ex- treme and abstract form it is false; in its more moderate form it never has been and never can be demonstrated; even if true, it is so hypothetical, and subject to so many disturbing factors, that it is of no practical value or importance. It is, of course, abstractly or theoretically possible that population may exceed subsistence, either temporarily and locally, or permanently and uni\-('rsall>'. This possibility has been frequently realized among savage peoples, and occasionally among civilized jieoples, as in the case of famine. But the theory of M.althus implies something more than an abstract possibility or a temporary and local actuality. It a.sserts that population shows a constant tendency to outrun the food supply, a tendency, therefore, that is always about to pass into a reality if it is not counteracted. In all the six editions of his work that appeared dur- ing Malthus's lifetime, this tendency is described in the formula that population tends to increase in geometrical progression, as, 2, 4, 8, etc., while the utmost increase in subsistence that can be expected is according to an arithmetical ratio, as, 2, 3, 4, etc. So far as we know, population has never increased in geometrical ratio through any considerable period; but we cannot show that such an increase, by nat- ural means, is physiologically imi)cissil)le. All that it implies is that every married cmiplo should have on the average four children, who would themselves marry and have the same number of children to each couple, and that this ratio should be kept up indefi- nitely. It is not, however, true that tlie means of
